Otrovert

Otrovert (pronounced ott-roh-vert)

A person unable to feel a connection to social groups or collectives; despite being welcomed and included in social settings, they feel like outsiders.

2025: A coining by US psychiatrist Dr Rami Kaminski (b 1954), who first used the word in his book his book The Gift of Not Belonging (2025), the construct being the Spanish otro (other; another) + -vert.  Otro was from the Latin alter, altera & alterum (the other), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European hélteros (the other of two); it may be compared with the Portuguese outro (from the Old Galician-Portuguese outro, from the Latin alterum (the other)) and the French autre (from Old French autre (another), from the Latin alterum).  The –vert suffix was from the Latin vertere (to turn) and was used to refer to a person with a particular personality which manifests when in the presence of others.

Otrovert is a noun; the noun plural is otroverts.  Because otrovert is a “hot word” (newly coined or an adaptation of an existing word and one which has in a short time become popular), most lexicographers are tagging it as “provisional”, the majority of “hot words and phrases” (think “six-seven”) fading from use and never gaining critical mass.  Even the idea of “popular: had (in this context) shifted because whereas once it could take months or years for a word or phrase to spread into general use, on the various platform on the internet, proliferation can be close to instant.  However, the tools used to assess “use” are rather brute-force and often are counting appearances in “lists” rather than “general use”.  For those reasons, in the technical sense, derived forms really don’t (yet) exist but if constructed the list (based on the model of other “-verts”) might include the nouns otrovertist, otroverting & otrovertness, the verb & adjective otroverted, adjectives otrovertish & otrovertesque & otrovertive and the adverbs otrovertedly & otrovertly.

Google ngram (a quantitative and not qualitative measure): Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

An ambivert is a person neither clearly extroverted nor introverted, but has characteristics of each, the construct being ambi- +‎ -vert.  Ambi- was from the Latin ambo (both) and was a doublet of the New Latin amphi-, from the Ancient Greek ἀμφί (amphí) (on both sides).  The dexter element in the Medieval Latin meant “right” and ambidexter thus was understood as “both hands being like a right hand”.  In English, the ambi- prefix is most familiar in “ambidextrous” (possessing an equal or functionally comparable ability to handle objects with both hands (in writing, music, sport etc) although it has from time to time been used figuratively (not taking sides in conflicts or being equally adept in more than one medium, genre, style etc) and even as a humorous synonym for “bisexual”.  When used in psychology, historically, ambiversion described someone with characteristics of both extroversion and introversion and thus suggested a “balanced personality”, the subject choosing to manifest the different characteristics according to what the circumstances seemed to demand.  Ambivert thus does not imply some sort of split personality or the existence of a condition like bi-polar disorder (the old manic depression) but simply reflects an individual able to undertake their social interactions in an appropriate manner.

Because the “vert words” are not really part of academic or clinical physiology, the definitions can be “elastic” and while centovert (being in the middle between introvert and extrovert) may be a synonym of ambivert, it may also be nuanced in that it suggests someone unable (or at least unwilling) to engage in introverted or extroverted behaviour, regardless of the circumstances.  A variant of the ambivert is the omnivert (someone fits into both extremes of the extroversion-introversion personality spectrum), the construct being omni + -vert.  Omni- ultimately was from the Latin omnis (all).  Again, because the “verts” are pop-psychology words there’s little to be gained from attempting to “parse the overlaps” (ie where one ends and another begins) and seems likely omniversion is simply an “enabling pre-condition” for one to possess if one is to attain the desirable “balanced state” of ambiversion.  Nobody seems yet to have coined ultravert, hypervert or ubervert but one need not spend long on social media to see the why such labels might be handy.

A self-described introvert: Lindsay Lohan explains she's an introvert; 2019 interview by broadcaster Howard Stern (b 1954).

Like other “-verts” of this ilk, otrovert was built on the model of the familiar introvert & extravert, the construct being intro + -vert.  An introvert (pronounced in-truh-vurt) is an individual who prefers (sometimes actively seeks) tranquil environments, limits social engagement and tends to a greater than average preference for solitude.  In anatomy & zoology there’s a technical meaning “a part (typically a hollow, cylindrical structure) that is or can be introverted, or turned in on itself (ie invaginate)) but the most commonly used is the psychological sense: a person characterized by concern primarily with their own thoughts and feelings.  Introverts are noted often for having a disposition that finds social engagement at least tiresome (and sometimes threatening), thus the preference for quiet solitude.  Introvert seem first to have appeared in print in the 1660s and was from the New Latin intrōvertere, the construct being intrō (within) + vertere (to turn).  The prefix intro- was from the Latin intro- (inwards) & intrā (within) + -ō (used as a verbalizer).  Although it’s not infrequent for introvert to be used as a synonym for “shy” (and in terms of observed behaviour the two phenomena can appear indistinguishable), they are definitionallly distinct.  While shyness is associated with timidity and social anxiety, introverts have a lack of interest in interpersonal engagement and a limited endurance for social contact; what that means is while the behaviours can often be the same, the underlying motivations differ.

Slaughterhouse-Five (1969) by Kurt Vonnegut.

Introvert & extrovert are popular terms of self-description but they can also be aspirational and while the classic stereotype is of the introvert who “wishes they were more outgoing” there are other types.  The US pediatrician Dr Mark Vonnegut (b 1947) wrote short stories and in one he described his father’s (the author Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007)) desire to be a cynical, grumpy old man who despaired of humanity but could never quite manage it because of his “inherent optimism”.  As Dr Vonnegut put it, he was “…like an extrovert who wanted to be an introvert, a very social guy who wanted to be a loner, a lucky person who would have preferred to be unlucky. An optimist posing as a pessimist, hoping people will take heed.”  Explaining the difference, he added: “Introverts almost never cause me trouble and are usually much better at what they do than extroverts.  Extroverts are too busy slapping one another on the back, team building, and making fun of introverts to get much done.  Extroverts are amazed and baffled by how much some introverts get done and assume that they, the extroverts, are somehow responsible.”  On the basis of his clinical experience, he observed: “I understand perfectly why some of my autistic patients scream and flap their arms--it's to frighten off extroverts.”

An extrovert (pronounced ek-struh-vurt) is described typically as an outgoing, gregarious person who thrives in dynamic environments and seeks to maximize social engagement; in the jargon of psychology, it refers to someone characterized by extroversion; a person concerned primarily with the physical and social environment, thus the usual presentation as a person with a disposition energized through social engagement who tends to languish or chafe in solitude.  The word extrovert (the alternative spelling extravert (an example of the influence of German on psychology) is now rare) also emerged in the 1660s, the construct being extro- + vert.  In this case, extro- was a pseudo-Latinism prefix based upon the Latin extra- (outside, beyond), under the influence of the distinction between the Latin intro- (inwards) & intra- (inside; within).  In English, formations using the prefix tend to be restricted to words formed as antonyms of terms formed with intro-.

