Alliance Opposes Ohio Statehouse Shoe Rule

The Primalfoot Alliance, an organization that advocates worldwide for the barefoot lifestyle, stands in opposition of a rule requiring that visitors to the Ohio Statehouse wear "shoes or comparable footwear." The rule was approved 8-2 by a committee and will now go before the entire state legislature.

In December, we sent letters to each member of the Joint Commission for Agency Rule Review (JCARR) speaking on behalf of all barefooters in Ohio and beyond. We expressed our concern that requiring shoes of visitors takes away an individual's right to make health decisions about their own body and forces a biomechanical restriction on feet. Apparently those concerns fell on deaf ears.

The leadership of The Primalfoot Alliance will now be considering what actions this organization can take to have this rule repealed. Options include petitioning all supporters of barefoot living to send emails and letters to the legislature as a whole or petitioning the ACLU for assistance in defending barefooters' natural rights.

Many legal precedents beyond this single action have already been set against the barefoot movement. Now it is time for a sea change to begin that stops additional damage to the movement and reclaims rights for anyone who chooses to live without shoes. If we cannot do that, bare feet and our natural rights will continue to be blocked in irreperable ways.

More:

Columbus Dispatch: "Bare feet officially going bye-bye at Statehouse" 
Ahcuah: "Statehouse Shootdown" 

Corrected: Struck statement saying that the rule goes before the entire state legislature. Because it was not rejected it will automatically go into effect once filed.

Airline Refuses Flight to Shoeless Toddler, Family

source: news.com.au

An woman and her two young sons recently were kept off a Virgin Australia flight after the younger child had lost his shoes and was going to board in stockinged feet, according to an article by the Website Terminal U. After the carrier apparently cited a non-existent policy of Australia's safety regulator, Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Karen Darley and her four-year and two-year old children were refused boarding on the flight and finally took another one when replacement shoes for the toddler were found.

Further complicating the matter is the fact that the family missed an alternate flight (for which she was not billed additionally by Virgin Australia), and therefore had to pay more than $800 for new tickets. Darley is seeking compensation for the second flight and a portion of the cost of the first flight.

Terminal U shared a quote from a CASA spokesperson: "CASA recommends that all passengers wear shoes on board. There is no regulation for wearing shoes, but airlines can set their own policies." Our emphasis was added. According to a news.com.au article, which Terminal U sourced, the airline does have a policy requiring shoes of "anyone who can walk."

As is often the case with discrimination against primalfoot people, there seems to be confusion as to why Virgin Australia actually kicked Darley and her sons off the plane. Both articles linked above claim that a safety regulation was wrongly cited. The airline does have a policy addressing this issue, but it's not clear if that was brought up by the airline only after the fact.

UPDATE, Nov. 2, 2011: Barefooter Bob Neinast informed us that Virgin Australia's posted Conditions of Carriage actually do not have a requirement that passengers use footwear. That said, the document does state that the airline "may take all steps it believes necessary to ensure the safety and security of its Guests," an excuse often used against barefooters when no specific policy exists.

Whatever the case, there is no regulation requiring that any Australian airline require shoes of their passengers. Furthermore, we believe that it's unnecessary for any airline to prohibit primalfoot passengers for reasons of safety. Under all normal circumstances, commercial airplane cabins are free of anything that can harm the feet. If emergency situations are a concern, hard hats and protective gloves are not required of or issued to passengers.

We hope that as the numerous benefits of primalfoot living come more into the public view, airlines and regulators will eliminate any policies requiring shoes of passengers.

Thanks to our advisory board member Moe Morales for passing this along!

Vermont Student Fights for Barefoot Rights

Photo: LogoProducts4Less.comThe Primalfoot Alliance leadership has reached out to a University of Vermont sophomore who is staunchly defending his barefoot lifestyle against discrimination.

David Wisotsky has seen discrimination from the campus cafeteria, library and police. His story was shared recently in an article of The Vermont Cynic. Though we could find no specific policies that addresses the issue of footwear in the university's Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities (PDF), the article claims David was cited by police for violating "other policies." He will soon defend himself at a "student conduct hearing" and is now working with the Student Government Association's diversity committee to draft legislation allowing students to live barefoot without fear of discrimination. David does acknowledge, however, that there isn't an organized group of barefooters...yet.

"Although we aren't a group right now, I know of a lot of barefoot students on campus," he is quoted in the article as saying.

We wholeheartedly stand behind David's efforts and have reached out to him via email offering any support we can give. There is an ever-growing community of advocates behind him.

It's important for the University of Vermont and all other institutions like it to understand that, although barefooters may not be organized or large in number, it's appropriate to allow for people to live shoeless if they so choose. It is a matter of personal choice and biomechanical health and does not harm anyone else. Though it is not a mainstream or widely-accepted lifestyle, that does not make it invalid or not worth protecting.

We will keep you updated on this story as plausible.