“traveling” yikes.
That is one way to say, you think wealth is attractive.
I have traveled quite a bit and I like it a lot, but it is no hobby. For it to be a hobby, I would have to have a lot more money.
Once or even twice a year, is hardly a hobby.
It could also just be women thinking, “I’d like to visit _____ when I’m able, I want my partner to go with me.” Working in a passport office, I’ve met a shocking number of men who have never left the US (or sometimes even the state) by choice. Then their wife or girlfriend wants to go to Mexico or something, and they come in talking about how they’re only doing it for her and they’d never travel if it was up to them.
Anyway, I’d consider traveling one of my hobbies even though I can’t afford to do it often - plenty of time is spent planning and looking at things to do, so it goes beyond just the few days of the trip.
I think so too.
I’ve met people who are extremely happy living in their small town life doing small town things, then get angry or confused why anybody would want to go someplace “exotic”.
Maybe “travelling as a hobby” as a women’s preference with regards to men is at about it being a man’s openness and ability to deal with totally different environments, disposable income, time availability and possibly foreign language skills.
I’m one of those people. I’ve never flown, rarely leave my state. My wife wants to travel, but we haven’t yet. I, personally, have no interest in it. Just like sports and most popular movie franchises. I just have no feelings about it at all. It seems like a huge hassle.
Yea same. New places, new people, and trying to figure out where I’m going stress me the fuck out. A vacation is just a whole week of that. No thanks. I want to use my time off to relax. If someone else wants to plan the whole thing and I just follow them around it’s fine but I don’t want to deal with that shit myself. It’s not enjoyable to me at all.
You can travel without spending a lot of money, people call it backpacking.
It’s unclear what countries this poll includes, having minimum paid leave is the law in most of the world. There’s also quite a few careers that involve forced time off.
If you live at home or are technically homeless it doesn’t really matter. If you can save up a bit and have a charismatic personality you can go far, especially if you’re willing to pick up shitty temporary jobs in places where you go. I had a friend who would do this all the time and periodically return home to work at a reliable job while living with a friend, save up more, then fly off to somewhere for a few months.
For the vast majority of you, long travel is required to get to somewhere you can backpack. And the the gear and foodstuffs is expensive also. And judging by the damages to the environment that some inconsiderate people leave these days, I’m not sure that you should be allowed to. (I’m getting sick and tired of picking up garbage and hauling it out of the forest I live in).
“Backpacking” can also mean couch surfing and staying in hostels or on park benches. In the early 2000’s, it was a really popular way to travel across Europe (at least among rich white college kids)
Or be in a religious cult like Mormons. Of course they will send you to a foreign country and confiscate your passport until your 1.5-2 years are over.
Depends.
If they flaunt it with their fancy cars and designer clothes, I think they’re gross.
If they look like a hobo but are highly educated about finances… Aaaaay bay bee how you doin? Wink at me, you economist with a 401K who ties her hair up because she hasn’t showered in days because she was doing data science. Spit in my mouth, you engineer with a diverse stock portfolio who wears the same hoodie you wore in college because clothes shopping is hard and you want to focus on optimizing your CI pipelines. Choke me, you tenured professor with a mature retirement fund who dedicated their life building physics engines to teach grad students.
There was this study where they asked a theater full of women to rate the attractiveness of men, based on a photo and a profession. Then they changed all the professions (but kept the same photos) and did it again.
The same picture with a higher-paying job was rated significantly higher.
A lot of these hobbies are wealth-adjacent.
Playing an instrument: a good instrument isn’t cheap, and music lessons can be pretty expensive.
Woodworking requires a lot of fairly expensive tools, and a space to do it. You can’t really have woodworking as a hobby if you live in a small studio apartment. You basically need a house, either one with a basement, a shed or a garage.
Gardening: requires a garden, something you’re unlikely to have unless you have your own house.
Photography: I don’t know anybody who is into photography who hasn’t sunk a lot of money into the hobby. There’s the cameras, the lenses, and even the software these days.
Astronomy: see above.
Hiking: not expensive on its own, but in North America it means being able to drive to a wilderness spot outside the city, so you pretty much require your own car.
Archery and blacksmithing: again, requires a specialized space
Now, I know that there are cheap options for a lot of these. A musician could be someone drumming on an upside-down pail. Someone who only has access to a hotplate could still experiment with food. Woodworking could be just whittling sticks found in the park. Gardening could just be tending to a small houseplant. But, are these the version of the hobbies the women are picturing when they’re imagining a potential mate doing the activity? Probably not.
Meanwhile, a lot of the stuff at the bottom of the list are very cheap hobbies. Like being influenced by the “Manosphere” just requires access to social media, same with porn and “arguing online”.
Honestly, it looks to me like if you sorted the list by “dollars per hour someone invested in that hobby is likely to spend” you’d get many of the same things at the top and many of the same ones at the bottom. Some of the few exceptions are writing and reading, which can be pretty cheap hobbies, but are still apparently very attractive.
For astronomy (really astrophotography, which is considered even more expensive) I guess it depends on what you consider expensive. For $500 and with 3 free software products I’m able to produce stuff like this:
A rather large telescope (8" dobsonian reflector) I have as well was “only” $500. So it can be a hobby that you don’t need to spend all that much on, but again that depends on what we consider expensive. $500 is definitely not cheap but I’m just a schmuck in a factory and I could save for that.
I’m sure you know other people spending thousands on their gear. Anyhow, many of these hobbies can be done relatively cheaply, but I imagine the woman picturing the man doing it as someone who wasn’t going the ultra-cheap route.
Nice picture btw. How far do you have to travel to get somewhere where there’s a low enough level of light pollution that you can take a picture like that?