Introvert & extrovert (in their literal senses) were since the late seventeenth century used in science and medicine but both in the twentieth century entered general use when certain works by the Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung (1875–1961) were translated from German into English.  What seems to have given the words their greatest impetus was the appearance of commentaries on Jung written for a general audience and for these purposes binary concepts like “introvert” and “extrovert” were useful devices to encapsulate layers of meaning although the trigger may have been the 1918 paper Psycho-Analytic Study of August Comte [1798-1857; a seminal figure in sociology] by psychologist Dr Phyllis Blanchard (1895-1986).  Being a woman, Dr Blanchard has been neglected by history but, like the Austrian psychiatrist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Jung became what would now be called a “celebrity” psychoanalyst and that happened because advances in their field (and neurology) had made the public fascinated with the human mind and its processes (especially dreams).  Reflecting what may possibly be a professional distaste at their jargon ending up in pop-psychology texts, technical papers often use the spelling “extravert”, following Jung and his contemporaries.

The Gift of Not Belonging (2025) by Dr Rami Kaminski (b 1954).  Psychiatrist Dr Kaminski is the founder and director of the Institute for Integrative Psychiatry in New York City.

Dr Kaminski describes The Gift of Not Belonging as “…the first book to explore the distinct personality style of the otrovert - someone who lacks the communal impulse and does not fit in with any social group, regardless of its members - and to reveal all the advantages of being an otrovert and how otroverts contribute to the world.”  He explained that while otroverts enjoy deep and fulfilling one-on-one relationships, within groups they feel alienated, uncomfortable, and alone.  Unlike introverts, who crave solitude and are easily drained by social interactions, otroverts can be quite gregarious and rarely tire from one-on-one socialising; unlike loners, or people who have been marginalised based on their identity, otroverts are socially embraced and often popular - yet are unable to conform with what the group collectively thinks or cares about.  Dr Kaminski positions all this as “the great gifts of being an otrovert” by which he means someone with no affinity for a particular group is not constrained by their sense of self-worth being conditioned on the group's approval.  A champion of the otrovert, Dr Kaminski suggests they “must not be harassed to take part, but allowed to revel in their glorious difference.”

Despite vying with “psychopath” for the title of “most popular” words from psychology, neither introvert and extrovert have ever been used as diagnostic terms in the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); that doesn’t mean they’re not used by clinicians, just that they’re not part of the formal jargon.  That might seem curious given their not infrequent appearances in the published history of personality psychology including Jung’s original typology (codified in their most refined form in the 1920s), the ubiquitous MBTI (Myers–Briggs Type Indicator) and the Big Five model, where Extraversion is one of the five major personality traits.  These frameworks are however psychological, not psychiatric.  The DSM does of course have an extensive section on personality disorders and many of the traits related to introversion & extraversion appear including in (1) Avoidant Personality Disorder (social inhibition—links superficially to introversion but is not the same thing) and Histrionic or Narcissistic Personality Disorders (social boldness—superficially “extraverted” traits).

However, what the DSM’s editors have in recent decades done is to avoid the use of potentially ambiguous labels and focus instead on behavioural criteria that may indicate impairment or pathology.  Especially since the 1970s, the DSM has acknowledged (even championed) the idea that many “things” once classified as deviant are really part of the “normal” human condition; reflecting that paradigm, introversion & extraversion came to be understood as “normal-range” personality traits, not indicators of disorder.  As a general principle, the DSM appears to restrict the use of terms to instances where they relate to clinically significant impairment (the emphasis on the effect on the patient rather than the mechanics of process).  This approach was institutionalized with the release of DSM-5 (2013) in which the model clearly had become one of trait-based personality assessment.

To make the point, there exists in DSM-5 & DSM-5-TR (2022) the “Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders, Section III” which describes personality traits that (more or less) correspond to what popular culture calls extraversion and introversion.  The editors however avoid the two popular words and instead breaks personality into trait domains with pathological versions of ordinary traits.  What general readers think of a “introversion” now appears in the DSM as “Detachment” although this is not pathologized unless it manifests in maladaptive extremes (chronic or persistent withdrawal; avoidance of social interaction; intimacy avoidance; a reluctance to form close relationships; anhedonia (inability to experience pleasure); mistrust of others; restricted affectivity (limited emotional expression)).  So, introverts can to some degree be “happy” with their state and just prefer frequent solitude and what the DSM calls “detachment” is invoked only when the trait is causing significant impairment or distress.

In the popular imagination, “extraversion” is associated with sociability, talkativeness, outgoing behaviour, enthusiasm (ie someone who is the “life of the party”).  That’s also obviously a “spectrum condition” and the DSM has never listed a single domain which could be classed as “high extraversion” which is good because high sociability isn’t intrinsically pathological.  Rather, should extraversion becomes maladaptive or extreme, the DSM classifies it across several domains:

(1) Attention-seeking (a facet of Antagonism) which manifests especially in Histrionic Personality Disorder.  Symptoms include an excessive need for approval, dramatic or provocative behaviour and an Intense desire to be the centre of attention.

(2) Grandiosity (a facet of Antagonism) which is characteristic of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, the symptoms including social boldness (masking fragile self-esteem) and entitlement and arrogance (which, in many cases, doesn’t manifest)

(3) Impulsivity & Risk Taking (a facet of disinhibition).  This is outgoing, sensation-seeking behaviour in its pathological form and is associated with thrill-seeking, poor impulse control and a tendency to act without considering the consequences

(4) Low Detachment: This is acknowledged as the “adaptive end of Detachment” but the editors seem to list it only to “close the circle”; it’s there because logically it has to be but is certainly not treated as a disorder.

So the DSM intentionally avoids the introvert/extrovert dichotomy which is how starkly it’s understood in popular use.  This “either-or” approach obviously doesn’t map onto the way the DSM treats personality traits as spectrums with only the margins (ie the dysfunctional extremes) described.  What that does is acknowledge there is introversion & extraversion which part of the “normal” human condition and not pathological.  Additionally it’s acknowledged the behavior which in one subject may indicate “significant impairment or distress” might in another not be of concern.

Chopstick

Chopstick (pronounced chop-stik)

(1) A harmonically and melodically simple waltz for piano played typically with the forefinger of each hand and sometimes having an accompanying part for a second player.  Originally, it was called The Celebrated Chop Waltz, written in 1877 by British composer Arthur de Lulli (the pen name of Euphemia Allen (1861-1949)); it’s used often as a two-finger exercise for those learning the piano and then name comes from the idea of the two fingers being arrayed in a chopstickesque way (should be used with an initial capital).

(2) In hand games, a game in which players hold up a number of fingers on each hand and try, through certain moves, to eliminate their opponent's hands.

(3) A pair of thin sticks (of ivory, wood, plastic etc), typically some 10 inches (230 mm) in length, used as eating utensils by the Chinese, Japanese, and others in East Asia as well as by those anywhere in the world eating food associated with these places.

