View Full Version : OKC livable without a car by 2020?



Pages : [1] 2

bchris02
11-11-2014, 07:39 PM
In your opinion, how far is this city from being livable comfortably without a car? Of course its possible today but it isn't fun and it isn't ideal. To me, the litmus test is to not need to go to the burbs for any necessities and to have reliable public transportation by streetcar between the core districts. What amenities are still needed before it will meet the standard?

Essentially I think the following will be necessary and I think the year 2020 is a realistic time frame. Am I missing anything?

-Completed streetcar system
-Full service grocery store
-Drug store/pharmacy (CVS)
-Urban Target
-Expanded bus system with frequent routes as far north as NW 63rd St.

Thoughts? Of course, OKC doesn't have near enough people living downtown to support the above amenities in 2014, but do you think it will by 2020?

Plutonic Panda
11-11-2014, 07:42 PM
I don't think an urban Target is needed for someone to be able to live car free. I actually think you could right now if you wanted to. TimeCar, Uber, buses, all make for being able to travel where you need to go and I think everything is there within the core, but there is much to be improved.

bchris02
11-11-2014, 07:46 PM
I don't think an urban Target is needed for someone to be able to live car free. I actually think you could right now if you wanted to. TimeCar, Uber, buses, all make for being able to travel where you need to go and I think everything is there within the core, but there is much to be improved.

Of course you could today, but I am not sure I would say "comfortably" about the situation right now. Ideally, one should be able to live downtown without a car and yet not have to sacrifice quality of life vs living in the burbs.

Plutonic Panda
11-11-2014, 07:47 PM
Of course you could today, but I am not sure I would say "comfortably" about the situation right now. Ideally, one should be able to live downtown without a car and yet not have to sacrifice quality of life vs living in the burbs.Yeah, I would say a functioning mass transit system = more people moving downtown and ditching cars = more retail and services opening up downtown

ljbab728
11-11-2014, 09:12 PM
Your thread title is a little misleading. You are only talking about downtown being livable without a car and giving examples about how that could be accomplished.

hoya
11-11-2014, 09:41 PM
Your thread title is a little misleading. You are only talking about downtown being livable without a car and giving examples about how that could be accomplished.

Well, to be fair, Hefner Rd and Rockwell is probably never going to be livable without a car. Certainly not in any time frame we're interested in here. We've got to focus on what we can accomplish.

ljbab728
11-11-2014, 09:49 PM
Well, to be fair, Hefner Rd and Rockwell is probably never going to be livable without a car. Certainly not in any time frame we're interested in here. We've got to focus on what we can accomplish.
I'm not arguing with that at all. I just think the thread title could have been a little more specific. It's no big deal though.

bchris02
11-12-2014, 06:12 AM
I thought it was implied that I was primarily referring to the urban core. I doubt NW 178th and Rockwell will ever be livable without a car.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 07:40 AM
I understand the want to have a cool district, or close nit "village like" city to be able to walk out your front door, and access any restaurant, bank, grocery store, market that you want within walking distance.....but, I still don't understand why someone desires to live without a car. What is wrong with this World?

bchris02
11-12-2014, 08:05 AM
It's not that people would ditch their car entirely (though some might.) It's whether or not it would be doable. Personally I would never want to give up having a car, but would love to live in a walkable neighborhood in which I rarely had to use my car. I am sure plenty of people feel the same way.

bradh
11-12-2014, 08:07 AM
but, I still don't understand why someone desires to live without a car. What is wrong with this World?

Now you've done it...incoming!

I'm with what bchris says, I think most would love to use their car less, but we take way too many road trips, plus it's required for my job.

AP
11-12-2014, 08:13 AM
I understand the want to have a cool district, or close nit "village like" city to be able to walk out your front door, and access any restaurant, bank, grocery store, market that you want within walking distance.....but, I still don't understand why someone desires to live without a car. What is wrong with this World?

