this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
244 points (93.9% liked)

Asklemmy

45953 readers
1182 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 minutes ago

You think we own shit? Lawns are the landlord's landscaping equivalent of white paint: inoffensive but dull and useless

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 4 points 43 minutes ago

Canadian here, that's getting more and more common over here. There's a ton of HOA bullshit here too but I've been seeing more and more food gardening in Vancouver, but that might also be because food is expensive as fuuuck here.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 4 points 1 hour ago

americans already do this i see it all the time

[–] OceanSoap@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

Grass is nice. It's nice to lay on. It's nice to walk barefoot in. It's soft and cushiony. It's cool on a hot summer day.

I have zero grass though. Just rocks and fruit trees.

Some cities actually mandate lawns. My city has code enforcement officials who have to go around and make sure that lawns are kept to a certain standard. I live in California and at some point these codes were relaxed to deal with water shortages (go figure) so we don't actually have to maintain our lawn. It's part of practices focused around preserving high housing costs (which I think are absolutely terrible).

[–] butsbutts@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 hours ago

too busy eating avocado toast

[–] Montreal_Metro@lemmy.ca 27 points 11 hours ago

Because having a big yard of grass that you have to mow every week while using up gasoline is the American dream and a flex for some reason.

[–] Niquarl@lemmy.ml 15 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

There is a pretty great website called Falling fruit to map trees and other plants that you can pick from freely.

[–] Norin@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

Hey. Thank you for sharing this.

Websites like this are the good part of the internet.

[–] stray@pawb.social 11 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Littering your yard with food attracts things like rats, raccoons, squirrels, etc, which destroy property and infrastructure, spread disease, and cause injury to people and pets. I'm not saying I'm against fruit trees, but I do understand people who are. It's a legitimate concern. Some areas even have things like boars or bears which are extremely dangerous.

I'm also curious with the way you can sue people in the US what would happen if someone becomes sick after eating one of your fruits. I imagine it varies by state.

[–] droplet6585@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Trees in general do all of those horrible things you mentioned.

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Dropped fruit all over the ground really encourages rats though.

My mum got a house super cheap when I was young because it had a "rat problem" it also had a peach tree in the back yard that the owner didnt pick up after. We removed literal garbage bags of peach pits from the roof space and crawl spaces of that house and garage.

Chopped the peach tree down (it wasnt a healthy tree anyway) and the problem basically disappeared in days.

[–] droplet6585@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

And I've found loads of walnut shells in nooks and crannies. I'm not going to cut a black walnut down.

Buildings need to be built properly to exclude animals regardless.

Not possible. Nature finds a way.

[–] Thebigguy@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

This. Fruit trees are loads of work that most amateur gardeners don’t know how to deal with them or have the time to deal with them. Gardening and farming is a shitload of work and was only made cheap and easy through the marvel of modern technology. You don’t just plant shit and get to eat lol

[–] piratekaiser@lemm.ee 4 points 9 hours ago

Reading this made me even happier I don't have to live there

[–] LiamTheBox@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 hours ago

Probably need a permit and license

Wait...

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 11 points 15 hours ago

Grass lawns as a concept came from Europe as a symbol of wealth. If you could afford a large green lawn, you were likely rich.

[–] RangerJosey@lemmy.ml 14 points 16 hours ago

Zoning laws in a lot of places.

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 2 points 12 hours ago

Rodents mostly

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

We do? At least where I live I see mango trees all over, saw a longan the other day, there are loquats all over too, and until citrus canker there were orange trees in most backyards. At my old house we had loquat, tangelo, lemon, lime, carambola and bananas, and a papaya tree.

At this house we have lemon, lime, Valencia, and sugar bell citrus trees, a fig (all of these are dwarf trees) and a vegetable garden but all are in back. In front a small lawn, a few ornamental plants and sometimes I plant bulb fennel out there.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago

That will depend on what type of Home Ownership Association the house is on. Some of them mandate a well kept grass lawn and you get fined for not moving.

[–] Turturtley@aussie.zone 52 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It’s a stupid reason. Historically, if you were a peasant and had been granted access to land, you grew food or herbs. If however you were a lord, you got your food from your peasants. You had no need to grow your own food. So they could afford to grow lawns as a sign of wealth.

This has transferred across into the modern psyche. Lawns are a way of saying β€œi’m so rich, i don’t have to worry about sustenance. In fact i’ll throw money at it to maintain this slab of green rather than have it provide food, or shade.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-modern-brain/202002/the-strange-psychology-the-american-lawn

[–] xye@lemm.ee 3 points 13 hours ago

It’s funny how this has come full circle - many people garden (in their back yards) to show they have the free time to do so.

[–] akalanka@masto.es 7 points 19 hours ago

@Turturtley @Confidant6198 Its worse, because, actually, even if they wanted to, most Americans are under the tyrannical rule of a Homeowners Association (talk about liberty huh) that forces them to plant grass, and can fine them a shit ton of money if they do otherwise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrizmAo17Os

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is the correct answer. So many US'isms are bourgeois / aristocratic imitation.

