7 ms·

All of them if they reduced their television and Internet consumption. I think a bigger issue is nature isn't so much accessible to many. They paved paradise

• hotnfresh 3y ago
  Nature’s boring enough that it’s not really worth the downsides (bugs, travel for most people, humidity/ice/whatever) to go out and “enjoy” it in large stretches of the country. There are cities where the nicest outdoor areas in 200 miles wouldn’t make the top-100 list of outdoor areas in the same radius, for other cities.
  • jwells89 3y ago
    Bugs is a big one. I have a hard time enjoying wherever I’m at if there’s a bunch of mosquitos or wasps around for example, even if I’m wearing repellent. I guess that means I should move somewhere that’s frequently snowy if being outdoors often is a goal.
    • bobthepanda 3y ago
      Alaska has pretty gnarly mosquitos.
      • WalterBright 3y ago
        I've been told that Alaska has 4-engine mosquitoes.
      • lupusreal 3y ago
        Alaska is much nicer in the winter, if you don't mind being cold.
      • mattpallissard 3y ago
        We also have no-see-ums, which I find more irritating personally.
    • kjkjadksj 3y ago
      If you want to avoid mosquitos move by a prevailing ocean breeze.
  • buffet_overflow 3y ago
    Climate change (less predictable weather, higher temperatures) is and will likely continue to be a factor as well.
  • macNchz 3y ago
    Arguably there’s plenty of benefit and enjoyment to be had in the outdoors regardless of whether wherever you are would make a “top-100 list”. I also think that too many Americans today err on the side of avoiding potentially rewarding activities because of the chance that they might be uncomfortable–stuck in such a narrow comfort zone that’s basically counter to experiencing things that promote happiness and fulfillment.
  • benkuykendall 3y ago
    It's hard for me to relate to this point of view. Sure, my local park isn't the Grand Canyon, but on a day-to-day basis, failing to make the "top-100 list" doesn't impact my enjoyment of the outdoors. Fresh air, literally. Sunlight during parts of the year. Observing the changing seasons. Seeing plants, and maybe animals. Exercising by myself or in organized sports. Being in a shared space with others in my community enjoying themselves. These all seem like pretty small asks for an outdoor space. Sure you probably won't appreciate them in a highway median, but I also doubt that most people would have to drive 200 miles to find something like this.
    • preommr 3y ago
      > Fresh air, literally. Sunlight during parts of the year. Observing the changing seasons. Seeing plants, and maybe animals You can do all of these by just opening a window. >but I also doubt that most people would have to drive 200 miles to find something like this. You're right, I don't have to drive anywhere, I can stay indoors and get all that by opening a window.
      • coldtea 3y ago
        Yeah, it's like sex, it's so overrated when there's p0rn!
        • shrimp_emoji 3y ago
          Show me the lie The exception is in the context of a relationship, but you only enter those by meeting rare drop people with good chemistry (which is precluded by staying indoors all the time) or as a coping strategy for low single income (but you're on HN hahaaa $$$).
      • iteratethis 3y ago
        You'd do great in prison.
        • shrimp_emoji 3y ago
  • wenc 3y ago
    As a city person, I don't really miss nature. I miss the city when I'm out of it. I'm deeply introverted, but I love the energy and bustle of people, and especially love the brownian motion of ideas and cultures colliding in big cities. I associate nature with deep loneliness because there are so few people out there, and those who are out there don't really talk to each other. I've been camping, been on hikes, etc. with and without friends, but it's really not my thing. I like going fishing with friends, but forests are not my thing. As a kid I watched a movie about cabin life in Oregon and it left an indelible mark on me: I told myself I never want to live that life. It's so isolating. I love being around people, even if I don't talk to them. I could sit in a cafe by myself and feel full just feeding of the energy of the overheard conversations and the relationships of people around me. But as a Chicagoan, I do love talking to people. I love the inconsequential interactions like asking the receptionist how her day was, or the person in line about the weather.
    • surgical_fire 3y ago
      I grew up in a large metropolis, and lived there for 30+ years. I can't stand it anymore. I found out I really enjoy living in the countryside, with access to some nature. I associate nature not to loneliness, but to solitude, which I usually find desirable. And the bustle of people around me is deeply annoying. I can enjoy going to a cafe when it is mostly empty. If I start to listen to people talk, I feel an urge to leave. I wonder if it has something to do with a personal trait, or to the specific metropolitan area I grew up in that made me dislike crowded places so much.
      • ulizzle 3y ago
        I’m the same way. I like people too but can’t stand to be around them for very long. Especially now that our culture is so vapid and hyper political.
    • thefz 3y ago
      > As a city person, I don't really miss nature. I miss the city when I'm out of it. Polar opposite here! I dread a landscape of brick, concrete and asphalt. Whenever I visit a large city I feel the need to escape as soon as possible. Large cities contain more people but less community than small centers, in which it's easier to get cozy with the people living around you geographically.