It's not for people who want to live without. It's people who can't afford a car.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 09:41 AM
It's not that people would ditch their car entirely (though some might.) It's whether or not it would be doable. Personally I would never want to give up having a car, but would love to live in a walkable neighborhood in which I rarely had to use my car. I am sure plenty of people feel the same way.

Understood. I guess I just personally have a hard time relating to such people. I was raised in a family, where cars weren't just modes of transportation, to get from point A, to point B. To me.... Cars, are for the most part, extensions of ones personalities. Whether it is wanting to always have the latest/greatest new age models/technologies, or owning rare collector cars. I know we no longer live in the 1950s, where Lil' Jimmy's Dad would bring home a new shiny Buick, and the whole neighborhood would come outside to look. It is just sad to me to see the World around me, increasingly see a car, as nothing more than a mode of transportation.

Just recently, when my wife and I were looking to purchase a new home, there were several different deciding factors. Some were more important than others obviously. Design of house, Area of city, School district.....etc.. But for me personally, my priorities were "How many garages does it have, and does it have enough land...to build a shop....to store my cars in." So, yes. I understand that I'm probably on the extreme other end of the spectrum. But somewhere in the middle ground......I'm still flabbergasted at the ever growing movement, to not care about cars. It's something that I categorize into my "Pussification" of America file.

Rover
11-12-2014, 09:48 AM
I thought it was implied that I was primarily referring to the urban core. I doubt NW 178th and Rockwell will ever be livable without a car.

Why does liveability have to be confined to downtown? There are any number of areas around town where you could live car free. The idea that urban living is only for the core is not even supported by new urbanists.

AP
11-12-2014, 09:56 AM
Understood. I guess I just personally have a hard time relating to such people. I was raised in a family, where cars weren't just modes of transportation, to get from point A, to point B. To me.... Cars, are for the most part, extensions of ones personalities. Whether it is wanting to always have the latest/greatest new age models/technologies, or owning rare collector cars. I know we no longer live in the 1950s, where Lil' Jimmy's Dad would bring home a new shiny Buick, and the whole neighborhood would come outside to look. It is just sad to me to see the World around me, increasingly see a car, as nothing more than a mode of transportation.

Just recently, when my wife and I were looking to purchase a new home, there were several different deciding factors. Some were more important than others obviously. Design of house, Area of city, School district.....etc.. But for me personally, my priorities were "How many garages does it have, and does it have enough land...to build a shop....to store my cars in." So, yes. I understand that I'm probably on the extreme other end of the spectrum. But somewhere in the middle ground......I'm still flabbergasted at the ever growing movement, to not care about cars. It's something that I categorize into my "Pussification" of America file.

It absolutely enrages me that you consider that "Pussification." As if that is even an acceptable term to apply to anything.

bchris02
11-12-2014, 09:57 AM
Why does liveability have to be confined to downtown? There are any number of areas around town where you could live car free. The idea that urban living is only for the core is not even supported by new urbanists.

Well within at least the next ten years, if anybody wants to be car free in Oklahoma or at least rely on their car less, its going to be downtown. While hopefully there may one day be new urbanist communities built in the outer burbs there really isn't anything on the horizon right now. If there is one place in a city where you should be able to live comfortably without a car its downtown. Even in big cities today, suburban areas can be just as auto-oriented as OKC is. There's nothing wrong with that. Options are good for everybody.

Roger S
11-12-2014, 09:57 AM
......I'm still flabbergasted at the ever growing movement, to not care about cars. It's something that I categorize into my "Pussification" of America file.

As someone that just spent more on a new smoker than I did for my last automobile.... I have to say it's all about priorities.... to me a vehicle is a means to get from point A to point B. I don't really care who I impress getting there.

I do however take very good care of my vehicles because I depend on them to get me from point a to point B... I am the original owner of a 97 Dodge Ram 1500 and the most recent vehicle is an 04 Ford Escape.

And I'll tell you straight up... There is nothing "pussified" about my new smoker and I'll get more use out of it than I ever would a fancy car.

bchris02
11-12-2014, 10:02 AM
I'm still flabbergasted at the ever growing movement, to not care about cars. It's something that I categorize into my "Pussification" of America file.