(4) As an ethnic slur, a person of East Asian appearance.

(5) In fishing gear, a long straight stick forming part of various fishing tackle arrangements (obsolete).

(6) In parts of Australia where individuals are subject to “attack” by “swooping” magpies, the use of cable ties on bicycle helmets to produce long, thin (ie chopstickish) protrusions which act as a “bird deterrent”.

(7) In automotive slang, the “parking guides” (in some places known as “gutter scrapers”) mounted at a vehicle’s extremities to assist when parking or navigating tight spaces.  They have been replaced by sensors and cameras but were at the time an impressively effective low-tech solution.

1590s (contested): The construct was chop + stick.  The use to describe the eating utensil was first documented in 1637 and may have been a transfer of the sense from the earlier use to describe fishing tackle (in use since at least 1615) which was based on the physical resemblance (ie long & thin).  The “chop” element was long listed by dictionaries as being from the Chinese Pidgin English chop (-chop) (quick), a calque from the Chinese 筷子 (kuàizi) (chopstick”), from 快 (kuài) (quick) but this is now thought improbable because there is no record of Chinese Pidgin English until the eighteenth century.  The notion of the link with Chinese Pidgin English appeared first in the 1880s with the rationale: “The Chinese name of the article is ‘kwai-tsz (speedy-ones)” which was a decade later refined with the explanation “Possibly the inventor of the present word, hearing that the Chinese name had this meaning, and accustomed to the phrase chop-chop for ‘speedily,’ used chop as a translation.”  This became orthodoxy after being picked-up for inclusion in the OED (Oxford English Dictionary (1893)), a publication so authoritative it spread to most until English language dictionaries from the late 19th century onwards.  The chronological impossibility of the Pidgin English theory was first noted by Kingsley Bolton (b 1947) in Chinese English: A Sociolinguistic History (2003).  The English form is now thought to come simply from the use of the Chinese, modified over time and oral transmission.  The current orthodoxy is the Pidgin English chop (quick; fast) was from the Cantonese word chāu (快) (quick).  The construct of the Chinese kuàizi (筷子) was kuài (筷) (quick) + zi (子) (a diminutive suffix).  Stick was from the Middle English stikke (stick, rod, twig), from the Old English sticca (twig or slender branch from a tree or shrub (also “rod, peg, spoon”), from the Proto-West Germanic stikkō, from the Proto-Germanic stikkô (pierce, prick), from the primitive Indo-European verb stig, steyg & teyg- (to pierce, prick, be sharp).  It was cognate with the Old Norse stik, the Middle Dutch stecke & stec, the Old High German stehho, the German Stecken (stick, staff), the Saterland Frisian Stikke (stick) and the West Flemish stik (stick).  The word stick was applied to many long, slender objects closely or vaguely resembling twigs or sticks including by the early eighteenth century candles, dynamite by 1869, cigarettes by 1919 (the slang later extended to “death sticks” & “cancer sticks).  Chopstick, chopstickful, chopstickery & chopsticker are nouns, chopsticking & chopsticked are verbs and chopstickish & chopstick-like are adjectives; the noun plural is chopsticks and the word is almost always used in the plural (sometimes as “a pair of chopsticks”).  The adjective chopstickesque is non-standard.

Niche market: a pair of chopsticks in 18-carat gold, diamonds, pearls, and ebony by Erotic Jewellery, Gold Coast, Australia.  The chopsticks were listed at Aus$139,000 and have the environmental benefit being of endlessly reusable and are also dual-purpose, the pearl mounted at the end of one chopstick detachable and able to be worn as a necklace.

In English, chopstick has proved productive.  A chopsticker is one who uses chopsticks, chopstickery describes the skill or art of using chopsticks, a chopstickful describes the maximum quantity of food which can be held in one pair of chopsticks (a la “mouthful”), chopstick land was a slang term for China (used sometimes of East Asia generally) but is now listed as a microaggression, chopstick legs (always in the plural) is a fashion industry term describing long, thin legs (a usually desirable trait), chopstickology is a humorous term used by those teaching others the art of using chopsticks (on the model of “mixology” (the art of making cocktails), “Lohanology” (the study of Lindsay Lohan and all things Lohanic), “sockology” (the study of socks) etc), a chopstick rest is a small device upon which one's chopsticks may be placed while not in use (known also as a chopstick stand), chopstickless means lacking or not using, chopsticks, chopsticky is a adjective (the comparative “more chopsticky”, the superlative “most chopsticky”) meaning (1) resembling a chopstick (ie “long and thin”) (chopstick-like & chopstickish the alternative adjectives in this context), (2) suitable for the use of chopsticks or (3) characterized by the use of chopsticks (the companion noun chopsticky meaning “the state of being chopstickish”.  Chopstickism was once used of things considered Chinese or Asian in character but is now regarded as a racist slur (the non-standard chopstickistic similarly now proscribed).

They may be slender and light but because annual use is measured in the millions, there is a significant environmental impact associated with chopsticks including deforestation, waste and carbon emissions.  Beginning in the early twenty-first century, a number of countries in East Asia have taken measures designed to reduce the extent of the problem including regulatory impositions, technological innovation and public awareness campaigns.  In 2006, the Chinese government levied a 5% consumption tax on disposable wooden chopsticks and later began a “Clean Your Plate” publicity campaign to encourage sustainable dining practices.  In Japan, although disposable chopsticks (waribashi) remain common, some local governments (responsible for waste management) promote reusable options and businesses have been encouraged to offer reusable or bamboo-based alternatives although the RoK (Republic of Korea (South Korea)) went further and promoted reusable metal chopsticks, devices which could last a lifetime.

The Chork

Although the materials used in construction and the possibilities of recycling have attracted some interest, there has in hundreds of years been no fundamental change in the chopstick’s design, simply because it long ago was (in its core function) perfected and can’t be improved upon.  However, in 2016, the US fast food chain Panda Express (which specializes what it describes as “American Chinese cuisine”) displayed the chork (the construct being ch(opstick) + (f)ork).  Designed presumably for the benefit of barbaric Westerners unable to master a pair of chopsticks (one of the planet’s most simple machines) the chork had been developed by Brown Innovation Group (BIG) which first revealed its existence in 2010.  BIG has created a website for the chork which explains the three correct ways to use the utensil: (1) Employ the fork end as one might a conventional fork, (2) break the chork in two and use like traditional chopsticks or (3) use what BIG call cheater/training mode in which the chopstick component is used with the fork part still attached.  Unfortunately for potential chorkers, Panda Express used the chork only as a promotional tool for the "General Tso's Chicken" launch but they remain available from BIG in packs of 12 & 24, both manufactured in the PRC (People's Republic of China).

