The media says Barefoot=VFF. Is this a major problem? Please discuss.

[stomper]

There's something that's been bugging me. It's gotten especially strong since I've been working on the BRS Library and have read article after article about something called "barefoot running."

The weird thing about "barefoot running" in the media is that it frequently means running in shoes. Case in point: do a google image search on the phrase "barefoot running" and most of the pictures that pop up are of VFFs!

As Will Ferrell says in Zoolander, "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"

Now I don't think there's anything wrong with wearing shoes (or whatever you want; you can wear pontoons if that works for you) when running. In fact I just ordered a pair of minimal shoes.

But IMHO there is a MAJOR difference between wearing any shoes and actually running barefoot.

In your opinion, is this equation (barefoot="VFF") something that needs to be debunked? Yes or no, and why?

 

[Blind Boy]

Yes. Mostly for clarity's

Yes. Mostly for clarity's sake. Now, the technique shouldn't be that different between any shoe and barefoot but there's still a huge difference in using them as a tool to learn proper form. Anything larger than a band-aid isn't barefoot in my opinion. There's nothing wrong with using minimal shoes if that's what you prefer but its helpful for everyone to use the correct terminology. Then again, this is exactly what you'd expect from media these days.

 

[Abide]

I thought so before, but I'm

I thought so before, but I'm starting to change my mind. I think the press realizes very few people will be interested in really running barefoot, but a bunch more will consider minimalist shoes. So they just clump the two together.

 

[Longboard]

I've heard people say that

I've heard people say that they wear their boat anchors "barefoot", meaning sockless.

I've heard people say they are going barefoot out and about, when they really mean they are walking around in their socks.

Most "barefoot" running articles I come across are really talking about VFF's and other minimalist shoes.

We can't change it.

If this trend continues, the singles's sites will have people mentioning how they "love long barefoot walks on the beach" with the potential suiter being surprised to find out that they really mean in water shoes.

 

[saypay45]

As I get asked all the time,

As I get asked all the time, "Why are you running barefoot. Haven't you hear about those shoes?" VFFs are incredibly popular because they have most of the great aspects of barefooting without most of the risks. Plus, barefooting is just plain taboo in American culture.

Personally, I'm just happy that people are coming over to our line of thinking, regardless of how they do it. Once they're over, a lot of them try barefooting just to try it. Most of those people then get hooked. Then they become us...complaining about how everyone thinks barefoot running involves shoes...

 

[Barefoot TJ]

I wish, SayPay, but I think

I wish, SayPay, but I think most of them stop short of full-on, true barefoot, and pick up running in minimalist footwear, which is a far better cry from full-on boat anchors. At least barefoot running is drawing people in to a healthy way of running, even if it isn't getting them fully, foot naked.

 

[perryrowland]

 I get the same questions

I get the same questions also about the VFF. I also have to wear them in the gym while lifting. I do not use them for running anymore.

I usually just stand there with a dumb look on my face when people ask me about them, but I think my latest comment to someone was the best: Buy two pair of flip-flops for five bucks, they're just as good as the eight five dollar VFF's!

 

[saypay45]

Yeah, looking at your post TJ

Yeah, looking at your post TJ I think I agree that a lot less will actually switch over all together. I don't think that's a bad thing though. Just as long as they join our club

 

[Barefoot TJ]

That's right.  All are

That's right. All are welcome, and besides, most people who barefoot run most of the time will don minimalist footwear from time-to-time (Footwear As Tools-FAT, remember?).

 

[stomper]

So, would you say it's

So, would you say it's important for an individual to respond, if say, a major media outlet does a piece about "barefoot running" that is actually about running in VFFs?

And if so, what would the response be?

 

[The Ramzev]

Barefoot TJ wroteFootwear

(Footwear As Tools-FAT, remember?).

How about "Footwear As Tools Avoiding Sharp Substances".

 

[Barefoot TJ]

I like that one too!

I like that one too!

 

[stomper]

Longboard wrote:If this trend

If this trend continues, the singles sites will have people mentioning how they "love long barefoot walks on the beach" with the potential suitor being surprised to find out that they really mean in water shoes.

 

[Barefoot TJ]

It's been said before.  We

It's been said before. We aren't going to change how the media behave or what words they use in their arsenals. Barefoot is the big buzz-word right now, not VFFs. If they wan't to get people to read something about VFFs, they have to use the word barefoot.