Everybody has their own interests, hobbies, and priorities and just because they aren't the same as yours doesn't make them "pussies." That's a very high school way of thinking.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 10:18 AM
Everybody has their own interests, hobbies, and priorities and just because they aren't the same as yours doesn't make them "pussies." That's a very high school way of thinking.

It looks like you have misinterpreted what I wrote. As, I clearly did not call anyone, anything. So, please refrain from fabricating half truths to push an agenda, that clearly isn't mine.

Rover
11-12-2014, 10:32 AM
Well within at least the next ten years, if anybody wants to be car free in Oklahoma or at least rely on their car less, its going to be downtown. While hopefully there may one day be new urbanist communities built in the outer burbs there really isn't anything on the horizon right now. If there is one place in a city where you should be able to live comfortably without a car its downtown. Even in big cities today, suburban areas can be just as auto-oriented as OKC is. There's nothing wrong with that. Options are good for everybody.

It isn't ten years from now, there are multiple areas NOW that you can live in car free. As it is with downtown, it depends on where you want to (or CAN) work, how you like to shop, what kind of entertainment, etc. There are these areas that are served by mass trans now that will take you downtown or to other parts of town. I could very easily be car free where I live right now. Does it have rail...NO. Does it have high rise communal living at the curb....NO. But it is walkable with sidewalks, grocery stores, high and low end shopping, lots of restaurants, some bars, etc. The area is very diverse and within 15 minutes walking are $5 million homes and $500 a month rent apartments. There are parks, bike paths, playgrounds and lakes within walking distance. We have virtually every race and a variety of nationalities within a mile radius. I am easily within walking distance of where I work, and quickly by bike. I can catch a bus relatively close to my house in case I want to. I could do the same in any number of areas of town.

It isn't always about what is available, but what people want to see and are willing to do. Most see only what they want to see.

AP
11-12-2014, 10:51 AM
It isn't ten years from now, there are multiple areas NOW that you can live in car free. As it is with downtown, it depends on where you want to (or CAN) work, how you like to shop, what kind of entertainment, etc. There are these areas that are served by mass trans now that will take you downtown or to other parts of town. I could very easily be car free where I live right now. Does it have rail...NO. Does it have high rise communal living at the curb....NO. But it is walkable with sidewalks, grocery stores, high and low end shopping, lots of restaurants, some bars, etc. The area is very diverse and within 15 minutes walking are $5 million homes and $500 a month rent apartments. There are parks, bike paths, playgrounds and lakes within walking distance. We have virtually every race and a variety of nationalities within a mile radius. I am easily within walking distance of where I work, and quickly by bike. I can catch a bus relatively close to my house in case I want to. I could do the same in any number of areas of town.

It isn't always about what is available, but what people want to see and are willing to do. Most see only what they want to see.

Where.

OKCisOK4me
11-12-2014, 11:28 AM
Downtown OKC and surrounding neighborhoods, yes. All of OKC proper, NO WAY JOSE!

Rover
11-12-2014, 11:33 AM
Where.

Try the area around Wilshire and May on down to 63rd and May, for one.

Teo9969
11-12-2014, 11:43 AM
It's something that I categorize into my "Pussification" of America file.

This quote is arguably getting a lot of attention.

Can you please define "Pussification"? And can you please outline how choosing to use a very basic human motor skill for transportation (one that keeps you healthier and saves money) takes away from whatever it is that is being "pussified"?

bradh
11-12-2014, 12:48 PM
Try the area around Wilshire and May on down to 63rd and May, for one.

If I lived in that area I'd want to be car free, that stretch of May is one of the worst congested roads in all of the city.

Rover
11-12-2014, 12:50 PM
If I lived in that area I'd want to be car free, that stretch of May is one of the worst congested roads in all of the city.

I can agree with that. :)

I might point out that the most traffic congested city area I spend time in is Manhattan, NYC.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 01:28 PM
This quote is arguably getting a lot of attention.

