Limitations necessary for Room for Debate

A Nov. 1 article in The New York Times’ Room for Debate series on the newspaper’s online opinions section asks the question, “Are spiky heels an appropriate fashion statement for the office?” The New York Times printed responses from a blogger, a style expert, two podiatrists, a chiropractor, a performer and even a shoe museum curator.

Room for Debate is a series that allows knowledgeable laypersons to contribute their thoughts on an issue.

Marney Reid, who runs the blog “Stilettos on the Glass Ceiling,” called high heels a “professional disadvantage” because they limit one’s mobility (despite the fact that most office jobs are fairly sedentary, and most people doing an office job don’t really need ultra-comfy shoes to power-walk to meetings.) Television style expert Chassie Post said that heels connote style and power, and that it is “[her] studied opinion that everyone looks better in a heel, no contest.”

The consulted podiatrists and chiropractors gave advice about the health risks involved with wearing heels higher than 2 inches, largely because they shift the body’s weight and gravity to the front, not the back, of the foot. One podiatrist advised that one should rotate heel heights, avoiding wearing very high heels all day, every day. 

Although it might seem like a simple question to ask whether or not it’s appropriate for women to wear heels in the workplace, this question raises a lot of questions regarding gender equality, health, sexuality and, most importantly, whether or not “experts” (or just everyday people) should be allowed to make judgment calls about other people’s wardrobes (or other lifestyle choices).

I have another question for the New York Times opinions section staff: Why do you think it’s helpful to your readership or society at large to create a discussion about the “appropriateness” of women’s shoes?

Opening up women’s professional wardrobe choices to public criticism quickly turns into a critique of bodies, sexuality and individual choices.

For example, it isn’t really a problem that Post says wearing heels makes her feel taller, sleeker and more powerful. She is entitled to her feelings and her choices. However, I find it very problematic for her to then say that if other powerful women — such as Michelle Obama or Marissa Mayer — wear heels, you should, too. 

The Room for Debate series has covered probably every topic that could possibly be interesting to the public, from the serious — “Would government-owned banks distort the free market or complement private lending?” (Oct. 1) — to the random — “Should salt have a place at the table?” (Sept. 10) — to the judgmental and sensationalist — “Should men over 40 avoid trendy looks?” (Oct. 3).

Newspapers — and especially serious, authoritative publications — should, when doing pieces like the Room for Debate series, keep questions to current events and the news, and not public judgments over other people’s bodies and choices.

It’s time that we put playground bullying over what is and is not a professional shoe choice to rest.

Write Naomi at neb30@pitt.edu.