Richard Nixon, détente and soupgate

Comrade Nikita Khrushchev (1894–1971; Soviet leader 1953-1964, left) and (then vice president) Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974, right)during the Кухонные дебаты (Kukhonnye debaty) (kitchen debate), conducted in a “model American kitchen” built for the American National Exhibition, Sokolniki Park, Moscow, 24 July 1959.  The pair (through interpreters) debated the respective virtues of communism verses capitalism, the backdrop being what was said to be a model of a “typical American kitchen”, packed with labor-saving appliances and recreational stuff “able to be afforded by the typical American family”.  Neither party persuaded the other but when finally able to choose between dialectical materialism and consumer materialism, most former Soviet comrades opted for the latter.

Richard Nixon (right) and HR Haldeman (1926–1993; White House chief of staff 1969-1973, left), the White House, 1 January 1972.

Although this photograph is sometimes captioned as being taken in the Oval Office, Nixon used that room only for formal meetings or ceremonial events and usually worked from this smaller, adjoining office.  The stacks of paper are not untypical examples of what workplaces often were like before personal computers transformed things and although the printed page has proved remarkably enduring, the days of the stacks mostly are done.  There was though one exception to that.  When in 2014 the House Select Committee on Benghazi (one of the many scandals involving crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) was sitting, the State Department requested crooked Hillary provide all the emails stored on her “personal mail server” which, controversially, she’d used for official US government business and "other purposes".  A period of negotiations with her legal team ensued (given crooked Hillary’s past, it was a busy team) and what ended up being provided was a dozen file boxes filled with print-outs of over 30,000 emails (calculated to be around 64 reams of paper or a stack some 10½ feet (3.25 metres) high).  The reason crooked Hillary refused to provide the material in digital form was presumed to be (1) in digital form it would have been easier for analysts to search for data and (2) concerns that even though she’d had her staff delete from the server some 32,000 messages (claimed to be “personal”), a forensic analysis of a granular message file might have revealed all or some of what had been deleted.  Crooked Hillary’s use of her so called "home-brew" mail server has never satisfactorily been explained and the contents of the deleted emails may never be known.

Richard Nixon became famous for some things and infamous for others but one footnote in the history of his administration was that he banned soup.  In 1969, Nixon hosted a state dinner for Pierre Trudeau (1919–2000; prime minister of Canada 1968-1979 & 1980-1984) and the next day complained to HR Haldeman that formal dinners “take forever”, suggesting “Why don’t we just leave out the soup course?”, adding “Men don’t really like soup.” (other than wives & waitresses, state dinners were then substantially a male preserve).  Well-acquainted with the social ineptitude of his boss, Haldeman had his suspicions so called the president's valet and asked: “Was there anything wrong with the president’s suit after that dinner last night?”  “Why yes…”, the valet responded, “…he spilled soup down the vest.”  Not until Gerald Ford (1913–2006; US president 1974-1977) assumed the presidency was soup restored to White House menus to the relief of the chefs who couldn’t believe a dinner was really a dinner without a soup course.

Richard Nixon, détente and chopsticks

A chopstick neophyte in Beijing: Comrade Zhou Enlai (1898–1976; premier of the People's Republic of China (PRC) 1949-1976, left), Richard Nixon (centre) and comrade Zhang Chunqiao (1917–2005, right) at the welcome banquet for President Nixon's visit to the PRC, Tiananmen Square, Beijing, 26 February 1972.  After the death of comrade Chairman Mao (Mao Zedong 1893–1976; chairman of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) 1949-1976), in a CCP power struggle, Zhang (a prominent figure in the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976)) was arrested, becoming one of the “Gang of Four” (which included the late chairman’s last wife).  After a typically efficient CCP-approved trial, he was sentenced to death but was granted a two-year reprieve and his sentence was later commuted to life in prison before being reduced to 18 years.  Released on humanitarian grounds in 1998 to enable him to receive treatment for cancer, he died in 2005.

The event in Beijing was not a “state visit” because at the time no formal diplomatic relations existed between the two nations (the US still recognized the Taiwan-based RoC (Republic of China (which Beijing regards still as a “renegade province”)) as the legitimate government of China). For that reason, the trip was described as an “official visit”, a term not part of diplomatic protocol.  There are in history a few of these fine distinctions: technically, diplomatic relations were never re-established between Berlin and Paris after the fall of the Third Republic in 1940 so ambassadors were never accredited which means Otto Abetz (1903-1958), who fulfilled the role between 1940-1944, should be referred to as “de facto” German ambassador (as the letters patent made clear, he acted with full ambassadorial authority).  In July 1949, a French court handed Abetz a twenty-year sentence for crimes against humanity; released in 1954, he died in 1958 in a traffic accident on the Cologne-Ruhr autobahn and there are conspiracy theorists who suspect the death was “an assassination”.  The de facto ambassador was the great uncle of Eric Abetz (b 1958; Liberal Party senator for Tasmania, Australia 1994-2022, member of the Tasmanian House of assembly since 2024), noted in Australian legal history for being the first solicitor in the city of Hobart to include color on his firm's letterhead.

Longing for a chork.

Still, whatever the detail of the protocol, the PRC's hospitality was lavish and it certainly looked (and tasted) like a state visit.  Both the US and the PRC had their own reasons for wishing to emerge from the “diplomatic deep-freeze” (Moscow something of a pivot) and it was this event which was instrumental in beginning the process of integrating the PRC into the international system.  The “official visit” also introduced into English the idiomatic phrase “Nixon in China” (there are variations) which describes the ability of a politician with an impeccable reputation of upholding particular political values to perform an action in seeming defiance of them without jeopardizing his support or credibility.  For his whole political career Nixon had been a virulent anti-communist and was thus able to make the tentative approach to the PRC (and later détente with the Soviet Union) in a way which would not have been possible for someone without the same history.  In the same way the Democratic Party’s Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) was able during the 1990s to embark on social welfare “reform” in a way no Republican administration could have achieved.

The chopstick as a hair accessory: Lindsay Lohan (b 1986, left) in The Parent Trap (1998) and Hilary Duff (b 1987, right) at Nickelodeon's 15th Annual Kids Choice Awards, Barker Hangar, Santa Monica, California, April, 2002.  These outfits might now be described as "cultural appropriation".

Following the visit, there was also a culinary ripple in the US.  Since the nineteenth century, Chinese restaurants had been a fixture in many US cities but the dishes they served were often very different from those familiar in China and some genuinely were local creations; fortune cookies began in San Francisco courtesy of a paperback edition of “Chinese Proverbs” and all the evidence suggests egg rolls were invented in New York.  The news media’s coverage of the visit attracted great interest and stimulated interest in “authentic” Chinese food after some of the menus were published.  Noting the banquet on the first night featured shark’s fin soup, steamed chicken with coconut and almond junket (a type of pudding), one enterprising chap was within 24 hours offering in his Manhattan Chinese restaurant recreation of each dish, a menu which remained popular for some months after the president’s return.  Mr Nixon’s favorite meal during the visit was later revealed to be Peking duck and around the US, there was a spike in demand for duck.

