Please don't rearrange our shoes when we turn up, paramedics in Japan urge
Posted by high_na_euv 5 days ago
Comments
Comment by purpleidea 1 day ago
Comment by embedding-shape 1 day ago
Personally I got so tired of it we got those "one-use blue shoe covers" that we tell them to wear before going in, but of course I don't think either of us would think about that if we called for emergency services.
Comment by swiftcoder 1 day ago
Comment by arjie 1 day ago
I was not brought up in a religious household and have never been a follower of any known religion. And I do not have any belief tied to this behavior. It is an oddity of my being that I accept.
Isn’t it interesting how one can be conditioned so? I sometimes wonder if alcoholics or drug addicts feel this way.
Perhaps the Japanese feel this way about their cultural quirk in the way I feel about mine.
Comment by fakedang 1 day ago
This is something I've noticed is uniquely culturally Indian, and transcends all religions. Which is beautiful.
I was once whacked in the head by a teacher for throwing a book onto the shelf, and rightly so.
Comment by tomasGiden 1 day ago
And I highly doubt that, in general, 'whacking' children will make them grow up kinder more compassionate adults.
Comment by fakedang 1 day ago
Comment by yarnover 1 day ago
Comment by fakedang 1 hour ago
Comment by lemmetellya 21 hours ago
Comment by arjie 1 day ago
Considering the rationale offered by Hindus, I’d be inclined to believe it is a Hindu custom adopted by everyone else by virtue of relative numbers. Sort of like how Christmas is secular in the US, Diwali in India, and perhaps weaker something like Eid in Jordan.
So I agree, very little to do with religion today, but perhaps not so always. Something like Halloween perhaps.
Comment by djeastm 1 day ago
Comment by vikramkr 1 day ago
Comment by srean 1 day ago
Comment by Der_Einzige 1 day ago
Comment by kelnos 1 day ago
Comment by cromka 1 day ago
Comment by makeitdouble 1 day ago
There's photos in the article, those aren't dress shoes with laces to be done and undone, they're fit for the purpose.
Also in cases where it's really dire they'll just step in with shoes on, it's just extremely rare and it might actually be another team altogether, operating under a different protocol.
Comment by embedding-shape 1 day ago
What about when you're three people while carrying a person? According to the article, it can delay them by ~30 seconds and risk dislodging the oxygen mask, the linked video also demonstrates the difference: https://www.instagram.com/p/DbqGfGfox3f/
Might seem like a small difference, but add in a stressful situation with a person almost dying, maybe being in pain, and the emergency workers trying to keep calm while also suddenly not finding their shoes in the position they purposefully left them, and suddenly the difference might be much large and also impactful.
Comment by makeitdouble 1 day ago
Like turning the thumblock, moving the bench, shoving other people's shoes in the way etc. There is a myriad of things the patient's family can do that result in 30s delays. Sure removing one specific potential cause could have value, but it might not be worth it considering the downsides (someone will have to deal with the mess, sometimes the lone elderly who's already in pain but not 30s from death either)
I think too many people are focusing on the "emergency" part, when most of the interventions aren't about shoving off every second. Other commentators picked up on the ambulances rolling into intersections at a snail's pace while blasting their sirens full volume, because they care a lot more about secundary harm than reaching the hospital 10s earlier.
Comment by embedding-shape 1 day ago
What mess? They're taking off their shoes regardless, and there is no additional mess being created by the resident not reorganizing the shoes of the paramedics.
There is no downsides here, just stop moving stuff around, pretty basic and no cost at all for stop doing so.
Comment by cromka 1 day ago
Comment by hulitu 1 day ago
I bet you don't have children. 2s might be too late in an emergency.
Comment by tdeck 1 day ago
So people are already doing this multiple times a day at their own homes and form a habit that often doesn't require much thought to follow.
Comment by setopt 1 day ago
(Where I live, this is the norm at home, but not at office or public places.)
Comment by Aerroon 1 day ago
Isn't it reasonable/normal to take shoes off at work and put on indoor does like sandals or similar ("work shoes")? Obviously it depends on the job, but it seems reasonable to me at a radio station. And if the regular employees are wearing indoor shoes, then it might become normal for outdoor shoes to not be typically worn inside.
Comment by tdeck 22 hours ago
Comment by makeitdouble 1 day ago
For instance for an elderly couple living together but both being pretty weak, if one's oxygen level was falling they probably couldn't get to the hospital for a full checkup by themselves. They'll call for help, these people will come, fit the patient with anything needed to safely make the trip, and move them out of the appartment to the nearest hospital.
There will be no need to trash the floor in precipitation, and they might spend some time in the appartement to properly access the situation and make it safe. They'll still want to be able to evacuate the person quickly if/when needed, but there will be a lot more to consider as well.
