Really? I've seen multiple places with signs that lie then =P That's crazy, people are so fucking weird.
Yes, those signs that claim health department rules against going barefoot are LIES. Check out this complaint I posted a couple of years ago. Be sure to read all 132 comments and you'll get a good idea of how much ignorance is out there. http://www.my3cents.com/showReview.cgi?id=27791
Unfortunately, it's a very common urban legend and plenty of store owners & managers, as well as the places that print and sell signs, believe it. Add to that the slightly less honest folks who know there is no law but who would rather blame a non-existent law than admit it's their own personal bias, or who think customers are more willing to comply when told it's a law than a personal preference of the manager, and yes, you end up with *many* stores that have a lie posted on their front door. McDonalds, when someone wrote and pointed out there was no such law and asked them to change their signs, answered that they were aware it wasn't a law from any state or county HD, but the sign referred to a rule made by their *company's* Health Department. Could be, but I would still call their signs misleading, since far most of their customers are going to assume that when nothing is specified, 'by order of the Health Department' refers to a government agency rather than a department of the company.
Anyone ever heard of "picking your battles"? Whadda concept... IMO it is easier to carry a pair of flips than get into protracted arguments with underpaid and burnt-out personnel. Considering how unhappy retail employees can be, I can see them digging their heels in just out of spite. And honestly I don't enjoy being inside a Wal-Mart enough to artificially prolong my visits by arguing, but that's just the little ol' me.
Yea, i didnt really argue with her i was just like ok.. But of course carrying flip-flops is always a good idea.
wal-mart is extremely anti-barefoot. i have shopped at target and did not have any problems while barefoot.
My area has not yet been cursed by a Wal-Mart. I have heard it is anti-barefoot. There is a Target in my neighborhood---barefoot-friendly!
I have thought about it often and I think fighting against *all* arbitrary rules as well as discrimination on *all* levels is an excellent, extremely important battle! In fact it's one of the most important things there are to protect our freedom, not just the freedom to go barefoot but freedom of choice on many levels. Also, I have plenty of stuff to carry and I wouldn't really want to lug around flipflops all the time. I guess if you drive it's just one extra thing in the trunk of your car, but when you use public transport you don't want to carry all kinds of extra stuff. Fortunately, in my country the myths against bare feet are non-existent so I really don't need backup footwear. And why would it be a good thing to carry flipflops -do you habitually carry a pair of gloves, or a cap/hat, or any other extra items of clothing, just in case you might need them somewhere? And Walmart doesn't have to be anti-barefoot, in fact we've had confirmation they don't have a corporate policy against bare feet.
*shrug* Hun, like I said, if it's your thing to get into protracted discussions on discrimination with store clerks, more powah to ya Me, I prefer to think that if someone is miserable enough to needle a barefoot girl about footwear, I don't need them spilling their misery on me. I guess I just have a thicker skin and don't feel like a discrimination victim at the drop of a hat. In general I believe that the word "discrimination" should be reserved for more egregious situations and not be cheapened by crying wolf over every tiny thing. I'm an anachronism, I know. Oh, and my flip-flops are thin enough to fit into the back pockets of my jeans, one in each Which is where they return after I'm all done shopping.
Well, since I don't even live in the US and those confrontations never happen to me personally, I don't go into discussions with store employees either. But there are other ways to fight against these silly rules and especially the myths; just like I do here, I provide information. Any time I come across internet messages which claim there are laws against going barefoot, or that feet need support on pavement, or that folks who go barefoot spread athlete's foot or hookworm, or any of those other common misconceptions, I take the time to type in a message showing these things aren't so, often linking to pages like the SBL page with the Health Department letters. Since a lot of the anti-barefoot attitude in the US is based on misinformation and myths, this is an obvious way of combating it. And about direct confrontations, I've heard of very good results from US barefooters with employees who genuinely believe the myths; those often are quickly persuaded when shown a print-out of the Health Department letters and some have even been quite pleased to find out there was no rule. Others who are personally anti-barefoot switch from one reason to another, when pointed out there are no laws they'll say it's for insurance reasons, when pointed out no one has ever been able to show an insurance policy requiring shoes for customers they switch to something else again... yeah discussion with those last category isn't going to do any good, but I would think it at least worth a try. The person confronting you may be one of the first category, and the exchange may be much more positive than you seem to think it has to be. Grin, I have a very thick skin, I don't personally feel insulted. In fact, I can't remember when I've last been insulted personally, about my feet or anything else. But having a thick or thin skin doesn't have anything to do with social awareness! I feel this is an important thing not on a personal level but on a social level. And this because I feel exactly opposite from you about discrimination; I think it *is* important on *all* levels, and discrimination based on clothing, hair color, skin color, disability, sex, sexual preference, religion, is all equally wrong on a moral/ethical level. We should treat *everyone* equally, not only those who are born a minority. If we protect only those who are born differently from discrimination, *that* is what leaves a bad taste in my mouth.. it seems to imply that there *is* something wrong with being different, so only when someone can't help it we have to treat them equally. And if something is different that we can change (like choice of dress, footwear, hair color), then it's perfectly okay to ask us to do so. Just for arguments sake, if there were a way for people to change their skin color, would it then be okay if a business asked people to change it to white (or black!) when shopping there? I think not! Whatever works for you I don't think I would be comfortable like that (apart from my gothic skirts I wear as often as jeans not having pockets at all) but to each their own. It's a good thing we're not all the same, and we don't all fight the same battles. There are many more important issues in the world than one person can fight for; if we all fought the same battles, a lot of important things would remain undone. Oh, and the barefoot thing isn't by any means the only thing I fight for; I have walked in rallies against racial discrimination, done stuff for charities involved with environment and animals, lobbied for equal treatment of homosexuals, etc, etc too. But those things don't have a place in these forums. When reading the messages in a place like this it may come across like I'm only spending my time and energy on the one thing but that's just because that is the only topic relevant to the 'Bare It!/Barefoot' forum!
