Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really funny picture. Not sure if you really want us to get into the male vs female tendency to take risks, or if we should talk about stupidity and recklessness in general.
I think there's riskiness and then there's recklessness. They might sometimes overlap, but they are usually very different animals.
A risk can be calculated. Someone can take a financial risk by making an investment they've researched, and they've concluded that they like the odds of a good return over a failure. Someone can take a risk by rushing into a burning building to save a small child.
Those situations are WAY different from recklessness, which is what the fine gentleman in the picture is displaying. Recklessness is carelessness to an extreme degree, usually coupled with stupidity, poor judgment, or denial of a risk that exists.
Apart from all that, you have "adrenalin junkies" or sensation-seeking personalities (sometimes called thrill seeking personalities). Those people thrive on risk, and seem to require it in order to survive. While I like to have a full time, 9-5 job with a steady paycheck and benefits, a sensation-seeking person would hate that, and would prefer a sales job where each month, he might earn zero dollars or he might earn $20,000. Sensation seekers enjoy gambling, while folks like me get nothing positive out of it. Sensation-seekers get into hobbies like skydiving, while I did it once, just because I wanted to experience it, but I'd never want to do it a whole lot and increase my risk.
Sensation-seekers can be male or female, but from what I've read, they are more likely male, and it may be hormonal rather than structural/hardwired. I did read one study, which I can't find now and it's p*ssing me off, that found that women with higher testosterone also showed increased risk-taking or thrill-seeking behavior over women with lower testosterone levels.
Sensation seekers do tend to not only tolerate higher levels of risk, but also crave them. I would guess that many sensation-seekers could also be reckless, but there are probably many who are not, but their risks are more calculated.
But I guess recklessness is in the eye of the beholder, and is dependent on the outcome. I'm very financially conservative, so I would see someone "playing the stock market" as "reckless" even if they felt they were only taking well planned calculated risks, and independent of whether they won or lost. Others might only label the person "reckless" if he loses money, but not if his risks pay off.
Of course life involves risks but I'm wondering why anybody would do something like this? Is it really a lack of fear or just a lack of common sense?
For me, that picture is a matter of physics. The weight of that man is pressing down horizontally on that ladder, so, considering the angle of that ladder, the only place it can really go is either, down the wall on its top end, or against the railing on its bottom end.
On a physical level, that ladder, with that man's weight pressing down on it, cannot go anywhere. As long as he keeps his footing it's secure, wedged between the wall and railing.
Y' know, I might be with Medi here.
At first glance, I looked at the picture and thought "what an idiot." But then I read what Medi wrote, and realized that I would probably do the same thing myself. (you should have seen the ways I climbed on ladders and my roof to power-wash my house). I'm not by nature a risky or reckless person, so if I did that, it would be because I was very certain the ladder was secure. Like I said, recklessness is in the eye of the beholder.
However, since part of my job involves keeping my company's worker's comp costs down, if I ever saw an employee doing that, my head would explode.
But his weight is shifted so the whole thing changes when he decides to go down the ladder and get on terra firma. Won't that change the physics of it?
Might have to e mail this to my brilliant physics PhD son for help but usually when he tries to talk to me my eyes glass over and i stop breathing. All gobbledegook to me.
For me, that picture is a matter of physics. The weight of that man is pressing down horizontally on that ladder, so, considering the angle of that ladder, the only place it can really go is either, down the wall on its top end, or against the railing on its bottom end.
On a physical level, that ladder, with that man's weight pressing down on it, cannot go anywhere. As long as he keeps his footing it's secure, wedged between the wall and railing.
I'd do it.
To me, that's not a risk.
Me too, ive done somilar painting the high parts of the stairway at my old house. The bannister would have to break away for that to go wrong.
But his weight is shifted so the whole thing changes when he decides to go down the ladder and get on terra firma. Won't that change the physics of it?
Might have to e mail this to my brilliant physics PhD son for help but usually when he tries to talk to me my eyes glass over and i stop breathing. All gobbledegook to me.
When you step down the ladder the force of weight is still downwards and slightly angled backwards towards the railing. When i got a step or two down I'd put one foot on the railing itself. To be honest, I've climbed up ladders and scaffolds at worse angles.
Then again, when I was a kid I wanted to be a stuntman and spent my weekends jumping across the gaps between the rooves of semi-detached houses.
Of course life involves risks but I'm wondering why anybody would do something like this? Is it really a lack of fear or just a lack of common sense?
Common sense. He probably thinks he can predict the future and nothing will go wrong. Sometimes people overestimate their knowlegde. Sometimes people forget how things can go terribly wrong in a matter of seconds.
For me, that picture is a matter of physics. The weight of that man is pressing down horizontally on that ladder, so, considering the angle of that ladder, the only place it can really go is either, down the wall on its top end, or against the railing on its bottom end.
On a physical level, that ladder, with that man's weight pressing down on it, cannot go anywhere. As long as he keeps his footing it's secure, wedged between the wall and railing.
I'd do it.
To me, that's not a risk.
I just took another look at that picture and yeah you do have a point. But I would still use a pole and a roller.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not sure if you really want us to get into the male vs female tendency to take risks, or if we should talk about stupidity and recklessness in general. 
