Dear PoP – “Suspicious person photographing girls in metro”

Photo by PoPville flickr user Bogotron

“Dear PoP,

I’m writing you with a very weird occurrence that I observed on the metro probably 2 months or so ago. I would normally just ignore it but today my best friend told me she saw a very similar incident by a man who fits exactly the description. What I saw was a large (6’3″/250) African-American man who appeared and acted like he may have a mental or emotional condition indiscreetly snapping several cell phone camera pictures of a young woman probably mid-20s reading a book. He sat across from her pretending to text but my roommate and I could see clearly he was taking pictures of her. He even got up and stood next to her to take pictures. I wish we had said something but we didn’t know what to do. I had forgotten about it until my friend told me that she saw a man who fit the exact description, with the same blue flip phone, clearly taking pictures of another young woman’s feet.

Braver than I she yelled at him and called the train’s attention to what he was doing. I don’t remember the time or line from 2 months ago where I saw him, but last night she saw him on a Glenmont-bound red line, getting on at Bethesda around 5:50 pm. Can you please let your readers know that this suspicious man may be taking invasive photos, particularly of young women on metro trains, and to be alert and let a driver or station manager know if they see such activity? As a young woman who frequents metro herself, I am more than concerned that potential predators could be photographing me or even identifying information somehow.”

At first I wasn’t sure if people just didn’t like being photographed, like Pablo discussed in his street photography post. But then I read the part that said he was photographing – “young woman’s feet”. This is a really bizarre situation. How would you recommend dealing with this situation?

Photo by PoPville flickr user [F]oxymoron

99 Comment

  • I just wanted to point out that many women don’t want to be photographed for a very good reason, even if it’s by a harmless street photographer – their safety. Women sometimes have to go to great lengths to get away from their abusers, including moving and changing their names. Having a photograph of them show up on the internet can undo all of that. I’m not saying that means no one should take photographs in public spaces, just pointing out a reason why someone might be upset by this.

    • Thats a reach. People might just be upset bc its creepy.

      • It’s not a reach. Yeah, most people would be upset because it’s creepy. But other people might be upset because for them, it’s dangerous. Violence against women is a fact of life in our society.

    • It is a major reach because it assumes that she is somehow fleeing an abuser. While many people have been victims of sexual assault, they are not all running around the country fleeing the abuser.

      • exactly. assuming everyone fits into some category that no more than several thousand people fit into is not really adding much to the topic.

        So we should all be aware that pictures we take in public places and then post on facebook could aid a stalker? Come on. I think you’ve been watching too many lifetime movies if you think that is even close to likely.

        • I worked at a domestic violence safehouse and the continual violence people face from their abusers is terrifying. If a photo can identify what metro line a person regularly takes in the morning or a child’s new school, the abuser can easily track the victim. In my opinion, either ask before publishing a photo or don’t use a picture where the person is easily identifiable.

          • The part that is a reach is the stalker finding the photo. Its not like he can google “the person I’m stalking” and find some random photo out in the universe.

          • this is ridiculous. I’m sorry but did you give a moment’s thought to how difficult it would be for the abuser to find that photo, given that the people in it would not be identified by name?

          • If the victim and abuser live in the same city, maybe in the same neighborhood, posting a picture on a local blog could be a problem. I’m not saying that the outcome is likely but why not ask the person whether you may post his or her photo?

  • How is this different than the guy who lurks around DC and photographs transoms, album covers, pop-ups, and cute animals?

    • Aren’t you in jail?

    • Why do people not share this same outrage when it comes to celebrities who are stalked on a regular basis? Because they choose to entertain us? I would ask the OP, do you read US Weekly and make comments on how creepy it is to watch some hunk from the Twilight movies take out his garbage or make fun of what Kim Kardashian wore to the gym?

      Not to freak people out much more, but there are whole websites dedicated to snapping pictures of “hot guys & Girls” in public.

    • Love it! Thanks for giving me a good laugh!!!

  • OMIGOD that large black man is taking pictures of that poor lady’s feet! Oh the humanity!

    • Clearly, the social taboo of taking pictures of strangers’ body parts is lost on you. This and other details lead me to believe you are socially challenged. Seriously.

      Can you prosecute someone for this? Probably not, but it’s still creepy as hell. If you think this is not a big deal, you should try imagining life as a 120 lb woman.