A very thoughtful post, though I must disagree with this: If you could change your skin color at will as easily as you can change your shirt (or shoes), then yeah, I would ABSOLUTELY support the shopkeeper's right to demand that everyone turns black, or white, or purple before entering. Amongst other things I believe in sanctity of private property and business, and that an owner has absolute right and control over the rules he sets - so long as those rules do not commit discrimination against those whose circumstances are unchangeable. If I was running a business, I reserve the right to put up a sign "people wearing bonnets need not apply". I hate bonnets. With passion. Would you deny me the right to keep that most insidious garment away from myself, I ask you?
Then we'll have to agree to disagree, because I'm the exact opposite, and vehemently so; if you open a business to the public, it should be open to *all* of the public. If you want your private property rights, don't open your private property to the public. Make it a 'private' club (like Sam's, or other clubs with membership). For me, what I hate is wetlook gel, it looks so fatty it makes me nauseous. But that is my problem, I know it won't jump out at me. I would interrupt my own dinner to defend someone who had wetlook gel who was asked to leave or wear a cap, rather than being relieved that I didn't have to look at it. And I would never, ever, even suggest someone wearing wetlook gel change their hairdo or change their place or anything like that. Fortunately our own country is pretty good in protecting public rights over property rights; when some store owners tried to ban a certain brand of clothing because it was often worn by youth gangs, the general public raised a huge stink and eventually the store owners had to take the sign down. :hurray:
myranya, excellent post as always. i truly respect your fight for the rights of barefooters. your posts here, on "sbl", "yahoo answers" are always thoughtful and respectful. i just would like to think you, because there a times i give in. i leave the business, avoid patronizing the business or putting on flips, if i'm not in the mood for the confrontation. as a person of color, who has encountered racism you are absolutely correct. the lame auguements business use to bar barefooters, are a crock of shit. banning a person because one's feet are bare, is just like any other act of discrimination.
Again, as far as Walmart goes, I know for a fact there is no corporate rule, and also as you may know if you've read the entire thread, the lady's claim that there is a health department rule against bare feet isn't true either. Local Walmart managers can set their own rules, but since the lady was misinformed about the Health Department, and weeattoes had been in Walmart (likely that same store, if it's local for her) many times before without any trouble, I can't help but wonder if she was wrong about that store's/manager's rule as well. While store owners and managers are allowed -unforunately, in my opinion, but true- set their own rules, that doesn't go for every employee or greeter who happens to be on duty. It is not their store, and they should follow the rules set by management, not make up their own. Edit: I see I hadn't posted the Walmart corporate message yet in this particular thread (Walmart threads pop up so often, I sometimes lose track what I posted where!) From the SBL archives: "They won't give us anything in writing, but (member) spoke to Mrs. Roberts at corporate. She told me in no uncertain terms that there is NO "shoes required" policy for Wal-Mart. And BTW, the number is 1-800-WAL-MART"
I always wear shoes, just in case the zombie apacolypse breaks out I want to be able to run over there prone bodies without becoming infected myself.
LOL, what you wear is totally up to you, if you want to wear combat boots when it's 110F in the shade just so you'll be ready for an alien invasion, go right ahead. All we ask is that same freedom of not being told what to wear.
Now that I think about it wearing shoes in public stores may be a law regualted by the state. It may not stem from the department of health but state law instead. Check it out on your States website.
Yuh, it was really stupid caues that bitch caught an attitude with me and we were looking at the flowers and next thing i know it a greeter is tapping me on my shoulder.. i was lik uhh????? And i really didn't think it was true.
Look, folks from the SBL *have* checked these places, I've looked over many myself, and there are NO LAWS. Really. Unfortunately I can't link to something that doesn't exist, but we've been doing this for many years (over 13 in my case), and we've spent quite a bit of time researching this. Why is it so hard to believe there are no laws? You are obviously not a barefooter, why are you trying to prove those who have many years of experience in the field wrong? It's like if I were to go over to the Home Schooling sub-forum, arguing with parents who have raised several home-schooled kids that while I don't even have any children, if I did I wouldn't home-school them, and I'm sure there are all kinds of laws regulating it at either state or county level, and if there aren't any there, then maybe the Child Welfare agency has problems with it... While I really know next to nothing about the whole topic. Now where's the sense in that? Instead, if I drop into a forum and read posts of people who've been doing something for many years, I assume they know what they're talking about and try to learn something. If you're really interested in barefooting, read some of the other threads about laws, stores etc and you'll see how many places we've looked and how much research we've done. If you're not interested and are only trolling, please go bug people at some other forum. :troll:
