[WackyFighter]

No. Urban environments suck to walk around. What you wrote is utter drivel.

If one needs to justify it by quoting authors, that suggests it isn't self evident and they are just trying to justify something that they know isn't good.

[wk_end]

What an unnecessarily hostile comment. "Utter drivel"? I was talking about how I personally feel. Am I just imagining enjoying the things that I enjoy?

Writers have, obviously, written about how walking in nature is nice. Does me saying that now mean that walking in nature is awful?

Maybe you're doing other people a favour by staying away from them, sheesh.

[WackyFighter]

> What an unnecessarily hostile comment. "Utter drivel"? I was talking about how I personally feel. Am I just imagining enjoying the things that I enjoy?

No it isn't. Anytime you make an fairly straight forward statement on any website you get some unnecessary contrarian response.

There are a bunch of downsides to doing any sort of outdoor activity in an urban environment. That is just a fact. It is noisier, often there it nothing to look at, repetitive (in a bad way) etc. etc.

Therefore I would not recommend walking as a form of exercise in that environment as the vast majority of people wouldn't enjoy it.

Whimsical writings by 19th century French poets aren't relevant to those facts.

> Maybe you're doing other people a favour by staying away from them, sheesh.

What an unnecessary comment to make. I never said anything about what you are like.

[tailspin2019]

What a bizarre response.

[WackyFighter]

Not at all. It was a contrarian response.

Walking in an urban environment is generally not very pleasant. It is often repetitive (in the bad way), noisy and there is little to look at. It the reason they often carve out space for parks and commons.