Discrimination

#61
Barefoot TJ said:
Oh, excuse me. Dr. Board, that is.
Click to expand...

Word has it that Ahcuah although not a lawyer has earned the title as well from a highly respected university.
Also any attorney members/contributors here are Juris Doctors,
so "Ask the Docs " could easily refer to questions regarding barefoot rights.
The answers given will probably be just as vague as the medical doc's though.
 
#62
jldeleon said:
So, if the store posts "walk in here barefoot at your own risk" and/or I hand them a signed waiver stating I will not hold them liable for any injuries I may incur in their store, while barefoot -then is everybody covered???
Click to expand...

Yeah, and suppose they negligently stack products on shelves entirely precariously so that when you walk by the slightest vibration makes them fall on your feet and break all the bones. You've just signed away your right to sue for those injuries, which are no different from the injuries you would have had if you were wearing flip-flops.

Seriously. Folks need be be extremely careful about signing waivers!
 
#63
The waiver should state, "I won't sue if it's my own damn fault."

Now, enlighten me, Ahcuah. [bows to greater knowledge and understanding smiley]
 
  • Like
Reactions: jldeleon
#64
Barefoot TJ said:
The waiver should state, "I won't sue if it's my own damn fault."

Now, enlighten me, Ahcuah. [bows to greater knowledge and understanding smiley]
Click to expand...

OK, you asked for it! ;)

Just because you say you won't sue, doesn't mean you can't. The lawsuit will likely be dismissed, but only after a fair bit of legal maneuvering.

Regarding "I won't sue if it's my own damn fault," that's the normal standard, so why would you need a waiver to include that? If it is your own damn fault (regardless of whether bare feet are involved), that is a perfectly good defense for the business (and one they use all the time, and quite successfully).

A somewhat better wording might be, "I won't sue if my injury is a direct result of my being barefoot". (But even then, you could sue and argue about whether the injury incurred would really have happened if one had on flip-flops, and that would require extensive discovery, etc..)

Now you see why lawyers are 1) fully employed; and 2) reviled. :rolleyes:

I hate waivers for another reason: it concedes right off the bat that somehow bare feet are less safe than shoes, and that is simply not the case! Why perpetuate the myth?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BFwillie_g, Bare Lee, NickW and 1 other person
#65
What really bothers me is gyms that force you to sign a waiver stating you can't sue due to injuries yet force you to wear shoes for bogus "safety reasons". If you get injuried wearing the shoes you can't sue, yet they force you to wear them. Why can a patron after signing the waiver go barefoot? The waiver should still protect the establishment if they get hurt, and are not liable?

Ahcuah do you have any insight in this?? I'm currently trying to find a track to teach a session for my barefoot runners and my local Abilities Centre (which is suppose to be inclusive for everyone) is telling me so far I still need shoes for the old bogus safety and hygeine reasons.

http://www.abilitiescentre.org/
 
#66
Horseman42 said:
What really bothers me is gyms that force you to sign a waiver stating you can't sue due to injuries yet force you to wear shoes for bogus "safety reasons". If you get injuried wearing the shoes you can't sue, yet they force you to wear them. Why can a patron after signing the waiver go barefoot? The waiver should still protect the establishment if they get hurt, and are not liable?

Ahcuah do you have any insight in this??
Click to expand...

Yes I do: They're morons. :D

Seriously, you raise a very good point. What do they say when you tell them that?

And when they talk health reasons, what about hands? People touch the equipment then their faces all the time. So where is the glove requirement?

But pelmatophobia is so strong that none of the logical reasoning matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickW
#67
Yeah, pelmatophobia, so pervasive here in the U.S.!
 
#68
Here. I'll save us all the trouble. philematophobia: the fear of kissing.

Couldn't find pelmatophobia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zetti
#69
I'm constructing a formal email to the CEO tonight. Hopefully I'll be able to report before the end of the week if I can run there this winter, and teach this spring. I do have another track in a city nearby, but this one is much closer to my work, and is suppose to be "inclusive" of all athletes and patrons.
 
#70
Ahcuah said:
Yes I do: They're morons. :D

Seriously, you raise a very good point. What do they say when you tell them that?

And when they talk health reasons, what about hands? People touch the equipment then their faces all the time. So where is the glove requirement?

But pelmatophobia is so strong that none of the logical reasoning matters.
Click to expand...

Or what about a helmet in case you drop a barbell on your head? :) Or a face guard in case you slip on the treadmill and do a face-plant onto it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee
#71
Barefoot TJ said:
Couldn't find pelmatophobia.
Click to expand...

From the Greek πέλμα, meaning "sole". Combining form: pelmato-. (And a cognate with "palm".)

A "pedophile" is not what we want, and a "podophile" refers to foot fetishes. Besides, it's really not the foot that disturbs these people, it is that the sole is touching the ground.

So "pelmatophobe" and "pelmatophile" are pretty good words to use.
 
#72
You must log in or register to reply here.

Support Your Club

Support Your Club! Purchase through the BRS!

Forum statistics

Threads
19,158
Messages
183,644
Members
8,705
Latest member
Raramuri7

Latest posts

Share this page

Share this page
Top Bottom
Back
Menu