There is risk in everything. Being an employee and relying on a business to provide you with money is risky, yet billions of men take that risk across their working lives.
If a man cannot risk anything to have a family, then there will never be any man who qualifies.
In fact many men work high risk jobs because they pay the most.
I think you misunderstood. What you mentioned are risks that have a payoff; some reason to do them, and sometimes that’s required. This doesn’t really. Maybe he makes slightly more money, but he really doesn’t need that even if that’s the case. It’s more like the risk of sticking a loaded gun in your mouth because you like the taste, not going to work because you need money to live.
How much would he make using ropes. I’m sure it’d be pretty damn close. Slightly more money means how much with ropes - how much without being fairly small. It’s not saying he’s not making a lot in general. That’d be stupid.
How much would he make using ropes. I’m sure it’d be pretty damn close.
I’m confident he would be just another climber and wouldn’t be world famous and wouldn’t be able to demand such high payment. He makes fat stacks because he is extraordinary, not because he’s doing what everyone else is doing.
Alex Honnold (born August 17, 1985) is an American rock climber best known for his free solo ascents of big walls. Honnold rose to worldwide fame in June 2017 when he became the first person to free solo a route on El Capitan in Yosemite National Park (via the 2,900-foot route Freerider at 5.13a, the first-ever at that grade),
I’m not saying in the past, nor is anyone else in this thread. We’re saying today, now that he has a family. He wouldn’t lose his fame because he started using safety gear. He’d still be extraordinary. He’d still be doing things no one else can. In fact, dealing with safety gear would add to the challenge. It’d remove some of the fear, but the climbs would be more challenging.
There is risk in everything. Being an employee and relying on a business to provide you with money is risky, yet billions of men take that risk across their working lives.
If a man cannot risk anything to have a family, then there will never be any man who qualifies.
In fact many men work high risk jobs because they pay the most.
I think you misunderstood. What you mentioned are risks that have a payoff; some reason to do them, and sometimes that’s required. This doesn’t really. Maybe he makes slightly more money, but he really doesn’t need that even if that’s the case. It’s more like the risk of sticking a loaded gun in your mouth because you like the taste, not going to work because you need money to live.
Is $3 million net worth at 36 years old “slightly more money” these days? I’m further behind than I thought.
https://www.climbingfacts.com/alex-honnold-net-worth/
How much would he make using ropes. I’m sure it’d be pretty damn close. Slightly more money means how much with ropes - how much without being fairly small. It’s not saying he’s not making a lot in general. That’d be stupid.
I’m confident he would be just another climber and wouldn’t be world famous and wouldn’t be able to demand such high payment. He makes fat stacks because he is extraordinary, not because he’s doing what everyone else is doing.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Honnold
Fortune favours the bold.
I’m not saying in the past, nor is anyone else in this thread. We’re saying today, now that he has a family. He wouldn’t lose his fame because he started using safety gear. He’d still be extraordinary. He’d still be doing things no one else can. In fact, dealing with safety gear would add to the challenge. It’d remove some of the fear, but the climbs would be more challenging.
You’re taking vastly different levels and kinds of risk and equating them. That’s either disingenuous or foolish, but we can only guess which.
I would argue that the saying “Nothing a man should risk once you have children.” is doing exactly as you are describing.