Comment by odiroot 1 day ago
Comment by bamboozled 1 day ago
Comment by swiftcoder 1 day ago
Comment by shdon 2 days ago
I'm not surprised the person last mentioned in the article, who suggests exactly that, got 800 likes on their comment. I am surprised that it even needed to be said.
Now I'm suddenly wondering (probably stupidly) whether firefighters also take their shoes off when entering a burning building.
Comment by wodenokoto 1 day ago
But ambulances in with full sirens begging over their speaker-system to have pedestrians at Shibuya crossing let the vehicle through, is probably the worst thing about Japan.
As for your second question, I’m reminded of Bob Mortimer in Would I lie To You: “… then the fire brigade came and ruined the whole house” - “Bob, surely the fire was ruining the house” - “No, water damage”. Maybe if those darn firefighters had taken their boots off, there had been a bit more left of Bobs childhood home.
Comment by bauruine 1 day ago
That's what we learned in fire fighting training. Everything that doesn't get destroyed by the fire and smoke will get destroyed by the water you use to put the fire out. A house on fire is lost. You just save people and animals and then you do whatever you need to protect the neighbouring structures.
Comment by tdeck 1 day ago
Unfortunately ambulances in Japan blare their sirens any time they are transporting a patient, and because they are free some people use them like taxis. So you may see an ambulance at 2AM driving down a residential street blaring their siren at full volume, going 5 mph while the medics call around to various hospitals to see who will take their patient with an upset stomach.
Once I passed a moving ambulance with the siren on...while slowly riding my bike down an otherwise empty road.
The result is that Japanese people seem to tune out the siren. If the driver isn't also on the loudspeaker telling them insistently to move aside, they assume it's not a "real" emergency.
Comment by throwaway270925 1 day ago
Bob should have used some of his Fuji 9, that fixes everything!
Comment by KennyBlanken 1 day ago
Comment by pvaldes 15 hours ago
Relatives in an emergency often act irrationally. I heard of an old case where a man suffered a heart stroke, and his child was ordered to phone rescuers. The boy ran to the nearest phone booth, said "my father is very ill, we need an ambulance" and hang the phone. He never said where. The ambulance roamed around trying to guess the address of the emergency, but when they found the family in the street it was an hour later and the man was dead.
Comment by socalgal2 1 day ago
> In Dutch culture it is far more common to keep shoes on literally everywhere
It is in many cultures, including my own family's, but having gotten used to taking them off from living in Japan, I find it extremely strange taking them off is not more common.
It feel similar to doctors refusing to wash their hands during surgery, though I get I'm not doing surgery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
I never thought about it growing up but once I got used to it I can believe I used to walk across my house carpet in shoes that had dog shit, grease, and other grim in them, and then later lie on my floor and watch TV or whatever. I don't get why people don't see that and get grossed out more.
Sure, if they were covered in mud or feces then I'd take then off but for small amounts I wouldn't notice. Why that doesn't matter to more people seems more strange to me than the status quo.
Comment by hbcdbff 1 day ago
That said, I don’t think it’s really rational. Our houses are full of bacteria and dirt one way or another anyway. It’s impossible to avoid that without having some kind of airlock equipped with a shower in your porch.
Comment by numpad0 1 day ago
Old farmer style houses in Japan have an entrance area behind the main sliding doors in bare soil[1], and a wooden platform at waist height between it to hallways. The platform can be sat on to take off shoes or to drop off bags of produces, and then hallways and tatami matted areas are further raised an inch or two - the walking floor level of houses are therefore give or take a whole feet off the ground. These together create multiple mental boundaries for dirtiness.
Modern houses have it miniaturized into just a cinder-block high gap or sometimes just industrial colored tiles before a bump. But IMO it's still nice being able to leave wet shoes and umbrellas there.
1: 土間 or doma, meaning soil-space. Oddly this transliteration coincides with "home" in Russian(and of course rhymes with Latin domus).
Comment by saltcured 1 day ago
One part is purely practical, making it easier to keep the living space clean when you are coming in from the farm etc. Places with messy winters have similar concepts for muddy boots, snow boots, etc.
Some regions also have (or historically had) real risk of parasite transmission from soil and short grass. Taking off shoes reduces the chance of bringing their eggs or tiny larva into your living space.
I can imagine some cultural practices here being early memetic/evolutionary in nature, much like some religions codifying what are essentially food-safety rules from a time before microbiology was scientifically understood. We think about the parts we can see, but also have some instincts and practices that seem aligned with threats we can't actually sense.
Comment by embedding-shape 1 day ago
True, but I don't know about you, but we don't have literal rocks, sediment, dirt pee, or literal poop on our floors in our home, anywhere. But shoes do occasionally step on stuff like that no matter how small, and neither of those things I want inside of my house on the floor.
But you're right that there still is bacteria or dirt all over the place, no doubt. But still, I don't step on something slightly soft with my socks in the living room and then inspect my foot to find poop stuck to it, and I think I'm gonna continue to prefer this way.
