[tester756]

>Perhaps traveling is more the last category for you, plan trips to visit your friends and family who you don't see as often.

I'd rather say that I'm going with friends somewhere cuz I enjoy spending time with them,

but I have completely very minimal interest in the stuff that we're visiting, like I have 0 emotions towards places.

[darkwizard42]

It sounds like you definitely could reduce the emotional/mental load of traveling by going directly to your friends and staying with them (if/when possible). This simplifies things like lodging, activities, etc. since they can/might be more able to take care of those things for you.

Travel is so broadly encompassing but I absolutely empathize with the challenges you face. Hopefully you find your own way to look at the bright side of traveling (the experience at the end of it)!

[polishdude20]

You're not interested in seeing great natural wonders? The Amazon rainforest, the cliffs of Dover, the Australian great barrier reef, the volcanoes of Hawaii etc?

[jurynulifcation]

Hi, as another odd duck here, I'd like to chime in: no, not really, I don't understand why people value these things. If I was interested in seeing them, I'd move near them so I could see them often. I'm really not interested in seeing things for a couple of hours. If I value it, I want it frequently.

[tayo42]

I actually travel a lot (compared to the typical person, maybe not compared the typical internet commenter that wants to one up me), and I kind of agree with you.

Going and just seeing things is a fairly shallow experience imo and leads to dull trips. Theres a lot more nuance to this then Im prepared to write about. I do think sightseeing is one of the shallowest things you can do and travel for, I think you are right for questioning it. Alot of people want to travel, but don't know how to do it and sight seeing is an easy default. I wouldn't be surprised that instagram and related are making this worse, where people just travel to see things because they don't know what else to do.

I went and read a bunch of Paul Theroux's books and it changed my idea of what travel should be. Travel and the destination you pick should have a purpose that's important to you.

Personally I find the beautiful nature to be a nice bonus to where ever im going. I enjoy a good hike, new scenery is cool to be in to some extent. If you plan a trip to lisbon, everyone guide will tell you to go to sintra, look at the castles. I found that to be one of the most underwhelming places Ive been, from the lines, to paying for everything, and the only thing to do was look at things I had no connection to, while being bussed around or walking. I got a few cool photos, but im not a photographer and no one cares about my photos.

[voakbasda]

I'd love to see those things, but not at the emotional/mental cost of actually having to travel to those places. If travelling didn't suck so much and in so many ways, maybe... but the reality is that airlines, lodging, and crowds collectively detract from the experience. Personally, it's very much a net loss.

[antognini]

I'm reminded of Dr. Johnson's assessment of the Cliffs of Dover: "Worth seeing, yes. But not worth going to see."

[xboxnolifes]

They're labeled great wonders by other people, but that doesn't make them universally wonderful. To them and others, they are just trees, rocks, and reefs.

[tester756]

Well, that's not the average trip :P

Yet still, I instantly feel tired by thinking about the effort / planning of cross-country trip

[financltravsty]

No. It’s boring. The appreciation of the external was never something that was cultivated in me.

It’s all just stuff. It’s all static. People are dynamic. They’re stimulating. They’re people.

Perhaps it’s due to upbringing. Depending on adolescent socioeconomic status, people may be more inclined to get their emotional “fill” from certain things.