Cars / wasteful transportation, lawns, sprawled out cities, high amounts of meat consumption, vacation homes / timeshares / exotic vacations, having servants, etc. These are things that are only possible for countries with huge amounts of land and resources, and not sustainable or doable for most of the world.

[–] turnip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

It could also be seen as rising standards of living, and aristocrats were optimizing their advantage before the standards rose for everyone due to cheap energy availability.

Saying people consume meat to mimic the rich is a little silly.

[–] the_q@lemm.ee 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] HurlingDurling@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

And for whatever the fuck reason, they wanted houses like the ones found in pre-1789 France

[–] GarkanTM@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago

Trees (e.g. apple trees or others) provide great shade and help lower the temperature. They are beneficial if you feel that summer heat is getting worse due to climate change. Additionally, if you have issues with heavy rainfall, trees can help by absorbing large amounts of water through their roots. This approach can be applied in most countries.

[–] Sarmyth@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

We do. Obviously not everyone can But I wager the number of Americans growing something edible on their space is decent. Usually it's easy stuff to grow, or someone's favorites.

Thinking about it and counting in my head I actually know dozens of people that grow tomatoes personally. They grow easily in large quantities in relatively small space and all taste better than store bought.

Citrus has been pretty plentiful my entire life too. Lemon trees especially.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I’m tryin’, man. Fruit bearing plants take a lot of work compared to the manicured suburban steriscape. They’re not super easy to grow (depending on where you live), require pruning and fertilizer, soil amendment, and unfortunately pesticides or fencing if you don’t want insects or deer destroying your hard work.

That’s way more effort than most people want to expend. HOAs or even local ordinances may also restrict what can be grown.

[–] Lennnny@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Look into native plants. There are so many edible things that you can just leave in the wasteland that is your yard and they'll take over. Here in Tennessee we have pawpaws and maypops for fruit, tomatoes that pop up randomly, garden greens like wood sorrel and lambs quarters, and a bunch of other things that absolutely take over given half a chance. Sure, if you try and grow the seed packets from your local Lowes you'll have issues with pests and whatnot, but there is so much more food out there than these varieties.

Absolutely. Already have a couple.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] greatwhitebuffalo41@slrpnk.net 73 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean some of us hate grass so much we started a huge reddit community about it that made it's way too lemmy.

https://slrpnk.net/c/nolawns

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 20 points 1 day ago

!nolawns@slrpnk.net

[–] fitgse@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

As someone who lives in an ex-industrial city (Birmingham Alabama), I’ve always been worried about air pollution and tainted soil (there are superfund sites nearby). I feel like every thing would have to be above ground and covered. That seems like a lot of work. Should I be worried?

[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 1 points 19 hours ago

Your city has a cool vibe.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

There are places where they have trees all around their houses. Like in California, where they just had been more fuel to the fires.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

In, or in the yard of? We're not talking about indoor houseplants, I assume.

If outside is what you mean, it goes back to the days of aristocracy. Having land you don't use for food was a form of conspicuous consumption, and you had sports for the elite grow up around stretches of short grass as a result, like golf and polo. The former is still synonymous with the well-off, even.

Then you have to skip ahead to the 1950's and 60's in America, where the "mid-century modern" philosophy of urban planning gains prominence. The idea was to get people out of the crowded, Victorian-style slums, which we might find quaint in hindsight, but at the time were very stigmatised. This extended to a certain disdain for cities and buildings in general, even - more nature was better. So, where do you put people? In tiny little rural estates modeled on the ones popular with aristocrats, separated by zoning laws from the other sections of the city.

The vision was that people would get home from their 9-5 jobs in the commercial-only zones in their very own car, and would hang out outside enjoying their government-mandated leisure time. The urban planners of the time probably pictured a giant croquet course going up and down a residential street, and the all-white 3.5 kid families that live there sitting outside on lawn chairs, playing friendly games against each other. These "white picket fence" suburbs had lawns, then, because you couldn't have semi-rural domestic bliss without them, according to some architects who graduated Harvard in 1920.

In practice, of course, none of that happened. Like so many other tidy ideas it failed to predict how the general public would interact with it. I've been around plenty of places like that. You know the names of your neighbor, but not much else about them, and the people a few doors down are suspect of being pedophiles or violent drug dealers. That fence line is sacred, each house becomes an island, and you're frightfully dependent on driving to get anywhere you can do basic errands. And that's not even getting into the racial issues that came out of it.

Now, in the 21st century, people assume houses have always had lawns, and messing with that formula irritates the local NIMBYs. New ideas eventually become rigid tradition, and as always it falls to the next generation to question the way things are done. Hopefully we will, but it will take a moment.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 day ago

A lot of people are secretly cows and they actually eat that grass. Next time you say hello to someone and they respond β€œmoo” you’ll know why.

[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 49 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Probably against HOA rules in many places.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Global_Liberty@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 day ago

The answer is they were a wealthy European concept brought to the colonies as a status symbol. They are still associated with wealthier people which raises property values, so are enshrined in local ordinances and HOA rules.

Growing crops is quite a bit of cost and effort and time. I have a little garden, but it's not like you just plant some seeds and you're all done.

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Because this is illegal in most of America. You would be fined and the city would probably send a crew out to rip it all up and give you the invoice if you defied it and left it that way.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί