What is it like?
Do you live in a flyover state?
|by Anonymous||reply 34||09/11/2013|
I imagine them to be deeply Republican as well as homophobic. Also they are probably cultural waste lands. That how imagine the flyover states.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||06/13/2013|
Sorry too generic.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||06/13/2013|
Jesus, this again?
|by Anonymous||reply 3||06/13/2013|
Haha, yes, Arizona! But I'm from Sacramento if that makes any difference. Arizona is the same as California it's conservative and republican, the weather sucks and it's not as pretty. But truly, there's not so much different. There's hot guys here like anywhere. Arizona is actually renowned for it's hot, redneck lumberjacks.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||06/13/2013|
"Also they are probably cultural waste lands. That how imagine the flyover states."
Everything that is wrong about New York can be seen in the grammar and punctuation (or lack thereof) in the above two statements.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||06/13/2013|
I live in Denver. I grew up in Portland, and have lived in LA, Chicago, and Phoenix. Denver is really slow, and I would have hated it in my 20's. It is a nice place for a 40 something person like myself, into hiking and the outdoors. There is a large gay community here, which is nice.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||06/13/2013|
I meant to say AZ is like CA 'except for'.. the republican thing, etc. Not so much different i think its just an uglier state. less water! and trees!
|by Anonymous||reply 7||06/13/2013|
Are flyover states every state other than California and New York?
What about Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Oregon, Washington?
|by Anonymous||reply 8||06/13/2013|
Even ny and ca has flyover areas.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||06/13/2013|
r6. why did you leave Portland?
|by Anonymous||reply 10||06/13/2013|
You have no idea what you're talking about r1. Nice trolling.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||06/13/2013|
New York City is the biggest 'flyover' - i.e. ignorant - place one can ever witness.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||06/13/2013|
R6 here. I really hated the rain in Portland. I moved back for a brief period in my late 20's, because I missed my family, but the constant rain and dark skies made me terribly depressed. I need sunshine.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||06/13/2013|
Lots of planes!
|by Anonymous||reply 14||06/13/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 15||06/13/2013|
[quote]I imagine them to be deeply Republican
There's really no need to leave this to your imagination; if you were even vaguely literate and informed, you would know that you could easily look up information such as how the "flyover" states voted in past presidential elections, and the party affiliations of their elected representatives.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||06/13/2013|
I fly over New York all the time on my way to London.
Lax to London is the new it route. NYC is over. Ask Gwyneth if you don't believe me.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||06/13/2013|
The sky is filled with vapor trails, casting darkness upon the land.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||06/13/2013|
oh yeah poetry!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 19||06/13/2013|
"Flyover" is a mental state, not a location.
I've met plenty of "flyover types" in New York and LA, both transplants AND locals.
Anyone ever meet a typical native New Yorker from the outer boroughs? Crass, rude and parochial sums it up.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||06/13/2013|
There’s a common perception that gays and lesbians who live in rural communities aren’t as happy as their counterparts living in major cities, researchers say. But a new study shows rural gays and lesbians may have a better quality of life by some measurements than those living in the nation's largest metropolitan areas.
Chris Wienke of Southern Illinois University and Gretchen J. Hill of Arkansas State University looked at the well being of gays and lesbians living across the urban-rural continuum – from the nation’s largest metropolitan areas, to midsized cities, suburbs, small cities and rural areas.
What they found contradicts conventional wisdom that large urban areas are better places for gays and lesbians to live.
“Results from a large probability sample show that rural gay people fare no worse than their urban peers,” the study says. “If anything, results suggest living in the largest cities may be detrimental to gay people’s wellbeing, although more so for lesbians than for gay men.”
The study identified 632 gays and lesbians in three random-sample surveys from 1988 to 2006. Researchers analyzed these respondents’ answers to questions about their happiness, health and job satisfaction and correlated those responses to geography.
Rural gays and lesbians didn’t reveal anything that indicated they were any less happy, healthy or satisfied than gays and lesbians living in larger communities. In fact, rural homosexuals reported better responses to these questions than their peers living in the nation’s 12 largest metro areas.
The pattern was especially pronounced in the respondents’ answers to questions about health. “Gay and lesbian residents of the largest cities were significantly less healthy than those living in any other community type,” the study said.