Comment by ericpauley 1 day ago
This is basically what dust is. It’s everywhere.
Comment by throw0101a 1 day ago
> This is basically what dust is. It’s everywhere.
What?
> Dust in homes is composed of about 20–50% dead skin cells.[2] The rest, and in offices and other built environments, is composed of small amounts of plant pollen, human hairs, animal fur, textile fibers, paper fibers, minerals from outdoor soil, burnt meteorite particles, and many other materials which may be found in the local environment.[3]
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust
Further: dust is floating in the air and can be removed with decent (MERV ≥11) air filters in your HVAC system. Stuff on the bottom of your shoe makes contact with your floor and stick around until you wash it (and for much longer in the fibre of carpet or rugs).
Comment by embedding-shape 1 day ago
Comment by SapporoChris 1 day ago
Comment by cannonpr 1 day ago
Comment by f33d5173 1 day ago
Comment by Gigachad 1 day ago
Comment by tdeck 1 day ago
Comment by echoangle 1 day ago
Comment by xxs 1 day ago
Comment by Cthulhu_ 1 day ago
Comment by Georgelemental 1 day ago
Comment by JackMorgan 1 day ago
Throughout my fire and EMS training I was taught to anticipate possible violence from the residents. I personally know folks who have entered buildings and been shot at or found booby traps. One guy I know responded to an arson house fire where the resident had cut out holes in the floor under every window and door and covered the holes with rugs, Home Alone style.
The US has a serious drug and mental health crisis. First responders often have to deal with people who probably would be in state care if we didn't spend all our tax money on bombs and tax cuts for the wealthy. Or at least they would have caretakers who visit and help them take medications and escalate when they start setting up booby traps to defend against the voices.
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
Comment by agarwaen163 1 day ago
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
Depending on the boots, you might not want to wear them while "idle"¹ in any case, though that's mostly a non-concern with modern safety shoes.
¹ mandatory note: most emergency responders have tons of work while "idle", I just mean "not actively responding"
Comment by Georgelemental 1 day ago
Comment by analog31 1 day ago
Also, in my town, the firefighters are also paramedics. The first people who showed up in my Moment of Need came in a fire truck. The ambulance came a couple minutes later.
Comment by Georgelemental 1 day ago
Comment by ErroneousBosh 1 day ago
The hospital facilities team removed the front doors and the unboltable parts of the frame, and then gassed off the handrails and wheelchair ramp fittings to give access.
The ambulance arrived followed by a fire brigade Landrover with four guys in and a rescue pump with another five. It took all of them to lift the patient into the hospital on a canvas sling.
Comment by left-struck 1 day ago
Anyway I’m not against paramedics wearing boots in my apartment, in an emergency very few people would care about that even in Japan.
Comment by Georgelemental 1 day ago
Comment by 21asdffdsa12 1 day ago
Comment by Faaak 1 day ago
Comment by 21asdffdsa12 1 day ago
Comment by rdmuser 2 days ago
Comment by JuniperMesos 2 days ago
This seems like the best policy in an emergency where 30 seconds actually matters. And I actually like the East Asian custom of taking one's shoes off before entering a house and adopt it myself.
Comment by Izkata 1 day ago
Comment by kstrauser 1 day ago
Similarly in the military. We got un-booted at bedtime, and put them back on when we got up the next morning. Even in the barracks, including the nice ones that were reasonably nice apartment buildings, I never took off my shoes to walk around my room or when visiting someone else's (and vice versa; no one took off their shoes to visit me).
The first time I bumped into that rule was when I met my wife, who'd moved to the area from New York. I was quite confused when she asked me to take my shoes off at the door, and more than a little anxious. Sure hope I'm wearing decent socks and my feet don't stink, lest I be traipsing dirty feet around her apartment. To this day, I'm not convinced that hardsole shoes that haven't walked through wet messes are substantially dirtier than a damp sock that's been inside a shoe all day long.
Comment by bschwindHN 1 day ago
I can't imagine feet in socks would be dirtier than the bottom of a shoe, but I guess it depends on where you walk, and how nasty you let your feet get. Like if you use a public restroom and then walk on carpets in your home, that's just gross. Maybe you walked in a park where dogs play. Good chance of tracking some dog shit into the house.
Comment by williamdclt 1 day ago
Absolutely no way. Like, it's not even comparable, sweaty smelly feet are infinitely cleaner than a shoe that stepped outside just once.
