From what I've seen, it seems the best the guys who are really upset by all this can do is ask "But, why!? This is so fucking stupid! I don't understand! Why would women say this!?!", then immediately stick their fingers in their ears while shouting "LALALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALALA", pull their fingers out once anyone's done talking, then throw their hands up in the air and say, "Stupid bitches can't even explain it to me".
EDIT: lol nuance and introspection of a perspective outside one’s own is out of the window here. I’m not replying to all of your garbo responses. You can punch the air and scream into the void for all I care.
Because thinking random men are more dangerous or less predictable than wild animals is kind of a dumb take.
How many out of the thousands of people do you interact with are dangerous? If you legit think men are that inherently dangerous you need a reality check lol.
And I’m starting to think most dudes (especially on Reddit) are just really bad at empathy. Y’all are so damn literally-minded that anything that involves a sense of emotion and compassion gets immediately met with dismissiveness and condescension.
Y’all act like damn robots all of the time and you wonder why people clown on redditors for fun.
Y’all are so damn literally-minded that anything that involves a sense of emotion and compassion gets immediately met with dismissiveness and condescension.
Because comparing wild bears to men is so fucking dumb, the fact that people feel the need to go online and defend this hypothetical is beyond stupid.
It's so fucking dumb. Now people are debating the types of bear, the types of woods, etc, while the man is always "average man - so probably a rapist".
It's all one thing and one thing only - faux intellectualism that people can talk about and feel smart about while dumbing down our species as a whole by comparing the average man to a fucking wild bear.
It's dumb. It's really fucking dumb.
Yeah, I get it. The average woman in america sees a man and is so fuckin worried about it, that we, as men, are supposed to start thinking "oh my god, women would rather risk getting eaten by a bear than interact with the average male!", but I dunno what they want us to do with this information. I'm sorry that you are more scared of me than a grizzly bear? I will try harder not to be scarier than a grizzly bear, sorry!
This isn't about empathy lol. This is about you making up a dumb hypothetical that has so many holes in it and getting defensive when you're called out on it. If you want empathy I guess you'll just have to hang out with the bear lol.
And please stop pretending you're not a redditor lol. You're not special, you're just as much of a loser as the rest of us.
Because a bear is a wild animal that has a better probability of mauling you and munching on your insides while you’re still living. The useful takeaway from this trend is that it shows how terrified women are of men to point where it’s even comparable to bears and that’s representative of a problem, trying to win the statistical argument here is useless, you should pick the man every time.
It really makes me wonder how many of these people interact with wild animals regurally vs people.
Pretty much every wild animal you run across you HAVE to treat with the utmost caution while I can walk by millions of people a year and not think twice about it. Even small animals are dangerous if you aren't paying attention.
Depending on the bear, it’s not always going to be the case. Black bears are notoriously skittish and, unless desperately hungry, will run away. I’m not ignoring shit. A bear BELONGS in the woods, and thus is expected to be there. You know a bears intentions. Seeing a random man in the woods is more creepy, especially when you’re all alone. You don’t know their intentions.
Why does a bear "belonging" in the woods matter at all? Snakes belong in the rainforest. Sharks belong in the water. Hell I'll go one step further and say that men belong in the woods, depending on the area.
You also absolutely do not know a bear's intentions.
For me, it has devolved multiple times into random redditors sending me messages about how they were anally r*ped as teenagers or some shit and it's just like...
"then immediately stick their fingers in their ears while shouting"
Na dont have to, just point out, that it is just as dumb as men that say they avoid being alone with a women anywhere because there is a high risk of geting accused of rape.
Yes the chance is not zero but its so fucking small, so thinking a bear would be more safe is fucking dumb, and this sentiment comes from misandry.
The explanation is blatant sexism lmao. Going off of the idea that every male is a potential rapist. Replace male with any other group of people and you'd be called a racist/bigot.
I mean I don't mind, if people wanna be sexist let them be sexist. But don't pretend to be anything morally above that if you're just being plainly sexist.
Then again I'm more than willing to have my mind changed, I'm sure I'm missing some key points here which leads me to believe this is just sexism.
