How I Make a Living as an Adventurer

[David Thomas]

>"I had a vasectomy at age 29. If I desire children (I work with children and have 5 adorable nieces and nephews) I will adopt a child who needs love."

Every child should be a wanted child. It'll never be 100% but let's improve the odds.

No Gay or infertile couple ever woke up from a night of drunken debauchery to discover that they'd unknowingly adopted a child.

Editted to capitalize "Gay" so it wouldn't be detected as "possible profanity".

The following word: straight didn't get flagged the by site's profanity detector. I'm offended at this site's homophobic bias. I mention my wife when it is germaine to a thread and I don't get censored for being straight. My Gay cousin has been 5,000 feet higher than I ever have and cycled 1,000 miles further. I fail to see why BPL doesn't treat all outdoorspeople equally.

[Rakesh Malik]

> Moral of the story: get a degree in journalism or english lit if you want to be an
> adventurer.

You don't a degree to learn writing and photography. My degree, for example, is in biophysics, yet I'm getting my work displayed in art galleries.

[Rakesh Malik]

> Imagine if he is able to make a "modest" living, allowing him to have a wife, kids,
> mortgage etc. and still embark upon his adventures. He would be the envy of most of
> us.

This guy does it too.

[Erin McKittrick]

The only thing that bothers me about the "adult responsibilities" bit is the idea that families are incompatible with adventure. If you don't want to have a spouse or kids because you don't want to – great. If you do want to, but think you'll be limited to a boring and unadventurous life once you do – that's sad.

We may not be as fast as Skurka (I never was as fast as Skurka, at any age or # of kids), but we have spent multiple months on amazing wilderness backpacking adventures with babies and toddlers – going to lots of places that very few single adults have ever been.

[Rakesh Malik]

> We may not be as fast as Skurka (I never was as fast as Skurka, at any age or # of kids), but we have spent multiple months on
> amazing wilderness backpacking adventures with babies and toddlers – going to lots of places that very few single adults have
> ever been.

If that isn't inspiration enough for someone to step out of the drudgery that qualifies as modern living and actually live, then they're beyond hope.

While it hardly qualifies as classic literature, John Locke said it best in Lost: "Don't tell me what I can't do."

You (and Andrew Skurka) are classic examples of that.

What I think is really funny is how often I run into people on hikes who tell me that I probably won't be able to reach the summit because of how much stuff I'm carrying. I always take my photo gear with me, so my pack always looks huge, even when the bottom compartment is empty, but that means that it always looks like it must weigh over 50 pounds, even when it's only around 30. :)

But even so… they just assume that I can't do it, even though they have no idea what sort of physical training, I do, just because they *think* they couldn't, therefore neither could I…

[Randy Nelson]

"I often encounter marrieds who are rousted with anger at individuals who make solid choices and live a life free of much, not all, responsibility. Always remember, your house, your children, your spouse, your choices. You chose this route and If you are angry at someone who choses another route with their life, this speaks to unhappiness with your own choices."

We encounter different people, that's for sure. I can't think of a single person I know that is angry at someone for living a life with little responsibility. Quite the contrary. I'm the married with kids, workaholic type (not by necessity,it's just how I'm wired). One of my best friends is single and hasn't worked in over 2 years. He is in very good shape financially so he can do this. He travels all over and has nothing but fun. Everyone that knows him is happy for him. But I've never heard anyone say they'd want to trade places with him. I sure wouldn't. That life works well for him and mine for me. In fact, I selfishly love the fact that he doesn't work. Every time I call him up and invite him to come do something fun, he can always make it. In fact, he's flying in in 3 weeks to join us on a hut trip.

Why would I be angry at someone else's choices on how they live their life? That's crazy! Unless my buddy decides to get a job, of course, then I'll have a reason to be angry! :)

[EndoftheTrail]

I think folks who are unhappy that others are happy (a la well, they are enjoying life because they are living irresponsibly, yaddy, yaddy, yada) — are either unhappy with their own lifestyle choices (as pointed out above) — or they just haven't cultivated a sense of contentedness within themselves. And until that's cultivated, there may be a lingering void that no amount of shopping / social one-upmanship can ever fill.