Even if we only talk about visible dirtiness (which is probably the least of the uncleanliness), I've hosted dinner parties in my flat where people kept shoes one and others where they didn't, and the difference is very very obvious: disgusting floors after the former and normally-clean-looking floors after the latter
Comment by kelnos 1 day ago
Comment by vkazanov 1 day ago
Comment by bjelkeman-again 1 day ago
Comment by ACS_Solver 1 day ago
Comment by jillesvangurp 1 day ago
Comment by nottorp 1 day ago
Romania. Typing this at the office, wearing slippers :)
Comment by vkazanov 1 day ago
Comment by culi 1 day ago
Comment by 50or05 1 day ago
Comment by zorobo 1 day ago
Comment by ldx1024 1 day ago
Comment by anigbrowl 1 day ago
The Japanese shoe taboo is about purity. It's not about protecting the floor but about the idea of cleanliness. Walking in with outdoor shoes is the equivalent of deliberately walking into a western home with dogshit all over your shoes, or (since most Japanese homes have small family altars inside) spiritual desecration.
Comment by vkazanov 1 day ago
Having been to houses/flats across all of eurasia, uk to hong kong, vietnam to lithuania, the majority prefers taking shoes when entering a house, but can be as practical as necessary when the need arises.
Comment by physhster 1 day ago
Comment by krupan 1 day ago
Comment by wahnfrieden 1 day ago
Comment by naishoya 1 day ago
Even when it looks like a laced up tennis shoe, closer examination of an 'outdoor' shoe will show that it has been stomped into and slipped out of many times.
If it is a sports use, i.e. basketball or other gymnasium, or indoors in a professional setting like at a busy office there will be a changing area and people etiher change into provided slippers (town hall and community centers, schools, and other public spaces have many cubicles and slippers) or will change into 'indoor shoes' brought for the purpose.
There is a strong cultural 'habit' that can be interpreted as 'manners' such that when visiting someone's house and switching from outdoor shoes the host will then either turn the shoes toward the outdoors such that they are easier to step into on the way out, or will arrange them facing out but no longer in the main path of the entry way.
It is this 'manners' which the EMT is requesting to stop. The indoor slippers are used for hard floor and rug covered areas, but not tatami mats. A quality tatami mat can be damaged and require actual replacement if stepped on with a hard soled shoe even once.
So the 'taking off of shoes on the way in my EMT is quite appropriate, and the time to 'unshoe' and reshoe on the way in and out is cumulatively not more than 5 to 7 seconds total - if the emergency case is that close to failure, the low speed ambulance ride through narrow streets is going to be the failure, not the shoes. But rearranged and relocated shoes becomes much more complex when the crew have a person in a stretcher (which is faster AND safer than a rolling gurney) - they can step into their own shoes without really even looking if the shoes are left exactly as they were placed on the way in - and this is what the original article is requesting.
The intent of the article in original Japanese is: "Don't slow down the exit process by moving our shoes in an effort to be 'mindful of good manners'. We really wont think poorly of your manners if you neglect this small gesture"
Comment by kstrauser 1 day ago
Comment by timr 1 day ago
Comment by waffletower 1 day ago
Comment by thih9 1 day ago
Comment by pvaldes 1 day ago
After thousands of interventions in this places, you are basically guaranteed to step while in your sockets on blood, syringes, broken bottles and glass pieces. Awful idea. Your toes smashing the leg of a table if you have luck. Hepatitis or HIV if not.
Also removing shoes that were designed to assure maximum stability before to enter in an unknown scenery can be a big mistake. You will regret it later, trying desperately not slip while you navigate a stretcher on a narrow spiral staircase, carrying a heavy guy with a fractured leg.
Comment by theonething 1 day ago
And it's so much more comfortable to be in your house barefoot, with socks or with slippers.
So much cleaner. I'm disgusted when people try to walk in my house with their shoes on.
Comment by probably_wrong 1 day ago
First, in the rare cases you describe (when was the last time you stepped on feces?) one would indeed leave their shoes outside. But in the day-to-day your shoes have some dust on them and that's it - you won't even notice it's there when compared to the dust that already accumulates daily. If you live in a climate where this assumption doesn't hold (snowy areas come to mind) then the equation changes.
Second, the floor is usually stone and therefore designed for being walked on with shoes. I would feel awkward walking on some polished wood, but if the difference between inside and outside is "this one is less coarse but just as hard" then I wouldn't see a good reason for taking my shoes off. I would probably avoid the rug, but that's me.
As for comfort, keeping your shoes on also means one less thing to do when going in and out. Do not underestimate the path with less friction.
Comment by ivell 1 day ago
So shoes on is not universal in the West.
Comment by vkazanov 1 day ago
Comment by jerlam 1 day ago
Comment by probably_wrong 1 day ago
Comment by hdgvhicv 1 day ago
Comment by naishoya 1 day ago
Try this , when was the last time you stepped somewhere that had previously been stepped on by someone who had walked on a spot which had been stepped on by someone who may have stepped on a spot trod on by ... go far enough back and it's all had feces on it to some small degree.
An easy way to keep this concept clear and understand the reasoning behind a 'leave the outside shoes out of the house' is something learned as a child.
Just like there is a Law of Conservation of Mass, and a Law of Conservation of Energy, and these two are the same law as defined by Einstein, there is also a Law of Conservation of Filth. The law may be stated as: "A spoonful of wine in a barrel of pigshit is a barrel of pigshit. A spoonful of pigshit in a barrel of wine is... a barrel of pigshit."