      Me, I’m closer in build to this guy, and if this happened to me by someone who was as much bigger than I am as I am relative to a 120 lb woman — he’d have to be 7’6″ and close to 500 lbs — best believe I’d be writing PoP about the motherfucker. I’d also start carrying mace and a tote-able battle axe.

    • +1. doesn’t seem like a big deal to me.

      • Okay, hypothetically speaking, you’re on the metro and it appears that an unstable man is taking pictures of your junk (assuming you’re male). He steps forward, just like the guy in the story did, so that he’s standing next to you, and continues to take pictures of your junk.

        Or what if he’s doing the same thing to your mother? Do you turn to her and say, “Pay no mind to the crazy man breathing down your neck, mom, just another metro pervert who likes feet. It’s not a big deal.”

    • +1. Definitely not a big deal.

      Sometimes, when tourists are by the mall, I find myself in the background of their pictures and am haunted by the thought that they might have digital rendering of my body.

      • Someone taking several camera phone pictures of a woman without her knowledge is way different then being in the background of a tourists picture of the Washington Monument.

  • You might not like it, but when you’re in public, you’re fair game. Unless someone is taking surreptitious upskirt pictures or things like that, it’s legal.

    • … and I would not be surprised if this man did upskirts too.

      It’s also not illegal to state something loudly as her friend did.

      If it were me I would call him out really loudly and clearly for the whole goddamned world — and then what do you think? I would have to worry about retribution and putting things on the net without permission.

    • Surreptitiously taking photos of a particular person (even if a stranger — particularly if a stranger?) is creepy, and behavior that indicates sexual predation. It’s very, very similar to being a peeping tom.

      • It’s very, very similar to being a peeping Tom, except that a peeping Tom is looking at someone who has a reasonable expectation of privacy. That, of course, makes it very, very different.

        • It may be legal but it isn’t right. We’re not talking about a photojournalist, blogger, artist, or amateur photographer here. This man is taking camera phone pictures of female body parts. Legal yes. Creepy and inappropriate definitely.

          • Exactly how do you know that this person is not a photojournalist, blogger, or artist?
            So if this guy was confronted, whipped out a faculty ID from GW and says he’s a photography professor working on a montage of women’s feet for a special installation that he is putting together and surreptitiousness (the subjects not knowing they are being photographed) was key to the project, that would have been okay? One man’s “arty photo” is another man’s amateur porn.

          • I would like to echo Marcus Aurelius’ comments and remind you of the fact that whether the photographer is an artist or pervert, the effect on a woman of having her picture taken is the same.

        • only in a legal sense. not in the mentally unstable sexual predator sense.

    • Just becaues it’s not illegal doesn’t mean it’s not creepy.

  • People in DC take pictures of me all the time as I usually sport some kind of ridiculous hair color. I’m always game because it seems to make people happy and I usually smile and flash the peace sign or something. However, I never let the photo taking carry over into harassment and have no problem letting them know they’ve crossed the line. A loud, “How would you feel if someone were taking secret pictures of your sister?” or “Have a great time using these pictures for your 2 hour long masturbation sessions. Be sure to have a towel handy!” will usually do the trick. People do what they want because they think they can get away with it.

    You can find less aggressive strategies at and

  • I recommend chilling the fuck out

  • There needs to be a LAW against this. We must protect women’s feet from being photographed by MEN!!! Because we WOMEN are so vulnerable and helpless!

    This, my friends, is why I quit listening to feminists years ago. And my wife agrees with me, because I told her to do so. Because she, too, is vulnerable and helpless.

  • Relax, he’s just going to be posting it to the Internet as porn.

  • Take out your own phone and take pictures of him. But do not be subtle about it.

  • pablo .raw

    I think the best you can do is alert the person who is allegedly being photographed indecently so that she can cover her feet or move to another car.

    “Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights when they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, rest- rooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.”

    I don’t think the police can do anything in this case, unless the guy was somehow harassing the lady or doing something related to terrorism.

  • There is a fine line between harassment and innocent photography. What this guy is doing may be legal, but it doesn’t make it right. If I end up in a tourist’s snap shot or one of Pablo’s arty photos, I have no problem. But if a guy is surreptitiously taking photos of me on the subway, I’ll make a scene to protect myself. What if this guy starts following his “targets” off of the train? Just because you’re in public doesn’t mean you should be subject to this behavior. To me, this guy’s actions are a precursor to something far more sinister.

