Smashing Pumpkin Shoes
By Glinda
You know what, call me a prude, but I have this big problem with women who go out with their kids dressed like they are late for their job at the Fantasy Club for Gentlemen.
Now I am the last person on earth who thinks that once you become a mom, any sex appeal you have should disappear under voluminous caftans with mandarin collars.
But, I do think that when you are out with your children on something as wholesome as a visit to the pumpkin patch, the last thing you should pick out of your closet is sky-high platforms and a shirt that leaves little to the imagination. It should just be a rule of thumb for any woman that one does not wear something that when one bends over, one will wind up flashing one’s, er, pumpkins for all to see.
One part of me looks at Shauna Sand, former Playboy Playmate (surprise!) and ex-wife of Lorenzo Lamas, and thinks, how nice that she is taking her lovely daughter on a fun family outing, complete with face painting! What girly fun! Then the other part looks at her shoes and says, girlfriend is gonna break an ankle on that uneven ground. And for what? To convince the face painter and the dude conducting wagon rides that she is a MILF?
Let’s get a better look at those shoes:
Ah yes, just perfect for walking in the hay! And as an added bonus, the ability to inflict major damage on some pumpkins.
October 11th, 2007 at 5:59 am
Yikes! She was obviously looking to pick up more than a pumpkin.
Insert horrific wordplay at own risk.
October 11th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Those are some ugly ass shoes! I wonder if the girl will grow up to be a nun, in self defense?
October 11th, 2007 at 10:18 am
She reeks of insecurity - look at me…pay attention to meeeeeeeeee. YUCK!
October 11th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Apart from the ugly factor, her toes are hanging over the edges of those shoes. That usually means that one’s shoes are too small. Maybe she’s recycling shoes from when she was a smaller shoe size before her pregnancy…
October 11th, 2007 at 11:42 am
I think I broke my ankle looking at her shoes.
October 11th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
You know, my first response was to be catty, but then I realized something. No matter how she looks, she’s a mom and she’s spending time with her kid. Who are we to judge?
October 11th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Rain- She was shown with a dude in other pics, but I don’t know if she is remarried or what. She’s a bit D-List, so hard to find info.
J- That is what I always wonder about girls whose moms dress so provocatively.
ML- Yes, I think she definitely wanted someone to take pics!
Mary- I noticed the toe-hang as well.
Twistie- My feet burned in protest when I saw these shoes.
Beenzzz- Well, I’m all about the judging. But, don’t women have a responsibility as a parent to not dress like a hooker when they are with their kids?
October 11th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
I just find it really sad the way women tear each other down. What if she’s a nice person? What if her daughter actually loves her regardless of her high heels and her low cut top. What if she and her daughter went shoe shopping and the girl picked those shoes out for her mom. My daughter picks out some outlandish shoes for me. We just don’t know. Plus, I think it’s because she is very attractive and embraces it, that many women are quick to rip her apart to make themselves feel better.
I know that the response will be, “Well I don’t have to dress like a hooker to feel attractive.” Well, we are not all the same inside or out and we shouldn’t hold every woman to one standard.
October 11th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
I am sure that her daughter loves her regardless of her outfit.
I think she is attractive, albeit in a sort of plastic-y way.
But, I don’t agree with you that pointing out those shoes are inappropriate to wear to an outdoor venue such as a pumpkin patch is “tearing her down.”
And, I am sticking to my guns that a mother should dress appropriately when out with her kids, and that means not wearing something that looks like she needs a pole. If we had no standards of dress, why not go out in bikinis? In our negligees? Where would it end?
Out with your man on a date night? Wear whatever you want. Out with the kids? I don’t think overt sexuality is the way to go. My personal opinion.
October 11th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Glinda,
It’s not what you said Glinda. It was some of the responses to the post. It seemed sort of vicious. I was addressing women in general, not just you.