  • tivert 3y ago
    > There are cities where the nicest outdoor areas in 200 miles wouldn’t make the top-100 list of outdoor areas in the same radius, for other cities. That's "why bother with romance when you almost certainly won't be with one of the 100 most attractive people in the world" logic.
    • hotnfresh 3y ago
      Never lived somewhere with a really bad outdoors situation, I take it? To use your analogy, it’s more like living in a city where the most-attractive person once came in 3rd in an ugliness competition, and also everyone has unpleasant personalities. It’s less that you don’t have any of the best options available, and more that you don’t have any that are better than “still fairly bad”. You visit a buddy few couple states over, rave about how wonderful and pretty all the locals are, and your buddy’s like “dude wtf we’re infamously the ugliest town in this state, and the reputation is deserved, I need you to say these things to some of my local pals so they can have a good laugh”. Why bother, indeed.
      • tivert 3y ago
        > Never lived somewhere with a really bad outdoors situation, I take it? I'm guessing I probably have (by your definition), as a matter of fact. But what exactly is a "really bad outdoors situation" anyway?
        • hotnfresh 3y ago
          Most of the bad parts of nature—mud, the usual unpleasant insects, an ecology dominated by poison ivy and thorn plants of various sorts—without the good parts. Nice, long views, pretty hills or mountains, ocean or nice lakes, dramatic rock formations (even for very modest values of “dramatic”), tall forests that aren’t edge-to-edge carpeted three feet high with poison and thorn plants, rivers and streams that are more than sluggish smelly mud-ditches? None of that. Zero. Not close enough to visit on a normal weekend unless you want to spend twice as much time driving as being in the place you wanted to go. You wanna go outside and enjoy “nature”, you do it somewhere that sees a lawn-mower on a regular basis, and/or is partially paved. Really bad.
• inamberclad 3y ago
  Absolutely the case. I moved to Texas for work and quickly moved back home to California. Simply reminding myself that I was so far away from any nice nature was pretty distressing.
  • glitchc 3y ago
    It's hard to beat California weather. Some of the best in the world.
• t-writescode 3y ago
  Worse. We paved paradise and put in a completely non-walkable big car hellscape and parking lots to go along with it, so most can’t or won’t walk to do things. Moving to a walkable area was a game changer for me in so many ways.
  • soco 3y ago
    It also looks... ugly. Desolate. A concrete wasteland, if you want, here and there punctuated by threatening billboards.
• crazygringo 3y ago
  > All of them if they reduced their television and Internet consumption. Huh? Those are in the evening. I can't pop into nature for an hour and a half after dinner the way I can pop into a TV show. It's like two hours away, if I plan the trains right. TV and internet has literally nothing to do with it. My ability to schedule an entire Saturday or Sunday does. And not have it pour rain (or be during a snowing freezing month).
  • kjkjadksj 3y ago
    You can experience nature just walking around your neighborhood. Even if its in the middle of a city. There’s no need to go full John Muir. Trees a plenty everywhere. Birds and squirrels. Either way, much better to be putting those legs to use than to sit.
    • crazygringo 3y ago
      You and I clearly live in different neighborhoods. The trees planted in the sidewalk of what is otherwise my concrete jungle does not constitute "nature" by any stretch of the imagination -- not any more than my indoor plants do. And the number of birds and squirrels is roughly zero -- I've got to walk half an hour to a park for any of those. I love walking around my neighborhood but it's exercise and walking -- it's certainly not nature. Don't confuse the two.
• otteromkram 3y ago
  Yeah, I don't get the no ideal thing. Seems to be mainly in southern states, but has been creeping into nicer neighborhoods up north. Some could be because they were rural, but if you look at places around DFW, you see sidewalks just...stop. Like, do they not expect people to want to walk anywhere or is it just too expensive due to property rights? Instead, what you end up with are silly trails that are often not lit up at night, paving the way for robbery, rape, etc. Much better than spending a few bucks on a legit sidewalk. (cough).
• plagiarist 3y ago
  I think your second point also feeds into why people trend towards television and internet. It is harder to make the time to go somewhere if it's a long distance to drive and you have other housework tasks that need to be done.
• tomcar288 3y ago
  absolutely. pavement is just everywhere. loads and loads of endless pavement in front of every freakin store, whether it's needed or not. It's disgusting and dipressing to be locked in a concrete jungle.
• TrueGeek 3y ago
  Many people don't spend their evenings watching television. Many spend it working a 2nd or 3rd job, or going to school, or caring for a sick relative, or some combination of the above. For many nature is far away, a car is unaffordable, and public transportation is non-existent. It is not at all accurate that all Americans have free time to get outdoors if they simply limit their screen time.
• fatnoah 3y ago
  For me, it feels far more subtle. As a kid, I remember roaming my town, playing in the woods, spontaneous trips to a beach, etc. Now, random kids roaming isn't possible without risking calls to police or child services, accessing nature areas requires arriving early to ensure parking, and getting into a beach needs a reservation made weeks in advance