    • “But if a guy is surreptitiously taking photos of me on the subway, I’ll make a scene to protect myself.”

      There is only a need to protect one’s self when one is being harmed. How is the person being photographed in this situation being harmed?

  • I believe that if you’re in public there should be no presumption of privacy. You should expect that you may be subjected to photography or CCTV. I personally have a greater disdain for law enforcement photographing me than creepy guys. Others differ.

    • houseintherear

      Ok, so the next time someone takes a closeup of my chest in public (yes this happened to me once on the metro many years ago), I’ll just let it go.

      This is not a normal situation because the subject being photographed is a woman. You may not like that, but it’s the truth.

  • I am a little surprised that people don’t see this kind of thing on metro more often, because I see it all the time in metro systems around the world (NYC, Chicago, London, Paris etc). The world is full of perverts. You either address the issue then and there, not waiting months to say something about it, or you don’t.

    I am also surprised that the blogosphere in general is pretty oblivious when it comes to taking photos of people and property without asking permission, then posting it for all the world to see without thinking about the possible reaction. Folks (like myself) get pretty incensed when I see people taking pictures of my house/car/person without first approaching me or asking my permission.

    About 18 months ago I was in my front yard and watched some 20 something walking down the street, taking pictures of peoples cars with his iphone (in their driveways) and then walking up peoples driveways to take close photos of peoples houses. As he started walking up my driveway I asked him what he was doing. After ignoring my first two questions he gave me some story about doing research for a RE blog he was putting together for a masters project at GT (why he needed car photos was still unclear). After asking him to stop taking pictures of my house and car and him huffily telling me he was “allowed” and to “back off” I grabbed his iphone and threw it down the storm drain a few feet away. Problem solved.

    Overreaction on my part? Maybe, but I had no idea what he was doing with the photos and those of you walking about town taking photos of whatever you please and posting it need to understand that most folks would probably have the same reaction if they caught you.

    • He was on the street taking photos of houses and cars in driveways. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

      There should have been consequences to your actions of throwing his phone in the storm drain.

      • You missed the part about him walking up peoples driveways, including mine as I was standing in my yard.

        Reading comp is key.

        And Chris, you hit the nail on the head. “Consequences”…there are consequences to everything. The general blogosphere seems pretty obvlious that photographing anyone and anything “might” not be ok with everyone.

        • While I smiled when I read how you threw his phone down the storm drain (I was imagining punching him in his forehead), I do think it was a big overreaction.

          Being a hothead myself, I can’t guarantee I’d do anything different, but it was a bit much. The little snotnose’s daddy is probably an attorney and you’ll be hearing about the extreme emotional abuse he endured or some sh-t.

          And no, he doesn’t have a right to get up on my property and take pictures. Punch him in his forehead!

    • seek anger management plz

    • Solve crime with crime! Next time try becoming part of the solution, not part of the problem.

      Now instead of one criminal trespassing and being questioned by the police, we have TWO criminals. One trespasser and one thief.

      Please folks, when you see something, SAY something. Don’t take the law into your own hands; what if you had stolen from this person and they pulled a weapon?

      • I dont think what he did was necessarily illegal. The man was on his property, not responding to requests to cease his actions… I think that the resident, if he felt a legitimate threat, could be well within his rights to take limited, yet forceful, actions to increase his personal safety.

        Who knows what the crackpot with the iphone was capable of, or what he was doing. I think that joker was right to intervene.

        • I would argue that if anything, he decreased his personal safety by physically engaging the person and thus escalating the situation. As you said “who knows what the crackpot was capable of”. Why wait around to find out? I would have been on the phone to police in a heartbeat from the safety of my home.

          Just because the person was trespassing does not give anyone the right to break the law and commit theft.

      • Thief? Hehehe…I didn’t steal it and the kid knew exactly where to get it. It was exactly 10 feet under a big steel plate covering the manhole. Heck, it still might be there today!

        • Did you take it without his consent? Did you deprive him use of it?

          I think you would meet the definition in any court in this country.

          The point is, as you admitted, you overreacted. This would have been better solved by having the police involved to, at the very least, give the kid a warning. Nobody wants a trespasser, but why stoop to their level?

          • Trespassers have very few rights if they refuse to leave and could be reasonably interpreted as a danger.