One of the menus from the official visit (not from a banquet but one of the "working dinners").  Clearly, the president's fondness for duck had been conveyed to the chef.

The graphic is the National Emblem of the People's Republic of China and in a red circle depicts a representation of Tiananmen Gate, the entrance gate to the Forbidden City imperial palace complex, where in 1949 comrade Chairman Mao Zedong declared the foundation of the PRC (People's Republic of China) in 1949.  The five stars are those from the national flag, the largest representing the CCP, the others the four revolutionary social classes defined in Maoism (the peasantry, proletariat, petty bourgeoisie & national bourgeoisie).  Although Maoism was criticized by comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) and others for being “ideologically primitive”, it has over the decades proved a practical and enduring textbook for insurgencies and revolutionary movements, especially where those involved substantially are rural-dwellers.  Although comrade Stalin may have been sceptical about comrade Mao's contribution to Marxist theory, Maoism has endured and its many (bloody) successes would have surprised Karl Marx (1818-1883) who saw the potential for revolution only in the urban proletariat slaving in factories, grumbling that peasants were impossible to harness as a movement because they: "...were like potatoes, all the same and yet all different."    

Viscacha or vizcacha

Viscacha or vizcacha (pronounced vi-skah-chuh)

A gregarious burrowing hystricomorph rodent (Lagostomus maximus), of the genera Lagidium and Lagostomus, within family Chinchillidae, about the size of a groundhog, inhabiting the pampas of Paraguay and Argentina and allied to the smaller chinchilla, also from the family Chinchillidae.  It’s known also at the mountain viscacha, a related rodent of the genus Lagidium (of the Andes), about the size of a squirrel, having rabbit-like ears and a squirrel-like tail.

1595–1605: From the Spanish viscacha from Quechua wisk’acha or Quechuan wiskácha.  The Spanish Quechua is from qhichwa (literally “temperate valley”).  With use depending on prevailing practice, both the spellings viscacha & vizcacha are used in various branches of biology and zoology, the older alternatives biscacha, biscacho & bizcacha now rare except in historic citation.  The noun plural is viscachas and the derived term is viscachera (plural viscacheras) which describes a warren inhabited by viscachas.

Vizcacha moments: Time for the world weary to take a nap; Lindsay Lohan (left) joining a viscacha (right) in a yawn.

The viscachas or vizcachas, of which there are five extant species, are rodents of the genera (Lagidium and Lagostomus) within the family Chinchillidae.  Native to South America, despite looking similar to rabbits or hares, they’re not related to either and are thus of interest to evolutionary biologists because they’re an example of convergent evolution.  When biologists first saw the viscacha they noted the question of heritage: mammals part of the Leporidae family (rabbit) or the Chinchillidae family (Chinchilla)?  Sharing the large ears, powerful hind legs, and small front paws, Vizcachas do bear a striking resemblance to the rabbit family but are distinguished by their long bushy tail, a trait unique to the Chinchillidae family.  Helpful for biologists as a species indicator, for the small rodent, it’s a marker of their state of mind, the tail is extended when distressed and curled when at ease.

Residing throughout southern and western South America, they tend to stay close to their underground burrows but possess surprising dexterity as climbers, able to jump from rock to rock so effortlessly and with such alacrity observers report their progress is hard to track with the naked eye.  They live in colonies that can be barely a dozen or number in the hundreds and have acquired an extensive repertoire of vocalizations used in social interactions.  Small they may be but Vizcachas are voluble and, belying their sleepy appearance, are noted for their gregarious behavior.

Up to two feet (.6 m) in length and weighing typically around 3.5 lbs (1.6 kg), Vizcachas are relatively large by rodent standards but are small compared to their carnivorous neighbors, the Puma and Culpeo Fox.  These two are fierce predators but the fast, agile Vizcacha has the advantage of inhabiting a mountainous environment littered with boulders and rocks which is difficult hunting ground so doesn’t suffer greatly from predation induced population decline.  The main threat is humans, less from the habitat loss which threatens some species but because of illegal hunting for their meat and fur, luxury items in some markets.

There are spiritual traditions in which exists the concept of the spirit animal, a creature the spirit of which is said to help guide or protect a person on a journey and the characteristics of which that person shares or embodies.  The apparently ancient concept is prominent in a number of indigenous (notably Native American) religions and cultures and was embraced by Pagan and Wiccan communities as recently as the 1990s and the term totem was sometimes used.  Totem was from the Native North American Ojibwe ᑑᑌᒼ or ᑑᑌᒻ (doodem) and referred to a sacred object, symbol or spirit and in a sense can be thought of as the equivalent of a flag (in the case of a tribe) or coat of arms (in the case of a clan).  The word totem became widely used by anthropologists when discussing cultural practices in many places (and not just in North America).  In academic use where it's a neutral descriptor this is usually not controversial but in general use it can be a form of cultural misappropriation.  In the West, the idea of spirit animals was picked up in the weird world of the new age, dolphins and other charismatic creatures predictably popular.  The concept turned out also to have appeal to some among the less spiritual who adopted the viscacha as their spirit animal because there is seemingly no living thing on earth with an appearance which so encapsulates the qualities of the melancholic, world-weariness and the need to take a nap.

Vizcacha moments: Jiang Zemin (1926–2022; General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) (and thus paramount leader) 1989-2002 & President of the People's Republic of China (PRC) 1993-2003), yawning (left) and resting his eyes (right) during one of the less interesting speeches delivered as part of the otherwise riveting proceedings of the nineteenth congress of the CCP, Beijing, October 2017.  Western diplomats noted that, unusually among those in the senior echelon of the CCP, Mr Jiang could at times seem almost "exuberant" (a contrast to his two more dour successors) but in retirement he may have adopted the viscacha as his spirit animal, the creature quite suited to his more somnolent lifestyle.

The Ciano Diaries, 1939-1943.  Although a literary genre not always renowned for accuracy, historians regard Ciano's among the more reliable.

