Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
In my Urban Sociology class, we are being taught about the Myth of Rural Virtue. The idea the living in rural parts of the country is simpler, better and full of more Ideals then Urban or Suburban living.
Here is a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarianism
But in my studies(AKA, Reading beyond the assigned text in class) It says that many studies show that urban lifestyles produce a more solid community, more happiness and that most of the country is predominatly urban but espouses rural virtues.

I ask Dakka, what do they think of the Myth of Rural Virtue.

More serial killers too.

Urban areas typically have substantially higher crime rates. In my personal life I never experienced the joy of a drive by in country or Da Burbs. Can't say the same for the The Big City.
many studeis have showed that social cohesion in urban environments is actually much less, as groups are more transient.

Actually Frazz, Suburbia is considered a part of Urban lifestyle believe it or not, a certain culture withing urban lifestyle.

The whoever is considering that is an idiot. Having lived in all three they are distinctly different environments.
Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

I don't really believe in rural virtue. What I do believe is that the communities approval or disapproval of you counts a lot more in the countryside than in the city. So if the community approves of you (you're a respected local businessman, church minister, or sport player) you'll think it's a great place where people are really friendly and do you a lot of favours and so on.
If you're disapproved of by the community (you're a transvestite, part of a disfavoured minority ethnic group, or just on the wrong side of the more well liked authority figures) then you'll find living in a rural area an unpleasant and alienating experience.

Cities are just more anonymous- it's not easy to hate someone you know nothing about, nor is it easy to like them. This can suit some and others find it jarring. The good point is that it's easier to be different in the city. The bad point is it's easier to get into trouble and not be able to find help or support despite being surrounded by many more people.

I think people aren't any better or worse in cities or rural areas, different attitudes and behaviours are just naturally highlighted by each situation.

 LordofHats wrote:
You can't separate them. Suburbia is intimately connected to urbanism (that's why its sub-Urbia, not sub-Ruria ).

Sure you can. For that matter you can't separate suburbs and rural either. its a nonsensical statement.

I think an American suburb is different to a European suburb.

AFAIK, an American suburb is defined in part by the need to drive to anywhere useful (work, shops, cinemas.)

European and Japanese cities have much better developed public transport from the centre to the suburbs.

 Frazzled wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
You can't separate them. Suburbia is intimately connected to urbanism (that's why its sub-Urbia, not sub-Ruria ).

Sure you can. For that matter you can't separate suburbs and rural either. its a nonsensical statement.

Suburbs are an outgrowth of urban environments, and intimately tied to commuting. The number of commuters to the city far outstrips those to rural areas within a suburb.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It isn't purely an American phenomenon. There is a strong strand of agrarian idealism in the UK, stretching at least from Blake's "dark, satanic mills" to Tolkien's "Shire". Similarly, France has the concept of "la France profonde".

Unsurprising. We got the idea from Jefferson and guess who he got it from

I migrated from Sevatopol to Berlin and from there to the English, Scottish and Dutch countrysides, and I say the myth is just that. A myth.
In fact, I find Berlin and the British countryside more similar to each other than the British and Dutch countrysides. Sense of community really depends on the area rather than whether it is urban/rural. There was much more sense of community in my neighbourhood in Berlin or Sevastopol than I have ever found on the Dutch countryside. On the other hand, the British and especially the English village where I stayed had a very strong sense of community as well.
Of course, apart from a 'sense of community' there is plenty of things about rural life that are different from urban life. There is much more space, people know all others in the village and greet each other in the street, and the overall pace of living is more calm and relaxed.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
You can't separate them. Suburbia is intimately connected to urbanism (that's why its sub-Urbia, not sub-Ruria ).

Sure you can. For that matter you can't separate suburbs and rural either. its a nonsensical statement.

Suburbs are an outgrowth of urban environments, and intimately tied to commuting. The number of commuters to the city far outstrips those to rural areas within a suburb.

I'll agree with that. Doesn't make it city though. People move out of the cities into suburbs for a reason.

 Frazzled wrote:
I'll agree with that. Doesn't make it city though. People move out of the cities into suburbs for a reason.

