Hello from NJ!

[Ddubb925]

Hi,

I've been running and living barefoot since spring/summer '11. So I'm still kind of a newbie, but I just love it 8) . My favorite things to do barefoot are walk around, run, longboard, hike and rock climb. I recently "dropped out" of The University of Vermont (UVM) during my second year where, among other unpleasant issues, they were coming down on me for being barefoot. I'm hoping to transfer to another school at some point. For now, I'm back home in NJ but trying to leave. I'm also trying to make sense of this snowless winter, which is challenging for me because I was planning on spending the winter instructing snowboarding in Vermont, but now it's too cold to run barefoot and too dry to snowboard

Here's an article that was written about my barefootedness at UVM (about my unsuccessful attempt to get the rules changed): http://www.vermontcynic.com/news/this-barefoot-man-won-t-put-on-shoes-for-anyone-1.2656531

Thanks for reading,

Dave

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Sounds like a rash of crap

Sounds like a rash of crap you've been having to deal with. You do know there are many "fights" going on all around the country on this same issue, people trying to defend their right to go barefoot in public places? Check out the home page about one our our members who is fighting a barefoot ban at the Ohio Statehouse here: Act Fast. Hearing is on Monday! I Need Your Help: The Ohio Statehouse By Bob Neinast

Are you a member of the Society for Barefoot Living? Google it. Join (although they are very particular who can become a member). They have the resources that can help you.



Now, I CAN'T wear shoes. I have a true medical condition that prevents me from wearing shoes at this moment, so I guess I cannot become a student at this university? I, as a "handicapped" person would be discriminated against? (I hate using that term for myself because I don't consider myself handicapped, but there are conditions a lot less worse and a lot less painful than mine that would label a person handicapped.)

Full disclosure: I have my left foot elevated after having two neuromas removed this past Friday, and I will have my second surgery on the 17th to remove the two neuromas from my right foot. Supposedly, I will be able to wear shoes without pain after I have healed. Although, the underlying reason I was predisposed to developing the neuromas in the first place cannot be resolved, would they prefer I risk my health by wearing shoes (again, the very thing that ignited this problem) so that they all feel better while I develop more neuromas in my feet due to wearing shoes?!



Welcome!

 

[The Ramzev]

     Welcome to the jungle

Welcome to the jungle Dave.

One thing I noticed at the end of the article is you mention that being barefoot is a matter of expression. Maybe instead of looking at it that way, look at it as your right. There are a lot of "expressions" i.e. nudity that are simply not acceptable in most places however, being barefoot should be fine. There are very few laws that provide that a person has to wear shoes.

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Board would say there are no

Board would say there are no laws pertaining to being barefoot, just policies.

 

[Ddubb925]

I became a member of SBL

I became a member of SBL right after that article came out. I would hope that they would allow you to be barefoot if it was presented as a medical situation; that could have made for good leverage. I used to use the example of a buddhist monk that has taken a vow of poverty as part of his religion and therefore goes barefoot; would a librarian call the police on him if he didn't put shoes on? The UVM student rights and the UVM common ground both claim to protect community members from discrimination and harrassment of any kind, for any reason.

Barefoot as "expression" implies that it's a right because freedom of expression is a right granted to us in our constitution. I presented a whole 10 minute speech on the subject in front of the student government. The problem is, establishments (in this case the individual establishments within the university) claim to be within their legal right to eforce an arbitrary dress code just as much as I'm within my legal right to go barefoot... It's a paradoxical clash of "rights." The unfortunate conclusion was that if the administration were to take any action, they would have to rule one way or the other in the creation of a university-wide policy; either banning bare feet entirely on campus (as of then, it was only in certain buildings) or allow it everywhere (more likely the former, so they intentionally ignored it). The only thing that changed because of me was that the dining halls all posted new NS3 signs, since I brought to their attention that NS3 was Sodexo policy rather than law.

UVM of all places is actually accepting of nudity; there's a naked run/bike ride at the end of every semester, and nudity is actually legal in Vermont. If someone wants to go to class naked, I say let them. I ran the naked bike ride once (1 mile in 4 degrees F) and I sometimes like to go running naked on the bike path in the middle of the night; it's the most natural way to run! Not to mention, there are quite a few habitually barefoot students besides me at UVM, and even more so historically. Anyway, I'm applying to an small, agricultural college called Sterling College in Vermont that I anticipate will be more welcoming of me.