Taking off the outdoor shoes to come indoors changes the "is there trace amount of feces on my dining room tatami floor?" risk from "I cannot be reasonable sure," to "I can be reasonably sure that there is none." If guests find that too much friction to understand and accommodate, one might argue for a different set of guests who are less accepting of an allowable amount of pigshit in their wine.
Comment by probably_wrong 1 day ago
I'm not going to say that every type of floor is to be walked on, with rugs and tatami mats being perfect counter-examples. But if a five-star restaurant doesn't ask me to take my shoes off (not evening Japan, AFAIK) then keeping them on is, from a sanitary point of view, probably okay.
Comment by b112 1 day ago
And of course, toothpaste is a cleaner, so it's not relevant.
But I find this all amusing, because wherever you take your shoes off? That's where all this supposed crap sits from all these shoes left outside. Which means you are walking in your socks in that area, after shoe removal, and entering the house.
So unless you levitate out of that area, your feet are still covered in this supposed crap.
The shoe rule in Japan stems from damaging floors. And checking your feet, shoes or not, is just prudent. But your feet or clean looking shoes?
Equally dirty.
Comment by naishoya 1 day ago
Absolutely not equally dirty unless you have FILTHY feet. If so, take a bath.
Comment by samus 1 day ago
Comment by b112 1 day ago
Comment by samus 1 day ago
Comment by naishoya 1 day ago
Nobody steps with their socks onto shoe trodden surface. It's not a complicated but of geometry, you loosen your foot in the shoes to make them ready for stepping out from, then step up onto a raised and dirt free platform, then if you have good manners, turn around, lower yourself, and use one hand to collect and turn your shoes so that they are not in the direct line of traffic and are facing away from the house, so that one may step into them from the wooden platform without needing to step backwards as you exit. This is amazingly simple, done by literally millions of people every single day, multiple times, and has been this way for centuries in all kinds of weather and many styles of shoes.
There is no dirt tracked in on your socks, there may be some 'stepping on the top of your own shoes' if you are in a rush and clumsy or a child. But grown ups rarely have much difficulty with this unless they are visiting from somewhere else and cannot be observant. Nearly every doorway in the country also has a handy long handled shoehorn to ease the donning of your shoes without requiring a seat. Community centers and elderly homes and some households with elderly residents will also have a small stool that is at an oblique angle between the 'dirty' shoe level and the clean wooden platform, allowing one to sit and take off shoes, then swivel without putting feet onto filth and stand again in the clean.
I'm frankly astonished at the seemingly purposeful denseness of comprehension for a simple act of cleanliness. The 'filth will make us stronger' approach reminds me of the historical writings of the 10th-century Arab diplomat Ahmad ibn Fadlan, who chronicled the Volga Vikings (Rus') and was the inspiration for the 'Viking morning bowl' scene from the movie The 13th Warrior. Just 'Ewww'
Comment by b112 1 day ago
I mean, dirt moves on its own. Bacteria moves, and dirt comes with them.
After all, how do you even know your soap is clean?
https://www.today.com/health/recall/hand-soap-recall-2025-rc...
And the recall was for deadly bacteria. Probably a growth medium too. Modern soap has lots of ingredients, each could be dirty at source.
So if your soap is dirty, how can your feet be clean?
I'm still not convinced.
Comment by samus 1 day ago
I don't think you can conclude from that incident that all soap is always contaminated. And even if it's not perfectly clean, in the end ist's all flushed away.
I don't really get what your point is. Are you regularly eating from the pedestrian way?
Comment by b112 16 hours ago
This obsession with shoes, doesn't cover the fly droppings, the dirt upon clothing, and the fact that your body is always covered in bacteria, your gut filled with bacteria, your lunch covered in it if you ever eat fresh greens, you will die without bacteria.
I'm not suggesting you walk around with dirty shoes, that's silly. Yet I feel you are a city dweller, because the world is made of dirt, and a rural farm worker spends all day in it.
To no harm to the worker.
Dirt is natural. Concrete is not.
So my point was just, you seemed a little upset at dirt.
After all:
Comment by samus 15 hours ago
Specific to Japanese culture is just that they prefer to sit at low tables and to sleep on the ground on duvets; it should be easy to see why they want less dirt on the ground than other cultures.
Comment by b112 10 hours ago
People were more used to having hands in dirt. That doesn't mean unclean, but I do find all city dwellers more "fussy" about dirt. They take traditions made for pragmatism (keep dirt off the floor, eg tidiness), and evolve it to fussiness(eg, contaminated).
Comment by samus 5 hours ago
Contamination is not a modern concept either. Cue to how many religions have quite sharply defined criteria for ritual cleanliness.
