Why is going barefoot such a big deal?

This is something that's been bothering me for awhile. Why is going barefoot such a big deal? Has it been a taboo or something in your lives?

This is really an honest question. I mean, to me it's just normal and there's nothing particularly amazing, spiritual, or on the other hand, wrong, about being barefoot. Maybe it's because I live in Georgia and it's so warm most of the time that I've always gone around barefoot. I walk around the house barefoot, take my dog out barefoot, and used to run around my backyard helping out with yardwork barefoot as well. But then there are people on here that make such a big deal out of it. And I really don't understand why it's so special. :\ I guess it was just because I was raised that way, but could someone please explain. Like I said, it's been bothering me. Thanks!

 

I can only speak for myself, but it's not a big deal to me. I'd just go barefoot and never write about it or anything, any more than I write about wearing jeans or a skirt, or how I do my hair. But some (quite a lot) of other people -and not the barefooters- make a big deal out of it. Fortunately it's extremely rare that I'm actually told to wear shoes or to leave, but people point, stare, ask questions, all the time, and posters from the US are regularly kicked out one place or other. Almost all my posts are in threads about whether being barefoot is allowed in this situation or that. Not being allowed to go barefoot *is* a big deal to me; just like I think being tossed places because of a tat, piercing, hairstyle or anything is. I personally am not inclined to post about 'regular' barefooting, maybe occasionally in passing but I don't go share with the world every time I've been barefoot somewhere (I'd have to post that kinda thing every day ).

 

I don't actually know why barefooting is such a big deal to people. When I was growing up, staying on my gramma's farm as a kid, she never LET me wear shoes. She was a depression era baby. As far as she was concerned, you wore shoes to school, church, and in the fall and winter. You didn't NEED shoes in the summer. You just needed to watch where you were going.

So as a kid, I got to experience the joys of barefooting and it was just a natural thing. I was allowed in shops and things without a problem because I was a kid. No one seemed to care if a kid was barefoot. But once I reached adolescence, it was time to grow up and be responsible, which meant wearing shoes. I didn't realise how uncomfortable they were until they were forced upon me. I wore shoes, though reluctantly until I was about 17.

When I was 17, I was in a theatre production and every rehearsal, I took off my shoes. I was more at home on the stage in my bare feet. And one day, because I was running late,I just didn't bother taking shoes with me. And the schtick I've got because of it ever since....good lord, you'd think I was commiting some sort of sin!

But I really don't understand why people think it's a big deal. There are some barefooters even, that I just don't understand. I barefoot because it's comfortable. I barefoot to be closer to nature. I barefoot so life in general is more enjoyable. I do not barefoot to see how dirty my soles can get. I do not barefoot as a statement. And I do not understand those people that think it's wrong to be barefoot. My friend Ben's mother seems to think that barefooting "isn't natural". Oh yes, and I'm sure that she gave birth to a son that was wearing trainers in the womb. And her daughter came out wearing Mary Janes. If anything is unnatural, it's wearing 5 inch stiletto heels made of black plastic that contort your foot into unnatural and uncomfortable shapes. Oh, but that's socially acceptable. Lord forbid you try to find any comfort in your surroundings.

/rant (sorry)

 

For some, yes.

The big problem about it is that it IS NORMAL, as you say -- it is a perfectly natural and harmless thing, and on top of that it is a beautiful, delicious, simple pleasure that we should be free to enjoy -- but there are people who work, endeavor, and even LIE to DENY us the right to be so!

You would be better off asking those who bar barefoot people from stores, concerts, restaurants, etc. why THEY make it a big deal. It is only because of them that WE have to make it a big deal. If we didn't run into opposition, going barefoot would just be a simple everyday ordinary thing. The attention that is drawn to it comes from the ANTI-barefooters. When I go barefoot around town, I think nothing of it, and I don't go into stores and say, "Hey everyone, look at how I'm barefoot!" No, if any issue is made of it, it's from those who want to deny me the right to be as I wish to be.

For those of us who discovered the pleasure of it later than others who were brought up that way, as you say you were, sometimes we feel like sharing the joy about it. Is that a problem for you? Do you have some reason for objecting to that?

-Jeffrey

 

Actually, I was more asking about why it was such a big deal that places don't allow people to go barefoot, but I guess I didn't really make that clear but I was kind of out of it last night.

So, I too am barefoot all the time, except for when I go out. However, I see insisting on not wearing shoes in stores that say on the door that shoes are required as trying to make a statement. It's a culture thing. It's a bad analogy, but you wouldn't go into a Japanese restaurant (or home) and outright refuse to take your shoes off. In places were it's not explicitly stated that you have to wear shoes, then whatever, go for it. But in other places, trying to force the issue IS making a statement, like school. I guess I'm lucky there too because half the kids in my classes take their shoes off in class and walk around barefoot and our teachers don't care, but in the hall or outside (unless it's raining cos there are foot deep puddles) then we throw our shoes back on. It's not that big of a deal.

