Toms shoes are doing a day where everyone is asked to go barefoot all day in support of charity giving to kids in Africa. Anyhow, we are all probably going to be supporting it even if we didn't plan on it.....lol http://finance.yahoo.com/news/TOMS-Shoes-Announces-Its-3rd-prnews-1168415548.html?x=0&.v=1
actually they want to stress the importance of shoes for children in preventing illnesses and to raise attention on the sanitary risks of going barefoot in poor countries. a noble purpose to help children in distress , but this happening isn't even remotely a somewhat frivolous 'pro-barefoot' statement , it is just the opposite, and would definitely damage the perception of barefooting. not that i am criticizing them, it is a serious issue while barefooting is just a personal thing, but since just about everyone seems grossed out by urban barefooting, and the base assumption of the happening is that bare feet are a serious health threat, it will be a miserable failure like the latest rallies of a few tenths of people in favor of mr. berlusconi's party who is going to be excluded from elections in the two major cities because of many severe law violations and of the unbelievable ineptitude of his servants who forgot to deliver the list of candidates in time at the electoral office forcing him to resort to one of his evergreen classics - changing laws for his own good. after this undreamed-of catastrophe mr. berlusconi kept smiling but turned green in the face and lost all his fake hair, now he looks just like this --> i know, this last thing is as OT as it can get. I couldn't refrain
Yeah the problem with the day without shoes is that it's ultimately not a barefoot awareness day (that is a day on which people realize how good and cool it is to be barefoot), but quite the opposite. It's as if people were invited to go barefoot so they can understand how uncomfortable it is. I don't know—I just can't shake the feeling that it's just another marketing strategy from a shoe company.
I know, it just amused me because we will probably be supporting the idea by accident. Unless we all wear shoes in protest, that is...lol Who knows, maybe some of these people will like the freedom and continue barefooting through the summer.
I wonder if all businesses will be open-minded that day? I go barefoot most anywhere weather permitting, but I stop short of upscale restaurants, professional services, etc. I just figure the likelihood of being busted isn't worth it. For that one day, I wonder if they would tolerate bare feet in their establishments to support the cause. My guess is a few would, but largely not. Other's thoughts?
Okay, first of all, yes in an ideal world going barefoot should be a choice, not necessity. I would like every child and adult to *own* shoes so they could wear them if and when they wanted. However, this isn't an ideal world and the children these 'shoe charities' are trying to reach lack many things that you and I consider 'necessities'. And in that case, I strongly believe footwear is not on top of the list of priorities to give to them. Why? Well, let's take a look at the list of facts from the charity's website. Fact 1: In some developing nations, children must walk for miles to food, clean water and to seek medical help..' And those shoes are going to last how long if they have to walk those many miles every day? Think of how long your kids' shoes last, and they don't walk a fraction of what these kids do. Wouldn't it make more sense to provide them with a well, starting equipment for farming, animals for raising, and more medicine? What's even better, the entire village benefits from that, not just the children. Fact 2 is 'Cuts and sores on feet can lead to serious infection.' Blisters from worn-out and out-grown shoes can also lead to serious infection. At least as bad or even worse, as blisters are known to be prone to infections, and the bacteria growing in old, smelly sneakers are of a particularly nasty kind too. Oh, about those nasty bacteria that live in closed shoes... do you think they'll wear these shoes with socks, and how often are they going to wash those? Old, sweaty shoes worn without socks (or with crusty, dirty ones) are worse than most of the things they step in barefoot! And related to this, how much choice are these children going to have, are they going to be fitted correctly & how often are they going to get a new pair? Ill-fitting shoes are worse than no shoes, if they walk on