Every man should know how to tie their shoes. Once I see a fellow gentleman with velcro straps on his feet, I immediately despise him.
A horse in excellent physical condition can cover 100 miles or more in about 10 hours, with the burden of a rider. In simply average condition, 25-50 miles would be easily attainable in about half that time. A human in excellent physical condition walking nonstop for 12 hours would be lucky to hit 50 miles.loc978 said:...well, the only thing on the list I can't do well is ride a horse. I'm more apt to kill and eat one. Between my own two feet and a bicycle, though, I can outpace most horses through any terrain except open grassy plains... and I hate open grassy plains (fortunately, I don't live near any).
Yet on a bicycle, a human in excellent condition can easily travel the same distance as your horse in 10 hours. 10mph is easy to maintain all day. Plus, if that human encounters a barrier that the horse can't traverse (as one is wont to do every ten feet or so where I live), he can carry his bike across it.Heronblade said:A horse in excellent physical condition can cover 100 miles or more in about 10 hours, with the burden of a rider. In simply average condition, 25-50 miles would be easily attainable in about half that time. A human in excellent physical condition walking nonstop for 12 hours would be lucky to hit 50 miles.loc978 said:...well, the only thing on the list I can't do well is ride a horse. I'm more apt to kill and eat one. Between my own two feet and a bicycle, though, I can outpace most horses through any terrain except open grassy plains... and I hate open grassy plains (fortunately, I don't live near any).
Through forest and thick undergrowth there'd be sections where a horse would slow but it would beat you because of the speed it can hit clear sections, climbing a cliff, well that's not very fair and I would be willing to bet a really fit horse could beat you on a pack over packed dirt, definetly in an endurance.loc978 said:Over what terrain? On pavement or packed dirt, that's why I mentioned the bike (I can maintain about 25mph for a few miles on level ground). Through thick undergrowth and trackless forest, I can certainly outpace a horse. Up the side of a cliff, they can't even follow me. Across a river, same thing. That pretty much covers all of the terrain around here. Horses are next to useless where I live.orangeban said:I'd be amazed if you could out-run a (decently fit) horse on foot. On a bike I could believe (presuming you were a very good bike rider) but no way could you beat one in a foot race.loc978 said:...well, the only thing on the list I can't do well is ride a horse. I'm more apt to kill and eat one. Between my own two feet and a bicycle, though, I can outpace most horses through any terrain except open grassy plains... and I hate open grassy plains (fortunately, I don't live near any).
That's from tunnel in the sky isn't it?crimson5pheonix said:?A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.? -Robert A. Heinlein
Word.
As an experienced Customer Service Representative, I think both men and women should know how to read instruction manuals and reference them for getting certain things done. It would be great if they weren't needed at all, but to me it shows a great aptitude for a person to leaf through the instruction booklet that came with their device/thing that needs to be built and use it to help them accomplish something (building furniture, setting up your mobile phone, etc.) without needing to call someone. I find that a lot of people unwrap their shiny new toys and toss the instruction booklets aside, only to become confused and/or frustrated when they can't figure out how to do something on their own. It doesn't hurt to reference the manual, and IMHO, more people could stand to do so.Lawnmooer said:Do something without looking at the instruction manual.
orangeban said:Through forest and thick undergrowth there'd be sections where a horse would slow but it would beat you because of the speed it can hit clear sections, climbing a cliff, well that's not very fair and I would be willing to bet a really fit horse could beat you on a pack over packed dirt, definetly in an endurance.loc978 said:Over what terrain? On pavement or packed dirt, that's why I mentioned the bike (I can maintain about 25mph for a few miles on level ground). Through thick undergrowth and trackless forest, I can certainly outpace a horse. Up the side of a cliff, they can't even follow me. Across a river, same thing. That pretty much covers all of the terrain around here. Horses are next to useless where I live.orangeban said:I'd be amazed if you could out-run a (decently fit) horse on foot. On a bike I could believe (presuming you were a very good bike rider) but no way could you beat one in a foot race.loc978 said:...well, the only thing on the list I can't do well is ride a horse. I'm more apt to kill and eat one. Between my own two feet and a bicycle, though, I can outpace most horses through any terrain except open grassy plains... and I hate open grassy plains (fortunately, I don't live near any).
Well that brings us onto another one:Ledan said:My dad did that, well on a volunteer farm, and sprained his back. 20 years later, his back hurts all the time. Soooo..... not such a smart planXHolySmokesX said:Attempt to carry as much weight as possible.
I work at a shop that sells 15Kg bags of sand. Now, Im not a bulky guy, i've always been pretty skinny, so carrying a lot of weight is something i probably shouldn't do often. So that's exactly what i tried to do, i managed to carry 4 bags of sand (60kg) across my arms and walk a good 25 meters to the customer with them, granted i nearly spraned my back, but it was worth it becasue i felt like a man!!!!![]()
Hmm, depends on the type of horse really... I know they're not horses but I've met a few trecking ponies who could at least have a good stab at getting through that.loc978 said:orangeban said:Through forest and thick undergrowth there'd be sections where a horse would slow but it would beat you because of the speed it can hit clear sections, climbing a cliff, well that's not very fair and I would be willing to bet a really fit horse could beat you on a pack over packed dirt, definetly in an endurance.loc978 said:Over what terrain? On pavement or packed dirt, that's why I mentioned the bike (I can maintain about 25mph for a few miles on level ground). Through thick undergrowth and trackless forest, I can certainly outpace a horse. Up the side of a cliff, they can't even follow me. Across a river, same thing. That pretty much covers all of the terrain around here. Horses are next to useless where I live.orangeban said:I'd be amazed if you could out-run a (decently fit) horse on foot. On a bike I could believe (presuming you were a very good bike rider) but no way could you beat one in a foot race.loc978 said:...well, the only thing on the list I can't do well is ride a horse. I'm more apt to kill and eat one. Between my own two feet and a bicycle, though, I can outpace most horses through any terrain except open grassy plains... and I hate open grassy plains (fortunately, I don't live near any).![]()
![]()
Cheesus333 said:I resent the idea that I should be able to do anything based solely on my gender. But hey, I can do most of those things at the age of 16 anyway.
Well,Vivace-Vivian said:How about not being a chauvinistic ass?
That is all the list you need.
lemiel14n3 said:I am saying that men SHOULD, not that women CAN'T, please don't confuse the two.
I think you should note that the third quote does not answer the first quote. In fact, the first quote is complaining about exactly what you said in the third.lemiel14n3 said:Cheesus333 said:I resent the idea that I should be able to do anything based solely on my gender. But hey, I can do most of those things at the age of 16 anyway.Well,Vivace-Vivian said:How about not being a chauvinistic ass?
That is all the list you need.
lemiel14n3 said:I am saying that men SHOULD, not that women CAN'T, please don't confuse the two.
...Well, yeah, that was kind of my point. I don't really like the fact that I would be considered somehow a lesser man because I can't fulfil a list of traits and feats.lemiel14n3 said:Cheesus333 said:I resent the idea that I should be able to do anything based solely on my gender. But hey, I can do most of those things at the age of 16 anyway.Well,Vivace-Vivian said:How about not being a chauvinistic ass?
That is all the list you need.
lemiel14n3 said:I am saying that men SHOULD, not that women CAN'T, please don't confuse the two.