To think that a shop who supports Let Girls be Girls

[ChaosTrulyReigns]

Shouldn't stock these Hooker chic boots?

Or am I wrong and these are acceptable?

They start at size 27 which I guess is about 6 years old.

I'm now concerned that my taste is way out and these boots are in good taste.

I think you shouldn't reproach yourself Chaos. You weren't sure if they were overly sexual. You put it to the jury and we voted. Nothing wrong with that. It's a good thing that retailers know we are on to them imvho

They are hideous and semi-hooker chic.

Notalone (as an aside/hijack) I wore high heels (and higher and higher) from age 17 until I was 32 at which point I had an ms attack, couldn't feel my legs and had to wear flats as I could hardly balance; once I started recovering, I still had to wear flats. Pain? Gosh yes. I could feel my calf muscles and achilles tendons like you wouldn't believe.

I had to stick with it though as I really couldn't balance on even small heels (still can't really). It took about a year, but my muscles/tendons stretched and now they're fine.

Hideous - they look cheap and nasty and the heels mean that any little girl wearing them has to miss any form of exercise unless it involves tottering about.

My DD will probably want some of these in a few years time but will have to prise my credit card out of my cold, dead hands before she gets them....

Horrible heel, but I do buy my DD Lelli Keely school shoes - very well made ( better than Clarks offering this year) - and suit her thin bony feet with high instep - tried 4 pairs from Clarks which all her her and made her feet bleed even after being ''expertly'' fitted.

They are vile but not tarty, just shiny and with a hell...eeewwww. DD (aged 4) has red suede UgGs....they are very nice and bought in the USA so a little cheaper than over here. Used to hate them though but they look lovely on her!

they are foul, anyone who thinks putting young girls in pvc knee high boots is ok needs to be reminded of just how far the sexualisation of children has crept to consider these boots ok

Mmmm yes I would agree would never buy them for a 3 yr old.

Was thinking more of my 11yo who would probably go for this kind of tacky crap. Not my taste but no harm in them for occasional wear for someone her age.

Would never pay £70 though!

Thanks Jux . My problem is that I have shoes of varying heels length ranging from the two pairs of flats that I force myself to wear sometimes to the towering sky scapers I occasionally wear on a night out . I can't afford to buy more flats at the moment cos I am an impoverished student (my flats are trainers and one falling apart pair of ballet pumps)but it is nice to know the problems could be fixable. I was told by a physio I "would just have to wear heels and get on with it" Am glad you posted to inform me otherwise. Thank you

ugh, chavtastic

Yuk, they are vile. And size 27 would fit my 3-year old, so not even starting from age 6.

ccpccp - what on earth have M&S got to do with a pair of tacky boots from John Lewis? [boggle]

Yes Hecate.

I took the opportunity of ignoring her ridiculous second statement based on the irrevelance of her comments on M&S.

I think the fact that they have Lelli Kelly on the side of them really takes away the 'hooker' angle :)

I don't like them, but if they weren't £70 and an 11 year old (but not younger) girl wanted to wear them with leggings and a casual top (tshirt/jumper) etc I could live with it, but wouldn't allow it with tights/mini skirt/crop top. I think with leggings etc it's a bit of harmless bling, with a miniskirt they'd start to look tarty.

Wouldn't pay £70 for the occasional wear they'd be allowed to get though.