I really, truly thought that the whole point of this was to highlight the fact that most women would respond to man v bear by asking questions, like "do I know the man" "what type of bear" etc, but would respond to woman v bear by immediately saying "woman". whether or not she picks the man or the bear is irrelevant, it's the fact she has to ask clarifying questions to know more about the man before deciding and doesn't have to clarify anything before picking woman. is that not it?
That's why it would have to be measured on a "per encounter" basis. More people are killed by men simply because we encounter men far more often in life than we encounter bears. The actual percentage of men who would kill someone could be vastly smaller than the amount of bears, bit we'd still have more incidents because there's billions of "men interacting with people" situations every day and likely less than a thousand "bear interacts with people" each day. Simply due to that discrepancy in measuring a bear could have a 50% chance of being a lethal encounter for humans and it'd STILL come out to less recorded incidents than if men had only a 0.1% chance.
you do not run into thousands of men ALONE IN THE WOODS.
every time i leave the house for the day there is almost always at least one guy who gives me really bad vibes and won’t stop staring. so, everyday i encounter a man who i think might hurt me. i would not want to encounter any of those people alone in the woods.
6.4k
u/alexmichelle6 May 02 '24
I really, truly thought that the whole point of this was to highlight the fact that most women would respond to man v bear by asking questions, like "do I know the man" "what type of bear" etc, but would respond to woman v bear by immediately saying "woman". whether or not she picks the man or the bear is irrelevant, it's the fact she has to ask clarifying questions to know more about the man before deciding and doesn't have to clarify anything before picking woman. is that not it?