I'm assuming it was a man..lol...cuz why would a woman create this painful fashion on purpose.
212782
Approx. 4000 B.C. \nEarliest depictions of shoes (flexible leather pieces held in place with lacings) in ancient Egyptian murals on tombs and temples. \n  \nApprox. 200 B.C. \nPlatform sandals called kothorni, with high wood or cork soles, become popular among Roman tragic actors. \n  \nApprox. 1000 A.D. \nAt Saxon weddings, father of the bride customarily presents the groom with one of the bride's shoes, symbolizing transfer of his authority over her. The bride's shoe is thrown to the bridesmaids; the one who catches it will be next to marry. \n  \n1154-1189 \nKing Henry II of England popularizes shoes with narrow, pointed toes. Legend says they hid his deformed toes. \n  \n1189-1199 \nKnights of Richard the Lionhearted begin to wear sollerets, downward-curving pointed toes, to keep their feet from slipping out of stirrups. \n  \n1215 \nA law passed in Paris bans university professors from wearing shoes with long, pointed toes. However, shoe toes, a symbol of rank, grow longer and pointier during the next two centuries, culminating by about 1382 in the spiky-toed cracowe. Kings and princes sometimes wore toes 30 inches long. \n  \n1386 \nKnights fighting in the Battle of Sempach in Switzerland are forced to amputate their shoes' long toes after dismounting before they can advance on foot. \n  \nApprox. 1500 \nShoes begin to be made in two pieces, with a flexible upper attached to a heavier, stiffer sole. This leads to the introduction of the heel, devised as a better way of keeping a rider's foot in the stirrup. Heeled boots for men quickly become fashionable. \n  \n1509-1547. \nHenry VIII of England favors wide-toed shoes, sometimes 12 inches across, which had to be stuffed to keep them on his feet. \n  \n1533 \nShort-statured Italian bride Catherine d'Medici, married at 14 to the Duke of Orleans, wears shoes with two-inch heels to exaggerate her height. The high heel may have been invented by Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519). \n  \n1553-1558 \nMary Tudor ("Bloody Mary"), another vertically challenged monarch, wears heels as high as possible. From this period until the early 19th century, high heels are frequently in vogue for both sexes. \n  \nMid-1500s \nAn extreme shoe style called chopines, popular among women in Italy, Spain and France, had pedestals of cork or wood as tall as 24 inches. A Venetian lady wearing chopines needed two servants to help her in and out of a gondola. \n  \n1628 \nPilgrims arrive in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. A law is passed prohibiting "excess in bootes." \n  \n1660 \nFrench shoemaker Nicholas Lestage, so clever at his trade that some accuse him of sorcery, becomes shoemaker to Louis XIV. The heels of Louis's shoes, some decorated with miniature battle scenes, are as tall as five inches. High "Louis" heels are also fashionable for ladies. \n  \n1745 \nMadame de Pompadour, tiny-footed favorite of Louis XV, popularizes high, narrow "Pompadour" heels. Ladies tape their feet to reduce their apparent size and faint at court. \n  \n1793 \nMarie Antoinette ascends the scaffold to be executed wearing two-inch heels. However, in the wake of the French Revolution heels become lower than at any time in the 18th century. \n  \n1794 \nQuincy Reed opens America's first retail shoe store in Boston. Around this period, Marc Isambard Brunel (1769-1849) invents machines for cutting soles and riveting them to uppers. \n  \nEarly 1800s \nFlat shoes and Grecian-style sandals become popular. \n  \nApprox. 1865 \nThe "sneaker" or plimsoll, a canvas-topped, rubber-soled shoe, is invented for badminton and tennis. Ladies' heel heights vary but stay below two inches during the rest of the century. \n  \n1904 \nThe ladies' "pump" or court shoe, a British invention, reaches America. Shoe stores begin to stock shoes with a range of widths around now. \n  \nApprox. 1955 \nTall "stiletto" heels for women's shoes, inv
258834
She is very childish and wants to make his life a misery...\n\nThink she still fancies him... :D
669486
That's exactly it! The whole thing was staged and people got their panties in a wad b/c "It was a wardrobe malfunction". PLEASE!! Wardrobe Malfunction my-----. It's also called, or what I like to call, "Picked On Favorticism." I'll agree with you that Janet took the heat for it, but Justin was the only one, that  I remember, that made a public apology for something that, what I feel, he AND Janet decided to do. I'm not saying she didn't  apologized for it, I just don't remember. I don't think it has to do with anyone being prejudice, I think somethings are just blown way out of proportion. That incident was totally staged and those two knew exactly what they were doing. As far as Brittany, she's from a small town in Louisiana and now she's this big time celebrity so she's getting all this attention now and sometimes I don't think she knows how to handle that. Brittany needs someone to give her some common sense though. Don't be suprised if she gets her children taken away from her. Haven't you noticed that everything is always a "mistake" now when concerning her son. She nearly fell on him coming out of a restaraunt b/c her shoe caught on her pants leg and another time, her nanny was getting him out of his high chair and he ended up falling. One other time, she was trying to get away from the Paparazzi and she didn't even have her son in his car seat. So is she as dumb as she looks or is she just trying to get more attention? I like Janet Jackson. I think she's talented and beautiful, but I also think some celebrities do things to get attention as if they already don't get enough.