Understandably so.


Can you please define "Pussification"?

Figuratively or Literally? I'm glad you asked, as it shows me that you are intelligent enough to know that I probably think it is something different than others here do. In a literal sense, it's a somewhat difficult word to define, seeing that I would classify it as more of a "slang" term. But there are a lot of posters here, who seem to always take everything posted here at face value, and proceed to get twisted.

Figuratively speaking, I was merely sharing my opinion/and or point of view on how, I find it sad that some of the things that use to be important in this Country.......are important no more. I see a disgustingly growing trend in the mindset of people that continue to help our society grow complacent. It's silly to try and use this conversation about driving cars vs. walkability as an engine for this conversation, but I honestly feel like it is all related. What happened to the days, when people wanted to live the "American Dream" family of 4, in a nice house, with a white picket fence, 2 Cadillacs in the driveway, with a dog in the front yard going woof woof. Somehow in this new and crazy time we live in......its seems to be somewhat frowned upon. What happened to people wanting to get ahead, and always craving more? A successful society is created by competition amongst one another. I never thought I would see a time in my life where people almost want to brag about living a simpler life, or having less, or doing without. I'm having a hard time grasping that concept. And it is dangerous to our society, by indirectly creating complacency.

So, in regards to this issue at hand, maybe my thoughts are old fashioned. Since, I'm damn near 35 years old...I'm sure my ideals are somewhat antiquated within this group. But the overall culture of having cars, and owning cars is a fundamental necessary in my eyes. And it has NOTHING to do, with getting from point "A", to point "anywhere." Its not because I need them to get around, and not because I cant walk or ride a bike.....but because its part of our culture. Not everyone is going to see eye to eye on this. But the whole "walkability" agenda that is discussed ad nauseam on this site, is debatable. Some people desire it.....others think it is a step backwards in regards to progression, and others just don't care.

bchris02
11-12-2014, 01:51 PM
Recent studies show that millennials value experiences more than material possessions. That is likely why we are seeing this shift towards downsizing and urban living. Much of this generation was raised in the big McMansions of suburbia so they know that lifestyle isn't key to happiness. Of course many are going on to pursue the 2.5 kids and white picket fence. It's by no means going away. Still others want something different, especially in their years between school and child-rearing. Even younger people who opt for the suburban lifestyle still enjoy urban environments for socializing. It's not uncommon for each generation of young people who have conflicting values with the previous generation. Walkability is discussed on OKCTalk so much because it is one of the keys to retaining the next generation in OKC rather than lose them all to Dallas, Austin, Denver, etc.

Rover
11-12-2014, 02:07 PM
We don't lose out to Dallas, Denver, Austin, etc. because of walkability. It's because of jobs and opportunities. It's about availability of capital. It's about lots of things. I would guess that when relocating the category of walkability falls way behind other things. Not saying walkability isn't a noble goal, but let's not empower it beyond what it is.

By the way, the priorities of today's millenials is almost certain to change. Trust me. I went through the whole 60's 70's anti establishment group that makes today's millenials look like hippy-lite. Guess who is living in the suburbs, buying the cars, choosing the schools and colleges, working for $150,000 a year doing establishment like jobs. LOL if you don't think they won't evolve. But the good news is that there will be a generation, and then another, and then another, that all devalues traditional things until they become traditional people with jobs, kids, desires of security, freedom, mobility, etc., etc., etc. Every generation thinks they re-write the course of history....but it turns out it is a slow evolution, not a revolution. Don't mistake period of life desires for all of life desires.