Reading the post above, Randy's is a good example of contented living.

[Tor Magnus Castberg]

Gosh I certainly did not mean to come off as some "operative" from an enslaving evil organisation or anything like that.

I guess I just wondered if I was the only one that though it sounded sad. I did by no means mean to imply that there was only one way to happiness nor that everyone should be "enslaved" by debt and children. I myself did not enter into a serious relationship until the end of my 20's and only got around to having a child as I was 35.

I still do believe that it's the responsibilities that we take on that defines us among our peers and in society whether that be financial (and we're not just talking about mortgage here), socially (family, charity, whatever gives of oneself) and how we choose to share those skills that we have. Nobody is a universe onto themselves and we're all in this boat together.

All that said I do think that what Skurka is doing is impressive, it would simply not be what I would choose to do.

[Kattt]

"
The following word: straight didn't get flagged the by site's profanity detector. I'm offended at this site's homophobic bias. I mention my wife when it is germaine to a thread and I don't get censored for being straight. My Gay cousin has been 5,000 feet higher than I ever have and cycled 1,000 miles further. I fail to see why BPL doesn't treat all outdoorspeople equally."

David, I believe BPL is using a filter that is preset to detect a whole number of words, including some that are not offensive. I do not think this reflects on any view PBL may have on homosexuality. They probably purchased or are paying a fee to use this "product" and it is not the best product. I think even " Breasts" are not allowed?? Let me see if it will accept "them".

Yup, it won't accept " Breasts" unless they are capitalized. From that I would not deduct that BPL does not like them.
Ok,now, all the clever guys take it from here ;)

[BlackHatGuy]

"Yup, it won't accept " Breasts" unless they are capitalized."

What! BPL even filters chicken parts! That's absurd! I guess I'll just have to eat thighs if I'm to talk about backcountry cuisine, then….

[EndoftheTrail]

"I still do believe that it's the responsibilities that we take on that defines us among our peers and in society whether that be financial (and we're not just talking about mortgage here), socially (family, charity, whatever gives of oneself) and how we choose to share those skills that we have."

Hi Tor:

We're all just chatting and sharing our two cents here… With that in mind, my own views:

So long as I am not doing anything illegal or immoral… and so long as I lend a helping hand along the way as opportunities present themselves, and not make myself a parasite of my family, friends or society… I do not much care how "my peers or society" choose to define me. The path I walk on, the things I do (or not) and the responsibilities I take on (or not) — I do all that because I sense fun and/or purpose. Whether I measure up or not will be defined by me — and not by "my peers or society".

To use backpacking as an example. The gear I buy and the types of hikes I do, etc., etc. are purely determined by my own likes and dislikes. I am always "befuddled" by people (not necessarily meaning you or anyone else specifically) who get hung up on "labels" and "labeling" — hey, my base weight is 5.1 lbs — am I UL or SUL… or turning it around, judging others as "traditional bakpackers" versus UL backpackers or straight out "tourons" — or whatever. Who cares?? Do we shed weight to enjoy our hikes or to impress? And if the latter, why this "need" to impress? Or to fit in? Methinks the world would be a better place with less labels and less labeling.

Again, purely my own two cents (or maybe just one cent).

[Travis Leanna]

>Again, purely my own two cents (or maybe just one cent).

Ben, we're up to $0.04. Inflation.

[EndoftheTrail]

I honestly don't think I can hype the above to four cents! :)

[Anonymous]

"I guess I'll just have to eat thighs if I'm to talk about backcountry cuisine, then…."

Just as long as you don't nibble on them. That'll get you in trouble, too. ;=)

[Anonymous]

"Nobody is a universe onto themselves and we're all in this boat together."

Well said, Tor, but unlikely to get a warm reception here in the land of the Ayn Rand "rugged individual".

[David Thomas]

>"David, I believe BPL is using a filter that is preset to detect a whole number of words, including some that are not offensive. I do not think this reflects on any view PBL may have on homosexuality. They probably purchased or are paying a fee to use this "product" and it is not the best product. I think even " Breasts" are not allowed?? Let me see if it will accept "them"."

Kat, Thanks for your thoughts. So if I wish to discuss being happy while eating white chicken meat tainted with element#33, I've got to put it all in caps? (joke).