The authors said the results were somewhat unexpected:
“The finding that gay residents living in the largest cities experience a relatively low level of wellbeing is a bit a surprising. After all, many of the best-known meccas of gay life in the United States are located in major cities, including Greenwich Village in New York, the Castro in San Francisco, West Hollywood in Los Angeles and Boys Town in Chicago.”
The authors theorized that any advantage that comes from living in large cities also comes with a price. “It may be that the benefits of living in extremely large cities are exceeded by the costs,” they wrote. “For gay people, large cities tend to provide more social-networking opportunities, more social and institutional supports and more tolerant social climates. Yet, they also typically have more noise, pollution, traffic, crime and ethnic conflict – stressors that tend to erode wellbeing. Other drawbacks of urban life may include high taxes, inferior public schools, substandard housing and a relatively high cost of living.”
The study had a limited sample size and was confined to U.S. respondents. But the findings were still significant when the authors controlled for demographic differences such as age, education and income levels.
The study, "Does Place of Residence Matter? Rural–Urban Differences and the Wellbeing of Gay Men and Lesbians," appears in the Journal of Homosexuality.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||09/09/2013|
Well, let me tell ya. If you are a pregnant woman and you pass under the neck of a mare, you will carry your baby for 11 months, just like a mare.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||09/09/2013|
True, r22, but if you would just have sex upside-down, then you wouldn't get pregnant in the first place.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||09/09/2013|
I live in Philadelphia. I like it.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||09/09/2013|
[all posts by racist shit-stain #11 removed]
|by Anonymous||reply 25||09/09/2013|
There are big cities in most flyover states filled with culture, and interesting people. Would the people in Manhattan want to be judged by the people who live in upstate NY?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||09/09/2013|
Lesbians are unhealthy due to epidemic Fibromyalgia. I think this needs to be looked into. Are homophobes killing our sisters through undeclared chemical and biological warfare?
|by Anonymous||reply 27||09/09/2013|
OP - you mean a flyover state like Iowa where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2009?
|by Anonymous||reply 28||09/09/2013|
I don't live in a flyover state, but I've lived in Illinois twice and it was two of the happiest times of my life. The mid-west is quite beautiful and a number of cities are the equal or better than many coastal cities. Chicago has to be the best major city in the US in which to live. The place is physically beautiful with only San Francisco and Boston being as beautiful.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||09/09/2013|
New York is the center of New York!
|by Anonymous||reply 30||09/09/2013|
What it's like: probably similar to a non-flyover state, but with lower salary and lower cost of living. I would say more driving, but then I don't know how the everyday public transportation is for people in LA or San Fran. Family, friends, visual arts, performing arts events, cultural festivals, ongoing education, delicious restaurant food (not junk), farmers markets, exercise, fresh air, excellent health care, and daily exposure to people from other countries.
I really don't need to have everything that you have at my doorstep every day. I've lived in Europe. I've visited many major cities. When I was younger, I looked down my nose a bit at where I'm from, but I attribute that to youthful arrogance and lack of experience.
Why this conversation keeps happening: Sunk cost fallacy. Escalation of commitment. Throwing good money after bad.
And by the way, macarons are soooooo 2007.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||09/09/2013|
The very notion of the "flyover" state..common to arch city dwellers is one of the reasons I left city life FAR behind. The attitude is narcissistic,superficailly supremacist and ironically,insecure and unsophisticated...only hicks are so closed minded as to dismiss whole swaths of the American landscape.
Frankly,when I see some of the prices some of you are willing to pay for an 750 s.f. dump on a tiny sliver of land robbed of all topsoil compared to the 3 acres of view property and spacious,updated home that one can own for more than HALF the price in my area...I have to conclude:
Not only are you smug and obnoxious..you're fools as well.
I guess all those overpriced,hip restaurants, trendy clubs and cool shops are worth such an inequitable tradeoff to many of you.
Oh, (and isn't this what it all comes down to for most of us)the men in the unsexy states and towns are SOOO much hotter and masculine and comfortable in their own skins...sweeter too.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||09/09/2013|
No, I hate New York and New Jersey.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||09/09/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 34||09/11/2013|