One can understand Mr Jiang taking a moment to rest his eyes during the congress.  After half a lifetime in politics, some of it in the era when “a fatal error” was not a figurative phrase, he’d probably heard it all before and could sense when he could “tune out” for a while.  Cases have often been documented of those for whom continued attention becomes just too much and one who caused more vizcacha moments than most was Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) whose repetitive and seemingly endless monologues (touching discursively on subjects such as art, architecture, dog breeding, artificial honey, the church, philosophy and vegetarianism) came to be dreaded by almost all compelled to sit and endure a session.  Count Galeazzo Ciano (1903–1944; Italian foreign minister 1936-1943 (and the son-in-law of Benito Mussolini who ordered his execution)) was, like us all, a flawed character but he had a diarist’s eye and in his entries left some of the most vivid recollections of the World War II era.  In the Austrian city of Salzburg in May, 1942 he attended a series of meetings along with Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943), General Ugo Cavallero (1880–1943; Chief of the Italian General Staff 1940-1943) and the two senior figures from the OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (the German military's high command)), Generalfeldmarschall (Field Marshal) Wilhelm Keitel (1882–1946; chief of OKW 1938-1945) and Generaloberst (Colonel General) Alfred Jodl (1890–1946, chief of the OKW operations staff 1939-1945), noting in his diary one “epic struggle”:

“Hitler talks, talks, talks, talks.  Mussolini suffers - he, who is in the habit of talking himself, and who, instead, practically has to keep quiet.  On the second day, after lunch, when everything had been said, Hitler talked uninterruptedly for an hour and forty minutes.  He omitted absolutely no argument: war and peace, religion and philosophy, art and history.  Mussolini automatically looked at his wrist watch, I had my mind on my own business, and only Cavallero, who is a phenomenon of servility, pretended he was listening in ecstasy, continually nodding his head in approval.  Those, however, who dreaded the ordeal less than we did were the Germans.  Poor people.  They have to take it every day, and I am certain there isn’t a gesture, a word, or a pause which they don’t know by heart.  General Jodl, after an epic struggle, finally went to sleep on the divan. Keitel was reeling, but he succeeded in keeping his head up.  He was too close to Hitler to let himself go as he would have liked to do.”

Things did not end well for those who attended the Salzburg meeting.  Some nine months after being dismissed from his military command, Cavallero (a confessed Freemason) was found dead in the garden of a hotel in Frascati, some 20 km (12 miles) south-east of Rome.  The case of death was a single gunshot and historians still can't be certain whether he committed suicide or was assassinated by the Italians or Germans, most favoring the latter.  After a prompting from Hitler, Ciano was executed on the orders of Mussolini (his father-in-law!) and the Duce himself was assassinated by Italian partisans.  Keitel and Jodl were tried before the IMT (International Mititary Tribunal in the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) and, after being convicted on all four counts: (1) Conspiracy to wage aggressive war; (2) Waging aggressive war; (3) War crimes and (4) Crimes against humanity, both were sentenced to death and hanged.  Hitler, with his wife Eva (née Braun; 1912–1945) of a few hours, committed suicide with the tanks of the Red Army only a couple of blocks from the Berlin Führerbunker.

Podophilia

Podophilia (pronounced podd-ah-fil-ee-uh or pod-oh-fil=ee-uh)

A paraphilia describing the sexualized objectification of feet (and sometimes footwear), commonly called foot fetishism although the correct clinical description is now "foot partialism".

1980s: The construct was podo- +‎ -philia.  Podo- (pertaining to a foot or a foot-like part) was from the Ancient Greek πούς (poús), from the primitive Indo-European pṓds.  It was cognate with the Mycenaean Greek po, the Latin pēs, the Sanskrit पद् (pad), the Old Armenian ոտն (otn) & հետ (het), the Gothic fōtus and the Old English fōt (from which Modern English gained foot).  The Greek poús was the ancient Greek and Byzantine unit of length originally based upon the length of a shod foot and the idea in Europe endured for centuries although until the seventeenth century there were little attempts at standardization, even within the one jurisdiction and although things were settled well before the twentieth century, in the legal sense it wasn't until 1959 that the US, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Australia and the UK signed the "International Yard and Pound Agreement" which codified avoirdupois weight and length then used in all those nations, a set (although largely supplanted by the metric system (except in the US)) which officially still defines both Imperial and US customary units.  The suffix –philia was from the From Ancient Greek φιλία (philía) (fraternal love), from φῐλέω (philéō) (to love), from the earlier Ionic Greek (where the meanings diverged somewhat over the years.  It was used to to form nouns meaning a fondness, liking or love of something and in pathology picked up the specific technical sense of abnormal liking or tendency such a paraphilia.  One with specific attraction to feet or footwear is a podophile and their predilections are described as podophilic.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

The English phrase “length of the chancellor's foot” is neither an allusion to lineal measurement nor an early example of political podophilia.  It is a critique of law and most associated with a passage by the English jurist and scholar John Selden (1584–1654) which appeared in his Table Talk (published posthumously in London in 1689), discussing the flexible, adaptable law of equity and how its administration differed from the rigid, precedent-bound courts of common law: “Equity is a roguish thing: for law we have a measure… equity is according to the conscience of him that is Chancellor, and as that is larger or narrower, so is equity. ’Tis all one as if they should make the standard for the measure we call a 'foot' a Chancellor’s foot; what an uncertain measure would this be! One Chancellor has a long foot, another a short foot, a third an indifferent foot.”

In other words, in the Court of Chancellery, equity was administered by the Lord Chancellor at his discretion, the attraction being when the application of common law precedents were seen to create an obvious injustice, equity could intervene to provide a just result: justice based on fairness rather than strict legal rules.  However, implicit in that flexibility was the estimation of equity could vary from one Chancellor to next and thus the Court of Chancellery soon created its own contradictions, attracting critics who noted an outcome depended on the personal judgment of the Lord Chancellor who reached his decision on a “case-by-case” basis.

The Lord Chancellor with feet in flippers: Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone (Quintin Hogg, 1907-2001; Lord Chancellor 1970-1974 & 1979-1987).  Hailsham was a Tory (Conservative) but the photograph was taken by the Labour Party politician Lord Healey (Dennis Healey, 1917–2015).

The rationale was both clear and commendable but lawyers trained in the courts of common law liked the certainty and predictability of adherence to precedence; their fees were dependent on them winning their clients’ cases, not seeking an abstraction like “justice”.  Thus the phrase became legal shorthand for judicial arbitrariness in which outcomes depended on personal discretion rather than objective standards.  The equity lawyers were of course sensitive to the criticism and what evolved in the Court of Chancellery was its own set of “rules” although these came to be called “equitable maxims” and were principles & concepts which can be thought of as a kind of “proto-fuzzy law” in that they existed to ensure justice and fairness would be delivered but in a consistent manner.  The phrase however survives as a critique of subjective decision-making by authorities or inconsistencies in governance or law.

Often focused on toe cleavage, many self-described foot fetishists provide curated content.

Although the psychiatric community has since the mid-twentieth century devoted some time to discussing, re-defining and pondering what is apparently the 1800-odd year history of foot fetishism, a glance at the literature does suggest it’s been thought usually an interesting quirk in the human condition rather than a condition, much less a mental disorder.  Before the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 1987 published the revised third edition of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R), fetishism was usually described as a persistent preferential sexual arousal in association with non-living objects or an over-inclusive focus on (typically non-sexualized) body parts (most famously feet) and body secretions.  With the DSM-III-R, the concept of partialism (an exclusive focus on part of the body) was separated from the historic category of fetishism and appended to the “Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified” category.  Although one of the dustier corners of psychiatry, the field had always fascinated some and in the years since the DSM-III-R was published, a literature did emerge, most critics maintaining partialism and fetishism are related, can be co-associated, and are non-exclusive domains of sexual behavior.  There was a technical basis for this position because introduced in DSM-IV (1994) was a (since further elaborated) codification of the secondary clinical significance criterion for designating a psychiatric disorder, one the implications of which was that it appeared to suggest a diagnostic distinction between partialism and fetishism was no longer clinically meaningful or necessary.  The recommendation was that the prime diagnostic criterion for fetishism be modified to reflect the reintegration of partialism and that a fetishistic focus on non-sexual body parts be a specifier of Fetishism.

