• merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Are you still dressed like this?

    Then why does your bed still look like this?

    18th century bed

    Look, I get the idea. Lawns are bad. But, the argument is a stupid one. Just because things haven’t changed in a few centuries doesn’t mean they necessarily should change. Beds are essentially the same design as hundreds of years ago because that design works. Why are lawns necessarily different than beds?

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Lawns were easily maintained by the livestock that simply ate the grass. What we are doing now is a facimile of that by wasting energy to pretend sheep live nearby.

      Do you have livestock? By all means have a lawn, it makes sense!

      • greedytacothief@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Depends on the livestock. Some are top grazers like cows and other eat all the way to the base like sheep (this one can kill the grass)

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Beds don’t have an adverse effect on our ecosystem like lawns do

      Also beds back then were made of straw and rope, maybe feathers if you were rich. Nowadays they’re made of a precision engineered combination of different types of foam and springs, all topped with self-cooling materials, placed on bases that can detect if you’re snoring and automatically adjust the mattress’s angle and softness to get you to stop. Beds are way fucking better than they were centuries ago. Yards are still useless wastes of space.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Also beds back then were made of straw and rope

        Mattresses, maybe. Beds were beds. The basic design of beds hasn’t changed.

        The point is that some things haven’t changed in centuries because they do the job just fine. So, the argument that “this is the way it was 300 years ago, therefore it’s bad” is a shitty argument.

        • webp@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The point is things need to change when they no longer do the job just fine.

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Ok but lawns have always been bad. Their whole original purpose was so rich people could flex their ability to leave some of their land useless. The whole point was for lawns to be useless. So like, the argument of “this is the way it was 300 years ago therefore it’s bad” is actually valid in this case. They were useless then, and they’re still useless now.

        • shiftymccool@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          The basic design of lawns doesn’t need to change: a relatively cleared area around a house. The exact composition of the lawn can change, though. Why does it need to just be some genetically modified grass that provides nothing? Let natural grasses, clover, and flowers take over.

          I’m pretty convinced HOAs are causing firefly extinction (among others). Better spray your lawn, i see a dandelion. Fire up the single-stroke leaf blower to push that one leaf out to the end of your driveway for the next 20 minutes.