70803
i am not a man but i have been there and done that you must have really pissed her off...hopefully someday she will mail it back to you...until then contact Lorainna Bobbits husband.
660207
whoa,thats deep...can we prove that they actually existed? if so,then yes,the poor woman must have gone through alot of pain.if she did exist,i think she would have  died giving birth to her like 10 baby...and men think that they rule humanity...they wouldnt be there if it wasnt for us women ! but,personally,i believe in evolution.
588173
She's probably a strap-on topper.  She's also a criminal and possibly  involved in a murder.
279455
someone trying to suck up their nasal drip, over and over, instead of blowing it. \nWhen someone in particular KHHHHHAAAAACCCKKKS a lougie. SO FRIGGIN' NASTY
41494
it's called gender sensitivity man. what a man can do, a woman also can.
311118
Maybe because they are wearing a push up bra or a gel filled bra to try to accentuate what little they have. If not that, maybe they do it because it's just the acceptable thing to do.
507581
My guess:  This is most likely a case of homicide. Signs of drowning does not prove anything. The important clues is:\nThe subject was naked. Generally women always dress up before comitting suicide, to protect their modesty.
651985
Good question.  I have always said the same thing.  There obviously is a reason they are showing it and that is to get looked at.  I am a woman and if I wear something like that, I expect to get looked at.
517495
This is a mess! I saw the pics of them on people.com with the one thigh high on, holding hands, and just shook my head! How in the hell are you out dressing like this, hanging with Paris and you have to very small children at home!!! A newborn baby at that! \n\nBritney made her bed and now she needs to lay in it! She needs to GROW UP! \n\nAfter seeing the different pics, I really hope this doesn't lead to one of those "lesbian Epiphany's" women have out in Hollywood, after bad breakups!\n\nIt's all so absurd...
264748
Well, I guess there is no law on him dressing in womens clothes after all women wear mens clothes all the time. The important thing is YOU are not here on this earth to be a punching bag. Note:...You sure he dresses in womens clothes? Or are you just wanting to get back at him?
639056
lol... that's really funny... I'm guessing he will not be getting his money back....   yes  plastic surgery is expensive from what I've read... but a million? wow...  must have been some ugly woman ! lol...
449216
I would like him to re-design women......Make them a bit quieter and less nagging..lol
156288
maybe the man was a sculptor or something?\nmaking a statue out of clay?
525684
Women were not to wear the clothing of a man or a man the clothing of a woman, a practice that might open the way for immorality, including homosexuality. (De 22:5) \nThe sim·lah′ was worn by both men and women, the woman’s being distinguishable from the man’s, perhaps in size, color, and decoration such as embroidery. God commanded that a woman should not wear a man’s garment, nor a man a woman’s mantle; this command doubtless being given in order to prevent sex abuses\n\nDoubtless the morally repugnant practice of sodomy was the reason for the severity of the rule declaring the wearing of apparel of the opposite sex to be “detestable.”