October 11th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
[…] You know what, call me a prude, but I have this big problem with women who go out with their kids dr… […]
October 11th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
I think she’s kind of stuck, honestly. She has the kind of (surgically altered) body that demands attention be paid to it no matter what she wears, especially the clothes aren’t baggy or loose. The shoes were definitely over the top, for a jaunt to the pumpkin patch, but then again maybe they just stopped by there on their way somewhere else. Her kid’s cute, and isn’t dressed for Mom’s particular brand of ‘Success,’ so it’s not all bad.
October 11th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I’ll bet good money that Dad is a load.
October 11th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
By the same token, mothers should not dress their daughters as hookers in training. What’s with the “Juicy” written across an 11-year-old’s butt?
October 11th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Those are attention-getting shoes. So, we’re paying attention to her.
Some things are good, some things are bad. Those shoes are bad. It’s not misogynistic to say so, either. We make fun of men’s shoes as well; check out Glinda’s post on the lovely and fragrant Liev Schreiber.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:46 am
The shoes are just silly, but to each his own. If she was wearing flip-flops with that same outfit, no-one would be commenting on the tank-top, which, on it’s own merits, it’s a perfectly acceptably sized garment for a mother to wear.
October 12th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
Jenbug- I did think perhaps they had stopped off from somewhere else, but I still take issue with the outfit.
Phyllis- Dad is a load, or Dad is loaded? Or both?
Class-factotum- I LOATHE writing on the butt.
Rain- Yes, those are not shoes for the shy.
TG- Do you see the buttons on the tank top? Should they ALL be unbuttoned? If it was a regular tank that didn’t go down in a V between her boobs, I would have been ok.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
I’m even surprised she can carry that pumpkin in those shoes. But then again, I’m sure she’s had years of practice prancing around in similar shoes
October 15th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
She looks like she’d smell like Calgon Mist, sweat, chimichangas, and wet cat.
August 29th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Well, my feet cry when I look at those shoes, but my primary objection is to a) the lipstick, which I think is unflattering; and b) the roots showing, which is hypocritical, because so are mine, and I’m not looking after a child. But she obviously (or at least appears to) takes care of herself, so take care of the roots!
As for her clothes, don’t we usually go on about being true to oneself, etc.? Let me be the first to say that with all the buttons buttoned up high and tight, if I wore it when I was with my nephew, I’d look as if I was about to poke someone’s eye out. And I would wear it if I were with my nephew, and I’d wear it if I were with a son or daughter, instead. It’s what’s in my wardrobe, and I’d wear it without a second thought. I’d wear it with boots, because I think her shoes are an ankle-break looking for a place to happen, but maybe she’s not as clumsy as I am. If I passed her on the street, I’d notice that she was: younger than I am; prettier than I am; with a child who seemed to be very happy, engaging in Halloweeny activities with her pretty mommy. I do NOT think that she looks like a hooker, Glinda; I think maybe you need to see some more real-life hookers, because they are waaaay skanky. She’s not skanky; she’s just wearing something that you wouldn’t.
August 29th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
It’s mostly the shoes, La BellaDonna, the shoes!
Although I’m sorry, I will NOT budge from or apologize for, the stance that when hanging out with your kids, your boobs should not be “hanging out” either.
As for hookers, I live in Los Angeles. I’ve seen more than my fair share.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:38 am
Those are hooker shoes. When in doubt, look at the shoes. And today I passed a round dozen hookers when I was out for my walk, and yes, they dressed like this although only one of them could afford implants. Implants don’t say “hooker” they say “stripper”. But you really do have to look at the totality: the makeup, the hair; it’s a hooker look, and I say that as a woman who has written a book on street prostitutes.
Do I have a tank top like that? Yes, but without the implants and with more than two buttons done up, it’s not as slutty-looking. The jeans? They’re “shants” and as such ugly, but not necessarily hookerish.
But we’re talking bleached blonde with roots, more makeup than Tammy Faye, cleavage out to here, and, last but not least, hooker shoes. Hooker shoes that don’t even fit!
None of this rules out the possibility that she is being true to herself in dressing this way. She is clearly identifying herself primarily as a sexual being, whether that is available for hire or not. What I think Glinda is saying is there is a time and a place for that and picking out a pumpkin with your little girl isn’t it.