The "no shoes, no shirt, no service" issue

[greensinestro]

Does this policy really apply everywhere? Sure, I have seen it enforced at places like restaurants. A while back I was at Bennigan's and the guy at the door actually turned a couple away because the husband was wearing this nasty, torn, unwashed t-shirt, and no shoes! Any time I eat in a place like that, I always see the patrons decently dresses.

On the other hand, I am not so sure this rule applies to places like local grocery and department stores. Whenever I do my shopping at Publix, at least in North Florida, I almost always see a family where the kids are running around barefoot, and sometimes (if the children are boys), no shirts. In other words, they come in as if they're going to the beach or the city pool. And, one in a blue moon, the parents are dressed in this manner. Upon entering the store, the sign at the door says "Shoes and shirts required", yet not one manager comes along and asks them to leave for violating this rule. I have also seen the same thing occur in Wal Mart and Target.

Even when I was a kid, I never went into any store dressed like that for fear of being embarrassed. When I was a baby, my mom always dressed my brother and I up in outfits, complete with shoes, and I do the same with my four year old twins.

[protege]

Is it just me, or does that policy almost dare a smartass to come in without pants?

[greensinestro]

Is it just me, or does that policy almost dare a smartass to come in without pants?

I think it actually does. Next thing, you know, a family of nudists will enter the establishment, and then they'll claim their rights are being violated.

[MadMike]

Is it just me, or does that policy almost dare a smartass to come in without pants?

I've been saying that for many years. Not that I'd actually have the balls to test it.

[greensinestro]

I should have also mentioned, or perhaps asked this question: Why is it the people, the ugliest people in the world, are the ones who do this? I forgot to mention a while back a guy I saw, with no shirt on, weighing himself on the scale at Publix. This guy's waist, I kid you not, must have been at least a 50, maybe more, with a belly that was enough to make him not be able to see his, um, manhood, for years. I need not mention that this guy's weight was more than the maximum on that scale.

[Acolyte]

I don't mind young kids running around shirtless or barefoot, because that's just sorta what young kids do, but anybody over the age of 12 should have the decency to cover up in a store.

[ShortTemperHatesStupidity]

I've been saying that for many years. Not that I'd actually have the balls to test it.

Really? Cuz I'm pretty sure if you tried it we'd all know whether or not you did...

[SuperDan]

Does this policy really apply everywhere?

Check your state and county health codes. This rule and how much it applies would be in one of the two, and it may vary from place to place. Normally places dealing with open food, including both restaurants and grocery stores, would have this rule.

Is it just me, or does that policy almost dare a smartass to come in without pants?

Yes. And actually the local Jimmy Johns here has a sign that reads "WE'D LOVE TO SEE YOU NAKED... but state code requires you to wear shirt and shoes."

I think it actually does. Next thing, you know, a family of nudists will enter the establishment, and then they'll claim their rights are being violated.

Most nudists are pretty accepting of the requirements when they're out in the textile world. Even in nudist-friendly environments it's pretty common to wear at least sandals and all nudists carry a towel to sit on.

[BlaqueKatt]

I've been saying that for many years. Not that I'd actually have the balls to test it.

I have bikini and a half-shirt cover up and aquasocks-no pants as a swimsuit is not pants....

and it's a health department code

[Reyneth]

I don't mind young kids running around shirtless or barefoot, because that's just sorta what young kids do, but anybody over the age of 12 should have the decency to cover up in a store.

The barefoot thing is a safety issue, though - possibility of broken glass on the floor (even if it was a sliver that was missed when cleaning up) is fairly reasonable in a grocery store or a place like Target, I'd think.

That said, when I worked at the ice cream stand I *loved* seeing kids out with parents, fresh from bathtime already in pjs on a warm summer night - because my sister and I did such many a night also.

[BookstoreEscapee]

Really? Cuz I'm pretty sure if you tried it we'd all know whether or not you did...

Damn you! I was going to say that!!! :shakes fist:

I can understand a little kid who isn't walking not wearing shoes, but if the kids are old enough to not be riding in a stroller or carried, they should have shoes for safety reasons, if nothing else. I can deal with shirtless little boys a lot more than shirtless men. (Well, depends on the man )

[ShortTemperHatesStupidity]

Damn you! I was going to say that!!! :shakes fist:

It's the parallel lives thing...

[rdp78]

I have say "no shoes" policy does make sense especially in restaurants and stores becuase some much things can happen on those floors. I mean something breakable can fall on them and have million sharp pieces all over the place. Also the floors may not be very clean and have dirt/mud or something that looks like dirt/mud on them. Also things like needles or nails could also be on those floors and water like substance could also be on those floors.

Now the "no shirt" maybe because they want to make sure no one is distracted and also to make young children don't see something they shouldn't be seeing. Well, it is just fair because women always have to cover up and so man have to do the same. Of course, they don't mention anything about pants/bottoms but I think its because people have common sense to where pants when going out in public and probably was never a problem with businesses.

I think I remember some businesses (I think McDonalds does) do require socks but I think that's going to far since there are shoes that don't require socks to wear ei. sandals.

[Heksubah]

Does this policy really apply everywhere?

Not exactly, in my opinion.

Then again, I'm the girl who grew up going down to the Lake of the Ozarks in central Missouri on weekends for vacation. Down there half the businesses and restaurants are on the water and people will boat up to them and come in off the water. That means you have a 50% chance that the people coming into the establishment are wearing swimming attire so down there the businesses are a bit more lax and laid back.

But on the flip side of the coin, at home (at either of the metropolises I have hailed from, Kansas City or St. Louis) it is considered a faux pas to be lacking normal sane attire. No shirt, no shoes, no service. Capisce? I thought so. *nods and dusts her hands off and waits for warm weather to join the shoeless crowd on the docks at the lake*

[Broomjockey]

Of course, they don't mention anything about pants/bottoms but I think its because people have common sense to where pants when going out in public and probably was never a problem with businesses.

Actually, I'm sure most areas have a law about indecent exposure if you're not wearing pants or similar attire for covering your behind-ish area (front side too!)