Now, with that useless diatribe, OKC has been woeful on providing that rung on the ladder...the important rung, the first rung. How to get the new generation to come enter into OKC life and to stay here productively their whole life. We want the best to be here and we need to provide "period of life" amenities that attract them. That's why we older ones want to support this evolving urban metro development and let it catch up to what is already here, not to replace everything that is here. Walkability is important to that. I just don't happen to think it has to be spoon fed in nice poster perfect planned new urban developments. We have great walkable, livable, mixed use areas in town now. But it doesn't look like the current textbook images. Heaven forbid, you might have to actually walk around to see them and open your eyes to not trip over them.

adaniel
11-12-2014, 02:19 PM
Figuratively speaking, I was merely sharing my opinion/and or point of view on how, I find it sad that some of the things that use to be important in this Country.......are important no more. I see a disgustingly growing trend in the mindset of people that continue to help our society grow complacent. It's silly to try and use this conversation about driving cars vs. walkability as an engine for this conversation, but I honestly feel like it is all related. What happened to the days, when people wanted to live the "American Dream" family of 4, in a nice house, with a white picket fence, 2 Cadillacs in the driveway, with a dog in the front yard going woof woof. Somehow in this new and crazy time we live in......its seems to be somewhat frowned upon. What happened to people wanting to get ahead, and always craving more? A successful society is created by competition amongst one another. I never thought I would see a time in my life where people almost want to brag about living a simpler life, or having less, or doing without. I'm having a hard time grasping that concept. And it is dangerous to our society, by indirectly creating complacency.


A traditional life in the suburbs is not as nearly frowned upon as you are making it out to be, even on this forum. However, you are taking a snapshot of what you think is the measure of success and applying it to everyone. I think that is the issue here.

I'll tell you what happened with "those days" you are quoting. Wages started stagnanting about 3 decades ago, and Mom and Dad had to get an High rate ARM for that big-ass McMansion in the suburbs with the picket fence. And the Cadillacs in the driveway aren't so nice when gas is/was at $4/gallon. I know at least 2 people who rent nice but nondescript places and do not espouse for the lifestyle you just laid out, but they have 7 figures to their name. Does this make them any less successful?

I also take slight umbarge at the suggestion that not wanting or owning a car is somehow a sign of complacency. I think it is far more complacent to go sit in a car then to actually walk somewhere using your own legs. And I say this as someone who is a bit of a car enthusiast myself but wants no part in being wholly dependent on a vehicle.

The America I know is all about choice. You choose the white picket fence lifestyle, some want something a bit different. Isn't that what freedom is about?

bradh
11-12-2014, 02:48 PM
Filthy I lean more towards your side on this argument, but that's a really shallow argument about people wanting to get ahead and having material to show for it. It's pretty ignorant to assume only those with possessions are the ones with the wealth and success. Honestly, even though I do live in suburbia and will have a 3 car garage, etc, I wouldn't mind one bit living in a 1500 sq ft townhome with out half the crap I have, but saving some of the money to go enjoy some of things I do love more than working on cars, like skiing, fishing, etc.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 02:50 PM
Filthy I lean more towards your side on this argument, but that's a really shallow argument about people wanting to get ahead and having material to show for it. It's pretty ignorant to assume only those with possessions are the ones with the wealth and success. Honestly, even though I do live in suburbia and will have a 3 car garage, etc, I wouldn't mind one bit living in a 1500 sq ft townhome with out half the crap I have, but saving some of the money to go enjoy some of things I do love more than working on cars, like skiing, fishing, etc.

I don't disagree, but it is somewhat disheartening, that what you just posted, is all that anyone is getting out of my post. Because it couldn't be further from the truth.

AP
11-12-2014, 02:50 PM
Filthy I lean more towards your side on this argument, but that's a really shallow argument about people wanting to get ahead and having material to show for it. It's pretty ignorant to assume only those with possessions are the ones with the wealth and success. Honestly, even though I do live in suburbia and will have a 3 car garage, etc, I wouldn't mind one bit living in a 1500 sq ft townhome with out half the crap I have, but saving some of the money to go enjoy some of things I do love more than working on cars, like skiing, fishing, etc.

You're our resident in-betweener. :)

bradh
11-12-2014, 03:04 PM
I don't disagree, but it is somewhat disheartening, that what you just posted, is all that anyone is getting out of my post. Because it couldn't be further from the truth.

