"Environmental antisocial behaviour is when a person’s actions affect the wider environment, such as public spaces or buildings."

With that definition, we could classify just about anything as antisocial.

No? How is reading a book in your home antisocial?

That book is printed on trees, or the device is powered. Those inflict externalities on others (trees for paper, components for the device, power inputs). Thus it affects others and the wider environment.

What's actually the antisocial behavior here is unsustainably harvesting trees, or polluting power generation. Not the act of reading itself, which has no adverse impact on other members of society.

There definitely is a difference between behavior that has a direct adverse impact on society, and pedantic attempts at portraying non-disruptive behavior as antisocial. A skateboard rolling down the street at night and waking people up is causing direct adverse impact, someone reading in their home does not.

Pushing the blame for externalities onto some nebulous other is antisocial though. It's a way of absolving yourself and others of the responsibility of agency and creating change. Limiting the definition to actions which directly "disrupt" others is simply a way for the privileged to export their antisocial behavior to ethically unburdened faceless corporations.

Is it practical to stop reading because a tree gets cut or your ereader needs charging? Probably not, but that's why change doesn't happen until it's forced by the circumstances.

Most paper is recycled (over 2/3rd). So no, it's not antisocial.

Regardless, it's still a false equivalency to try and equate directly antisocial behavior like making loud noises that disrupt people's healthy sleep and the sustainability of producing paper, some of which is used for printing novels that people read in their homes.

There's no claim of total equivalency. Only that they meet the poorly formed definition given previously

That's not the definition given though. That's why I'm saying if That's the definition we're using, then it could be applied to just about anything.

If a lone skateboard at night in a major urban area bothers you, I'd suggest considering a move.

I live on a street in NYC where the sound of a skateboard is nothing compared to sirens (cops will punch them to run the red at the corner but sometimes it’s ambulances or fire trucks) and the ridiculous mufflers mentioned in the article. I can’t even imagine being bothered by the sound of a skateboard.

Why would someone commute on a skateboard instead of a longboard? They are both similarly annoying to carry on foot and stow away later.

Maybe they have skateboard and dont have cruiser/longboard. Or they were doing tricks and are coming back on the thing they had with them.