shoes too small for them that's not going to do their feet any good! Apart from the obvious blisters (and possibly infections), here is an article showing that even in our Western world, many children walk on shoes a bit too small for them and it's causing foot damage like Hallux Valgus: http://newsblaze.com/story/2009031807190200001.tf/topstory.html So if that happens here, where we have shoe stores in every town, then what do you think is going to happen when you give a single pair of shoes to a third-world kid? Is anyone going to keep up with them, checking their shoes often enough and providing them with a new pair if they've outgrown them? Fact 3 'Often, children cannot attend school barefoot.' This may be the case in some places, but I know from various sources I trust that in many places in Africa and Asia kids are allowed to attend school barefoot. The teachers, when asked what was needed most, answered 'pencils, paper, books...' Sometimes more general things like food and safe water were named. Shoes were NOT mentioned to ANY ONE of the people who have visited third world schools & whom I know personally. I am sure some schools require footwear but I would replace the word 'often' with 'occasionally', and in general concentrate on school supplies when donating for the children's education. Fact #4: 'In Ethiopia, approximately one million people are suffering from Podoconiosis, a debilitating and disfiguring disease caused by walking barefoot in volcanic soil.' Fact #5: 'Podoconiosis is 100% preventable by wearing shoes.' Okay, in some areas/circumstances shoes are higher on the list of priorities, if the donations are going there I support them. Same as to cold climates where children are kept from going to school in winter months without footwear and warm clothing! But send them there and concentrate on more important things elsewhere. If they concentrate on such areas, I also think it's more likely Toms can keep the donations frequent and prevent the problems I named above, caused by outgrown and worn-out footwear. I will go barefoot April 8 (as I do any other day) and ask people to donate to groups who help people in small villages with wells, farm equipment and animals, and medicine. Suggested charities: Water/wells: http://www.charitywater.org/ http://www.letsbuildwells.org/ Mosquito nets: http://www.nothingbutnets.net Livestock: http://www.maasai-association.org/goat.html http://www.sendacow.org.uk/ http://www.heifer.org/site/c.edJRKQNiFiG/b.204586/ Many, many items to chose from: http://donate.worldvision.org/OA_HTML/xxwv2ibeCCtpSctDspRte.jsp?section=10389 (note how this last organization has a *huge* list of different things to give, including clothing... yet I don't see shoes mentioned specifically. Hm, wonder if this is an oversight or maybe a large charity organization might have more of an idea what is needed than Toms? ;-))
+1 Myranya, you are a great asset to this forum. Your research, writing and objectivity are absolutely superb. :cheers2:
This "charity" follows the model of so many others, which is to decide that what you can't live without is what other people must need. If you wince at the thought of walking barefoot across a smooth floor, "poor, barefoot children" must need shoes. If you can't start your day without a slice of bread, "poor, starving children" must need wheat even if rice or another grain is their staple food. If you can't imagine a world without internet connectivity, "poor, uneducated children" must need access to computers even if they have no basic school supplies or are currently illiterate. Of course, there are always companies willing to manufacture these products that the "poor, underprivileged children" need so much. There is a great deal of need in this world, but there are all too many people whose greed or paternalism masquerades as "altruism." I won't be so naive as to think that money doesn't get diverted, but I will say that generally the best way to donate is by giving money to groups that are local to the problem. They can then buy what they need to meet the needs they actually see. Donating to a company 5,000 miles away from the problem so they can ship products only enrich the companies that make and ship the products. If children in Ethiopia need shoes (and they very well may), enable the shoemakers in Ethiopia to meet their needs. You'll help the children and their community at the same time without enriching the "Chief Shoe Giver" and his shipper.