Then what is it then? You specifically line out that craving more, living the American dream, etc is a sign of wanting to get ahead. I actually got what you meant by your "pussification" statement originally with the cars. That made some sense because I felt you were talking about people taking care of their own stuff, hunting & killing their own food occasionally, mowing their own grass, fixing their own problems. However, when you went off saying that because people want to minimize the amount of crap they have meaning that lack some sort of drive, you lost me.

Plutonic Panda
11-12-2014, 03:04 PM
It absolutely enrages me that you consider that "Pussification." As if that is even an acceptable term to apply to anything.

It's completely acceptable

bradh
11-12-2014, 03:04 PM
You're our resident in-betweener. :)

Someone has to do it :)

AP
11-12-2014, 03:06 PM
It's completely acceptable

No it isn't.

catch22
11-12-2014, 03:09 PM
The term pussification is a poor choice of words if you are trying to describe something that is weak and fragile.

Those things can take a pounding and give birth to a watermelon sized human being. I'd say they are pretty tough.

Unlike male parts where if you sit wrong you lose all of the air inside of your lungs for a few minutes and can cause your eyes to water profusely as your face turns a bright red.

Plutonic Panda
11-12-2014, 03:10 PM
No it isn't.
Why not? Is it not politically correct? Does that offend biotorich or whatever his name is and your views on sexism?

I don't care either way, to be honest with you. We I live in a world I as a human will make crude racist and sexist jokes towards another and in friends with a lot of different colored and gendered people, belive it or not. So I think, the joke was acceptable.

bradh
11-12-2014, 03:14 PM
The term pussification is a poor choice of words if you are trying to describe something that is weak and fragile.

Those things can take a pounding and give birth to a watermelon sized human being. I'd say they are pretty tough.

Unlike male parts where if you sit wrong you lose all of the air inside of your lungs for a few minutes and can cause your eyes to water profusely as your face turns a bright red.

post of the day lol

Plutonic Panda
11-12-2014, 03:16 PM
I'm not worried that you think we're being pussies. My kids walk miles without an ounce of worry, are more capable of meeting people on the street and holding a normal conversation, and are far, far more independent than any of their peers.

I'm very glad we chose to shed the cars and live life differently. It's just sad that you think that we are weaker. It's actually an ironic statement from the way I see it.

I don't think he meant you were a puss(y) for not having a car.

adaniel
11-12-2014, 03:18 PM
The term pussification is a poor choice of words if you are trying to describe something that is weak and fragile.

Those things can take a pounding and give birth to a watermelon sized human being. I'd say they are pretty tough.



Wait, I thought we were talking about cats? What are YOU talking about? And I might need some pictures as examples, I'm a visual learner, you know.

BDP
11-12-2014, 03:18 PM
Understandably so.



Figuratively or Literally? I'm glad you asked, as it shows me that you are intelligent enough to know that I probably think it is something different than others here do. In a literal sense, it's a somewhat difficult word to define, seeing that I would classify it as more of a "slang" term. But there are a lot of posters here, who seem to always take everything posted here at face value, and proceed to get twisted.

Figuratively speaking, I was merely sharing my opinion/and or point of view on how, I find it sad that some of the things that use to be important in this Country.......are important no more. I see a disgustingly growing trend in the mindset of people that continue to help our society grow complacent. It's silly to try and use this conversation about driving cars vs. walkability as an engine for this conversation, but I honestly feel like it is all related. What happened to the days, when people wanted to live the "American Dream" family of 4, in a nice house, with a white picket fence, 2 Cadillacs in the driveway, with a dog in the front yard going woof woof. Somehow in this new and crazy time we live in......its seems to be somewhat frowned upon. What happened to people wanting to get ahead, and always craving more? A successful society is created by competition amongst one another. I never thought I would see a time in my life where people almost want to brag about living a simpler life, or having less, or doing without. I'm having a hard time grasping that concept. And it is dangerous to our society, by indirectly creating complacency.

