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.
“Fun” fact, this is actually why my mom has no interest in camping as an adult. Her family was homeless a lot when she was a kid and her mom disguised it as a fun extended camping trip. The kids bought it for the most part, because the family really did camp for fun, and they were used to fishing for dinner and things, but she said as she got older, she realized things like the month long trip in November were because they lost their housing.
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 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.
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?
Thanks! I’m lucky enough to live in a bortle 4 zone so that was taken right outside my house, it’s just processed a bit to pull out the colors and darken the background.
Cool stuff, I live in a city. Not a huge city, but big enough that I only see the major stars at night. It would probably take me at least 45 minutes of driving to get somewhere dark enough to take a picture like yours (assuming I had all the equipment and skill to take that kind of picture at all).
“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.
“I’M NOT DRIVING OFFICER, IM TRAVELLING!”
Gets 'em so wet
That explains why there are so many of them. It is for the WAP.
You can travel without spending a lot of money, people call it backpacking.
Time off is expensive
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.
Maybe, though that lifestyle is very unconducive to relationships generally.
“I love camping, I usually do it under bridges and in gutters.”
“Fun” fact, this is actually why my mom has no interest in camping as an adult. Her family was homeless a lot when she was a kid and her mom disguised it as a fun extended camping trip. The kids bought it for the most part, because the family really did camp for fun, and they were used to fishing for dinner and things, but she said as she got older, she realized things like the month long trip in November were because they lost their housing.
My wife hates camping. She needs electricity, a toilet, wifi, etc.
I never thought about why until your comment. My wife moved houses every few months as a kid. Maybe 10-15 times total before before college.
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.
College educated US women iirc. I found the source at some point
Depends how you typically live
Is it not?
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.
I wasn’t saying it’s like that for everyone but rather in a generalized way being wealthy seems to be a factor in making someone seem more attractive.
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.
Wealth and social status and what those can provide are just attractive features to people.
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?
Thanks! I’m lucky enough to live in a bortle 4 zone so that was taken right outside my house, it’s just processed a bit to pull out the colors and darken the background.
Cool stuff, I live in a city. Not a huge city, but big enough that I only see the major stars at night. It would probably take me at least 45 minutes of driving to get somewhere dark enough to take a picture like yours (assuming I had all the equipment and skill to take that kind of picture at all).