Also, the main reason stores and schools have the shoes only policy is for liability reasons. Sure YOU know that you're watching where you're going and you're not going to accidentally step on something and sue the store, but they don't know that. And the way people sue (assuming that you're in America) it is definatly something that HAS to be on the minds of people who work in and own stores.

Anyway.. that's just my opinion. I just have a weird perspective because I've never actually met anyone who thought it was weird to be barefoot, but then again, never met anyone who didn't at least carry flip flops in their car for stores. My best friend is the least hippieish person I've seen in my life, but unless she's at lacrosse practice or it's snowing, I've never seen her not barefoot or wearing flip flops. She even drives barefoot but throws on shoes whenever she needs them.

I didn't mean to offend anyone (if I did, I'm sorry), but the whole idea that it's so imperative to be barefoot is so alien to me.

 

I guess it is just a symbol of rebellion and making a connection with the land where i live. Its rly out of the ordinary in the city to be willing to let your feet come in contact with the ground. Ppl sometimes look down on you for it though... kinda sad....

 

Several reasons why I think it's not okay to wear shoes. In no particular order:
-I don't drive, so it's quite inconvenient for me to carry footwear. I travel to work by bicycle, two trains, and bicycle again, and I don't really wanna carry all kinds of things 'just in case'. Apart from the weight, I don't care about getting dirty feet (that stay on the ground) but I don't like carrying street shoes in my bag (same bag I carry groceries, lunch, drink, etc).
-It's just plain WRONG to arbitrary require shoes. Discrimination on any one thing is not right, whether it's a preference of dress or something not as easily changed, like skin color. A lot of people get annoyed when I say it's equally wrong, say it's demeaning to compare the two. But I think it's exactly the other way around; to say only those things like skin color, sex etc should be protected is demeaning. It implies that there *is* something wrong with it, that they must be treated the same 'because they can't help it'. If a person *could* change their skin color, would it be okay to ask them to do so in order to enter a store? If not, then why is it okay to ask someone to wear/not wear something?
-Saying it's a liability issue is not right either. Every store/restaurant does allow all kinds of footwear that is as dangerous/more dangerous as bare feet; high heels, platform shoes, etc. Only the few places that require 'sturdy footwear' or something may have a point here, but I've never heard of a store doing so. Any store that doesn't allow barefooters but allows high heels has *no* solid basis to do so but arbitrary discrimination or a personal hangup with barefooters.

Btw, we've had a looooooong thread about this a few months ago: http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56189

 

Most people who sue stores for such things are those who are sue happy and will try to sue someone for just about anything so making them wear shoes WILL NOT stop them because they will simply find some other reason to try to sue you. Besides a store should not be held liable if a person choses to go barefoot and then hurts themselves. Its their choice to go barefoot and they know theres a chance they might step on something so if they ignore the risks and go barefoot anyways then whatever happens to them should in no way be the store's fault because they could just say well the person couldve just worn some shoes and this wouldve never happened.

 

The only logical instance I could see a place of business being sued for a personal foot injury is if it was caused by an employ. Other than that, it's just personal concern for safety and awareness; there should be limitations put on lawsuites... It's ridiculous here in America; an obese man sued McDonalds for creating his weight disorder. He was the dumbass eating fries everyday, how the hell was it McDonalds fault? It wasn't; but this is America, petty stuff like that tends to go unmentioned...

 

That's not correct. There is no more liability for the store. For one thing, their insurance does not stipulate that they must make sure patrons are shod. No one I know who researches barefooting has located any such clause or received any such information from an insurer.

The business owners also have no idea whether a woman wearing tottery high heels is watching where she's going. If there is a slick spot on the floor in the supermarket and she goes down on it, why would that have less liability for the store?

Who cares about "the way people sue in the U.S."? If a case has no merit -- as it would not if a barefooter got injured because of his own choice -- then it doesn't go anywhere in court.

It's not that it's imperative, but if you were told that something was wrong with some harmless thing that you like to do, or some way you prefer to live, wouldn't you want to make sure you didn't capitulate your right to be that way to some ignoramus who thought it was his right to regulate your behavior?

THAT'S how you have to think of it to understand our insistence.

-Jeffrey

 

lol. I was tickled by this topic as well. I'm in my 40's and grew up here in GA. I never wore shoes except to go to school, and they were hand me downs. As a matter of fact, I even went to church barefoot. So did my friends. I never even owned a pair of "bought" shoes until High School.

