Works for me.... <a href='http://img18.imageshack.us/i/24922801.jpg/'><img src='http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6085/24922801.jpg' border='0' alt='Image Hosted by ImageShack.us'/></a><br/>
And these are actually hooker boots as opposed to the ones Sarah Palin's wearing in the other pic. I haven't seen an uptic in females wearing the prositboots as compared to the other normal ones.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yRkovnss7sg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yRkovnss7sg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> For some reason hooker boots seemed really popular in Ireland.
I always thought "hooker boots" were those that were thigh highs. The ones that go up to the knee aren't hooker boots but I guess it depends on what is worn with them. If a micro mini is worn with them, then the knee highs could be considered "hooker boots". But I always thought that the thinner the heel (like a stiletto) along with the toe being pointy adding on to the overall length (thigh compared to knee) are all factors. Yet it is hard not to argue that the pic below is an example of hooker boots despite the heel being those irritating wedge thingies (not a fan of the wedge heel) but you have to look at what Faith Hill is wearing with the boots. I have this argument every so often with the wife as she owns 10 to 12 pairs of knee high boots (in various colors, heel sizes, and textures) and depending on what she wears with them determines if she is a ho, w****, slut, or I guess hooker. So, you have to look at the overall outfit, IMO, before you can make the assessment that a woman is wearing "hooker boots". And yes there is some perverse pleasure of being with your woman in public dressed like that but at the same time, not all that thrilled that other guys are probably staring or drooling over her. Because believe me, when a woman dresses like the pic above, she is definitely wanting to get some attention.
The only item a woman should wear are the hooker boots, completely butt ass naked from top to bottom except those boots they're made for walkin...
So we have not reached an agreed definition of "hooker boots" yet? My girl has the ones that go up to right below her knee but she never wears them. She wants to but always chickens out. I'm cool with them and never really thought of them as making her look w****-ish.
Yea what ferrari said is true. Palin isn't wearing hooker boots although it could be looked at their her outfit is a little risque considering her position and lot in life. Yet, if she was anyone else, nobody would say a word about it. Now, if her skirt was about 3 inches or more shorter, than yea her boots would be considered, IMO, "hooker boots" but that is more or less due to the outfit which would be considered "whoreish". The girl that Grendal posted is much more closer to being a "hooker" than Palin mainly because the boots are higher but look at her coat. Any time that a woman's coat covers up what she is wearing, making it all that you can see is her coat and boots, then her skirt/dress is too short. It's sexy, for sure, but I don't know if I would like a bunch of guys hitting on her if that was my wife or even worse, daughter.
I hate hooker boots. Why would any woman with nice legs want to completely cover them all the way up past the knee? And why would a guy find that sexy? I certainly don't.
