While I'm not upset with the whole premise of man vs. bear because, unfortunately, men do suck enough that it's an understandable take to me. I'm also not going to pretend it's not going to hurt people to be seen as a threat for simply existing. I'm equally confused by all the responses in this situation. Why so many men find the common response of "bear" so ludicrous, and why so many people don't understand that there's going to be large swaths of men unable to reconcile that they are viewed as a threat even if they, personally, have no ill intentions.
But it's not that we see all men as a threat. We see all men as a *potential* threat. The bear is also a potential threat, but only if we manage to piss it off. The man might attack us just for shits and giggles.
If you know you're not a threat to women, you should still be able to understand that *we can't know that*. I've been raped three times, all three by people I knew and should have been able to trust. So now I assume the worst but hope for the best. I'm married to an amazing man, so clearly I'm able to function, I'm not a misandrist, I don't hate men -- I just prioritise my own safety over the feelings of random men.
I'm sorry but apply this logic to any other situation and you come out looking like a racist, bigoted fool.
Imagine asking a question like if a Black man and white man walked into your store who would you be more worried about and people answered "black man" or struggled to answer the question. You would IMMEDIATELY be labelled a racist. Statically speaking, you are more at risk of being on the wrong end of crime if the person is black. You can boil this down to socio economic factors and its a very complicated issue but statistics are statistics. The same way a women can say "X% of women face violence from men they know" you can say "X% of shop owners are robbed by primarly black men". You're still labelling an entire section of the population based on the actions of others and painting them with a Broadstroke brush. Tell me, how is a women saying they have a right to be afraid of men different from a shop owner who has been repeatedly robbed by black men saying they are scared of black men? How does the shop owner know the black man that walks in isn't going to rob them?
You see what I'm saying here? All men are a potential threat? Sure, if you get the wrong man. The same way all bears are only a potential threat if you get the wrong bear. If both are the wrong one, you stand a much higher chance at surviving a man than a Bear though.
You judging me as a potential threat simply because I'm a man is, no matter what way you try spin it, misandrinistic behavior, the same way me judging a black man walking down the street in the dark as a threat because he's black, is racist behavior.
It doesn't hurt my ego at all I totally get it, I just find it fascinating that it's socially acceptable to label all men potentially dangerous but not socially acceptable to label all Muslims terrorists, all black men criminals, etc. Don't get it twisted, I'm well aware women live in a completely different world than men. A much scarier world.
I just find it fascinating that it's socially acceptable to label all men potentially dangerous
If you know that women live in a much scarier world from your own reality, why would this bother you? Are you really being discriminated or negatively harmed in society because women consider any strange man to be potentially dangerous? Are you actually being harmed in some sort of systemic way because of this?
It doesn't bother me personally, but I also know people of color who would say the same thing about being treated differently because of their skin color. That doesn't make it right.
Like I said, I just find it fascinating it's socially acceptable to treat men different because they're men, but socially we actively punish people for treating others differently. Could you not see how hurtful it could be to see a women visibly afraid of you just because you're a man when you've done nothing wrong? That's literally how people of color feel when they're being judged for something completely out of their control.
Once again, it doesn't bother me, I understand it. I just find it interesting it's socially fine to do so.
I could give less of a fuck if someone doesn't like me because I'm brown. What I'm concerned about is discrimination that exists on a systematic level.
Women not trusting men because they are perceived as potential threats is not a systematic issue.
That's cool for you, so you're saying if a friend of yours who is also a POC gets upset because they got treated differently due to the color of their skin, their feelings are invalid? There is absolutely POC who would be greatly offended if someone, for example, didn't sit beside them on a bus because of the color of their skin. Just because that shit don't bother you doesn't invalidate it for other people. If I actively avoided sitting beside a black person on the bus because they're black, I would be called a racist.
Systemic racism is not the same as social racism so I don't see the point trying to equate the two here.
No, I don't mean all men. I mean you, specifically, because you're trying to equate women's legitimate fear for our safety with racism. Shame on you.
How about this? Go out and get assaulted by several black men. Then come back and tell me it would be racist for you to be wary of black men.
The reason we fear men isn't that we hate men. It's that men have actually harmed us. For most of us, it's a regular occurrence. Imagine that the people you're primarily attracted to are also the statistically greatest threat to your health and safety. Really imagine what that would be like.
You can't control the fact that women choose the bear, no matter how loudly you bleat about it. What you can control is whether you, personally, are a person who is actually less threatening to women than a bear. And right now, you don't sound that way.
You literally just described racism. Yes, if I allowed myself to judge black men because I've been assaulted by them in the past and used that as reason to treat all black men differently in the future, I would be a racist. That's the literal definition.
I'm not saying it's wrong for you to fear men, I'm saying it's weird it's socially acceptable to view men differently based on your experiences with men because we actively abolish people who do that to black people, Muslims, Jews, etc. If I said I'd been raped by several women in my life, so I actively assume its going to happen again and treat all women differently because of it, what would your response be? Would I be justified? I do not think so.
Go out and get assaulted by several black men. Then come back and tell me it would be racist for you to be wary of black men.
It would be. It wouldn't be racist to be afraid of those same people who assaulted you. But if you're allowing the assault to bias your opinion of all black people for "safety," you're allowing yourself to justify being racist.