          • Citation needed.

          • Wow, photodork you sound like an incredibly defenseless person.I imagine life is going to be rough for you as you go through life letting anyone and anything walk right over you.

            Call the police? Why? I am an adult. I can handle a snobby 20 something with an iphone without running away like a child locking myself in my house away from the big bad 20 something hipster with an iphone and calling in the national guard. And, as it turns out. I did.

            Give the kid a warning? I told him to remove himself from my property 3 times and to stop taking photos. He didn’t, end of story. Why stoop to his level. Because he refused to climb to mine and apparently it was the only way to get what I wanted…and it worked.

            And no Melissa, as long as the google folks stay on public property, they can do what they like. The second you walk up my driveway to take close photos of the side of my house and of my car, and persist even after I’ve asked you to leave (after ignoring my first couple of questions) thats a different matter.

            I really am shocked at the general helplessness shown in these posts.

            Someone making you feel uncomfortable on the metro. Ask them to stop.

            Someone trespassing on your property and taking photos of your property. Demand they stop and/or remove them yourself.

            Really folks…this is “being an adult 101”.

          • I stand corrected – reading fail – missed that he was actually *ON* your property. I had imagine he was just standing at the bottom of your driveway “toe over the line” style. If he was advancing up the driveway, getting in his face is warranted.

            I’d like to think there would be a few escalating steps between that and grabbing the iPhone but…

          • No, you dont need a citation. You want one. Go find it yourself.

          • I just believe in two wrongs DON’T make a right, and letting cooler heads prevail. I have to deal with enough violence at work, I like it peaceful at home.

            In my version of the scenario, I would rather have the guy in cuffs being questioned by the cops as opposed to the cops knocking on my door and questioning me about a theft and then a he said/she said situation developing. I can imagine you saying “but but but he was standing on my driveway! I swear!”

            As adults we are taught and learn to control our impulses and act responsibly (obey the law). Who is acting childish in this situation? I can’t see how reacting peaceful and calling the police is childish.

            It is clear from your description that your ego took over, you weren’t gonna let this “snobby hipster” talk back to you. You knew you could “handle” him. Just imagine how ridiculous you looked throwing his iphone in the sewer, you were no better than he was.

            It’s funny because we are usually allies in these PoP debates…as far as I can remember.

          • That’s because there isn’t a citation, it’s bullshit. Trespassers don’t give up any rights.

          • Actually, you’re wrong. If someone is trespassing on your property, you request that they leave, they don’t comply, and you have the reasonable belief that your personal safety is in danger, the trespasser has very few rights. In DC, I dont believe you’re allowed to shoot them – but certainly taking their phone and throwing it, is well within the realm of reasonable.

            This person was asked to leave 3 times and continued to advance onto the property. The thought that he didnt forfeit his rights is laughable.

          • Joker didn’t say anything about his personal safety being in danger. The guys was taking photos. And that still does not entitle him to engage him physically unless he is attempting to enter the dwelling. It most certaily does not entitle the person to steal from the trespasser.

            The police can be called and can escort the person off the property. This is a misdemeanor offense folks.

            Your knowledge of the law is laughable. See:

            District of Columbia Official Code 2001

            Division IV. Criminal Law and Procedure and Prisoners.

            Title 22. Criminal Offenses and Penalties. (Refs & Annos)

            Subtitle I. Criminal Offenses.

            Chapter 33. Trespass; Injuries to Property.

            § 22-3302. Unlawful entry on property.

          • If Joker didnt feel threatened, I doubt he would have taken such measures. The guy continued to advance onto his property, would not leave when asked, yet you’re saying you think the law would find Joker the aggressor? I think his actions were an appropriate reaction to the imminent threat that was reasonably interpreted as a result of the person’s actions. We live in a dangerous world and someone who doesnt obey simple commands on private property should be deemed a threat.

          • I am not stating what I “think” about the law. I am stating what remedies the law provides. They are very specific in this case.

            Also, Joker says nothing about the person “continuing to advance on his property” like you have stated twice now.

            And I feel bad if he felt threatened by the so-called “snobby hipster”. The account read to me like he was trying to teach the student a lesson.

    • Are you planning on blowing up the Google street view van the next time it rides by your house?

    • Jesus, what do you do when the Google Maps car comes by, IED them?

