KUER0%

For noobs, Utah’s competitive outdoor culture can intimidate. More so for men 53%

By Sean Higgins0%

6/8/2026, 1:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 35 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Appeal to Authority, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 28.2% saturation with 226 hits. Analysis detected 2,151 faulty-reasoning hits from 802 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.6% and a BS Rank of 53% (10,420 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.40% of the article peer group.

Jake Esayian was blown away by the outdoor recreation opportunities just minutes from the University of Utah when he moved to Salt Lake City from San Diego for his undergrad. 
But he kept running into a problem. 
“You get this different level of almost competitiveness, that's innate to men,” he said on a morning hike on the trails above Salt Lake City. 
“There's always that aspect of, I don't want to be the guy slowing everybody down, right? 
I don't want to be the guy who's falling, who's crashing, who's breaking stuff and, you know, kind of ruining it for the group.” 
That feeling matters. 
Outdoor recreation is a big part of life in Utah and a $9.75 billion share of its economy. 
But men and boys could be missing out on one of the biggest draws to living in the state. 
Research has shown that men and boys are experiencing a deepening disconnect on things like mental health, finding community and overall belonging. 
Recent University of Utah grad Jake Esayian on the Bonneville Shoreline Trail, May 10, 2026. 
He found it hard to find his outdoor community in Utah, so he built an app to help people like him find like-minded friends of similar skill levels. 
It’s something Erica Yaeger, director of overnight camping at the YMCA of Northern Utah, has seen before. 
Even her husband navigates that dynamic. 
“He has that same experience of any running group or group that he tries to join has this, like, added level of expectation,” she said. 
The competitiveness is backed up by science. 
While overall competitiveness across the sexes is similar, research suggests men are more competitive than women in areas such as sports. 
It’s something Esayian kept coming up against when he searched for an outdoor community of his own. 
“It was a lot more difficult to be able to find those clubs and jump into those clubs, especially as somebody who's just kind of solo,” he said. 
“As a relatively beginner-intermediate guy, to be able to go into these clubs where people are riding double black trails was pretty intimidating.” 
Esayian is hardly alone. 
Despite the stereotype of Utah being a haven for outdoorsy types, Yaeger said it can actually be really hard for people  especially beginners  to get outdoors. 
“There is almost an elitist mindset in some scenarios,” she said. 
“We are very heavy outdoor recreation space, we've got world-renowned climbers and skiers and all these really incredible groups and programs here. 
But getting that entry point and then really finding a home base can be tricky.” 
That awkwardness can be even worse for men and boys. 
Utah has a reputation as a haven for outdoor enthusiasts, such as those who flock to the Red Butte Skyline Nature Trail, seen here on May 10, 2026. 
But research shows that it can be especially hard for men, boys and those new to the outdoors to find a community to enjoy it with. 
For someone struggling to find a group to experience the outdoors with, Yaeger said the easiest place to start is looking online. 
There are countless Facebook groups to join and sport-specific apps where you can find like-minded friends at similar skill levels. 
That digital approach is something Esayian knows well. 
He even founded his own app, Always Outdoors, while completing his Master of Business Creation this year at the U. 
“What I saw over and over and over is that this was something that people loved, having this easy way where it was as seamless as possible to go and meet these people, meet other people.” 
The app helps people connect with outdoor communities they might be struggling to find on their own. 
It sorts people by interest and ability and connects them with others or groups who match. 
He’s found that connections made in the outdoors transcend differences. 
It’s people coming together over a shared love for something bigger. 
“The outdoors, in my opinion, everybody loves in one way or another,” he said. 
“Whether that's, you know, taking a road trip through Yellowstone, or getting out in your ultra marathon and everything in between. 
So finding your group is, I think, super important.” 
For those looking for their kids, think about camps. 
The YMCA has ones dedicated not just to exposing kids to things like horseback riding, archery and mountain biking, but building a community through those shared activities. 
Esayian eventually did find a group to share his outdoor passions with. 
He just had to take a little risk first. 
“Inevitably, in the beginning, it’s going to be uncomfortable, but don't quit. 
Don't stop. 
You got to continue, because it's absolutely worth it.” 
At the end of the day, everyone was a beginner once. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.7%Sean Higgins: 2.5%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.3%Sean Higgins: 2.8%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic13.3%This article: 6.6%Sean Higgins: 1.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic6.6%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.4%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Sean Higgins: 2.1%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias2.0%This article: 8.6%Sean Higgins: 5.2%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect8.6%This article: 5.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion5.0%This article: 5.2%Sean Higgins: 1.1%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias5.2%This article: 1.5%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect1.5%This article: 15.1%Sean Higgins: 4.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias15.1%This article: 4.2%Sean Higgins: 1.9%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias4.2%This article: 15.8%Sean Higgins: 5.3%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias15.8%This article: 7.7%Sean Higgins: 4.2%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias7.7%This article: 3.1%Sean Higgins: 0.7%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.1%This article: 3.5%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.5%This article: 3.1%Sean Higgins: 2.7%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%Sean Higgins: 2.1%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect10.5%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.1%Sean Higgins: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias2.1%This article: 0.9%Sean Higgins: 0.5%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.5%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 3.5%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man3.5%This article: 18.8%Sean Higgins: 4.1%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority18.8%This article: 1.6%Sean Higgins: 2.2%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma1.6%This article: 1.5%Sean Higgins: 0.7%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope1.5%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 20.4%Sean Higgins: 4.7%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization20.4%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 14.5%Sean Higgins: 5.5%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion14.5%This article: 2.6%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question2.6%This article: 6.1%Sean Higgins: 2.5%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 3.1%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 28.2%Sean Higgins: 2.4%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal28.2%This article: 1.4%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman1.4%This article: 9.1%Sean Higgins: 1.8%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote10.0%This article: 4.5%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection4.5%This article: 4.1%Sean Higgins: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice4.1%This article: 3.2%Sean Higgins: 2.4%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination3.2%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 1.3%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 20.4%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…20.4%

802 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers36%attributed speech510writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 25 words • 100.0% coverageJake Esayian • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageErica Yaeger • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageErica Yaeger • 11 words • 100.0% coverageErica Yaeger • 22 words • 0.0% coverageErica Yaeger • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageJake Esayian • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageJake Esayian • 12 words • 100.0% coverageJake Esayian • 2 words • 100.0% coverageJake Esayian • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jake Esayian

100%flagged-word coverage
219 attributed words75% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -8.7 ptsWriter: 25.1%Jake Esayian: 16.4%16.4%Quote-first Misdirection+16.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Jake Esayian: 16.4%16.4%Unattributed Quote-13.5 ptsWriter: 13.5%Jake Esayian: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice+9.8 ptsWriter: 1.6%Jake Esayian: 11.4%11.4%Indoctrination+9.9 ptsWriter: 0.6%Jake Esayian: 10.5%10.5%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.