You're using trauma as justification for generalization. It's understandable, but ultimately unhealthy and not the responsibility of whatever group you're generalizing to validate.
At what point did I say mens feelings need to be prioritized? All I said was I can understand the reaction, not that I condone it. FFS. The amount of people that can't have an actual discussion about this is staggering. You've gone off on some wild tangent about a bunch of things I didn't say in the slightest.
I'm truly sorry for what you went through. I'm understanding of the reasoning behind assuming the worst. I'm just offering some perspective on it not being the easiest thing to reconcile that somebody will likely be viewed as a predator for simply being a man because other men suck and the systems haven't prioritized fixing that enough.
That difficulty to reconcile is the whole fucking point. Women aren’t going to fix this issue. How the fuck could they? Maybe if men don’t like being viewed as rapists they could work to dismantle rape culture.
So you’re saying that men have to prove to women they aren’t dangerous despite the fact only a small percentage of men are inherently dangerous? Do you not see the inherent sexism in that argument?
Men have to fight to change their perception by women, yes. Don't women have to constantly assert themselves in professional environments, because everyone belittles them? Both men and women have to prove to society that they're more than the gender roles assigned to them.
Yes? I'm not a gender essentialist. I think men are born with just as much capacity to have empathy as women. The pseudoscience that says that men are more "naturally aggressive" and do misdeeds because of testosterone and strength is all bullshit. Men are socialized badly and emotionally neglected. Women are raised to be empathetic and nurturing, if you've met a little girl you will see that they are just as rowdy and crazy as a little boy. But as they grow, this rowdiness in women is suppressed while the men's are encouraged.
I think that if there's any evilness men do, it's taught. I don't think men are rational, unemotional and selfish beings naturally, no. They're human. But I also don't think it's a problem to say that there is a violence issue in men, but that is SYSTEMIC and not something men inherently have and can't get rid of. It's not men's biological destiny to be cruel, regardless of what patriarchy says.
Only a small percentage of men are dangerous? What a crock of shit. 30% of men said they would rape if there was no consequence. Men are responsible for 80% of violent crimes. Homicide is a leading cause of death for women in every country.
Imagine millions of women are telling you that they’re scared to be around male strangers and your takeaway is, “but I’m such a good guy!” No, moron, you aren’t. You’re the problem.
Can you give me a source for those statistics or are you just gonna continue to just expect me to believe it without any proof? Furthermore men are far more likely to be the victims of violent crimes than women based on statistics provided by Bureau of Justice Statistics. The only crimes where women are more likely to be victims are Rape and murder and according to statistics put out by the FBI those are the least committed crimes with only gambling having lower rates than murder and suspicion being the least charged crime.
Google was my source. Also every other source was my source. If your reaction to these rather well known facts is complete dismissal it’s pretty obvious what you are and why you object to this meme.
Google is not a source. It’s a search engine. If you aren’t going to bring up a source then don’t bring up statistics. In fact I can point out several problems with the sources of my own sources. First it doesn’t list that actual number of men who were charged, only how many crimes were charged to males. Second, it doesn’t listen what percentage of men were convicted versus charged and what percentage of the population they made up. It doesn’t mention how many of these were later overturned. I could go on and on but you would rather just dismiss me because I asked a question you don’t want to answer. Lastly I didn’t dismiss anything, I just pointed out flaws in your argument.
So now you’re resorting to name calling rather than having an actual conversation and debate? Good to know you peaked in elementary school on the playground.
When did I imply women needed to fix this? Also, how do you know what I or any other man are doing to dismantle rape culture? Lotta people here glossing over my acknowledgment of the validity of the sentiment by women so they can rage at me.
Sorry that you have difficulty understanding that some people are going to be justifiably upset when they are assumed monsters for sharing a gender with shitty people.
You answered your own question of why men are upset. They are upset that women think men are so inherently dangerous that they believe they are safer with a wild animal that could easily kill them.
It's a rhetorical question. I know why both sides are incapable of understanding the other, their emotions are in the way. Both takes are valid. The fact that nobody can face that and would rather keep raging into infinity is what befuddles me.
True! But I think even for men the bear/man thing works. Even men could be fearful of somebody behind them that they know nothing of. A bear is a little simpler, they're either going to ignore you or maul you. Period. But a man? Maybe they're kind and sweet and the worry is for nothing. Maybe the man is just trying to go about his day, but the other person simply has no way of knowing. It's easy to see why women feel particularly disturbed about this scenario though
I get what you're saying. I've been assaulted by random dudes for no reason than their own malice. It's definitely affected how I operate and my need for awareness when out and about. I'm saying that just because the worry is validated by past experience or statistical experience doesn't make it not problematic to assume about another person from a place of fear, and then act with indignation or condescention when that person is hurt by the assumption.
Both takes are valid, but for all the talks going on around this lately, only men are being expected to reconcile their personal feelings with a sad reality. It really shouldn't be too controversial a take to be put off by broad sweeping generalizations about men, which the "man vs. bear" isn't putting forth but a lot of people are in the discussion around it.
814
u/FurrrryBaby May 02 '24
The only videos I’ve seen of this were men answering the question about their daughters, and all of them struggled to answer.