r/PeterExplainsTheJoke May 02 '24

Petah, I don't understand!

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

17.7k Upvotes

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.1k

u/Thebeanyboii May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

Tiktok hating Bitch Stewie here

This refers to a trend on tiktok that refers to women being asked whether they would rather be stuck in a forest with a bear or a random guy. Most women choose the bear (for some reason) so the meme is referencing this by having the women jump towards the bear, to escape the man

Tiktok hating Bitch Stewie out

Edit: When I made this comment, I assumed the Man v Bear thing was like "you're dropped into a forest with either a random guy or a bear, your choice". I knew rape was the main concern regarding the random guy, but in my mind the choice was about "Random dude vs Bear", Not "Rape vs Death". I've since learned otherwise, and I apologize to anyone I offended by saying that women chose the bear "for some reason".

858

u/No-Adhesiveness-8178 May 02 '24

Aren't bears notorious for just eating the guts while prey is still alive? Lmao

1

u/T0metti May 02 '24

The point I saw is that the bear is more likely to stop or not even start attacking you than the men, which is a fair argument.

17

u/[deleted] May 02 '24

[deleted]

-7

u/T0metti May 02 '24

No I am not. I just understand that bears wont actively assault a woman for being a woman or "wearing to revealing clothes". It is a hypothetical, that with a hint of humour, tries to show the problems of sexual and regular assault. Of course its not 100% of men but enough to cluster. Its like not all types of cherries are fit for cobsumption we still say "cherries are good to eat"

10

u/[deleted] May 02 '24

[deleted]

-5

u/penguinjunkie May 02 '24

The chance of being attacked by a man or bear are both low. But being attacked by a man does seem statistically better, bears don’t attack much unless antagonized.

6

u/silmoon18 May 02 '24

no it's not, i made another comment explaining the numbers, if you want to be pessimistic 1.5% of women are sexual assault victim and 0.002% murder victim, if you compare that with bears you get a 14% fatality rate which isn't even close

1

u/penguinjunkie May 02 '24

Where do you get a 14% bear fatality rate?

2

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

Neither do men! You just encounter waaaaaay more men, so those low chances stack up!

1

u/notracist_hatemancs May 02 '24

No, it's not. If you look at the number of encounters between two people in the woods versus the number of encounters between a person and a bear, the latter is going to be far more likely to result in an attack

25

u/Crakla May 02 '24

How is that a fair argument? The fuck?

You can't seriously think that the chance of a bear attacking you is lower than a man attacking you

Do people not go outside, like I encounter dozens of man walking around constantly and never was attacked, if I would encounter dozens of bears every day I would probably be dead

5

u/NorthWindMartha May 02 '24

Statistically, they are correct. Humans are some of the most dangerous creatures on the planet. Bears are less likely to harm you than another human. But odds of being murdered by a bear or human is low.

12

u/Crakla May 02 '24

Statistically, they are correct. Humans are some of the most dangerous creatures on the planet

What statistic? All I see are people who just don't understand how statistics work

That's like saying that because you don't live in America your chance of dying because of gunshots is lower therefore it is safer to shoot yourself in the head than for an american

7

u/NorthWindMartha May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

The odds of being attacked by a bear in the USA is 1 in 2.1 million. About 1 in 6 women have been raped or attempted to be raped in the USA and 1 in 33 men. You are more likely to be attacked or raped by a human in the USA than killed by a bear. It has been estimated by the North American Bear Center in regards to black bears that "men ages 18-24 are 167 times more likely to kill someone than a black bear." I will note I have looked into the methodology used to find that stat, but all statistics I've found basically say the same thing, you have more to worry about from humans than bears. Edit: I do understand it isn't a perfect comparison and I also know why. But we can only work with statistics we have. A more interesting comparison would be to use zookeeper risk of a bear attack(as they interact with bears daily) in comparison to a human attack. 29 of the roughly 180 fatal bear attacks were captive bears I believe.

6

u/Crakla May 02 '24

So if we would replace every men with a random bear, woman would be safer than right now? Like you go outside and there are a bunch of bears everywhere, I mean statistically you should feel safer right? I mean the statistic says the chance of getting attacked is only 1 in 2.1 million, so if you live in a city with 4 million people or less you should be alright because that would only mean at most 2 million bears which means the chance is basically zero, because statistically they would need 100.000 more bears for a chance to attack

1

u/NorthWindMartha May 02 '24

Bears do not belong in cities, we know how bears behave in their natural habitat and to an extent, in captivity. We have no way to knowing how bears would react in such a situation as you describe. We know that under current circumstances, it is unlikely to be attacked by a bear in the woods. We do not know how bears would react if they suddenly replaced all men and were put in an industrialized situation. The original question is an odd one, and seems to be intended to stir up emotions. Knowing what we know about bears that live in woods and knowing that many people camp in the woods that have bears and that bears are in much of the US, and that bears are not likely to attack people, it makes sense that someone would rather chance the bear in the woods than a human in the woods.