Comment by naishoya 9 hours ago
I was simply explaining a foreign culture where removing shoes when coming indoors, and In confused that somehow my familiarity with these traditions is somehow indicative of my life experience or familiarity with microbes. Quite strange indeed. Lets clarify these assumptions.
In fact I was raised in a ranching and dairy household with over 600 head of beef at the dairy, and about 1600 head of beef at the ranch, each of which was owned or managed in various stages by my two grandfathers. Ihave previously lived for a few months less than a full decade in the middle of actual jungle in one of the rainiest locations on the planet without any infrastructure - literally a mile from the nearest paved road, and 3/4 of a mile from the closest vehicular access point with long periods of the year being closed off from that by high water on both sides. No power lines, no water lines, and out of the reach of cell service, so gasp, no internet!
During that time my wife and cared for over twenty goats and about a six pigs. We did all of our laundry by hand with a cranked wringer and buckets and lived principally off of what we could grow, harvest from the jungle, or milk from the goats and did nearly all of our cooking with self harvested wood, a mix of guava, eucalyptus, and mesquite/locust. In those years I have shoveled literally metric tons of goat manure out of sheds built from recycled building materials, one of which incorporated lumber from the shipping of mirror segments to the Keck telescope. < dakine when stay read dis, you know.
As for microbiome knowledge, I have made a living at times from my skills as a microbiologist. I have designed, built and used laminar flow hoods and sterile glove boxes for the isolation and identification of lambic brewing strains for award winning beer produced by two different local microbreweries, have prepared mushroom spore and tissue cultures in agar and liquid media, have cultured cheese and meat preserving lactic cultures (the dusty white wrapping on many different sausage varieties are examples of these lactic cultures) and to make cultures for lactic fermented pickles and kimchi intended as farmers markets and restaurant products with appropriate safety testing which has included sequencing, PCR and gel electrophoresis techniques. I routinely start sourdough cultures for home use and to share, and yesterday started a live ferment chili salsa that will be ready for probiotic consumption in about a week. I'm away from my home kitchen at the moment, but my kombucha polycultures are at a friends house, and my dry aged lactic cultured wild boar leg quarter is hangin at another friends farm awaiting my return.
I have also produced antifungal and antibacterial fungal metabolic products for veterinary use, and have collected, cultured, and sequenced coliform specimens from near shore runoff for submission to EPA wastewater monitoring as part of federally funded grant programs, having been the program designer and submitting author for those and other awarded STEM and educational grants. So, i am not unfamiliar with the beneficial aspects of microbiotic life forms and their importance to all functioning ecosystems and human life.
My Japanese culture experience includes 32 years ago years at rice farms and seaweed farms, and I am very familiar with the 'dirt' to which the common agriculture worker is exposed to in every day life. However, the differentials that I have personally observed include beef ranches in the US Southwest, Hawaiian beef and sheep ranches, and dairy operations in Japan is that the separation between the conditions in the barn and stockyard are more strenuously partitioned in Japan than elsewhere. It's not that I'm unfamiliar with 'muck', but that I was trying to explain that it is actually common and not very much effort at all for a culture, which has a strong tradition of separating their own dining space from the trough in the barn, to do so.
You are certainly free to convey whatever level of dirt you find reasonable into your own dining space, but please, don't feel that a high acceptance of dirt at mealtimes makes for a greater lifespan through immune system effects. The outdoors will provide all the challenge necessary for proper function without it being present inside the house.
But please, don't feel that I think people who wear outdoor shoes into their own kitchens are parasite ridden or otherwise uncouth, that image nor intent was never in any of my explanations of the how and why for Japanese shoe etiquette. Nor should you infer that I am dirt averse in general, only that I prefer not to have it on my own tatami mats or in my own house. The microbiome of the world is essential, but my personal preference is that dirt as well as cats and the rats they chase should remain outside of my own sleeping quarters.
As for fly droppings, the solution to those is to not allow an accumulation of the growing conditions for maggots to persist in close proximity to ones's indoors spaces, and to otherwise keep the screens on doors and windows closed. No flies will resolve to no fly shit, and a fly swatter plus a dilute peroxide\or\bleach dampened cloth will sanitize the mess for when they wander in from somewhere you cannot control, like the barn or an accidentally uncovered compost pile. Again, fly shit outdoors, no problem. On the walls, tables, and inside windows of my own home, nearly fully preventable and absolutely manageable.
I might type long expositions, but am in no way upset by making the choice to do so. Color me mildly dismayed when people have a hard time understanding that other people in other places do things in different ways, without any real difference in effort or loss of time as experienced by those other people, and upon hearing that those different traditions make a certain kind of logic and have a real benefit to those other people, become defensive as if they were being told 'your doing it wrong.' Not upset in the least, bemused and mildly dismayed in a slight measure.
Comment by b112 8 hours ago
Just 'Ewww'
Isn't it more that you spoke of "not doing it the Japanese way", and then referenced the comparator I've quoted?