So, in regards to this issue at hand, maybe my thoughts are old fashioned. Since, I'm damn near 35 years old...I'm sure my ideals are somewhat antiquated within this group. But the overall culture of having cars, and owning cars is a fundamental necessary in my eyes. And it has NOTHING to do, with getting from point "A", to point "anywhere." Its not because I need them to get around, and not because I cant walk or ride a bike.....but because its part of our culture. Not everyone is going to see eye to eye on this. But the whole "walkability" agenda that is discussed ad nauseam on this site, is debatable. Some people desire it.....others think it is a step backwards in regards to progression, and others just don't care.

I can understand some people love cars and don't mind the expense associated with them, but I can not grasp the concept that our country has become less complacent because people want to walk. Are people who walk less motivated than the person who drives and parks their car three times in the same strip mall so they don't have to walk between stores? Seems like the opposite would be true.

BDP
11-12-2014, 03:21 PM
It's not for people who want to live without. It's people who can't afford a car.

And for some people with money who can think of better ways to spend / invest it. Cars are money pits.

adaniel
11-12-2014, 03:21 PM
Why not? Is it not politically correct? Does that offend biotorich or whatever his name is and your views on sexism?


I'm not a moderator but some friendly advice. I am not sure what you are implying here but I think you REALLY need to be careful about what you say about memebers on here before you find yourself on "vacation."

catch22
11-12-2014, 03:21 PM
Wait, I thought we were talking about cats? What are YOU talking about? And I might need some pictures as examples, I'm a visual learner, you know.

Even cats have 9 lives and vicious clawing techniques...so there is really no meaning of the word which implies weakness.

Richard at Remax
11-12-2014, 03:23 PM
I think the term was probably a poor choice (i will add it to my personal aresenal though). "Smugness" might be a better fit.

Ive been there, done that when it comes to urban living, ect but i got married, priorities shifted (have a child on the way), and i made the move out to the burbs in preparation for that. Funny thing is is that I am probably going out more for entertainment in the core than when i lived in Edgemere.

It just get tiring when others, esp people i dont know on a message board, criticize me and other for wanting other things than them. You live in the core and walk everywhere and don't have a car. Awesome. Good for you. Why do you care that i like my car and my pool and more house for my $$$? You shouldn't.

Rover
11-12-2014, 03:24 PM
It is sad that we have to demean each other depending on what we choose to aspire to. So many on here say they want inclusion, choice, diversification, freedom...... but it appears they don't. Driving a car doesn't automatically mean you are smart or dumb, weak or strong, wise or unwise. I dare say some of the toughest and meanest thugs don't own or drive a car. But it also doesn't make them the smartest for it either. And I know plenty of wealth dumb people too...some in the suburbs, some in the city. So what? Everything on here turns into a pi$$ing contest it seems.

Richard at Remax
11-12-2014, 03:24 PM
Also i will point out i know for a fact someone who has fancy cars or a big house doesn't mean they are successful. The "illusion" of wealth is rampant everywhere.

Rover
11-12-2014, 03:26 PM
Also i will point out i know for a fact someone who has fancy cars or a big house doesn't mean they are successful. The "illusion" of wealth is rampant everywhere.

And the reality of poverty is everywhere too. So what's the point?

Plutonic Panda
11-12-2014, 03:27 PM
I'm not a moderator but some friendly advice. I am not sure what you are implying here but I think you REALLY need to be careful about what you say about memebers on here before you find yourself on "vacation."

Excuse me? Did I say something offensive about another member? Biotorich(I don't remember how the guys name is spelled and I'm not going to look for it) made a ridiculous comment about another comment that was already a day or two old about a reference to Kate Uptoms boobs or something and made a comment about keeping sexism off the boards like it was some big deal. Andrewmperry liked the comment, so that's where I got that from if he is an advocate against stuff like that.

So what in the world are you talking about?

CuatrodeMayo
11-12-2014, 03:31 PM
The term pussification is a poor choice of words...