And no one has said they are the same thing, but they tied to urban environments, both economically and historically, not rural ones. Well, one of the big reasons for the growth of suburbs in the US was white flight, so I'm not sure that is a reason we should dwell on.

Looking around the web US suburbs also differ from UK/Japanese, beyond the car/public transportation difference, in that in in the US suburbs are more likely to be autonomous agents whereas in those areas they are just parts of the city, and can lack a separate government.

I've lived in all three, and I'd rather live in the city or the country then in the suburbs.

There's bigotry and closed mindedness in every place, just different types.
I've seen people ridiculed for being religious in the city and there are many neighborhoods in the city you don't go into if you don't have the appropriate skin color.
Don't paint the urban areas as if they're an open minded utopia. They're not. The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

Actually my experience is the exact opposite of that. If your are different from the norm, then in the city people will just shrug and move on, but in more rural environments you will be harassed because of it, not only because the community is smaller and as a result any "deviant" behaviour will stand out, but also because since the exposure to different behaviours is much more restricted in rural environments people tend to be much more close minded.

PhantomViper wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

Actually my experience is the exact opposite of that. If your are different from the norm, then in the city people will just shrug and move on, but in more rural environments you will be harassed because of it, not only because the community is smaller and as a result any "deviant" behaviour will stand out, but also because since the exposure to different behaviours is much more restricted in rural environments people tend to be much more close minded.

So you can be a Christian woman and go through all parts of Paris without problem then?

 Frazzled wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

Actually my experience is the exact opposite of that. If your are different from the norm, then in the city people will just shrug and move on, but in more rural environments you will be harassed because of it, not only because the community is smaller and as a result any "deviant" behaviour will stand out, but also because since the exposure to different behaviours is much more restricted in rural environments people tend to be much more close minded.

So you can be a Christian woman and go through all parts of Paris without problem then?

I didn't realize that being a Christian was something that stood out in an obvious way; I always thought they just looked like people.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

Actually my experience is the exact opposite of that. If your are different from the norm, then in the city people will just shrug and move on, but in more rural environments you will be harassed because of it, not only because the community is smaller and as a result any "deviant" behaviour will stand out, but also because since the exposure to different behaviours is much more restricted in rural environments people tend to be much more close minded.

So you can be a Christian woman and go through all parts of Paris without problem then?

I didn't realize that being a Christian was something that stood out in an obvious way; I always thought they just looked like people.

Thats sounds good but realistically its not.
And of course the reverse could occur as well.

 Frazzled wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
The difference is that in the country you'll be left alone to do as you please without interference and the people will generally want to help you or at the least be friendly.

Actually my experience is the exact opposite of that. If your are different from the norm, then in the city people will just shrug and move on, but in more rural environments you will be harassed because of it, not only because the community is smaller and as a result any "deviant" behaviour will stand out, but also because since the exposure to different behaviours is much more restricted in rural environments people tend to be much more close minded.

So you can be a Christian woman and go through all parts of Paris without problem then?

Criminality =/= Intolerance

I'm an atheist white man and I wouldn't go through some parts of any city in the world since I would have a significant chance of being robbed or probably even killed. But those would be equal opportunity criminals that would do it.

I wonder if there are any studies about this tied to the average time the residents have spent in the community. My perception of rural communities is that they are relatively stable, and thus a modicum of fair play is expected since you will be there for the foreseeable future. As a suburbanite, I moved states twice and was one of the more stable of my classmates.

I assume city dwellers are even more mobile, but I have experience of urban living.

There may just be a reason that it is called a myth

I've never seen such accepted and common place bigotry as urbanites vs rural. It's ok to make fun of people that don't live in the cities. however if you make fun of a city dweller OMG your probably an inbred red neck. If you think cities are open minded, liberal (small L) bastions of reason, try walking around Washington DC with a pale complexion.

 Musashi363 wrote:
I've never seen such accepted and common place bigotry as urbanites vs rural. It's ok to make fun of people that don't live in the country. However if you make fun of a country boy OMG your probably an worthless liberal hippie.

They both do it. You should have stopped at your first sentence.

I have another question, How well do subcultures flourish in the south? Things like Goth, Model Train Lovers, D&D? Stuff like that.

Define south.

 Frazzled wrote:
Define south.