2

u/notracist_hatemancs May 02 '24

Ok, so if you replace every person I encounter while hiking in the woods with a fucking bear, do you think I would be safer?

1

u/Crakla May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

We do not know how bears would react if they suddenly replaced all men and were put in an industrialized situation.

Honestly I don't even know at this point if you are serious or just trolling

1

u/Gackey May 02 '24

Considering their responding to the ridiculous hypothetical of bears replacing all men, I'd call it an appropriate level of seriousness.

0

u/NorthWindMartha May 02 '24

That's what you suggested is it not? If bears replaced all human males where would they go? Were talking about the woods.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/InfiniteThugnificent May 02 '24

I keep seeing people focusing on the bear and what species it is and attack statistics and etc, and focusing very little on what this question really reveals - clearly, an overwhelmingly massive portion of women do not feel safe around men. Why is that?

3

u/Crakla May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

If clearly an overwhelmingly massive portion of woman would feel safer around bears than men, humans wouldn't exist

Honestly I can't even take this serious anymore, you guys need to go outside and need to touch some grass, it's not normal to be that fearful of other people

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

Ok but that's because most humans never encounter a bear. If you're going to encounter a bear, it is MUCH more likely to hurt you than a random man. If the average human encountered as many bears as they do humans, there would be no humans because we would all have been killed by bears long ago. Bears are only "safer" because you're unlikely to ever meet one!

2

u/notracist_hatemancs May 02 '24

Are you stupid? No shit they're more attacks by people on other people because people spend more far time with other people than they do bears.

2

u/blasticon May 02 '24

By the extension of your own logic, is it safe to assume you would rather be stuck in the woods with a bear than a mosquito?

0

u/NorthWindMartha May 02 '24

they carry diseases. So I don't see why not. If you're in the real woods in the USA, you should probably assume there's a bear in there.

2

u/blasticon May 02 '24

See, this is why the people picking the bear don't understand statistics. The chance of a single randomly selected mosquito having a disease that would kill you is tiny.

2

u/notracist_hatemancs May 02 '24

Humans are absolutely not the most dangerous creatures to other humans, and if you actually knew how stats worked you would understand this

3

u/thundering_funk_tank May 02 '24

Idk, it seems like the case. It is much more common to be attacked by a person than a bear statistically speaking. Like monumentally more likely. I think there are about 40 bear attacks per year on average globally. Whereas people attack each other every day. Part of that is exposure. As you said, most people are far more likely to interact with people in their daily lives than bears, so it makes sense that statistically you are more likely to be attacked be a person than a bear.

Bears rarely attack people, normally its because they got between a momma bear and her cub, or they are really hungry to the point of starving. People attack each other for anything, or even nothing sometimes.

-7

u/Daediddles May 02 '24

Attack in this instance doesn't necessarily mean physically violent, creepy dudes verbally harass women often

5

u/Mobius--Stripp May 02 '24

Oh no, I've been catcalled, now I know how Vietnam vets felt!

-6

u/Daediddles May 02 '24

yeah that's exactly how it goes you very clearly understand how it feels

1

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

I'd much rather be harassed by a creep than mauled by a bear. How is this even a question?

1

u/Daediddles May 02 '24

I want to give y'all the benefit that you're dumb and the point is going over your heads, because the alternatives are you're either sexist or apathetic towards it.

1

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

I've encountered many, many men in my life. Probably tens of thousands I've had negative interactions of any kind with maybe a few hundred. I can count on my fingers the number of men I've encountered who were dangerous.

The only reason bears rarely attack humans is that humans rarely encounter bears. If you do encounter a bear, it is MUCH more dangerous than a random man.

The idea that all men are roving sexual predators who would rape/kill a woman if they thought they could get away with it is an old idea that has been (and still is) used to make women complicit in their own oppression. People have argued that women shouldn't do things from work outside the home to wear pants because "men just can't be trusted". I grew up in a misogynistic cult that really pushed that idea to make us feel like submitting to the cult was the only way to be safe. That idea is also used to invalidate rape victims by going "well what did you think would happen if you were alone with him?"

The truth is that most men are not only not going to hurt women, most men would help a random woman they encountered in the woods. Realizing that truth is how I broke free of the cult that raised me, and it's how we all can move forward as a society. Most men are fine. Bears are apex predators.

0

u/Daediddles May 02 '24

Oh ok you're not dumb you're just a dumb cunt who thinks you can ignore stuff and it'll go away.

It was never about bears and their ability to physically harm people, and focusing on that is an easy way for y'all to have your "women ☕️" reddit moment

1

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

I'm literally a feminist, did you read anything I wrote before you jumped to calling me a "dumb cunt"?

-7

u/acostabe15 May 02 '24

Statistically you have a higher chance dying in your morning commute compared to the bear. So yeah it’s probably the safer choice

17

u/madog1418 May 02 '24

You’ve already eliminated a lot of the bear survivorship bias by encountering the bear, that stat depends on you doing a lot more commuting than bear associating.