...And a vulgar term that shouldn't be used in civil conversation. Not to mention the overt implication that girls are lesser and weaker than men. As a father of daughters, I find the use of this term insulting.

catch22
11-12-2014, 03:32 PM
Excuse me? Did I say something offensive about another member? Biotorich(I don't remember how the guys name is spelled and I'm not going to look for it) made a ridiculous comment about another comment that was already a day or two old about a reference to Kate Uptoms boobs or something and made a comment about keeping sexism off the boards like it was some big deal. Andrewmperry liked the comment, so that's where I got that from if he is an advocate against stuff like that.

So what in the world are you talking about?

Keep in mind, even though message boards tend to be male-dominate, we do have a resident population of female posters and visitors. Some may not appreciate references to things unique to females, as comparisons to buildings...or people who ride bikes and/or walk to work.

It's completely acceptable that we keep that off of here, or at least tone it down a notch. We are better than most forums -- I am afraid to even try to look at most message boards while at work, or in public, for fear of what I may accidentally scroll past while someone is looking over my shoulder. OKCTalk is a rare exception and a high-standard model for what message boards should be.

BDP
11-12-2014, 03:33 PM
I think the term was probably a poor choice (i will add it to my personal aresenal though). "Smugness" might be a better fit.

Ive been there, done that when it comes to urban living, ect but i got married, priorities shifted (have a child on the way), and i made the move out to the burbs in preparation for that. Funny thing is is that I am probably going out more for entertainment in the core than when i lived in Edgemere.

It just get tiring when others, esp people i dont know on a message board, criticize me and other for wanting other things than them. You live in the core and walk everywhere and don't have a car. Awesome. Good for you. Why do you care that i like my car and my pool and more house for my $$$? You shouldn't.

I don't think anyone was running down the suburban lifestyle (at least not in this thread). I think sometimes people confuse a desire for urban living in Oklahoma City as contempt for suburban living, I think in Oklahoma City the thing is that for people whose priorities are is a car, pool, and a big house, there is ample supply. For those that desire living where they can walk to some places, the choices are very limited. So, I don't think people should care that you want to live in the suburbs, but everyone should care about expanding living options in Oklahoma City so that it can continue to increase its competitive position. It's really more about offering choices. OKC doesn't have that many and that can make it less appealing to people who want or need to relocate.

bradh
11-12-2014, 03:33 PM
And for some people with money who can think of better ways to spend / invest it. Cars are money pits.

To defend some, most car folk will admit to the "money pit" term. Very few do it for any ROI

catch22
11-12-2014, 03:33 PM
...And a vulgar term that shouldn't be used in civil conversation. Not to mention the overt implication that girls are lesser and weaker than men. As a father of daughters, I find your use of this term insulting.

I hope you are not referring to me, as I was responding to and countering "Filthy" and his use of the term.

Plutonic Panda
11-12-2014, 03:34 PM
Well, I'm signing off of here. Sexism and racism is alive and well and it's evident that one's who are portraying it to be what it isn't. Just abolsutely amazing what people will accuse others of that disagree with them.

Filthy
11-12-2014, 03:35 PM
Jesus H Christ, you guys are so *****ng fragile. None of my posts have a goddamn thing to do with wealth, monetary value, or anyone being weak. I never said anyone is a "p*ssy" for anything. You guys manipulate sh*t in your head, and take off and run with it. You can disagree with me all you want, but its pathetic to see some of you pick and choose minor pieces of the discussion, and try to fabricate it into something it isn't. Its disgusting to see here.

CuatrodeMayo
11-12-2014, 03:36 PM
I hope you are not referring to me, as I was responding to and countering "Filthy" and his use of the term.
Nope. I edited it to clarify :D

AP
11-12-2014, 03:37 PM
Why not? Is it not politically correct? Does that offend biotorich or whatever his name is and your views on sexism?

I don't care either way, to be honest with you. We I live in a world I as a human will make crude racist and sexist jokes towards another and in friends with a lot of different colored and gendered people, belive it or not. So I think, the joke was acceptable.

You can use terms that belittle women on your own time, but I will never agree that it is acceptable and surely a majority of this board feels the same way and doesn't want to see that trash posted here.