If that's the case, I'll grant that BPL is maybe not actively bigoted regarding orientation. They "just" may be buying/using a product/service that is offensive to me. But if one of their suppliers or vendors were as biased against people of a particular race or religion, would they be as blase' as to continue the relationship?

It was risky in the 1850s to be against alavery, to promote women's right to vote in 1900, or work for racial voting and employment rights in the 50's and 60's. It saddens me that with so little risk associated with promoting human rights for all, US politicians go by public opinion in their positions. They aren't for it unless 51% of the people are already there. Humans rights shouldn't be 9 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

[Anonymous]

"If that's the case, I'll grant that BPL is maybe not actively bigoted regarding orientation. They "just" may be buying/using a product/service that is offensive to me. But if one of their suppliers or vendors were as biased against people of a particular race or religion, would they be as blase' as to continue the relationship?"

David,

I think you could greatly reduce your stress level by evaluating the profanity software in the greater context of BPL. It has been a running joke here for years and clearly does not reflect the opinions of the vast, vast majority of folks here including, I suspect BPL staff and owners. Witness the many ways we have found to circumvent it and say all sorts of "censorable" things, with no reaction from BPL management. I also suspect that were anybody to intentionally post anything derogatory about gays on this website, the reaction would be swift, sure, and censorious. It is pretty to clear me at least that the software was purchased for economic reasons and has nothing to do with management philosophy. My 2 cents.

[Larry De La Briandais]

Also, the word g@y is more commonly identified with s3x where straight is not, unless in context. The filters don't take into account context, so…

To many forum owners don't want s3x discussed, so many words are censored that seem silly when taken in context.

[Nick Gatel]

"I think you could greatly reduce your stress level by evaluating the profanity software in the greater context of BPL."

Yeah, just a minor inconvenience to go back and capitalize the first letter of the world. Sorta like software that won't let me use all of the old Word Star keyboard shortcuts.

And there are forums where chaff type discussions are not permitted, so it may serve them well. But form me, it is not something I even bother to contemplate.

[Tor Magnus Castberg]

"I do not much care how "my peers or society" choose to define me."

That's good, but it's also not what I said. :)

[EndoftheTrail]

Tor:

It's sometimes hard to discern content through an LCD screen, but I was responding to what you wrote above:

"I still do believe that it's the responsibilities that we take on that defines us among our peers and in society…".

[Tor Magnus Castberg]

It's sometimes hard to discern content through an LCD screen, but I was responding to what you wrote above:
"I still do believe that it's the responsibilities that we take on that defines us among our peers and in society…".

Maybe it's my English that is not good enough, but I thought it was clear that it in the sentence refers to responsibilities. Am I missing some commas or something? I.e. it is the responsibilities that you take on that defines you, not your peers. Among your peers and society at large is pretty much implicit because on your own there is really nothing that defines you (as you would be the only one and pretty unique at that). :)

[Nick Gatel]

"it is the responsibilities that you take on that defines you"

What only matters is what you think about yourself. I could give a Rat's Ass about how society or my peers view or define me. If they don't like what they see, then I consider it their problem. However, I do strive not to injure others based on my own definition of who I am.

[Rakesh Malik]

"What only matters is what you think about yourself. I could give a Rat's Ass about how society or my peers view or define me. If they don't like what they see, then I consider it their problem. However, I do strive not to injure others based on my own definition of who I am."

Well said! Especially the last sentence.

[EndoftheTrail]

"I still do believe that it's the responsibilities that we take on that defines us among our peers and in society…".

Maybe it's my English that is not good enough, but I thought it was clear that it in the sentence refers to responsibilities. Am I missing some commas or something?

Tors:

Responsibilities in and of themselves define nothing. It's always people who are imparting values — high or low. Reading your line, it's pretty clear that who you are is determined (defined) by what you do (i.e. the responsibilities that you take) — in the eyes of others (i.e. your peers and society).

In contrast (and speaking for myself) — what a person does (high responsibility executive, low responsibility laborer, no responsibility jobless…) is a very low determinant of who that person is in my mind. As well, I all but disregard people's opinion of me based on my responsibilities.

[Author]

Posts