Presenting High Heeled Shoes... For Babies

Posted by Brian Fairbanks

 

We're seriously not making this up. And we have pictures of this weirdness to prove it...

Sure, these are "fake" high heels in the sense that they have a squishy heel ("for safety reasons," as one of the designers put it), but we're still baffled that someone thought it was acceptable to have zero to six month old babies stumbling about in shoes with a stubbed dangling heel attached to them. And yes, they are deliberately geared to that exact age group. (Oh, and if, as the designers claim, they actually do fully flatten underneath, then what's the point? Do parents enjoy seeing their daughters crawl along the floor in heels? Reminds us too much of "Secretary" for our taste...)

Admittedly, this would be much worse if the "Heel-arious" shoes (yep, that's the actual name of the company) were just smaller versions of what long-suffering women wear everyday, but do we really want to damage our kids and their feet with this kind of thing so early on?

Perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Their website is so goofy and tries so desperately to empahsize its own harmlessness that it may, in fact, not be a completely terrible idea:

Extremely funny, completely soft shoes for babies
0-6 months designed to look like high heels
Not intended for walking (heel will collapse with weight).
Not intended to harm children in any way.

WARNING: May cause extreme smiling and hysterical laughter when in use (this is completely normal).
Honestly, probably not for the tot who has to wear them, but as long as mom's laughing her ass off, right? Oh well... if you've had a different experience, we'd love to hear about it...

Via Heelarious.

 

Related:

Running in Heels: It's Hard Enough Just Walking, Moscow

The 2008 Mermaid Parade Rocked Our Partially-Nude World

Judge Us Harshly for Wanting to See the "Sex and the City" Movie, We Can Take It

back to dailyscanner.com


Comments

Emily Farris said:

This infuriates me as much as people who get their babies' ears pierced.

September 11, 2008 8:53 AM

dippy_gumball said:

0-6 month olds can't walk.  On that age group, these would just sit on the feet being squishy and "cute", cute being in quotes because I, personally, think it's retarded and in bad taste.  

Unlike piercing a baby's ears, it's not permanent.  Utimately, what it is is just another fashion choice parents make for their kids.  Led Zepplin tees on one year olds garner just as much eyerolling.  

I say, if the kids are happy and healthy and loved, who cares what their wearing (as long as they're warm).  Just keep them off of MY baby.

September 11, 2008 9:41 AM

Mandy said:

"Of what long-suffering women wear everyday." How do you know, Brian? Do you wear heels? I wear heels and I don't suffer. I just pick shoes that fit.

(Please say yes.)

September 11, 2008 11:01 AM

jen said:

Observations - they look like the shoes they have Miss Piggy wear on the Muppet Show.  

Also, wouldn't having shoes like that on an infant affect the way the arches in their feet form?  I mean they used to bind the feet of infants - granted it's not the same but still...

September 11, 2008 11:08 AM

Nikki said:

Well, this isn't a surprise.... it was only a matter of time before they started tarting up infants...the epitome of youth.  Has anyone else noticed all the H&M, Gap and Guess ads featuring kids?  This is only the begining...

September 11, 2008 3:13 PM

Elli said:

Dressing up your kids just to laugh at them is kind of horrifying, but then again I do find this funny so I guess I am just a big hypocrite (start at the 3:00 mark).

www.youtube.com/watch

September 11, 2008 5:16 PM

About Brian Fairbanks

Brian Fairbanks, the Senior National Political Correspondent for Nerve, is a filmmaker living in Brooklyn or New Orleans, depending on the season. He is a heavily-armed advocate of gun control.

in