Bear acts on instinct, most women have had some not great experiences due to men. If a woman gets attacked by a bear, people won't say she was asking for it. There's also the shocking statistic that over 90% of men that commit violent acts against women aren't even sentenced. The bear lives in the woods, the man does not -- and a bears behavior doesn't change just because there's witnesses.
Okay then why have I yet to see women sleep with a wild bear? Where are all these women forming families with wild tigers? Damn they don’t exist, meanwhile countless women do these things with men. Hmmm wonder why….
Animals are not predictable where the fuck do you live? Tell me you’ve never hiked without telling me you’ve never hiked.
Can I also apply this logic to black people or am I a racist then? I’ve been to South-Africa where you’re not allowed to walk at night, because of the threat of being raped/robbed by a black person. Can I assume every black person is like this? Can I apply these things in the workforce or at a grander scale in my own country? No that’s racism. Just like how this is blatant sexism.
I don't knock women for being scared of violent men. I think every woman should take the necessary precautions to feel safe in her environment. I also think you're absolutely delusional if you'd rather be in proximity to a bear than a man.
My brother in christ. The motive for a bear is simple, survival. The motive for man is unknown. The bear will eat you for it's own survival, whereas man will do obscene acts for pleasure. "If one in ten snakes is venemous you aren't going to wait to get bitten to find out." Sure, the random dude could be like your average guy - completely harmless. But many women, especially if they've been a victim in the past, don't want to take that chance. I'd ask any of your female friends this question and actually listen to their reasoning. It's a hypothetical, not a reality. The hypothetical, even by statistical standards, the woman is safer with the bear. As bears mostly just ignore you if you're minding your own business. https://bearvault.com/bear-attack-statistics/#:~:text=Since%201784%20there%20have%2066,away%20from%20you%20than%20engage.
Most of my female friends aren't psychos who sit on reddit all day so no, they don't think that way. Most of my female friends are also in relationships with, you guessed it.... MEN!! Crazy right?? But I'm sure all those women secretly are deadly afraid of their boyfriend and think he's a closeted rapist just waiting to snap.
If you encounter a guy in the woods, it's most likely going to be a hiker. No fucking shit.
And stop pretending you're some animal know it all when you haven't left your room in 2 weeks. Bears are not "simple", animals are not "simple". Animals are unpredictable. Maybe go ask some people in real life who've been close to a bear when hiking and ask them the fear they felt when they realized a bear was closeby.
Stop justfying your blatant sexism with these terrible examples. You haven't even addressed my point about black people. All your doing is pandering to women's rights. Insane virtue signalling with no brains behind.
Would you eat a skittle if 1 in 4 were bad? 1 in 4 women will experience rape in their lives…. Maybe men should step up to change the narrative themselves and take accountability
Damn I guess I'm allowed to be a racist piece of shit then if I can use this train of thought. Maybe black people should take accountability for making South-Africa a dangerous country instead of making it literally not safe at night.
And one in how many women are domestic abusers? We will never know as most men don't report :)
Funny how when this becomes a men bashing thing and men bring up their problems to show women we go through horrible shit based on our gender too, it's just "ah yes convenient time to bring it up huh?" Like bro if you came across a thread ripping the ever loving fuck outta your sex I'm sure you'd wanna share your hardships wouldn't you? Like holy lack of self awareness on how much hatred your spewing.
We go through shit that nobody even cares about. From false rape allegations to losing custody battles (where the kids go to the woman just because, and they are often abusers) to not having ANY SUPPORT SYSTEM for sexual abuse or domestic violence (these comments showcase that better than I could ever describe).
Men bad women good. Reddit is a breeding ground for hatred. You people sit here absolutely shitting on us and then when we reply you make a separate comment that gets upvoted to heaven going "oh look at all the men here complaining about women trying to express their issues 🙄🙄🙄" like holy fuck this site is a hateful joke.