Lohanic footage: Lindsay Lohan’s feet, the right plantar flexing (left), the left dorsiflexing (right).  Wikifeet's expert critics rate Ms Lohan's feet at 4½ stars (beautiful feet); her page has 3653 images.

Fetish was from the Latin facere (to make) which begat factitious (made by art), from which the Portuguese feitico was derived (fetiche in the French), from which English gained fetish.  A fetish in this context was defined as "a thing irrationally revered; an object in which power or force was concentrated".  In English, use of fetish to indicate an object of desire in the sense of “someone who is aroused due to a body part, or an object belonging to a person who is the object of desire” dates from 1897 (although the condition is mentioned in thirteenth century medical documents), an era during which the language of modern psychiatry was being assembled.  However, the earliest known literary evidence of podophilia lies in dozens of brooding, obsessive love letters from the second century AD of uncertain authorship and addressed to both male and female youths.  That there are those to whom an object or body part has the power to captivate and enthral has presumably been part of the human condition from the start.

Suspected podophiles, parked outside shoe shop.

From the beginnings of modern psychiatry, such a focus was not in itself considered a disorder, unless accompanied by distress or impairment although it was noted by many that if even a nominally “harmless” fetish became an obsession, it certainly could impair healthy sexuality.  In DSM-5 (2013), the diagnosis was assigned to individuals who experience sexual arousal from objects or a specific part of the body which is not typically regarded as erotic and presumably any body part or object can be a fetish, the most frequently mentioned including underwear, shoes, stockings, gloves, hair and latex.   Fetishists may use the desired article for sexual gratification in the absence of a partner although it’s recorded this may involve nothing more than touching smelling the item and the condition appears to manifest almost exclusively in men, the literature suggesting a quarter of fetishistic men are homosexual but caution needs always to be attached to these numbers.  Because fetishism is something which many happily enjoy their whole adult lives, it never comes to the attention of doctors and a high proportion of the statistical material about fetishism is from patients self-reporting.  The statistics in a sense reflect thus not the whole cohort of the population with the condition but rather those who either want to talk about it or are responding to surveys.  That is of course true of other mental illnesses but is exaggerated with fetishism because so much lies with the spectrum of normal human behavior and the definitional limitations in the DSM-5 reflect this, including three criteria for Fetishistic Disorder and three specifiers:

Criterion 1: Over a six month period, the individual has experienced sexual urges focused on a non-genital body part, or inanimate object, or other stimulus, and has acted out urges, fantasies, or behaviors.

Criterion 2: The fantasies, urges, or behaviors cause distress, or impairment in functioning.

Criterion 3: The fetishized object is not an article of clothing employed in cross dressing, or a sexual stimulation device, such as a vibrator.

Specifiers for the diagnosis include the type of stimulus which is the focus of attention (1) the non-genital or erogenous areas of the body (famously feet) and this condition is known also as Partialism (a preoccupation with a part of the body rather than the whole person), (2) Non-living object(s) (such as shoes), (3) specific activities (such as smoking during sex).

Not AOC’s feet.

The foot particularists also do PSAs (public service announcements).  When an image of feet was posted to Instagram with a caption claiming they belonged to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC, b 1989, US Representative (Democrat-New York) since 2019 and one of "the squad"), the alleged foot-selfie was lent a whiff of scandal by their owner being in the bath, holding a vape with a bottle of pumpkin-scented shampoo nearby.  Quickly the story was debunked by the online foot fetishists at WikiFeet, the internet’s most comprehensive collection of pictures of women's feet.  In this case, Ms Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Wikifeet page was used to C&C (compare and contrast) against the images in their library and it wasn’t a difficult task for the Wikifeet experts because the toes in the image were mildly brachydactyly (an inherited trait whereby the bones of the digits are relatively short) whereas AOC’s are not so afflicted.  Wikifeet’s users rate AOC’s feet at “3.92 stars” (nice feet), based on the 83 images in her page (many in sandals but some daringly bare).  Further research by the Wikifeet particularists revealed the feet surfacing provocatively from the pink bath-water really belonged to Sydney Leathers (b 1991) who became even better known by parlaying the publicity she attracted for being the sexting partner of disgraced New York politician Anthony Weiner (b 1964) into an apparently brief career as an aspiring porn star.  Why that didn’t flourish isn’t clear because rarely has there been a better porn star name than "Sydney Leathers" and Australian fellmongers and fetishists alike missed a marketing opportunity there.

Gianvito Rossi 85 suede pumps, US$1,210 at net-a-porter.

Noting the definitional model in the DSM-IV-TR (2000), despite the history in psychiatry’s world of paraphilias and a notable presence in popular culture, there were those who claimed the very notion of a foot fetish was false because of that critical phrase “non-living” which would seem to disqualify a foot (unless of course it was no longer alive but such an interest would be seriously weird and a different condition; although in this context there are deconstructionists who would make a distinction between a depiction of a live foot and the foot itself, clinicians probably regard them as interchangeable tools of the fetishist although the techniques of consumption would vary).  The critic noted many fetishes are extensions of the human body, such as articles of clothing or footwear but that did not extend to feet and that diagnostically, a sexual fascination with feet did correctly belong in the category of “Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified,” and thus be regarded as partialism: Foot partialism.

Design by Davina-India.  Although the extreme examples won’t be possible to render as practical products without (unanticipated) advances in materials, 3D printing offers possibilities for the shoe-oriented faction of the foot partialists.

It was Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) who admitted that, lawfulness aside, as animals, the only truly aberrant sexual behavior in humans could be said to be its absence (something which the modern asexual movement re-defines rather than disproves).  It seemed to be in that spirit the DSM-5 was revised to treat podophila and many other “harmless” behaviors as “normal” and thus within the purview of the manual only to the extent of being described, clinical intervention no longer required.  Whether all psychiatrists agree with the new permissiveness isn’t known but early reports suggest there’s nothing in the DSM-5-TR (2022) to suggest podophiles will soon again be labeled as deviants.

Most Beautiful Ankle competition, Hounslow, England, 1936. What such competitions did was “level the playing field” to ensure a woman was judged only on the body-part being assessed, the rest of her concealed behind a screen so a judge wouldn't be influenced by “extraneous aspects”.

