Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Barefootedness' started by happysongbird, Sep 23, 2013.
Good for you, Barefoot Walker! I like your style.
I just noticed this thread is in the running forum. I am moving it to the Barefootedness forum (more fitting) with a redirect that will expire in one day.
I admire someone who will stand up and confront people on this, but at the same time....I just don't want confrontation. I'm usually wanting to do something else, and confronting some angry/ignorant store manager just puts me in a bad mood. When I did go barefoot a lot, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, I loved it, though even then, getting all the odd looks from people, that wore on me. And so when I moved one county over, to Jackson, and people's reactions just got livid, I just felt it wasnt' worth it. So, maybe they 'won', but I at least was running all over town barefoot, and I was a teacher and went barefoot in my classes all the time. I just didn't like the feeling of going into Meijer's wondering/fearing if the cops would be called and/or if some idiot would get in my face. So, maybe I was just choosing my battle (ie my classes).
Well, ten days ago I gave the young manager/assistant manager of our local grocery store a copy of the SBL's pamphlet. He was in a hurry to open up the second cash register, as it was close to dinner time and the line at the first register was getting to be more than a few people deep, so I didn't have time to say anything to him other than, "please take a look at this when you have time."
Last week when my wife went in, she noticed that the noSSS sign had come down. Yesterday when I went in (with my moccasins) to pick up a coupla racks of ribs, I too saw that the sign was down. I'll have to try to go in during the day this week and ask the management if they've changed their minds, or if it's just coincidence. I'm hopeful it's the former. Or I suppose I could just go in barefoot, and point out that they've taken down their sign if anyone gives me trouble, but it seems like I should take the most diplomatic tack possible.
Well, I have finally posted my blog article about the incident. Feel free to share on FB. I hope it comes across as thoughtful. http://dailyimprovisations.com/hand...tations-lies-and-intimidation-at-nampa-winco/
Nice blog entry, hope it causes at least a few people reading it to change their minds about bare feet in public spaces.
I wouldn't ask about the sign. Just go in barefoot, and if someone says something, then point out that the sign has been taking down, so it must be a "sign" of acceptance.
Oh. I wrote that paragraph in the "Case For" article. Some of the other stuff there has since changed, but that still holds true.
I just got my first angry comment comparing us all to homeless drug addicts.... I let it stay because it wasn't completely over the edge and so I could respond to it reasonably, but I added notice at the bottom of the blog about deleting rude comments. Sigh. My mother would be so shocked to know she is a "stoner."
That is awesome! I love the comments section! So much logic and intelligence. Gives me faith in humanity.
Personally I didn't receive this comment as "angry" or "rude" : the phrase about "not my job to judge whether you are a barefoot athlete or a hippy stoner or homeless and shoeless"
does not really compare the one with the other, it just states that the reason for being barefoot is not the root of the problem. The root of the problem are potential or imagined accidents and the implied potential for law suits. That means it would be quite easy to find a solution to accommodate everyone: A big sign "Barefoot at own risk" would do, would it not?
I'm not looking for ways to be offended. Maybe he is just careless, but I think the whole tone of the comment is rude, as is his follow-up comment. One doesn't use all those descriptors without intending to give a certain sense of how barefoot people are judged. By including barefoot athlete in a list of implied negatives, he at least strongly suggests negative judgment in an unkind way. His imperatives at the end are phrased in a confrontational way. I really appreciated the Barefoot Professor's response.
"What does make me a little bit annoyed is when a small demographic of people with fringe ideas..."
America is all about respecting "small demographics" with "fringe ideas", such as freedom of speech and religion, as long as one is not harming others.
Yes, this phrase about "small demographic of people with fringe ideas" did annoy me as well, but it reflects a profound American contradiction, which as a non-American, I've always wondered about:
As far as I've understood, in America you have the liberty to carry firearms wherever you go but you don't have the liberty to go barefoot wherever you wish - and strangely it's the barefooters who are treated as potential criminals!
