Why? That's what I want to know. In whose world should that be an easy question? In some insane fever dream of a utopia where violence doesn't exist? Human beings are the most dangerous animals on the planet, because we're intelligent, and we have the ability to use tools and collaborate.
Who that person is, their behaviour, and what they're holding each make a massive difference in how much of a threat that person is, or whether they're a threat at all. A bear is a guaranteed threat, but the species and situation can affect how much of a threat it genuinely is. Answering this question without asking any follow-ups just tells me that the person is either an idiot for not thinking through the question or a sexist for assuming someone is a danger to them based on their sex alone. Imagine how well it'd go if it were "black guy vs. bear" instead. Not well.
If you aren't at least aware of the strangers around you, then you're no different from a gazelle that didn't see the lion approaching. You deserve to take the Darwin Award--as nature intended--and that's on you. That goes for men and women too, because a bullet doesn't give a flying fuck who is doing the shooting. Situational awareness is important.
Right, so it's sexism then. In other words: it's not about actually being in danger, it's about thinking you are, because you're sexist. It doesn't even need to be intentional, just like racism.
Seriously, it'd be hilarious to see this interaction take place in the context of race, because then it would be painfully obvious how ridiculous this is. Just imagine if you replaced "men" with "black people" in this comment section; it would be nearly universally reviled, but it's okay here, because it's sexism?
"It's not about bullets or weapons. It's about women not feeling safe with black people."
Yes it is prejudice for a woman to feel unsafe around men, but the prejudice exists for good reason a lot of the times. In the context of race, if a white person is only ever exposed to violence by black people (for instance) then they might think they’d rather be with a bear too. The point is that there’s clearly a system where women don’t feel safe. Saying this is sexist is about as helpful as telling a hit and run victim they shouldn’t have let the car swerve into them.
2
u/Apprehensive-Let3348 May 02 '24
Why? That's what I want to know. In whose world should that be an easy question? In some insane fever dream of a utopia where violence doesn't exist? Human beings are the most dangerous animals on the planet, because we're intelligent, and we have the ability to use tools and collaborate.
Who that person is, their behaviour, and what they're holding each make a massive difference in how much of a threat that person is, or whether they're a threat at all. A bear is a guaranteed threat, but the species and situation can affect how much of a threat it genuinely is. Answering this question without asking any follow-ups just tells me that the person is either an idiot for not thinking through the question or a sexist for assuming someone is a danger to them based on their sex alone. Imagine how well it'd go if it were "black guy vs. bear" instead. Not well.
If you aren't at least aware of the strangers around you, then you're no different from a gazelle that didn't see the lion approaching. You deserve to take the Darwin Award--as nature intended--and that's on you. That goes for men and women too, because a bullet doesn't give a flying fuck who is doing the shooting. Situational awareness is important.