Of what am I to infer, if we start at 'dirty shoes', and then evoked is this image?
While you may not be afraid of dirt, and you've provided context now, don't you think it's reasonable to make assessments, when someone connects my statements of "you're still going to track stuff in" and "a clean looking shoe is just as good as a foot", with the above?
So yes, it's reasonable to think one is over-concerned about cleanliness in such a case. And clearly from your response, you did not mean to evoke that impression.
Fine. No worries.
My comments about clothes and fly droppings, is that in rural environments flies abound. They land on you, and therefore deficate and urinate on you, and your clothes. Such is life. There was another poster worried about animal droppings in tree leaves and the grass, evoking concepts of the whole outside world being covered in animal leavings. Whether intentionally evoked or not, this is another source of my bafflement.
Comment by wahnfrieden 1 day ago
Since you can't imagine it, you could consider looking up some videos of their use before mocking what you consider a fantastical impossibility. In fact it's so easy that children and the elderly succeed at it.
Comment by adrian_b 1 day ago
However, later this changed, in good part because much of the population moved from bigger rural houses to smaller apartments in the cities. In a small apartment, there was not enough space to have at the entrance a big enough wardrobe with dedicated places for the visitors to store their shoes, and to provide slippers for them. Moreover, a small apartment was easier to clean after the visitors left.
Thus the customs changed, and it became normal when visitors came and attempted to remove their shoes, according to tradition, to assure them that there is no need to do that. Nowadays I think that few remember that in the past it was really mandatory to never enter a house with your shoes on.
Comment by stevage 1 day ago
I suspect it depends a lot on the climate, predominant style of housing etc. If you live in a nice climate and everyone has houses with backyards, you expect to be going in and out a lot all day. Very annoying to be constantly putting shoes on/off.
Personally, I just really don't care if the floor of my house is dirty. A thin smear of dog shit? If I can't smell it, I don't care. I'm not licking that floor. I'm not eating food off it. It's floor, it's basically in the same category as the ground outside: dirty.
I think of feet as dirty, so feet that go on the floor make the floor dirty.
Comment by askvictor 1 day ago
Comment by charcircuit 1 day ago
Comment by askvictor 1 hour ago
Comment by wpm 1 day ago
Comment by WD-42 1 day ago
Comment by lokar 1 day ago
Comment by jimjimjim 1 day ago
Comment by thih9 1 day ago
Anecdote, I recall reading about older family members being disgusted by the removal of outhouses and the idea of shitting indoors.
Comment by bigstrat2003 1 day ago
Comment by Gigachad 1 day ago
I have to imagine the person who leaves their shoes on either never goes outside, or just has filthy floors.
Comment by Grombobulous 1 day ago
Unlike the commenter above you, I don’t really agree that it’s completely sanitary, though. I’m just saying that keeping you clean is actually pretty far down the list.
Another thing about whether the floor is sanitary: that changes a lot based on how you use your floor. If you eat, sleep, or sit on the floor often like in a traditional Japanese home, keeping the floor clean is a lot more important.
Comment by Izkata 1 day ago
Keeping your feet clean and protecting them from surfaces are the primary purposes of shoes. Some people need them for support after having worn shoes too often (my parents are in this situation and have a separate set of "indoor shoes" just for this), or some sort of disability that needs those super-wide-sole shoes, but in general they are not for supporting your feet.
Comment by Grombobulous 1 day ago
Hiking boots can significantly enhance stability and of course walking over sharp rocks becomes trivial.
I also forgot to mention steel toed boots, no slip restaurant shoes, and other injury-protective shoes.
Then you’ve got temperature: hot pavement, cold snow.
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
Nah, the main function of shoes is (to support your feet and) prevent injury. Cleanliness is second on the list.
[ed.: added braces]
Comment by Gigachad 1 day ago
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
Comment by Gigachad 1 day ago
Comment by jimmydddd 1 day ago
Comment by thaumasiotes 1 day ago
Well, more directly, if you want to be going around barefoot outside, you have to go barefoot for a while in order to harden the skin on the bottom of your feet. It will happen naturally, given enough time, but walking around outdoors with soft feet will hurt like crazy. Bones and muscles are secondary.
In an American context, the primary reason to wear shoes is to prevent parasites on the ground from infecting you through your feet. Shoes are the single most important public health measure in American history, beating out handwashing.
Comment by jevogel 1 day ago
Comment by samus 1 day ago
Comment by qsera 1 day ago
But not on hard floor.
Comment by ryan_lane 1 day ago
Comment by jimjimjim 1 day ago
Comment by alfg 1 day ago
Comment by Balooga 1 day ago
Removing one's shoes before entering a house isn't a thing in South Africa.
Filth can sometimes be a good thing.
Comment by ryan_lane 1 day ago
Take a second, get a tissue, and go wipe the bottom of your shoe.