Lets go with this one

I lived in North Carolina for years. DnD and stuff like that never seemed to come up much in my school. I think I was the only person who'd even heard of 40k.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It isn't purely an American phenomenon. There is a strong strand of agrarian idealism in the UK, stretching at least from Blake's "dark, satanic mills" to Tolkien's "Shire". Similarly, France has the concept of "la France profonde".

It goes further than that. Even at the height of its empire, Rome still enshrined agrarian idealism as something to work towards.

Having lived in and around Manhattan and now in the country, I much rather prefer living in the sticks. Life is simpler, people are more honest and caring, there is a truer sense of community which I found lacking in the city. I actually know my neighbors out here as opposed to the "commuter town" I lived in before. In the city, there was too much of an emphasis on materialism and "wealth" and obtaining both. Out here, its more about family and helping your neighbor. It's not all roses either, every place has it warts, just some areas have less so.

Granted, this is my opinion and experience, but as far as Im concerned, its not a myth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I have another question, How well do subcultures flourish in the south? Things like Goth, Model Train Lovers, D&D? Stuff like that.

Generally, in a rural area, stuff like that exists but not the the degree that it does in urban areas. There is more to do I guess outside than there is to do in built up steel and concrete canyons. There are model train clubs, comic book stores etc. Goth has pretty much died out in the area Im in. I can find people to game with, but it's not like it was in the city.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I have another question, How well do subcultures flourish in the south? Things like Goth, Model Train Lovers, D&D? Stuff like that.

<--- Louisiana schooling, if you couldn't tell.

They stood out in the 90s. There weren't many goths at my high school, but since one of them was a smoking hottie, and the other one was a mountain of a young man, they weren't fethed with. It was more of a shrug your shoulders thing. I'm not sure if they would have been goth or grunge back then. They certainly wore mostly black, and were separate from the flannel Nirvana loving dudes, but they acted much the same. Maybe that was before the Goth/Grunge schism that followed The Crow.

Nerds were always picked on, not just for playing D&D and so forth. But I was too handsome for people to feth with me.

I can't speak for the entirety of the South, though. There was still some "Is that that Demon game? You play that" along with sneers of judgement, but I never cared about others opinions much. Except the hot chicks.

gak, I said South? I meant Rural. Freudian slip there I think.

Dunno. I was in Suburbia. Rural Louisiana in the 90s would have been harsher on the Goth/Grunge kids and D&D players. As for nerds, you either played baseball, football, or you became manager at a local manufacturing plant!

 Ahtman wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
I've never seen such accepted and common place bigotry as urbanites vs rural. It's ok to make fun of people that don't live in the country. However if you make fun of a country boy OMG your probably an worthless liberal hippie.

They both do it. You should have stopped at your first sentence.

Yeah, he kind of became the bigoted person he dislikes by the second part.

 Easy E wrote:
It is a Myth.

I have lived many places, but no place was less tolerant of diversity in race, creed, or thought than the rural location.

This. My hometown quietly chased out people who weren't of the "right" race, and it was plagued with more churches than storefronts. it also had people who proudly displayed confederate flags in public view. On the other hand, living in St. Louis has brought to attention the filth that is present in the city. Violence, lack of 'community', idiot drivers causing traffic jams are all everyday things.

My conclusion: There is no "rural" virtue OR "urban" virtue, because there is no virtue. Everyone sucks for the same boring human reasons that make them human to begin with, and my new life goal is to find a cave somewhere remote to live in.

 daedalus wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
It is a Myth.

I have lived many places, but no place was less tolerant of diversity in race, creed, or thought than the rural location.

This. My hometown quietly chased out people who weren't of the "right" race, and it was plagued with more churches than storefronts. it also had people who proudly displayed confederate flags in public view. On the other hand, living in St. Louis has brought to attention the filth that is present in the city. Violence, lack of 'community', idiot drivers causing traffic jams are all everyday things.

My conclusion: There is no "rural" virtue OR "urban" virtue, because there is no virtue. Everyone sucks for the same boring human reasons that make them human to begin with, and my new life goal is to find a cave somewhere remote to live in.

^This. As long as I call dibs on the Meramac Cave.

Not remote enough. All yours sir.