When I was fighting for barefoot rights for the Royal Oak MI Arts Beats & Eats 5K/10K and Festival I brought that up early on. Almost a year later when the festival owner/promoter called me on the phone for a 30 minute discussion turned argument, the open carry firearm comparison was the major issue. He had backed down on his no guns rule when the local NRA group promised to have thousands of gun totin' folks all around the perimeter, but he stood his ground on the shoe rule until he saw that I was serious about having a very visible comparable protest. Here's where I first mentioned it on their FB site in the original thread:
If that provision withstands a legal challenge, it will be a first in the history of the U.S. Never before has a group been able to "rent" a section of a city and suspend the constitution during their rule. The open carry folks fought and won their battle with the event, which was very predictable. Nobody can be forced into footwear to walk the city streets even when an admission charge is being assessed.
"profound American contradiction"...more like your profoundly confused. That's a bad comparison and makes no sense and would probably take it's own political thread to explain it to you. No problem since you don't live here I can understand the confusion.
I equate the no barefoot/no shirt rules set down by stores as a way to try to keep the more upscale customers coming back to spend their money...they don't want the big spenders to have to associate with the riff-raff now do they...bad for business.
Could you envision signs that said no "No Beards/No Tatoo's allowed" some people look down on those also...to me that would be a better comparison. There aren't enough barefoot people to matter to the business owners overall... I don't mind wearing flip flops into stores if they have signs but I don't really have much trouble locally in the stores.
Legally we can go barefoot AND carry a weapon, it's just that some private businesses try their best to put a stop to either or both activities. Not all that many people are sympathetic to the plight of the shoe-less by choice crowd, but try to mess with our second amendment rights and you got to wait in line to join the protests!
That's why I fight discrimination against bare feet, almost always it's decided in our favor. It's just a shame that we have to bother.
If that happens to me I'm thinking I will just take 2 of their shopping bags and wear them as shoes....that might be good for a laugh or two...my son works at a grocery store...that would be a good place to do that on one his work days.
Hi! As a habitual barefoot criminal in the UK, I can tell you that independent stores here are normally ok.
It's the chains which have imaginary policies. I have had a run in with Tesco (A bit like Wally World) where I would be pounced upon by security guards whenever I entered their stores or service stations. I came across this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2189145/Podiatrist-banned-Tesco-insisting-walking-store-barefoot.html About a Podiatrist here in the UK who had the same problems. I found Steve's site and entered into email correspondence with him regarding his success. (http://www.stepfree.co.uk/). After he had provided me with the relevant laws and regulations (There are none) And he had offered me advice on how to deal with them I went into our local store and asked to see the manager. He came out with the same old Blarney about Health and Safety and risks of me suing them for injury.
I asked him to refer the case to their head office and he replied that he would contact them and write to me if I gave him my address. At this point I offered him my phone with the head office number already programmed into it and asked him to call them so that they could email over the pertinent documents about the laws and regulations. He phoned them and to his surprise was told they did not actually have anything written or indeed an existing policy on the matter.
Needless to say he was nonplussed so I suggested that they emailed him a letter giving me written permission to shop barefoot in their stores. Much to my surprise they did exactly that. Now I can shop in my local superstore and the security guards actually give me a thumbs up when I come in. I keep a copy of the email in my car and use it whenever I go into another of their stores. I am normally pounced on by a security guard but once they have seen the email they let me in. Each time it seems like a little victory!
As an aside. I have shown other establishments who have refused me entry the email and they also normally let me in. I assume they think that if Tesco will there is no reason they shouldn't.
Sorry about the essay. I couldn't think of a shorter way of writing it.
That was great! I appreciated all of it. It is an interesting thought to see if they have something written anywhere except the signs on the doors. Since I have already contacted the main offices, I expect they might just write something up to ban bare feet, since that seemed to be the direction they were heading, but it still might be worth a try.