When I read some of the "Barefooters" posts it was intriguing to say the least. Try being a "guy" who wears skirts/kilts exclusively for 6 months. I did just that, and sometimes barefoot. And yes, I also carry a pair of flip-flops in the car as well.

I do remember going to Rhode Island when I was 15 and running around all the time barefoot and having comments made because of it, and my affinity for going shirtless all the time as well. When my ex wife and I had our first son in MN, we never even dressed him other than a diaper in the summer. He was nicknamed by many in that area as "nakedbaby". We never bought him shoes other than winter boots until he went to pre-k. I do remember one restaurant trying to deny us service because of his lack of shoes. I argued that since he couldn't even walk his feet would never touch the floor, so shoes were irrelevant in his case. I won the argument and we enjoyed the meal, but we didn't bother going back, or tipping.

Maybe us country folk in Georgia are just too laid back when it come to clothing, or lack of it. I'd sure like to have such a life that my biggest worry was where I could or couldn't go barefoot. (Don't anyone get wound up over this, it's just my opinion.)

 

i went barefoot to bible study this morning and every single one of the 20 women there were amazed by and commented on this. so to some, yes it is a novel concept. most city kids probably don't go barefoot all that often.

 

I grew up in KY, and in different areas of KY. I was in a moderately sized town for a while, and I never wore shoes. Then we moved to the country, out in the middles of the woods, hills all around, and I still went barefoot. Still to this day the first thing I do when I come in is off with the shoes. But being in the country, where snakes abound, you must be careful where you walk, and oftentimes you have to wear some kind of shoes. As far as schools and stores go, I have no idea why schools require shoes. I plan on being a High School English teacher, and I won't say a word to my students who want to go barefoot, in truth I will encourage it. It is more relaxing and I feel like students learn better when they are comfortable. I always did.
Stores here, namely KY and Indiana as that is what I am familiar with, require shoes because of health codes. I worked at a large chain store, and that was part of our training, why barefeet were not allowed. I did not agree, and they even tried to keep me, one of their best employees, from wearing my sandals, saying that they wouldn't be liable if I dropped something on my toes. Of course not, MY TOES!
As for my children, my oldest won't leave without the shoes, and my youngest won't leave with them. The youngest runs around in a diaper only, and sometimes not even that.

deb

 

Do you wear closed shoes then? Because from what I know about snakes, if they would strike at you, they'd likely hit you in the top of the foot or the ankle, rather than the sole.

Maybe it was a STORE policy, but look at http://www.barefooters.org/health-dept
There are NO state health laws, nor any local health laws, requiring shoes for customers. I don't care what your training was, and it may have applied to you as an employee, but it can not have been for customers.

Kentucky does allow store signs to *claim* health department, as long as they don't site a specific entity of state or county government (which I think is weird; they allow stores to put lies on their sign?), but some other states have specifically stated that if any sign falsely claims 'by order of the health department' they will be removed or reworded (see Georgia for example).

Also, McDonalds has once used the cop-out 'it's by order of our own health department'. Which still makes their sign misleading, people who see 'by order of the Health Department' will almost certainly assume it is the government, not some internal department of the company. But well, as long as it doesn't actually *say* 'State Health Department' there's nothing we can do about it.

 

yes, when I trolled around the farm I was mostly in soft cotton shoes, like the classic ones you see in movies about the fifties, similiar to the brand keds. And yes, snakes are likely to strike your legs and ankles, and for that reason I also kept my legs covered in heavy jeans. We kept many cats around, they did well at keeping down the snakes, and also keeping pests out of our garden.

As for the store, they told us that it was also for customers, because we sold groceries, and I was a service desk worker. I would not go into the store barefoot myself, it's not the cleanest place, I keep sandals close by for that. Not that cleanliness is of the utmost importance, but I don't want to carry anything home to my children, or my pets.

deb

 

Hi deb,

Sorry, that bold part does not make sense to me. If you were going to "carry anything home" on your bare feet, think about the fact that wearing shoes would not stop that from happening. The "anything" would just come home on your shoes, instead!

And you're talking about a grocery store, saying that it's so unclean that you would not go barefoot there? Why on earth would you buy FOOD from there, then?!

-Jeffrey

 

I generally take my shoes off as soon as I get home, mostly on the porch and leave them there. As far as the food goes, I cook nearly everything, so any germs would be killed in the cooking process. I try not get veggies there, I like organic better.

deb

 

idk, i like going barefoot and if you have a problem them OH WELL!!! haha

 

This may be a surprize to you, but soap and hot water do the same thing on your feet.

Germs get murdered in the washing process.