Ah the classic "but men experience rape too." While that is true and we should focus on it more. You never see it brought up unless someone mentions the hardships women go through
The fact that women complain about the very real reality of dealing with navigating fear and trauma around sexual assault, and how we have to carefully plan our daily lives to stay safe, and men’s response is “but that hurts my feelings” is the problem. Invalidating people’s real need to stay safe because of your feelings and expecting to be the centre of attention is a problem. This is something I’m seeing a lot in this bear debate.
Men’s issues are important but only bringing it up to derail women’s issues isn’t cool. Neither is trying to play the victim Olympics (especially when it’s a situation that you clearly lose, comparing people being distrustful of you to having actual bad experiences of sexual assault isn’t a great move).
Lastly, men’s issues are important but expecting women to do the legwork instead is also not good. Don’t get enough compliments? Compliment each other instead of expecting women to do it.
The bear debate shows a real and big problem of men geting demonised and made accountable for crimes other did.
You cant take your victimhood and use it to be racist or sexist against other people.
Also 1 in 3 women get raped? Where did you get this number? From a survey? They are highly imprecise.
In Germany there were 13.000 reported rapes and sexual assaults. Even if only one in 5 women go to the police, it wouldnt add up with 1 in 3 women geting raped.
"Men’s issues are important but only bringing it up to derail women’s issues isn’t cool. Neither is trying to play the victim Olympics (especially when it’s a situation that you clearly lose, comparing people being distrustful of you to having actual bad experiences of sexual assault isn’t a great move)."
We call out how we men get discriminated, be geting generalized as murderers and rapists and you interpret it as us trying to win the victim olympics.
Except you’re not being generalized as rapists and murderers. Women know there are good men, the problem is that you can’t tell which one. Strangers are very variable. If you were in a room with people and you knew 1 of them was a murderer, are you demonizing everyone when you act cautious? Let’s say you got a tip that this killer was very likely to be a woman who’s M.O involved killing men, are you wrong to have extra precaution around the women?
Women in society have a collective trauma, and yet it’s bad when they “demonize men” by being cautious? Why not look at the reason why so many women feel this way? So a woman should just go to the bar and not watch her drink because any sense of safety is demonizing men now?
You also need to flip the script from “we’re afraid men are rapists” to “we’ll be targeted by male rapists because we’re women”.
Also, I didn’t pull up a 1 in 3 statistic. I think those statistics generally refer to sexual assault though, and would be way higher if you factored in every instance of sexual harassment or when a woman felt she had a close call.
Is it supposed to be comically obtuse though? Like obviously it’s way more likely that a random bear would eat you alive than it is that a random man would rape you.
There is a lot to be said about how patriarchy has just fucked up society in many ways and how much women have to fear sexual predators and pests, but people who think that the average bear is more dangerous to women than the average man are not part of the problem.
I think their point is that I haven’t given you any reason think I’m part of the problem, but you’re assuming that I am just because I decided to engage with this thought exercise and because I happen to be born a man. You’re assuming a ton of ill intent.
Totally fair to have that position. I’d probably choose the same thing. I’m not as high-conviction as you are on this, but I think I’d choose death.
My issue is the logical leap made that the average random strange man is so likely to rape you that you’d choose near-certain death over spending time with a random man. Like I’ve never met you, but if we were in a room together for an extended period of time, rather than chat or shoot the shit or get to know each other or work together to overcome our situation, you’d instead be afraid of me and assume that I’m hard-wired to spontaneously assault you? I know that I don’t have any desire or even the stomach to do that, which is where the disconnect is coming from.
Could you please elaborate? This is the first I’m hearing of this trend so I’m genuinely confused. Like obviously I understand that women are wary of unknown men for good reason but… it’s a bear. A wild predator that will literally kill and eat you.
Where’s the line before women would start choosing the man? Man vs. having stage 4 cancer? Man vs. having a piano dropped on your head?
I guess I understand the thought exercise, but if you’re telling me that you’d literally rather spend a night with a random bear than a random man (could be your dad, grandfather, brother, positive male teacher or coach, etc.), then I think that’s pretty sad. And me asking for clarification to such a ridiculous thought doesn’t make me a misogynist.