The matter of podophilia is not exactly a neglected field but beyond the particularists it’s a niche topic for study, probably because despite being often curated as collections of images of objectified, un-clothed body parts, the stuff inherently is SFW (suitable for work) so is not as controversial as some fetishes.  Indeed, even were someone found to be in possession of many images of the feet of minors, unless the circumstances were unusual and disclosed suspicion of other behaviours, it’s likely no offence has been committed.  There have though been some academic studies including Sexualization of the Female Foot as a Response to Sexually Transmitted Epidemics: A Preliminary Study (1998) by A. James Giannini, Andrew E. Slaby, Gale Colapietro, Steven M. Melemis & Rachel K. Bowman.  A review of historic literature, the authors hypothesized a relationship between epidemics of sexually transmitted diseases and foot fetishism, the research prompted by an exponential increase in the behaviour seen in the 1980s, before AIDS had been listed as a pandemic.

Most Beautiful Legs competition, Palisades Amusement Park, New York, 1951.  Note the judge crouching to achieve the perfect angle, presumably a podophile with a well-trained eye.

The paper noted that during the second millennium there have been four major epidemics of STDs (sexually transmitted diseases, then the preferred term for what are now classed as STIs (sexually transmitted infections)): (1) what’s believed to have been an outbreak of gonorrhoea in the thirteenth century, syphilis in (2) the sixteenth and (3) nineteenth and (4) AIDS in the late twentieth and during each “there seemed to emerge a sexual focus on the female foot” which “disappeared with the epidemic's subsidence, usually after 30-60 years.”  What was intriguing was “the focus on feet was unique to each of these epidemic periods” whereas in all other eras studied, “eroticism was attached to breasts, buttocks and thighs.”  It was not suggested feet (bare or otherwise) didn’t appear in Biblical, Egyptian or Classical art and literature but they were not depicted as “sexual foci”.

It was in the thirteenth century things began to change as romantic writings came to include paeans to women's feet and the details were often not metaphorical but anatomical, describing in loving admiration the “aesthetically idealized woman's foot” which was to be “narrow with high arches.  The toes were to be somewhat long with no ‘webbing’ or folds of skin in between.  The great toe was longer than the second toe. The nails were to be elongated with large white moons and pale-pink nail-beds.”  The perfect foot was expected to be “white on both plantar and ventral aspects” so clearly, like thighs, buttocks and breasts, women’s feet were expected to conform to what men had decided was “beautiful” and those with body parts outside the “standardized image” could not be beautiful. Plus ça change…

Most Beautiful Ankle competition, Cliftonville open air swimming pool, Margate, England, 1936.

The Church looked askance at this “new” fetish, damning it as a “further form of degeneracy as Europe” and though the paper finds the trend faded to oblivion with the end of what is now believed to have been an epidemic of gonorrhoea, with the outbreak of syphilis in the sixteenth century, there appears again a “near-simultaneous reappearance of the foot fetish” which began in southern Europe before spreading north and the art of the time suggests it was then “toe-cleavage” was first identified as a motif, as a “voyeuristic mark of this time period as decolletage for other generations”.  Interestingly, 300-odd years on, the ideal structure was re-imagined and an “elongated second toe” became suddenly fashionable.  When syphilis re-appeared in the 1800s, so did the focus on women’s feet and because photography was available to the Victorians, there’s a record also of the reaction of polite society with the female foot “removed from photographic tintypes”: While men’s boots commonly remained exposed, women's boots or shoes were either covered with fabric or “mechanically cropped from the plate”.  Ballerinas would perform bare-footed (critics writing of her feet as they “flexed and extended”) ice-cream confections (called the “Trilby”) were sold in the shape of a woman’s foot and the “Cinderella fairy tale was revived with foot fetishistic overtones not now reflected in twentieth century versions”.  

Sometimes, statistical methods are purely lineal: Technicians recording (in metrics) the metrics of a contestant in Miss Italia, Rome, 1949.

“Body part” contests offered scope for those who wouldn’t be “competitive” in mainstream beauty contests.  As a footnote, the perfection (in the sense of digital depiction) of generative AI (artificial intelligence) may see the end of the industry’s “body part model” niche in which those with exceptional hands, feet, eyes etc were contracted for photo-shoots involving just that one part.

In the nineteenth century, some did offer explanations (sometimes fanciful) for the phenomenon and although in the medical literature there were observations of the use of the foot “as a safe-sex alternative”, no systematic studies seem to have been undertaken.  The AIDS pandemic revived the interest and the proliferation of foot-fetish publications in the 1980s (before the internet was a mainstream product) was a marker of the trend and interestingly, the titles of what were usually glossy magazines avoided the words “feet” & “foot”, instead using “neutral” terms such as “Leg Action, Thigh High, Leg Show, Leg-Scene, High-heeled Women, Silk Stockings or Leg Tease”.  Despite that, the content seems overwhelmingly foot-centric and the conclusion was the publishers wished to “avoid embarrassment for the purchaser”.  That was interesting in that publications devoted to other body parts seemed to tend to use unambiguous titles and the paradox was that although feet were SWF, the perception was there was shame attached to the predilection, something not suffered by consumers of the definitely NSFW (not suitable for work) breast-related material.  Editorially, there were photographs mostly including feet and tips & techniques for “foot sex” which could be “a pleasurable sexual alternative without risk of sexually transmitted diseases”, the foot described as a safe “erotic alternative to the anus and genitals”.  It was at this point even the mainstream magazines began to advocate “toe sucking” and “foot biting” between couples, not to avoid infections but because for even the most sexually jaded it would be a “genuinely new” experience, novelty in this field much valued.  Diligent washing prior to sucking and biting was recommended.

First heat of Miss Slender Legs Competition, Miami, Florida, 1952.  Many good things happen in Florida; everybody knows that.

The pop band The Monks in 1979 released the single Nice Legs Shame About Her Face so the contest in Miami was really an early example of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion).  It's a bit of a stretch but as a Lord Chancellor might have put it, "beauty contests" are a thing of the common law while the "most beautiful body part" competitions belong to equity. 

The AIDS pandemic of course remains afoot although advances in treatment have made it manageable for most, at least in developed economies though there are concerns how cuts to foreign aid will affect outcomes in poorer regions, especially sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific islands.  Despite the the condition fading from public consciousness, foot particularism appears still to be flourishing, the absence of foot-focused print titles an indication of the general industry shift to digital content rather than any decline in interest and the count of related internet pages is said to be in the millions.  To explain the phenomenon which has for centuries re-occurred, the neurology community has also become involved.  In Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind (1998), neurologist V.S. Ramachandran (b 1991) and science journalist Sandra Blakeslee (b 1943) offered the theory of a link with brain areas for the feet and the genitals being physically close, their speculation being there may be some “neural crosstalk between the two”, the idea a concern about STIs induces the brain to be stimulated to think about feet, purely because of the effect of directly adjacent electrical activity.