• olutukko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      lawns are shit and they were actually a tool for colonialism. they quite literally came in fashion because rich people in europe were flexin with their wealth because they could spend their land and work force for lawn that looked pretty and contributed for nothing. they even took those same lawn species for america so keeo that same flexing going on.

      fuck lawns. Go actually diverse meadow plants that bugs need!

      also lawns are insanely unecofriendly despite being plants.

      https://youtu.be/ciz8NwjurZU

      • FLeX@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Except in europe we have trees, flowers, vegetables, plants. Real gardens.

        Not just an ugly lawn like this, you never see just a lawn with nothing on it.

        Are americans allergic to trees or something ?

        • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          These days, you’ll lose your homeowners insurance for having trees anywhere near your house. They’re legit taking drone pictures on that now.

          • FLeX@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I guess it could be because of big storms in some areas, but losing it really ? Why not just more expensive for vulnerables/dangerous trees ?

            This is nonsense

      • ILikeBoobies
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Read the title, your argument shouldn’t be things better than lawns

        It should be that concrete is better or no argument at all

        • olutukko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I never said they were worse than concrete. just stated that lawns are shit and shouldn’t existed

          edit: I do understand your comment though and I just wanted to rant aboutnit

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lawns beget concrete elsewhere (in the form of parking lots) by being too low-density for walkability.

      • ILikeBoobies
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Bus, Cable Car, Train, Bicycle

        You would think people in this community wouldn’t say something so foolish

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes, what you’re saying is foolish.

          It’s an issue of low density. Having single-family houses spread apart with lawns necessarily lowers the viability of methods other than driving because e.g. you have to walk farther to get to destinations, there are fewer riders per mile along the transit line, etc.

          • ILikeBoobies
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Look you don’t know what you’re talking about and it’s fine

            The roads do way more for spreading people apart than the lawns do

            Whether you have grass or trees on people’s property does not impact density

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Whether you build a single-family house with a yard or an apartment building on a lot absolutely impacts density. Hell, even among single-family houses, whether the minimum lot size is 9000 square feet or two acres (real zoning categories on my city, BTW) absolutely impacts density.

              • ILikeBoobies
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                An apartment with a lawn vs an apartment without doesn’t impact density

                Nor does a two hectare lot with one vs a two hectare lot without

                • grue@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  You just keep insisting on missing the point, don’t you? This thread is not actually about grass vs. other plants with density held equal, and never was.

                  • ILikeBoobies
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    name a more wasteful use of land

                    Me: concrete

                    You: you’re missing the point

      • Nurgle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Lawns are 100000% better than an impermeable hardscape like concrete.