Generally, the chafing and rubbing of toes and other parts of my feet against closed shoes' leather plus the loss of feeling between and the ground are the main reasons I loathe shoes, too... And even though I have a pair of wide-fit Birks to wear for work, when closed-toe shoes are called for, they still restrain me from pedal freedom. Therefore I do cherish every moment of barefoot freedom. Wiggling currently elated bare toes, ~*Ganesha*~
Comments like these actually prick my conscience. I feel guilty for undermining parental discipline. Mom's work is hard enough without me setting a bad example. I'm lucky, I think, in that I live in a very warm place where flip-flops are the norm year-round. The few negative reactions I've gotten have all been very muted -- usually nothing worse than a grimace. One exception was a guy who muttered, "Dude, put shoes on" in disgusted tones as we passed on the street. I shot back, "And who the fuck are you? The fashion police?" We stopped, turned and squared off. Then he turned back and continued on his way. Maybe he thought I was a Shaolin monk.
What are you setting a bad example of? Some parents require their children to wear long-sleeved shirts and long pants. Would you feel you were setting a bad example for Amish children if you wore shorts and a t-shirt? At least you wouldn't be setting a bad example by going barefoot because they likely would be to. The relationship between parents and children is far too complex for me to worry that I'm setting a bad example for a child simply because I don't fit the cultural norm. I'm actually grateful for people who modeled behavior that my mother didn't approve of. She's entitled to her opinion, but I'm entitled to live my life as I see fit. Seeing other people model behavior that my mother disapproved of and realizing that it didn't make them evil allowed me to choose my own path as an adult. Now, if you're setting an example of an armed robber or a carjacker, I completely understand your pricked conscience...
I know better than to walk barefoot over broken glass or rusty nails. A little kid might not. As for exemplars of countercultural behavior, I never noticed any shortage of them. But then, I grew up in New York City. It wasn't until after moving to Phoenix that I began to meet people who didn't behave like laws unto themselves.
Isn't things like this something that kids have to learn? Parents are supposed to be the people who teach their kids what they can and can't do. I'm not saying let them walk over broken glass to learn, but pointing it out to them and explaining it isn't hard.
Heh. You must have been much more accessible to reason as a kid than I was. I figure that going barefoot, like every other fun activity, has its own age of discretion. Is that age as high as the age for, say, drinking or having sex? Offhand, I'd have to say no. Still, I'd put it a bit above most of the kids who ask the questions. If you're too young to grasp concepts like eccentric behavior, you're probably too young to appreciate the dangers of tetanus. But, finally, a small, occasional prick to my conscience isn't going to make me stop barefooting. If I encounter these curious kids on a city street or a jogging trail, they're on MY turf -- that is, adult turf. Explaining why I'm shoeless is the price mom pays for bringing them there.
I think you people may be looking into it too much. Not walking on broken glass is instinctual. When a child burns his hand on a hot stove, he probably will know better next time. There are children all over the world who grow up without shoes, nails and glass don't seem to be a big conscern. The way I look at it, I am not setting a bad example in my eyes. The mother is teaching the child that shoes MUST be worn at all times, and that is just wrong in my opinion, not to mention the harm she is doing by not letting the child's feet develop properly.
I was asked why I was barefoot by a few kids a couple days ago... one of them wore those quite narrow, pointy-toed pumps (I mean the shoes came to a *sharp* point). I didn't ask her her age, but I'd say she was about 11. She didn't see anything wrong with it, said her feet fitted in those just fine. So sad she (and her parents!) don't know any better, her feet have no room to grow anywhere but into the shape of those shoes. And I wonder what shoe factory makes those kind of shoes in children's sizes?
A factory that makes a lot of money for the investors. The last thing on their minds are the feet going into their product.
I know those shoes are trendy, but I think they look silly. The first time I saw them was several years ago when they had hit the scene in Europe but had yet to make it to the U.S. I got off a plane in either Frankfurt or Geneva, saw lots of women running around in those "clown shoes" and almost burst out in laughter. In my generation women wanted their feet to look petite not like skis. That said, those shoes really look like they could do damage to one's toes. Despite the elongated toe box, it still appears the shoes force one's toes together. That leads to bunions and other foot deformaties. Being one who had surgery to have my toes straightened to correct such a problem, I have no use for restrictive footwear. My preference is bare feet. If I must wear shoes, non-restrictive flip-flops are next. For business and social events, okay, I've got sneakers, dress shoes, etc. None of them create undo pressure on my feet in the interest of fashion, however.
The kid was wearing a short sharp point, not one of those very long ones. Just a tiny, tiny triangular toe box. Sort of like these http://media.laredoute.fr/intl/products/picture/3/324135594_0005_EM_1.jpg but I think the toe box part was even smaller. Aside from that, I agree, the very long ones look totally ridiculous and are just as bad when it comes to causing bunions, after all the foot isn't made of putty and the long tip doesn't help a bit when the shoe is that narrow.