    • I didn’t read your comment…I never read your comments anymore…i just see your name and assume that I completely disagree with whatever stupidity you wrote below your moniker.

      My favorite thing to do on P.O.P. is ignore whatever you have to say.

  • Did he take the photos and put them on Unsuck DC Metro?
    He might have taken these pictures too.

    or This one

    or This one

    or This one

    It is always ok to photograph something or someone who looks funny and post it on the internet. Right?? The woman probably had six toes.!!

  • I had this hipster woman once on the metro who wouldnt stop harassing me with her camera. At first she was taking pictures very sneakily, then I realized she was doing it I ignored it for a while, I asked her what she was doing, but she ignored me and just kept snapping pictures, but then it continued – so I started taking pictures of her… she got all flustered and started to stand up on the seats and like get really close to me with the camera snapping it in my face.

    To this day, I dont know how I was restrained enough to not take her $1000 camera and break it.

    I have a feeling she was doing some sort of hipster social experiement, probably for some obscure degree from a school I’ve never heard of. But, at the time it was creepy, annoying, and frustrating.

    So, original question asker, I completely understand where you are coming from. Maybe this person wasnt doing anything illegal, but its annoying and in your case its creepy. I think both my experience and yours are examples of you having your privacy violated, even if it is legal to do so.

    • Unfortunately, there is no law against being an ass (good thing for me, at times!) I admire your restraint. Not sure if I could have done the same.

  • junkpunch!

  • pablo .raw

    While I understand people’s reactions to being photographed in public, I think it’s important to mention this which is also in the document I mentioned before:

    “Your Legal Remedies If Harassed”
    “If someone has threatened, intimidated, or detained you because you were taking photographs, they may be liable for crimes such as kidnapping, coercion, and theft. In such cases, you should report them to the police.
    You may also have civil remedies against such persons and their employers. The torts for which you may be entitled to compensation include assault, conversion, false
    imprisonment, and violation of your constitutional rights.”

    • That’s all well and good, but what remedies are there for people being harassed by obnoxious photographers (such as the hipster chick in Anon 9:36’s comment)? I would qualify that as being “harassed”, “threatened” and “intimidated.” Can she sue, or does she just have to sit and grin and take it?

      I’m sure you’re not like this, but can you see how sticking a camera in someone’s face, then hiding behind threats of torts and civil remedies if I so much as lay a finger on you would make someone want to throw your camera down the storm drain?

      As I said before, there’s no law against being a jerk, but (as someone else said) there are consequences for every action. Just be respectful with your camera, that’s all.

      (and, again, I don’t mean you specifically, Pablo. I’m sure you’re not like that).

      • What this thread needs now is a celebrity comment on dealing with paparazzi…but maybe a celebrity lawyer would do the trick too?

        …and before I’m misconstrued, the OP’s story is definitely creepy. It seems like immediate, negative reinforcement through public shaming is definitely warranted.

      • pablo .raw

        Just a couple of days ago, walking home from the metro a girl pointed her camera at me from less than 10 ft. away and took a couple photos of me! I just thought to myself “maybe she read my column on PoP!”
        I understand people gets angry sometimes (believe it or not, other times they like it!), and I hope is clear that I’m not defending harassment but letting people know that there could be consequences to the consequences of being angry in this case.

  • Pretty sure I saw this guy take a picture of a random girl last week on U st. while waiting for the cross signal. My girlfriend and I just sort looked at each other and thought the whole situation was pretty sketch, but then we realized that we send each other camera phone pictures of funny looking people that we see in public. There is a line there somewhere. Where is it crossed?

  • In cases like these, it really depends on how the person (victim?) felt. If the woman reading the book was uncomfortable about a stranger taking pictures of her feet, then he should stop.

    Like the TBD story, if you feel violated, you were violated and you have a right to tell the person to stop. A woman who had a stalker turn violent is probably going to react differently and have a different “threat-o-meter” (for lack of a better word) than someone who hasn’t.

  • I am a street photographer and I use my iPhone to take pictures on the metro. I have even snapped a photo or two of someone’s feet:

    I agree if someone asks you to stop you should but from what I can tell the guy was well within his rights to take the photos. It’s a public area with no expectation of privacy. Now I have to ask this question. If the guy taking the photos was a normal, white, somewhat attractive guy, would there be such an issue? Just my two cents.

