I have a question!

[conuly]

I go barefoot. A lot. Every chance I get, in fact. I hate shoes. Now, for years people told me to cut it out because "you might step in glass or something, and die of tetnus". (They eventually stopped. I think they got tired of always being wrong). I'd always reply, reasonably, that I didn't see any glass, and that if they could show me some glass I'd be careful to walk around it. This always, ALWAYS prompted/prompts the response:

Well, there could be glass!

I don't understand that. There is no glass. Look up the street. No glass. Look down the street. No glass. Simple observation will tell you that there is far less glass on the street than most people commonly believe. Were there glass, one could easily walk around it, the same way one walks around dropped toys and other dropped... things. I am neither blind nor stupid. I am perfectly capable of seeing obstacles on the ground and not walking on them. However, it does not matter. There is never any glass. I have seen glass on the sidewalk so rarely that I can actually list up the times. And most of the times, the glass was right up against a building, not in the middle of the path.

What confuses me is that, when confronted with one of life's harsh realities, namely the fact that there isn't any glass, people always say "but there could be!" as though this means I should take excess precautions where there clearly isn't any glass (or rusty nails, or lit cigarettes....)!

Why do they do this? Why don't they say something else? I'd even "what would you do if there were?", because that opens some sort of discussion (not much, what I'd do is walk around it). But not only do they expect me, apparently, to protect my feet against imaginary dangers, they also don't like me looking around and pointing out that these dangers don't exist! And I just don't understand that.

Comments

[marveen.livejournal.com]

Depends on where you are, how many hazards are littering the pathway. It could, I suppose, be said that you would be spending all your time looking at where your feet are going in some circumstances....

(Now, I grew up in the country. The land on which we lived had had a house on it previously which burned down, so any patch of soil might often prove to contain such dangers as broken glass or rusty nails. Matter of fact, one of my worst scars came from kneeling on a glass shard while crawling under a barbed-wire fence.)

I think the rusty-nail thing has arisen because rust indicates that it's old and dirty and has picked up tetanus spores from the environment, whereas a new, shiny, clean nail is far less dangerous.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

It could, I suppose, be said that you would be spending all your time looking at where your feet are going in some circumstances....

Which could potentially be a hazard when doing something like crossing the road (and crossing at lights are the sorts of place you do get glass underfoot from people rear-ending each other.)

[satyrblade.livejournal.com]

Actually, you'd be surprised how much better you sense things when you're accustomed to walking barefoot. Like hands, feet "feel" far beyond their physical reach when they're allowed to do so. You don't have to stare at the ground to be aware of your footsteps when you're used to being barefoot. Your natural sensory perceptions are far more developed than we commonly believe.

[conuly]

That's a fact. Furthermore, you don't have to stare at the ground all the time regardless. Look once, sweep the area with your eyes, and don't look again until you've passed the furthest place you saw that time.