Thanks for the welcome.

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Nudity is legal in Vermont

Nudity is legal in Vermont but not bare feet, which are nude. Hmmmm. That's messed up!

What does NS3 stand for?

It's difficult when you have private entities setting up shop in a public place, so I get the catch 22. Getting them to allow you to go barefoot in the cafeteria is a huge step, a huge barefoot step. Don't be disappointed with that. That's progress.

If it's a public facility, then I don't undestand why people have such an issue with others going barefoot. There are no laws that say it's against the law to be barefoot in public/in public places, and if you break the law, you go to jail. There are no laws that say you can't be barefoot in a private place either. But, if it is a private business, that's another thing. They have their own "policies," however, we should be able to petition the store owners to at least open up to our barefootedness if they want our business. But, most likely, they figure we would chase off more business than they would gain from us, so it's going to take some time and a lot of open minds.

I do understand why gyms require footwear in their facilities, although you can lose a toe from a weight being dropped on a shod foot just as well as you can on a bare foot. The reason why I can back this concern of theirs up is because I was running on a treadmill barefoot at a physical therapy session, when I took my eyes off the conveyor belt for just a moment to turn and look toward my left. My foot slid under the metal edge that outlines the belt and burned/cut a gash in the side of my foot. I, knowing it was my fault, didn't say or do anything about it, but someone else who is not as forgiving (of their own actions) could have turned around and sued them.

I can also understand that in public or private places it could be considered dangerous to go barefoot in certain environments, construction zones, as one example, and no one wants a law suit, so naturally, they are going to say we can't go barefoot there. It would be nice if there was some way each barefoot citizen could carry some sort of waiver with them that says, I will not sue anyone should I become injured while being barefoot in public or private places, but no such document would be considered legitimate wihouth some sort of law to recognize it and back it up. That's where it's going to take more people to stand up and fight these battles.

BTW, were you barefoot when you stood on the senate floor and before the school's student government?

Now throw in the nudity runs and races, and it sends a cluttered signal. Do they require footwear of the naked participants in the nude race? If they feel the human body is acceptable in its natural form, then why wouldn't the feet be included in that? Is it because most people still feel that the feet are considered ugly, dirty, and vulgar? I believe they do, and it is quite sad.

 

[NickW]

TJ we had a mini discussion

TJ we had a mini discussion about this in my class tonight and why feet are so hated. It was the first night of class and of course, I had to bring up that I am a barefooter and would prefer to go nearly everywhere barefoot, but rather than get in arguments everywhere I went I have decided to just done some sort of minimal footwear. One person in class said, "well, for one feet are dirty and unhygenic." I replied, "Well, I'm not sure about you but I scrub my feet everyday. How often do you wash your shoes?" This got a big reaction from the class, most of which went, "I never thought of that, how gross!" It was pretty interesting to see everyones reactions and how I maybe somewhat changed their perceptions just a little bit. I was more trying to get my teachers reaction and see his philosophy on me being barefoot in class. Still not sure so next class I'm gonna wear the huaraches.

 

[Ddubb925]

NS3 is no shirt, no shoes, no

NS3 is no shirt, no shoes, no service. I think you misunderstood, I didn't actually get them to reverse the rule in the dining halls (although that was my goal), what they did was post clearer signs about their anti-barefoot policy. I ended up off of the meal plan and I went without much food for a period of a few months (because I was also almost arrested at the grocery store, but I don't have much money to spend anyway). It's very true about the mixed message about nudity and bare feet; I know people that have run through the library butt naked and faced no consequenses while I had a disciplinary hearing over being barefoot in the library. Nudity has become institutionalized but bare feet still remain on the fringe at UVM, despite the presence of both. Bare feet and nudity are both in this weird middle ground where they are not explicitly legal or illegal, but not permitted in certain situations. That begs the question: how can you enforce a policy that is not based in law? The answer is with trespassing laws. Apparantly a full-time, tuition paying student could be banned from the school library, which would inevitably lead to suspension/expulsion from the school. That's what I was told. The last person that they tresspassed from the library was a screaming homeless person that would come in to use the computers, never a student. We live in a highly podophobic society and people can't wrap their heads around things that defy conventional wisdom.

 

[Phil Hart]

BFers are welcome here,

BFers are welcome here, Dave. Sorry you've had a less pleasant experience other places.

 

[Ddubb925]

Thanks

Thanks