Posted this piece, with another paragraph added about the difference between going barefoot for those habitually shod and children who are used to it, on my blog. Feel free to spread the link! http://sheriam.blogspot.com or this one will still take you directly to the post if/when I ever get around to making another entry: http://sheriam.blogspot.com/2010/03/one-day-without-shoes-barefooters.html
Hi everyone, We actually really appreciate your thorough research here on some of the facts TOMS has presented alongside our One Day Without Shoes campaign. Just to clear up some concerns about why we do what we do, we put together some info directly from our Director of Giving- who researches, learns, and talks to experts in the field day in and day out about the impact a pair of shoes can have on a child's life. We hope this helps you understand why we are asking our movement to experience one day without shoes on April 8th! From Myranya: "Fact 1: In some developing nations, children must walk for miles to food, clean water and to seek medical help..' And those shoes are going to last how long if they have to walk those many miles every day? Think of how long your kids' shoes last, and they don't walk a fraction of what these kids do. Wouldn't it make more sense to provide them with a well, starting equipment for farming, animals for raising, and more medicine? What's even better, the entire village benefits from that, not just the children." TOMS strives to donate shoes that are appropriate to local weather, terrain, and cultural conditions and we partner with charitable organizations that have the capabilities to reach the same children over and over. Its important to note that the organizations we work with might also provide additional things such as wells or medicine- they reach out to TOMS for a specific need: shoes. From Myranya: "Fact 2 is 'Cuts and sores on feet can lead to serious infection.' Blisters from worn-out and out-grown shoes can also lead to serious infection. At least as bad or even worse, as blisters are known to be prone to infections, and the bacteria growing in old, smelly sneakers are of a particularly nasty kind too. Oh, about those nasty bacteria that live in closed shoes... do you think they'll wear these shoes with socks, and how often are they going to wash those? Old, sweaty shoes worn without socks (or with crusty, dirty ones) are worse than most of the things they step in barefoot! And related to this, how much choice are these children going to have, are they going to be fitted correctly & how often are they going to get a new pair? Ill-fitting shoes are worse than no shoes, if they walk on shoes too small for them that's not going to do their feet any good! Apart from the obvious blisters (and possibly infections), here is an article showing that even in our Western world, many children walk on shoes a bit too small for them and it's causing foot damage like Hallux Valgus: http://newsblaze.com/story/200903180.../topstory.html So if that happens here, where we have shoe stores in every town, then what do you think is going to happen when you give a single pair of shoes to a third-world kid? Is anyone going to keep up with them, checking their shoes often enough and providing them with a new pair if they've outgrown them?" Yes, children will grow and wear out their shoes- it is for this reason that TOMS partners with those organizations that can reach the same kids once their shoes wear out or they grow out of them. We work with our partners to send "replenishment" shoes on a regular schedule. From Myranya: "Fact 3 'Often, children cannot attend school barefoot.' This may be the case in some places, but I know from various sources I trust that in many places in Africa and Asia kids are allowed to attend school barefoot. The teachers, when asked what was needed most, answered 'pencils, paper, books...' Sometimes more general things like food and safe water were named. Shoes were NOT mentioned to ANY ONE of the people who have visited third world schools & whom I know personally. I am sure some schools require footwear but I would replace the word 'often' with 'occasionally', and in general concentrate on school supplies when donating for the children's education." As mentioned above, TOMS responds to requests from our giving partners for shoes. We do not enter communities and give shoes without a clear understanding that the shoes will benefit the children's lives. We hear from health organizations who see that the children they work with are exposed to serious diseases and parasites every day because they are barefoot. Health and education issues are intertwined - if a child is barefoot on a long walk to school, he/she will be more exposed to those diseases... and if he/she gets sick, his/her school attendance will suffer. From kazuya5611: "This "charity" follows the model of so many others, which is to decide that what you can't live without is what other people must need. If you wince at the thought of walking barefoot across a smooth floor, "poor, barefoot children" must need shoes. If you can't start your day without a slice of bread, "poor, starving children" must need wheat even if rice or another grain is their staple food. If you can't imagine a world without internet connectivity, "poor, uneducated children" must need access to computers even if they have no basic school supplies or are currently illiterate. Of course, there are always companies willing to manufacture these products that the "poor, underprivileged children" need so much. There is a great deal of need in this world, but there are all too many people whose greed or paternalism masquerades as "altruism." I won't be so naive as to think that money doesn't get diverted, but I will say that generally the best way to donate is by giving money to groups that are local to the problem. They can then buy what they need to meet the needs they actually see. Donating to a company 5,000 miles away from the problem so they can ship products only enrich the companies that make and ship the products. If children in Ethiopia need shoes (and they very well may), enable the shoemakers in Ethiopia to meet their needs. You'll help the children and their community at the same time without enriching the "Chief Shoe Giver" and his shipper." TOMS carefully selects trusted giving partners to distribute matched pairs of TOMS. We work with organizations that are on the ground, understand the need of the community, and are committed to providing shoes to children sustainably and responsibly.
Does TOMS provide foot health care as well to these children? Wearing shoes without proper foot care may solve some problems but will also create new ones pretty quickly. I think all we're trying to say here is that a campaign that says "they're barefoot, let's give them shoes" propagates the myth that barefoot is unconditionally bad, and does nothing to promote correct ways for people to keep their feet healthy—whether in developing countries or in a big Western city.
