Another post on the same topic...

[conuly]

Despite the fact that this is untrue, many people believe that various health departments in the US ban bare feet in restaurants. You're not required to wash your hands, but the part of your body that doesn't come near the food or your mouth, that's supposed to be covered for "health reasons". That's not true.

I remember reading once that, in the Brady Bunch, the kids were never barefoot. If they got out of bed to go across the room for a book, they put on shoes or slippers. I don't know if that's true, but it seems unnatural for me, at least as bad as Lucy and Ricky's bed.

However, the silliest thing I ever noticed was this. Way back when, Lizziey dared me to 'liberate' some of 'dul's porn. Which I shouldn't've done since she wussed out of HER dare, but it was late, you get drunkish when you're that tired. And I noticed something scary. In all the "naked" pictures except one, they were wearing shoes. This didn't seem to be some sort of shoe fetish porn, but they all had shoes on. They theoretically stripped, and then PUT THE SHOES BACK ON.

I don't understand it. Didn't understand it then, either. What's so objectionable about the naked foot as compared to the naked hand, or nose, or... well, anything else? While I realize that pr0n != realism, these pictures really confused me. Why put the shoes back on?

There's something wrong in this society. Clearly. People have more hangups about the feet than they do about the privates! Gah!

Or maybe that was an weird bit of porn. Maybe.

Comments

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

Well, when it comes to porn I don't think that it's an objection to bare feet that causes actresses (I use that term loosely in this case) to don shoes. Porn caters to the male persuasion and for some reason they all seem to think that 4 inch stilletto (sp?) heals are preferable to bare feet. Personally, I think bare feet are way sexier.

[conuly]

Porn caters to the male persuasion and for some reason they all seem to think that 4 inch stilletto (sp?) heals are preferable to bare feet.

What about socks and sneakers, and no I'm not joking?

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

Maybe those are for the guys that like athletic girls....um, yeah.

[conuly]

See, I could've seen fancy shoes. That's like fancy lingerie. It makes sense. But the sneakers (with socks!) doesn't.

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

Maybe the director was just a raving loony!

[conuly]

Psst - editor. This was a magazine.

Though that might've been the case. God, I hope so.

[strangelette.livejournal.com]

Or maybe that was an weird bit of porn. Maybe.

It's most definitely was not just a weird bit of porn. Perpetual shoes is right up there with long nails (ouch!) and jewelry as confusing points for girls watching p0rn. And it can be athletic shoes, it err... just depends on what you're watching but most of the time it's digusting heels.

I think it's mostly stripping around the shoes - not a lot of pants in p0rn.

[conuly]

And no undies either, of course.

It still makes no sense. When I'm thinking about hot, sweaty sex, I don't want to think about being kicked by people with shoes on because they can't feel their feet.

Seriously, shod feet are almost dead compared to bare ones, at least as far as the sense of touch goes.

[neurotica0.livejournal.com]

Speaking of the health code thing, I have an acquaintance at school who rarely wears shoes. He was told he could not come into the cafeteria without shoes. I told him that was wrong. He says that they can reserve the right to refuse service to him. I still think he should be allowed in without shoes. From a legal perspective, who is right? (I'm assuming you know; you may not.)

[ruthanolis.livejournal.com]

Okay, I'm a guy. Now that that is sorted here's some of the why's and wherefore's.

Firstly, next time you get a chance, check out the shape of the leg on a woman wearing stiletto's. I'm serious. It's a major turn on for most guys to see a well defined and taut calf muscle — at least, I love it anywa. If you can, ask that same woman to step out of her heels and put both feet flat on the ground and look at the difference in the calf. Not saying that there's something wrong with it, but the leg in the first instance is so damn sexy! ;)

Secondly, when it comes to tennis shoes and long socks, that's another major turn on for guys. Long socks that have been pulled up as high as possible [usually above the knee] matched with a skirt that comes down to within an inch or two, but not overlapping, and thus showing some thigh is seriously hot.

That's just the aesthetics of things like that anywa.

But when it comes to the hard core stuff, I think it's to make it seem more urgent, more animalistic, like, "She didn't have time to get her shoes off". Some guys like things like that. Me, I never really noticed.

Then of course, it's also possible that the actress [did I just call them that? I can act, they just have sex with multiple partners] has ugly feet!

Besides all of that, there is a social stigma about feet in general being dirty. Hence so-called foot fetish magazines.

[conuly]

He was told he could not come into the cafeteria without shoes. I told him that was wrong. He says that they can reserve the right to refuse service to him. I still think he should be allowed in without shoes. From a legal perspective, who is right? (I'm assuming you know; you may not.)

Hm. I'm not a lawyer, so this is my very uneducated opinion!

No state has a health code that forbids entering any place of business without shoes.

However, any individual place of business has the right to make their own rules. So he can be banned from a cafeteria because of his shoelessness. Unfortunately.

He definitely should be allowed in without shoes, but that doesn't mean they have to allow it.

[catsluvdmb.livejournal.com]

NC does ban bare feet in restaurants. It's for health and safety reasons mainly.

[neurotica0.livejournal.com]

He definitely should be allowed in without shoes, but that doesn't mean they have to allow it.

Good point.

[satyrblade.livejournal.com]

>Personally, I think bare feet are way sexier.

Agreed. High heels are trite... not to mention terrible for a woman's feet. Having worked in a shoe store, I know all too well the effects of podical tyranny on women's feet. Hell, that's one of the reasons I'm such a barefooter now - I've seen with constant shoe-wearing does to people by the time they hit middle age. Hint: there's nothing "sexy" about THOSE feet!

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

The number one reason I go barefoot? Shoes cause me pain....especially heals. I am knock-kneed and have collapsed arches. So, no shoes, thanks!

Heals are just barbaric...especially "stripper" heals. *shudders*

[conuly]

Heels. Heal is what you do when you get better from being sick.

*hugs for your poor feetsies*

And yes, stripper heels must be torture.

[conuly]

Are you sure?

If you doubt the validity of this source (fair enough), you can write to the health department yourself and ask for a clarification.

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

Brain....is....fried....cannot....spell.....

[conuly]

There's responses from previous inquiries as well. Again, I'd be interested in seeing where you found this law. My source can certainly be wrong, but as I know of no health nor safety reasons for banning bare feet, I am skeptical that such a law would actually exist.

[conuly]

Well, look on the bright side. Fried brain is a yummy treat!

[catsluvdmb.livejournal.com]

It's one of the things you can get marked off for in a health inspection of a restaurant. When I worked at Starbucks, we would always get .5 points taken off of the catagory that includes "hats, hairnets, closed toed shoes." It mainly has to do with safety in that if you spill a hot liquid or food onto your feet, you don't want to get scalded.

While I doubt the law directly applies to customers, I do have a friend who had gone to Wendy's and had the manager threaten to kick her out because she had taken her shoes off in the restaurant. My guess is they had an incident with the health inspector recently (and they can be total vindictive jerks in Wake County) so he was trying to cover his ass in case the inspector came back in for a reinspection.

[catsluvdmb.livejournal.com]

If I remember correctly the it was 18A.2616 or .2617 of the DoH handbook, though I may be completely off on that. I wonder if I still have that handbook laying around here somewhere.

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

Is it now? What does one fry brain in? Butter or oil?

[conuly]

Lard.

[conuly]

It mainly has to do with safety in that if you spill a hot liquid or food onto your feet, you don't want to get scalded.

See, that's not what I was talking about. Even if it's not a health regulation, it's almost certainly an OSHA one.

If you can find that the law applies to customers, I'll concede the point, but not if it only applies for foodstaff.