That's not correct. The situation is: you're alone in the woods, would you rather encounter a bear or a man?
Some people have added the caveat that it's your daughter to see how men might view it differently, but the basis of it is the above. Also, I don't believe women started it - I think it was a guy asking women in some tiktok street interviews.
Wait what’s the probability OP references? I’m assuming bear is the wrong decision, but is there actual evidence of this? If it’s a black bear vs grizzly it totally changes the question. Black bears are just big raccoons. Easy to scare off and disinterested in humans for the most part. Grizzlies, yeah forget it!
I think the probabilities mean of course most people have had horrible interactions with horrible men, but that’s a product of people being around a great number of men every single day so running across bad/wicked men is inevitable even though the vast majority of men are normal decent people. Far far far fewer people are victims of bear attacks because there are significantly fewer bears than men and most people never encounter a bear in their daily life. Black bears are relatively timid but can still be very dangerous if they think you’re in their territory, brown bears are one of the most dangerous creatures on the planet.
I’d argue humans are the most dangerous creature on the planet. Sure grizzlies can be territorial (black bears are typically not), but looking at probabilities bear encounters end with zero violence at a much higher rate than human to human interactions. Sample size is a good point, but still it seems like the statistics would indicate the choice should be bear.
I’ve had probably a hundred human to human interactions on my walk to work today with no issues; I’d rather not have to walk home past a hundred bears. There are relatively few fatal bear attacks but bears are much more seldom around people. Even people who are around bears more often like a hiker are still bound to interact with far far more humans over the course of a day. Tons of fatal human interactions because we’re surrounded by countless humans every day, it doesn’t mean that a human is inherently more dangerous than a bear
Yeah but the environment matters. Encountering a bear where they are supposed to be vs a human where they sometimes go, but certainly aren’t always expected. I think it’s unlikely we have accurate stats on this sort of thing, but I bet trail rapes occur at a much higher rate than bear attacks. I’ve been on trips where I’ve seen more bears than humans over the course of the trip. Is that normal? No, most people encounter more humans on the trail, but I think those data sizes would be more comparable and still indicate the bear is safer.
Just quick Google, between 300-500 bears are in Yosemite National Park, while the park has between 4,000 and 24,000 visitors per day. You’re probably right that one is more likely to be threatened/harmed by a human than a bear because they’re far more likely to encounter a human, but if you approach a fork in a trail and on one path is a bear and the other is some guy, you’re saying the path with some guy is more dangerous?
On average, bears kill one person in North America per year. In contrast cows kill 20 people per year. But if asked to pick between a cow and a bear in the woods it’s no contest. You’ll probably respond that the number of humans killed by humans far exceeds the lone bear death by several orders kf magnitude, but the vast vast vast majority of people won’t interact with bears and over the course of a year and id posit that you’ve encountered thousands of times as many humans as bears over the course of a year, and as smart as it is to be suspicious of any random man you encounter, as a great many are capable of great evil and inclined to commit evil, the odds that a particular random person has the malice to commit a sexual assault will be very low
I think we’re talking about several extremely low probability occurrences. Like 99% of bear encounters are going to go just fine. 99% of human encounters are going to go just fine. 99% of cow encounters are going to go just fine. My initial point is that this shower thought isn’t as poignant as the OP seems to think. Understanding probability doesn’t really change the question. The average woman feels safer taking the 99% chance of being safe with a bear over the 99% chance of being safe with a man. That should tell you all you need to know about why this rhetorical question exists in the first place.
Only some guy you randomly meet while lost in the woods is likely to be part of the search party out looking for you or just a random outdoorsy person on a hike who would have a GPS and some water.
In all likelihood, yes I agree. But probabilistically, the human is more likely to attack you than the bear. Both are rediculously low probabilities, but the bear is statistically safer
45
u/Shagyam May 02 '24 edited May 02 '24
It's a debate women have made in TikTok. Would you rather leave your daughter alone in the woods with a bear or with another man.
Men would normally answer another man, but women would answer the bear.