    • You carry what is likely a film camera which connotes “student photographer” and you’re not drooling or jittering like our suspect was. Still, if you were standing next to my lady and photographing her feet or any other body part, we would have words.

      I’d step between the two of you. I’d ask you to stop. If you didn’t, I’d take your camera and ask you to take it back from me. You’d apologize and get your camera back.

      • @Tres All of my photos are taken with an iPhone. I don’t think this guy was “drooling or jittering” as you stated. If so then I agree, creepy. I can understand you would be upset if someone took a picture of your “lady” but you have to understand they’re not doing anything illegal. If you asked me to stop I certainly would but just for future reference, if you take someone’s camera you are the one breaking the law, not them.

  • OK, you get photographed/watched&recorded without your knowledge everysingle day, he didn’t seem to be bothering anybody unlike other “disturbed” individuals on metro, this should be the least of your worries…i’m fine with someone taking pics of me, as long as they aren’t perverted.

  • I have to say I’m pretty surprised with how comfortable a lot of you are with this and being photographed by strangers in general. I mean, I accept that if I’m at a concert or something and end up in someone’s photo of the crowd, that’s one thing, but if anyone – even Pablo – was taking a photo of me, specifically, and I didn’t know them, I’d ask them to stop. I just think it’s weird and creepy and totally something I wouldn’t be comfortable with. And then having it turn up on the internet – just no. I’d be really upset and angry. It seems like such a violation. When I see pics of people that turn up here sometimes of the day, and it seems like they were not people the photographer actually knows or got permission from, I always think how mad I’d be if it were me.

    I guess my thinking is that people have to go out in public/ride the metro/what have you – that shouldn’t subject them to having to be photographed. Turning up on a security camera is one thing, but having a picture turn up on the internet or elsewhere without their permission, even for artistic use is unfair and I guess I don’t think that’s part of what people sign up for when they’re just trying to live their lives and/or get from point a to point b.

    I know it’s not illegal, and the law isn’t with me here – it just seems like basic respect for other people, their space and their privacy.

    • To be clear, I’m not one of those weird libertarian privacy freaks. Like I said, security cameras, cctv etc are a way of life. But I don’t consider having one’s photo taken for a stranger’s personal use – artistic, perverted or otherwise – without their permission, okay.

      • There are ways to conceal your identity when you travel in the public space; disguises, burkas, etc…

        There are also places you can move if you want to have your rights oppressed in the manner you suggest. I imagine that PRC and DPRK have some pretty tight restrictions on who can take photos of who.

        • Oh, spare me the sarcasm, ANON. I post under my real name, with a link to my blog where you can find a picture of me, and several posts where I state where I live – I’m not exactly an uber-private person,ANON. It’s about asking permission, and being respectful.

          I host a lot of events where there are photographers present. They always ask if they can take people’s pictures – especially before publishing them in their magazines, on their blogs etc. It’s just common courtesy.

          I just find it amazing that it doesn’t bother other people. Especially people commenting on blogs calling themselves ANON. Your comment seems a wee bit hypocritical in light of your username.

  • I’m sure it’s already been said a hundred times in the comments section, but men rarely understand why things like strangers photographing us is something we should get upset about, or being told to smile by a male stranger. There are dynamics to interactions with men that women are generally hyper-aware of while men see no need to be concerned. A man taking pictures of women in public places without their consent (and not a situation where you’re in a tourist spot and just happen to be in a frame) is extremely aggressive and frightening for most women. Try not to be flippant about it and dismissive until you get to the part where ‘feet’ were involved.

  • My feet are so soft and pretty and they smell like flowers and hot leather. That’ll be $100.

  • Remember, there are (a hundred?) security cameras watching you every day without your permission. Who knows what kind of perverts are behind those.

    The devil you see vs. devil you can’t.

  • Not happy with all the “well women are special” crap that has been posted. Either be upset that is happening or not upset. Don’t make your outrage contingent on the gender of the person getting photographed.

  • gotta be honest..its like folks on metro have never SEEN 5′ heels before… they stare..they whisper and often take pics… sometimes they ask…sometimes they dont… its realllly not that big of a deal… no touching me…ill call your shit out for that…but you wanna stare/photog at my feet/shoes…you go right ahead…they are after all…amazing…


  • 🙂 thank you!!! usually its dudes making the size exaggerations!! 😉 lol ….inches”… my bad xoxo

Comments are closed.