Bare soles of the feet in advertising? Gross or nice?

I noticed on an earlier question that many people find bare feet gross or ugly. I can totally share this view if smelly dirty feet are concerned.





On the other hand, while obviously many people don't like feet, especially naked ones, they are very present in advertising. Almost daily I see ads where people are barefoot, mainly in ads for couches, travel agencies but also telecommunications. I suspect that the feet should be a symbol for feeling well, relaxed, at home etc. But: not just feet are presented to the viewer, but especially the soles are presented in clear focus. Why, if this conflicts with so many people disliking feet? Wouldn't that put off that product advertised?





What is your opinion? Do you make a difference between "just feet" and "bare soles"?

Bare soles of the feet in advertising? Gross or nice?
Doesn't make a difference to me; I'm always barefoot for comfort but I don't think anything really special about the appearance of the foot, toes, soles or as a whole. To me, feet are more like hands than anything else; they're just a body part, looking good if they're strong and healthy, looking not as good when they're all gnarled, but I wouldn't expect an old person with gnarled hands to wear gloves so why should feet be covered? It's great to go barefoot but just looking at them, I feel neither the attraction fetishists have, nor the repulsion some others seem to have.





I think the dislike many people have of feet has to do with so many myths that do the rounds about bare feet being unhealthy or gross. Here in Europe it's rare to find any signs banning bare feet from stores, most people here think it's a rather healthy practice. While I get lots of surprised comments it's rare for anyone to respond in a truly negative manner.





In the US lots of people see signs against bare feet all the time, however the Health Department does NOT have any laws against going barefoot, signs stating so are FALSE (see source). Yet many people believe them %26amp; believe that obviously there must be something wrong with bare feet, they must be gross/dangerous/unhealthy. It's very sad so many stores keep posting those signs with misinformation, I'm sure they influence the public opinion in a very negative way.
Reply:To keep it short,I love it..Bare feet are great...the dirtier and smellier the better...but thats another thing..personally,I want more ads to have barefeet in them...I usually get disappointed when I see shoes or socks when barefeet can easily be shown.
Reply:Bare feet are no doubt a symbol of freedom and comfort. Although I agree that some feet can be mis-shapen, blistered, or with bunions or fungus resulting in feet that are not very appealing, there is a conflict due to the fact that most, if not all foot ailments are caused by shoes. I have been a full time barefooter for a year and a half walking, shoping, dining, working, driving and hiking always barefoot and have feet that are healthier and stronger than they have ever been in my life.





I think the symbol of healthy bare feet portrays freedom and comfort perfectly.
Reply:i love bare feet
Reply:Personally I do not feel any difference between the two terms. I just say, personally, I like to see other women's feet (I have a fetish for other women's feet) and it is a matter of fact that since some years female's feet are more present into advertising of many products, often it handles of products which have nothing to do about feet. Why? To me, feet are the new expression of "daring and unexpected" and this tickles fantasies of men (and women), so when you want to advertise something, if you have the chance to put inside the view of some nice shaped female feet you surely know you will drag the attention of people watching the ad. Female feet sell great, and if they are well shaped and well cared, are always a pleasure to see and appreciate!