Dear TOMS, I'm very impressed and thankful that you took the time to read and address the criticisms presented here on this forum. I'm sure that most of us appreciate your motivation to assist people of the world who have limited resources and who are consequently exposed to greater health risks, and appreciate the fact that your organization is merely a supplier of shoes to partner organizations. However, my only advice to your giving organizations is to better understand the issues surrounding "Fact 2", also presented by Myranya. While it may be true that shoes can prevent direct injury to the feet, they actually pose a more serious infection risk by trapping heat and moisture which in turn cause bacteria, viruses, and skin disease to multiply and spread much more quickly than feet kept dry and aired out. The only way to mitigate this problem with shoes is by keeping feet and socks clean and dry on a daily basis, a luxury which may not be feasible for many of the children you are trying to help. The bottom line is that I'd just like to know that these charitable organizations are taking a more cautious and less cavalier approach when generating requirements for shoes. We don't want to see the efforts backfire and cause an increase in disease.
Thank you Toms, I'm glad you addressed the points I made, and it's good to see you aren't just shipping one load of shoes over to every barefoot kid you spot regardless of what other things he or she might need. You're right, in some areas there are conditions where shoes are more of a necessity due to volcanic soil or sand fleas etc. I'm still a bothered by the whole thing though, since the way most of the charity's site is worded does make it seem like you consider shoes a necessity for *all* children in all third-world countries to wear at all times, just like almost all people do in the US & Europe... as if all the planet is covered in caustic soil & parasites, as if wearing shoes solves the problem of having to walk long distances for water every day, and as if it's just as common for small third-world village schools to require shoes as it is for schools in the US... that simply isn't so. Also, trying to go barefoot for one day & one day only is going to give those well-meaning participants who are used to wearing shoes from the moment they get out of bed until the moment they get back to sleep at night the wrong impression of going barefoot. On my blog I added another paragraph that I did not include here (because here it's pretty much all barefooters reading to whom this is obvious). "Now I have gone barefoot by choice for fourteen years, and I am very happy with healthy, strong feet. I can tell you that going barefoot for a single day when you've spent a lifetime in shoes is NOT anywhere NEAR experiencing 'what children have to endure'. YOUR feet are going to be extremely tender and soft, you're going to wince at every pebble, shy away from every rose bush or thistle you spot, you'll probably get cold toes. You may even get sore calves because you walk differently from what you're used to. But THEIR feet are tough, calloused and leathery, they can handle much larger rocks without noticing them, they are only occasionally bothered by particularly nasty thorns. Many of them live in warmer climates, and they won't get sore calves because their calves are used to walking that way. I walk across broken glass, have cleared out thick bramble bushes wearing gloves but no shoes, have dug up parts of the garden using a regular shovel, been on hikes and recently taken up running, all without any trouble. In fourteen years, I have never yet had a cut, and even (glass)splinters and thorns happen only very rarely and leave no sores when they're picked out. When you're habitually barefoot, your feet get MUCH stronger than people who regularly wear shoes can even begin to imagine (it surprised me too, although I never thought that going barefoot was extremely painful or I wouldn't have started doing it)"
So I saw some advertisements for this around my school. I thought this was pretty cool; I've always wanted to go barefoot to school. However, it says on the poster that individuals "must wear socks." I really don't understand that caveat at all. Not like fungus is going to grow on tile or short, dry carpet (HOPEFULLY). It's also not like the kids in Africa have socks... Unless I'm gravely mistaken.
Wonder what they would do or say if you didn't wear socks? Like what do they expect people to do, walk to school in socks? Or walk barefoot to school and then stop to put on socks before entering? I would definitely try the sockless route. If you really want to go to school barefoot what is the worst that could happen? You would probably get detention which you would have to do barefoot, just a way of prolonging your fun. And if a lot of you did that they probably wouldn't have a big enough room for all those barefoot people in detention.
What's the point in it all? Either let the students go barefoot for the day or don't even bother posting the event.
yanno, just wearing socks could be a safety hazard, you could slip on the tile floor in socks where you wouldn't in barefeet. if you go this route I'd wait until that day and then bring it up because if you bring it up early the authority might cancel the day without shoes all together.