 

[Matt]

Stomper -- Were you the one

Stomper -- Were you the one who orginally mentioned Googling "barefoot running" here on BRS? If so, thank you. I wrote a blog post about it, but I wasn't sure who to thank for the idea.

In any case, I suspect that more and more "barefoot shoes" will come out, and eventually those who run without shoes and socks (formerly known as barefoot runners) will be a very, very tiny minority of the "barefoot running" population.

I imagine that when I started running barefoot, I would have done so in "barefoot shoes" if there had been a better selection at the time.

 

[Barefoot Mary]

As a newly-minted barefoot

As a newly-minted barefoot runner, I have to admit the moment I finished reading "Born to Run" I was cruising the internet looking for a nice pair of 'barefoot' shoes. Should I buy VFFs, or Soft Star, or Evos???....I think American consumerist society is more friendly to buying a shiny new toy than to shucking off shoes like a hippie. That includes me.

But it's nice to know how incredibly addicting it is to be barefoot, really BAREFOOT! I ended up bypassing the Vibrams and I'm very glad that I did. Actually, I do have KSOs for hiking only. No running in VFFs! Lol.

I do wish that the media would define the blight of injuries as a minimalist shoe problem, rather than a barefoot problem. Everyone knows barefoot runners have a problem with blisters maybe once or twice, followed by a keeping warm problem, that's it.

 

[stomper]

Barefoot Mary wrote:I think

I think American consumerist society is more friendly to buying a shiny new toy than to shucking off shoes like a hippie.

Yeah, something like that. I'd say it's not even American, it's more like basic human nature to hear about some good way of living, and then say, "What's the easiest way for me to acquire that?" And if there's a product to buy, you naturally gravitate toward that, because it's an instant ticket.

It makes total sense for something like the desire for clean windows. If you have that, itt's logical to buy window cleaner. But it's kind of laughable when it comes to acquiring something like "Zen" or "grace" . You CAN acquire those things, but not by buying the tea bags with the same names.

(Though if other people have experienced different results with the tea bags, please drop me a line. )

 

[Blind Boy]

Stomper, it all depends on

Stomper, it all depends on what you fill those tea bags with.

 

[Jimmy Hart]

 Most articles are about Born

Most articles are about Born to Run and it is about being able to run pain free, then it's about vffs and tires on your feet. After that it's about the nutty barefoot guy so if you were writing an article based on those things which direction would you go to get the reader to buy into what you're saying? You'd start by saying shoes might not be the answer and then offer them another shoe to solve the problem. Enter vffs and boom barefoot benefits are now "barefoot in these shoes" benefits. Even Ted has said he's happy what Born to Run has started but it hasn't been easy shedding the loon image the book gave him. Barefoot running is still an "insane" idea but it has benefits so, like a lot of you mentioned, there has to be a way to get it without being at risk or getting called crazy. Again enter vffs. Just sort of the cycle this thing has taken.

Anyone wonder if there was this much debate when they came up with the idea of landing on the heel when running?

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Barefoot Mary wrote:I do wish

I do wish that the media would define the blight of injuries as a minimalist shoe problem, rather than a barefoot problem.

Mary has hit upon a very important point here. If any of you receive Google Alerts (or similar) on "barefoot running", then you will know that the "Internet" news reports are constantly reporting that doctors are "supposedly" being bombarded by BAREFOOT runners with barefoot running-related injuries, which you and I know is a bunch of horse shit. (Can I say that Blind Boy without your banning me?) First of all, how many barefoot runners does each town have? Yea, were just all over the freakin' place. Now focus in on the part about "injuries due to minimalist footwear." Since the media (and medical community) want to call minimalist runners barefoot runners, then "barefoot running" get's all the flack, when someone running in minimalist footwear becomes injured. In fact, we all know the truth--you can be injured barefoot or minimal or traditionally shod just the same (but not necessarily for the same reasons--different discussion). Being barefoot or minimal or traditionally shod does not PROTECT runners from injuries. What protects runners from injury is running smart. So let's call it a horse if it's a horse. If someone is running in VFFs and becomes injured, let's not report that there goes another barefoot running injury.

In this light, yes, it's messed up that the media labels VFFs as barefoot running. How's that Stomper?