Comment by dzhiurgis 1 day ago
Then sanitation itself is a but of a moot. Bacteria can spread million different ways, it’s mostly futile fight. If you wear flip-flops all day and don’t wash your feet, don’t shower after using public bathrooms, etc - whats the point?
Comment by swingandamiss 2 days ago
Comment by Enginerrrd 2 days ago
Comment by kstrauser 1 day ago
We're just going to pretend that Japanese web design is identical to the rest of the world's, and that Japanese homes aren't half the size of elsewhere such that every horizontal and vertical service is commonly used for storage.
Comment by pezezin 1 day ago
People who think this have actually never been to Japan, most Japanese homes and offices are incredibly messy.
Comment by vkazanov 1 day ago
Comment by ahartmetz 1 day ago
Comment by shoobiedoo 1 day ago
It's always a clunky, awkward, boxed in mess of text that is a miracle in the case that it actually works. But that's just the way it is here. Lots of elderly, and the elderly prefer a nice helpful receptionist, I guess?
Comment by pezezin 1 day ago
Comment by rayiner 1 day ago
Comment by alfg 1 day ago
Comment by samus 1 day ago
Comment by jwrallie 1 day ago
Comment by MrDrMcCoy 1 day ago
Comment by oliculipolicula 2 days ago
Comment by eqvinox 2 days ago
What is characteristic of "the American South" here?
Comment by jankcorn 1 day ago
The society is based so strongly on group cohesion and de-emphasis of the individual, the experience of living there is very, very different than the West.
I think that this "deep cultural difference" is what the original comment was trying to get at. Sadly the reference point of "American South" ended up triggering a different (less useful) trajectory for the responses.
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
Comment by oliculipolicula 1 day ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chichibu_incident)
The following may help--- if you think of Othello as a kind of ideal southern gentleman, as the Japanese sort of did
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Othello-in-Tokyo%3A-Pe...
Now a Alt-Dixie readaptation of that adaptation must of course be the story of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Bedford_Forrest
(Taiwanese would be negroes loyal to the Cause, and Ainu would be the native Americans)
Comment by LPisGood 2 days ago
Comment by eqvinox 1 day ago
It actually makes it harder to tackle the discrimination, since it's not openly admitted. Glass walls and ceiling.
(Recommended read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burakumin
'There is a "virtual taboo" in the Japanese media against discussing the topic, leading to widespread public ignorance.')
Comment by rayiner 1 day ago
Comment by Grombobulous 1 day ago
Comment by kmeisthax 1 day ago
The biggest historical commonality between the American South and Japan - or, at least, the Tokugawa shogunate that was ruling around the same time as the South - was that both of them were at one point ruled by a cabal of essentially feudal lords. There is a lot of convergent social evolution that happens when your country's economic elite all make their money by owning land - lots of strange social titles, honorifics start floating around, people start talking around problems, and the like. However, this comparison is only skin deep, and there's plenty of things the Tokugawas did that have no parallel, or even worked backwards, to what happened in the historically contemporaneous American south:
- Sakoku (the policy of keeping Japan completely closed to trade and immigration).
- While America generally has had a long streak of veneration of the police, they never reinvented anything close to the samurai in terms of being a hereditary warrior class with a tax stipend.
- Likewise, the American South did not have a caste system; Japan did (and so did France?!?)
This makes more sense when you remember that the Tokugawa shogunate itself is the time reversal of the American South: the Tokugawas were born out of a long civil war and ended with a foreign invasion (from America) while the American South was born from foreign invasion (of Americans) and ended with a civil war.
The American South is also, interestingly enough, a mirror of Japan in other dimensions as well. The reason why the Tokugawas shut the country's borders for hundreds of years was because they understood that Christian missionaries were a front for a larger invasion force that would pillage the country's resources and abduct people to become slaves in other countries. Of course, the South was buying slaves abducted in other countries in massive quantities.
Going back to the convergent social evolution I mentioned before, you can see some of this in Japan today. Kyoto is notorious for doing exactly the same kind of backhanded compliment bullshit the South loves doing. But even then, that's one part of Japan, that was formerly the capital city. One stop on the Shinkansen takes you to Osaka where people are about as open and outgoing as Americans are.
Comment by samus 1 day ago
They simply didn't want another religion. Buddhism was already troublesome enough with a long history of popular uprisings and many monasteries having become as powerful as daimyos. Oda Nobunaga had been mostly tolerant of religions and also of Christians, but he is infamous for bloody curbing their power. The Tokugawa didn't want any of that from happening again, regardless which religion.
There was also a strong motivation to deflate the power of the port cities. They were often in the hands of untrusted daimyos because the Tokugawa prioritized controlling inland regions with farmland and important road connections to keep the economy running and to ensure that troops could be deployed everywhere and kept supplied in case of rebellions.
Comment by Der_Einzige 1 day ago
Comment by gverrilla 1 day ago
Comment by gfrecvh 2 days ago