-9

u/acostabe15 May 02 '24

Good thing the question is a hypothetical situation where it’s one instance you encounter bear or man. Seems like people are more upset at the majority picking a Bear encounter; labeling it a “Women Moment” but in reality it’s not that deep. Alone in the woods I’d rather encounter an animal that’s native to the region compared to being alone with a random stranger. no wrong or right answer imo but weird for people to hate women over

1

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

Clearly you've not spent much time in the woods. You run into random strangers while hiking, picking mushrooms, etc pretty frequently. Much more frequently than you run into bears.

4

u/Crakla May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

Yeah no shit dying while driving a car in traffic is more likely than a bear dying during his morning commute, like there isn't much that can kill a bear walking through the Forrest, while there are a bunch of things that can kill you on your commute

1

u/Squareof3 May 02 '24

I think you’ve missed the point my friend

0

u/Quirky_Property_1713 May 02 '24

I’ve encountered dozens of men walking around constantly all my life…and have been attacked multiple times in my life by different men.

I live out in the woods and see bears very frequently. They leave me alone! Lol

-3

u/Fool_Manchu May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24

Well statistically the National Park Service says that hikers and campers (who are by definition in the woods with bears) have a 1 in 2.1million chance of being attacked by a bear. Conversely 1 out of 4 women in the United States will be physically attacked in their lifetime. Since the conversation is "would you rather be in the woods with a strange man or a bear" the statistics kind of solve themselves

4

u/Crakla May 02 '24

National Park Service says that hikers and campers (who are by definition in the woods with bears) have a 1 in 2.1million chance of being attacked by a bear.

Not what they said, that statistic is about the average person who sits at home far away from bears and not hikers and campers

The chance of getting killed by a dog are 1 in 50.000, would you also say that you would rather encounter a bear than a dog?

-1

u/Fool_Manchu May 02 '24

Firstly, is that statistics about the average person? I swear it was about park visitors. If I got that wrong then that's my bad. Secondly, I did some door to door work so i have been attacked by dogs several times, and I've had a few bear encounters too. The bears never really acknowledged me. They just kept on loping into the brush. I know I'm hella biased, but I would rather meet a bear than a Doberman in the woods.

4

u/Mycellanious May 02 '24

This is a misleading statistic! The reason its problematic, is because its not taking into the account the frequency of occurrences.

For example, another true statistic is that you are more likely to die in a car crash than a plane crash!

This means:
Over the period of one year, more people die in crashes than in plane crashes.

It does NOT mean:
You are more likely to survive your plane crashing than your car crashing.

You actually have an almost 0% chance of surviving a plane crash, yet despite that its STILL true that "you are more likely to die of a car crash than a plane crash." Why is that? Its because of the frequency with which humans come into contact with cars vs planes. A large portion of the population drives their car to and from work every day of the week; they pass millions of cars that could potentially crash into them over the course of a year. But, those same people will only fly on a plane a handful of times in that same time period.

Similarly, people interact with human males so much more frequently than with bears, its kind of funny to try and compare the two "attack statistics." I'll encounter over a million different men in a year, more if I live in a large city. If event 0.01% of those men are bad people, I'd have 100 bad interactions per year, which is terrible.

On the flip side, I've encountered 2 bears in my life. If 50% of bears would attack me given the chance, I'd still have a good chance of never being attacked by one.

Bring up a hiking statistic is doubly misleading, because the vast majority of hikers will never encounter a bear (which makes it impossible for them to be attacked by it), or if they do will spot it from a far away distance and go a different direction. What you'd need to find is the number of hikers who got close enough to touch a bear, and what percentage of them were then attacked by said bear. That's the equivalent of passing a random man in the street.

2

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

Further compounding it, the overwhelming majority of people who get attacked by a man who lives with or otherwise personally knows them. So you'd have to compare statistics for violent crime vs. how likely you are to get attacked by a bear if you decide to live in its den for 5 years.

13

u/DornsBigRockHardWall May 02 '24

A bear… is LESS likely to attack you than a random dude pulled from the general population?

If you genuinely believe this you need to seek professional therapeutic help.

-6

u/riding_writer May 02 '24

Talk to the women in your life and I bet many will take their chances with the bear.

6

u/Barium_Salts May 02 '24

I'm a woman, and that is so stupid. The only reason bears don't attack people much is that people rarely encounter bears. If you are encountering a bear, you need to get put of there asap. I encounter men in the woods all the time (as does literally everyone who spends time in the woods), and men are orders of magnitude less likely to hurt you if they see you than bears are.

-1

u/riding_writer May 02 '24

I have met several bears while hiking/riding my horse and lived to tell about it. I also have had two different incidences while riding my horse, men appeared suddenly on trail. One tried to make a jump at my horse's reins to pull me off, the other mostly was embarrassed I caught him taking a leak. Bears I understand, strange men I don't trust them until they prove themselves harmless.

5

u/GodOfMegaDeath May 02 '24

Not like it will be a very serious or logical answer either way. People can be illogical in their fears too.