Monday, November 22, 2010

Ed Miliband does not have a shoes-off policy

Ed Miliband does not appear to have a shoes-off policy. The Labour party leader was interviewed at his home in the Guardian today. He wore deck shoes, though his wife was just in socks.

Given that he has a cream carpet (according to the interviewer) and a new baby he really should insitute a no-shoes rule.


richyrich said...

Maybe he has (especially as his wife (or partner) was just in socks)but that he wanted to appear more formal for an interview. Why don't you write to him to commend the policy?

Moderate Mouse said...

As far as the wearing shoes to appear more formal is concerned (if that was what was going on), I remember when I, for some reason, felt that wearing shoes was a prerequisite for being presentable before company (and that was just at a time when jeans, if not shorts, were worn). I'm pretty sure I had that sentiment nearly two years ago when I had first joined this discussion. These days? Not so much, especially given the two pairs of ballet flat slippers that I had bought specifically with my regular clothes in mind. Not only do I think these look better with my clothes than do the really obvious pajama-style kind, but I think they put me in a better frame of mind to get things done around the house and not to mention make me less prone to dragging my feet when walking. (I've done that before in the pajama-style kind. I got reprimanded for this as it was supposedly doing a potential injustice to the floors. As the slippers I was wearing at the time were such that I would've had to practically march to keep from dragging, I think that's when I gave up on being without real shoes while otherwise dressed for the day.)

IMO, what kind of footwear the guy had on at the time is his business, not mine, but I wonder if he could've gotten some slippers in whatever styles are available to men these days that could be as discreet as the ballet flat-style is for us ladies and allow him to maintain the same "dignifying" appearance that he may have been trying to achieve with the deck shoes (again, if such was the case), especially if he really DOES have a no shoes rule in the home. Just saying.

Celestial Fundy said...

Deck shoes are not terribly formal. Some leather moccasin slippers would have looked equally smart.

Moderate Mouse said...

Not only am I not the skeptic about the shoes-off practice that I was when I commented here two years ago today, but I've been kind of kicking around in my head an idea for a new school of offalist thought. (I just don't know what I want to call it.) I will most likely bring it up on my "Musings" blog. (I just now wrote what you might call my, for lack of a better term, testimony "Slipping Away From At Home Shoe Wearing" on said blog. It's a bit lengthy though.)

The most likely member of the type of offalism that I'm working on trying to present would be someone who was a Tramplian or at least borderlined on it, but something inside them has questioned their alleged need to wear shoes around the house. It doesn't place the emphasis on the cleanliness angle that a lot of articles on the shoes-off practice do, but it looks more at other reasons why one might want to re-think their need to wear shoes at home. (This isn't to say that there are no circumstances under which it shoes are remotely acceptable in the home, but when one takes into account factors like time spent at home, things that they do at home that warrant shoelessness, etc., they may find that they probably don't need to be wearing shoes at home as much as previously thought even if revelations of this come in degrees.)

I'd go into more details, but I might not be able to here due to whatever limit Blogger has on the number of characters in a comment. It's a work in progress. I may or may not mention it at all here, but I will likely bring it up on my "Musings" blog at various times. (My apologies for yet another lengthy comment. It's just the way it turned out.)