Its England. It rains. A fuck tonne. An absolute fuck tonne. Chances are you have muddy or wet shoes. My house is 100% carpet. Most people i know have 100% carpet houses. Those that dont have a shoes on inside policy. But seriously what the actual fuck are you saying. "I should be allowed to track mud and rain onto your carpet because you can just clean it up you filthy maid peasant servant, even when me just taking off my shoes could save you the effort!" I mean come the fuck on. Youre a guest in my house. If its raining outside (and it usually is) just take your shoes off. Mud doesnt hoover properly on longer carpets. At all. And youre a goddam guest. If its a case of YOU the invited guest taking of their shoes and ME the home owner shampooing and scrubbing mud out of the carpet i wonder who should make the sacrifice?matrix3509 said:Dude, its the fucking floor. The floor is where dirt goes. There is ALWAYS dirt on the floor no matter how clean you think it is. If it gets too dirty for your gentle sensibilities, well, thats what fucking vacuum cleaners are for. Unless you are literally eating your food directly off the floor, what the fuck is the big deal?
Seriously do you live in some alternate universe where all the myriad ways to avoid/clean up dirt don't exist. Here is a way, just off the top of my head: chairs.
Jesus tap-dancing Christ, and people say Americans have superiority complexes.
Wow way to invent a situation specifically to your liking. I said nothing about going into another person's house. Neither did the OP.BiscuitTrouser said:Its England. It rains. A fuck tonne. An absolute fuck tonne. Chances are you have muddy or wet shoes. My house is 100% carpet. Most people i know have 100% carpet houses. Those that dont have a shoes on inside policy. But seriously what the actual fuck are you saying. "I should be allowed to track mud and rain onto your carpet because you can just clean it up you filthy maid peasant servant, even when me just taking off my shoes could save you the effort!" I mean come the fuck on. Youre a guest in my house. If its raining outside (and it usually is) just take your shoes off. Mud doesnt hoover properly on longer carpets. At all. And youre a goddam guest. If its a case of YOU the invited guest taking of their shoes and ME the home owner shampooing and scrubbing mud out of the carpet i wonder who should make the sacrifice?matrix3509 said:Dude, its the fucking floor. The floor is where dirt goes. There is ALWAYS dirt on the floor no matter how clean you think it is. If it gets too dirty for your gentle sensibilities, well, thats what fucking vacuum cleaners are for. Unless you are literally eating your food directly off the floor, what the fuck is the big deal?
Seriously do you live in some alternate universe where all the myriad ways to avoid/clean up dirt don't exist. Here is a way, just off the top of my head: chairs.
Jesus tap-dancing Christ, and people say Americans have superiority complexes.
What the actual fuck is this alternate universe where its perfectly ok to make an easily avoidable mess in someone elses house because hey, they can just clean it up for me right after i leave? Why dont you spit in their eyes while youre at it, they can just wipe it offOr just miss the toilet on purpose. Because they can just wipe it up? If a mess is so easily avoided why not just take off your shoes to avoid it rather than make it anyway and expect your host to clean it up. Youre their guest not their dog. You dont make messes on the floor.
You were referring only to people who dont wear shoes in their own homes? You have zero issue taking off shoes in someone elses house? Seems a bit strange to be venomously against it in your own home but to be understanding for why others ask you to do it. In any case i made a colossal reading failure. And for that i apologize.matrix3509 said:Wow way to invent a situation specifically to your liking. I said nothing about going into another person's house. Neither did the OP.
well from what I've heard, in sweden (where I live as well) it is also alot about class.Realitycrash said:I live in Sweden, and it sure isn't here. And even IF it is common-place, it doesn't explain why people would do it.
It is, and it's a fine example of cultural relativism.Realitycrash said:In multiple instances of US media, I've seen characters wear shoes inside a private home.It always struck me as odd; Why would one wear it? For comfort? Isn't it more comfortable without the shoes..Or with slippers?
And hey, don't you realize that it is DIRTY? What especially baffles me is that Sheldon and the others in Big Bang Theory wear shoes inside the apartment, even with Sheldon's extreme germ phobia. Isn't this exactly the sort of thing he would crack down on?
So, my question is; Is this really common-place in the US, and why? How do you feel about it?
Wikipedia said:Cultural relativism is a principle that was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887: "...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] However, Boas did not coin the term.
The first use of the term recorded in the Oxford English Dictionary was by philosopher and social theorist Alain Locke in 1924 to describe Robert Lowie's "extreme cultural relativism", found in the latter's 1917 book Culture and Ethnology.[2] The term became common among anthropologists after Boas' death in 1942, to express their synthesis of a number of ideas Boas had developed. Boas believed that the sweep of cultures, to be found in connection with any sub species, is so vast and pervasive that there cannot be a relationship between culture and race.[3] Cultural relativism involves specific epistemological and methodological claims. Whether or not these claims necessitate a specific ethical stance is a matter of debate. This principle should not be confused with moral relativism.
Wikipedia said:The concept of culture, like any other piece of knowledge, can be abused and misinterpreted. Some fear that the principle of cultural relativity will weaken morality. "If the Bugabuga do it why can't we? It's all relative anyway." But this is exactly what cultural relativity does not mean.
The principle of cultural relativity does not mean that because the members of some savage tribe are allowed to behave in a certain way that this fact gives intellectual warrant for such behavior in all groups. Cultural relativity means, on the contrary, that the appropriateness of any positive or negative custom must be evaluated with regard to how this habit fits with other group habits. Having several wives makes economic sense among herders, not among hunters. While breeding a healthy scepticism as to the eternity of any value prized by a particular people, anthropology does not as a matter of theory deny the existence of moral absolutes. Rather, the use of the comparative method provides a scientific means of discovering such absolutes. If all surviving societies have found it necessary to impose some of the same restrictions upon the behavior of their members, this makes a strong argument that these aspects of the moral code are indispensable.[13]
I have to wonder how dusty/muddy/whatever your city is, if just walking around makes your shoes dirty. I know that when I go into town, or into the city (depending on where I am at the time, I move around the state quite a bit), my shoes don't get dirty from walking around on asphalt and pavement. They usually only get dirty when... you know... I've walked through dirt recently.Realitycrash said:Oh come on, my feet might be dirty, but AS dirty as the sole of my shoe after I've been into the city? I seriously doubt it. I doubt it is even close.