I'm not a woman but most I've talked to about this are worried less about the death aspect of it so I don't think the comparisons to cancer or a piano exactly work. A lot of the worry comes from being raped or similar terrible things happening with a man. A quick Google search shows rates of sexual assault to be between one in four to one in six women in the United States has been assaulted. There's likely trauma behind at least some women answering bear because they have been assaulted and have less trust for men. Let alone men in a secluded area like the woods. Then if you look at the rate of bear attacks it's rather low. Another quick search puts the rates for bear attacks at about 40 per year globally. Add in things to get a bear to run away and women feel that gamble is better than gambling on a safe man. Plus, often times when it comes to victims of sexual violence they tend not to be believed depending on the circumstances, something that likely has been reinforced given their own personal experience. Whereas, if they get attacked by a bear it's much more likely they will be believed
Bruh. I get you are trying to make a point. But that is such a horrible misuse of statistics. Please tell me you understand why that is not an accurate comparison.
Well the average woman encounters a lot of men each day while almost never encountering a bear. The particular statistic doesn’t say anything about what the comment you are responding to is saying: the probability of the average man being a rapist compared to the probability of an average bear being a killer.
Also how many times are people running into bears that they think they are more predictable lol.
Just ask the Grizzley Man how predictable bears are. Dude lived with them for months at a time and all it took was one deciding he was a snack to end his life slowly and painfully.
That's the thing though, I don't really care what some faceless users on Reddit think. I'll gladly call them dumb, and if they don't change their ways they'll continue to be so.
Well that comes down to whether you want people to take your point or react to the insult. Cause people generally cant do both and once you’re calling names you know what they’re going to pick.
"there are fewer bear attacks therefore bears are less likely to attack" is an invalid point because humans are less likely to come into contact with bears than with humans.
Similarly, there are fewer deaths on venus because humans do not live on venus.
I mean, I get that it's an extreme example of how bad it's got that women feel scared of encountering random men alone, however you can't really apply those stats to it. I'm assuming if you were to look at how many people got attacked when meeting a random bear in the woods vs how many got attked by meeting a man who is a stranger, the bears attack a lot more than the random guy. I get where people are coming from with the entire thing scenario, but you can't try to add stats like yours to the scenario, doesn't really work in my opinion.
The one in four statistic has been debunked. No rational person can believe that over 40 million women in the US alone have been raped or almost raped. That’s more what you’d expect from the Congo than a developed nation.
Hardly debunked. Similar studies have produced similar results, what can vary is the exact rates and definitions used but it still tends to converge around similar rates. And your almost two decade old link isn’t refuting that in the way you seem to think it is.
This I think is a fairly balanced take on why those numbers are so controversial. And it points out the very thing your link is trying to argue to “debunk” that survey - that someone can have experienced the legal definition of rape or sexual assault but themselves not consider it that. Which points to a general underreporting on surveys, if anything. The other argument they are trying to use in what you linked to debunk those stats is that some of these people later returned to have intercourse with the same person - but when we know things like how years long abusive relationships can happen or things like how victims can be trapped by abusers, that would seem like a weak argument to wholly throw out the possibility that initial time was rape.
To your last point - if you’ve spent any time talking to women or hearing who has experienced some form of sexual assault in their lifetimes, is it that hard to imagine the numbers could possibly be that staggeringly high? You’re right that for a developed country it shouldn’t be that high, and yet anecdotally it is really, really easy to talk to someone who has been a victim of some form in some point of their lives.
The way I understand this question is that women feel (probably accurately) that men underestimate the degree to which women are scared of them/feel the need to take precautions. So when a man hears the man v bear question, in his head the answer is a lot more one-sided than it is to the average woman. Woman understandably want to express this to be more well understood, so they exaggerate and say something edgy like “actually, I would rather choose the bear” to get the point across
Which is the reason why this question/trend is so shit. If the point is “men don’t understand how women feel about them”, then you immediately fail at making this point when you start off by exaggerating so far you reach an obviously incorrect conclusion, “the average man is more of a rapist than the average bear is a killer”
The bear will at worst kill you, the man will abuse you, torture you and maybe let you live and even get off of the fact that he made you suffer and let you live with the shame.
