New law restricts a woman’s right to shoes

Fresh off the most hardline abortion legislation in generations, several US states are now planning to regulate not just what women can do with their bodies but what they can wear on them. Specifically, their feet.

Alabama is the first to introduce the Calcaneus Anti-Elevation Bill, more commonly known as the High Heel Ban, which would forbid publicly wearing shoes with heels higher than half and inch.

“Despite what is claimed by the liberal media and the fake news and my mother-in-law Trixie, this is not a law targeting women,” said Alabama Rep. Wilbur Bitkins (R), who introduced the bill. “It is a law protecting the podiatary and spinal health of all citizens, to prevent strain on posture and feet that can be caused by prolonged wearing of high heels, including men, because we are a progressive state and we recognize and respect that some men are fairies.”

Wearing high heels, said Bitkins, can cause irreparable harm to “a person’s ability to perform her – or his! — housewifing and childbearing duties. And ain’t nobody wants that.”

The legislation was preventive, not restrictive, he claimed.

“It’s no different from the state making sure people wear their seatbelts, unless they’re going to church, in which case God protects them,” said Bitkins. “But God draws the line at feet. He’s got no time for that, all them little bones and phalanges. So that’s where we come in. We’re God’s little foot soldiers.” And then he laughed and laughed until he saw that no one else was.

Critics point out that the legislation seems to take a moralistic stance against any kind of shoe that is not, essentially, a simple flat. In fact, one clause in the proposed bill describes pumps as “dirty, dirty, dirty” and three-inch wedges as “the Devil’s doorstop.”

This impression is backed by vocal endorsement of the bill from, among others, Flatfoots for Jesus, a far-right Christian lobby group known for their outspoken conservative views and abysmal fashion sense.

“High heels lead to promiscuity, STDs and Shawn Mendes concerts,” said Ellen Drabney, Flatfoots VP in Charge of Outrage. “When a woman stands on high heels, it serves to thrust out her so-called ‘booty vicinity,’ sending a signal to men that she is wanton and ready to be impregnated. Also, lipstick and lower-back tattoos. All tattoos. And yoga pants. And eye contact!”

Drabney said her organization and others like it will continue to champion legislation that protects the sanctity of human feet.

“Domestic income wasted on shoes is money that could be spent on necessities, like petticoats,” she said.

Georgia is planning a similar legislation and is not even hiding its fundamentalist Christian underpinnings.

“Sandals,” said Georgia State Rep. Byron Warmschmutt. “The Bible mentions sandals. No high heels. Just sandals. So if the Bible doesn’t mention high heels, women shouldn’t be wearing them. I think there’s mention of thongs too, but that could be referring to underwear, which is okay because it’s not out in public for everyone to see but underneath the clothes of my mistress.”

Warmschmutt went on to reference a specific Bible passage. “I think it’s Psalm 635.3 that says, ‘Moab is my hot tub; over easy will I cast out my sandal: Philadelphia, triumph thou mainly because of the meat.’ You can’t get much clearer than that.”

Fellow Republican Floyd “Gherkin” McFadden had a more practical reason for being in favor of the legislation: “I don’t like it when ladies is taller than me.”

Kentucky is going one step further than a high heel ban, proposing that women’s feet be covered at all times with so-called “burqa boots.”

“Toes. Too many toes. Too many tempting toes,” said Kentucky Governor Beel Flagnum (R), who is not seeking re-election and has turned full-on weird.

Women’s groups have come out strongly against any laws that would restrict their right to shoes. They blame the rash of shoe legislation on lawmakers becoming emboldened in the current political climate, starting with the president and his infamous comment, “Grab them by the espadrilles.”

To protest the ban, several women’s groups are organizing marches in their high heels, which everyone agrees is a terrible, terrible idea.

“This legislation is clearly an attack on women’s feet,” said Rachel Viers, president of Alabama’s Right to Height organization. “It’s like buying a new pair of stilettos and breaking off the heel: a waste of money and pointless.”

Opponents hope that these protests along with the embarrassing media coverage will cause lawmakers to flip-flop.

In solidarity, Elton John has cancelled all concerts in the affected states.

Advertisements

About rossmurray1

I'm Canadian so I pronounce it "Aboot." No, I don't! I don't know any Canadian who says "aboot." Damnable lies! But I do know this Canadian is all about humour (with a U) and satire. Come by. I don't bite, or as we Canadians say, "beet."
This entry was posted in Never Happened and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to New law restricts a woman’s right to shoes

  1. Claudette says:

    You’re hilarious. ❤ 🙂

  2. pinklightsabre says:

    A waste of money and pointless. Priceless!

  3. Laughed out loud. I haven’t had so much fun with shoes since a roommate put jello in my Blüchers. The devil’s doorstop indeed. Stiletto wit.
    I do remember that Psalm, about chillin’ in the hot tub, listening to Moby. It goes on:
    Ye, I’m walkin’, ye indeed I’m talkin’
    About thou and me, I’m hopin’
    That thou’ll walk back to me, ye, ye.
    Be thou therefore not a loafer,
    But gird up your laces, do not vamp,
    and let not the tongue flappeth.
    Nor yet be thou a heel
    But look thou to thy sole…

  4. Kimball Smith says:

    Not to overlook the agony of defeet……

  5. List of X says:

    Thankfully, a woman’s right to wear full body-covering wading boot while fishing – as opposed to a right to sit in a fishing boat and, God forbid, touch any oars there, has been protected by the historic Row vs. Wade decision.

  6. Interesting to note that the shoe manufacturers did not comment. But then again, no local manufacturers will be harmed by the passing of this law, so, no problem!

    Great satire.

  7. Lex Leclerc says:

    I really enjoyed the quote that said one guy was laughing and then he stopped when he realized know one else was. This was funny but that little absurd detail got me. 🙂

  8. Yes. A thousand times yes.

  9. ksbeth says:

    a woman’s place is in the flat. she shall go forth and never prosper. learned that way back in book 7, chapter 10, psalm 2. duh –

  10. maryannetuck says:

    You mean I can’t wear only tennis shoes any more?

  11. crystalwende says:

    Alabama law makers – don’t U have anything important to think about?

  12. Trent Lewin says:

    This was pretty damn awesome, and a great laugh. Wanton and ready to be impregnated indeed… I was going to say, to show solidarity, that I was going to wear high heels one day a week, but I’m afraid it may make me look like a tart.

  13. kirizar says:

    By far your best anti-high-heel rhetoric report ever! Also, in this uncertain climate, it took me quite a while before I was certain it was satire. I wouldn’t put it past certain Dweeble McFlea legislators to propose such pain-in-the-arch proposals. I’m sure there’s a platform shoe that fits some elected pinheads out there.

  14. They can’t be embarrassed if they have no shame. It’s all fun and games and satire until it actually happens.

  15. cat9984 says:

    At least, they’re still allowed to wear shoes.

Go ahead, don't be shy.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.