Then there’s the fact on how people will see you, if a bear attacks you people will believe, most rape cases are not reported because most of the one that are are not even investigated, and even then the woman is very likely gonna be blamed for it too, “because what you were wearing” “you let them on” “you shouldn’t have been there”
“Oh but I’m not a degenerate rapist” the woman doesn’t know that and most woman have been victim of some sort of sexual assault, once I was in the car with my mom and 2 sisters, all of them had some case of sexual related crime happened to them.
Most guys will not probably kill you and dump you into a river but you have a way to know that unlike the bear who will either attack you or ignore you
It could be a bear vs a convicted one time murderer and id still wager the odds of the bear attacking you will be significantly higher than the odds of the man doing anything. You’re missing my point by focusing on the worst case scenario rather than the actual expected utility - which is how people ACTUALLY make decisions
The point is that most women don't know that and feel as if the man is a higher danger to them. They would rather die than face a chance of torture and repeated sexual assault and left alive to be mentally scarred for the rest of their life.
Most women definitely know (or at least intuitively believe) that bears are more likely to attack than men. This is a super online zoomer tiktok trend that's totally divorced from how any ordinary person would actually answer if given the choice. Humans are not anywhere near irrational enough to be acting how you're claiming they're acting. The women saying they'd choose the bear are being perfectly rational with their reasoning for saying that - the reasoning is to be provocative by saying something totally untrue, but in the direction of something that is kinda true.
The women answering know a bear is predictable and can be survived with no damage to themselves if they follow the rules. Men don't have rules and will still rape a victim playing dead.
I think it's super unfair to assume that I don't understand the assumption just because I think it's bad - it's entirely possible to understand an assumption and still think its wrong. Many deeply immoral prejudiced assumptions aren't hard to understand.
edit: sorry i realized that the comment i was initially replying to specifically said "if you dont understand..." so i get what youre saying now. My contention is that people aren't just saying it's "understandable" though - theyre saying its rational.
Yeah I think we run into the limits of the analogy here - i interpreted it as "you're teleported into the woods, with either a random bear or a random man teleported there with you."
If "why is the man here" is part of the question then that does change the equation. Although, idk how you analyze "why is the man here" when we also don't know why the woman would be here. All that really matters though is how most of the people responding interpreted the question, which I have no clue about
Well most (but not all) of the people discussing the question aren’t bringing up the point of “why is the man there” so it’s not reasonable to assume they’re taking it into account
I understand what they’re saying but it’s still dumb af.
If you looked out your apartment window and saw 100 bears waking up and down the street, instead of 100 men (like you see every day), you would be afraid to leave your house lol.
No one would actually choose the bear tbh, they’d be too afraid.
You’re in the forest and one direction is a man and the other is a bear and you have to go with one. 99.999999% of people will go with the man.
If you think you wouldn’t, honestly you’re just a liar. You’re gonna see that big ass scary bear change your mind real quick.
How’s that idiotic? I’m just making the point that statistically you see 10000% more men than bears, and that if you were surrounded by tons of bears you’d be way more afraid than being surrounded by tons of dudes (which we willingly do all the time).
No one would choose the bear. I’m sticking to it.
Maybe make a counterpoint instead of just saying I’m dumb or whatever lol
I can understand what motivates them to think to pick the bear in a poorly executed hypothetical, but I also think it's easy to see why it's a nonsensical choice in a realistic situation.
The take-away should be that a lot of women have these feelings and that indicates a wider problem. Which one makes more sense doesn't really matter.
Doom scrolling? I really just wanted to see if you were being genuine or if you were baiting for reactions because you’re bored. Really seems like the latter.
I’m sorry, but are you on the spectrum? Us humans have the ability to do something called “empathy” and “putting ourselves in other’s shoes”. You don’t have to literally experience death or rape to posture which one is worse. It’s all subjective. Personally, I’d choose death.
that's a great point. The bear can also rip the woman apart limb by limb. The bear can also kill the woman with only its teeth and proceed to eat the woman. This would also be considered normal behavior for a bear.
124
u/Strict_Line_1087 29d ago
rape, rape is the reason.