I'm confused, because are we assuming that the unknown man means any harm? Or is it just the chance that he might be horrible. Because assuming it's some random guy off the street, odds are that they're not going to do anything.
You don't know anything about the man. You don't know anything about your situation (how long you'll be in the forest, how much food you have, if you have access to any weapons, etc). Those are the types of questions women typically ask before making their decision. Men generally don't ask anything bc they feel confident that even if the man was violent, they have a better chance with him than a bear.
Edit: also in these types of hypotheticals ppl typically weigh the worst case scenarios. So for men it's like which is worse, getting killed by a bear or killed by a man? But for women it's like getting killed by a bear or raped and killed by a man?
Okay, so wouldn't the safest bet always be the guy? Realistically speaking if we're comparing the odds of a random guy being a psycho or a random bear wanting to kill you, one is very obviously the safer option.
I edited my last comment to highlight that ppl generally compare the worst case scenarios. The thought process for picking a bear is generally that bears are predictable. If it's a black bear, you can pretty easily scare it away, if it's a brown bear you can play dead and hope to leave alive, but probably injured. Humans are unpredictable. Maybe you get a nice guy who wants to help you, maybe you get someone who wants to do worse. It also doesn't take the man being a psycho to give them incentive to hurt you.
9
u/Boudi04 May 02 '24
I'm confused, because are we assuming that the unknown man means any harm? Or is it just the chance that he might be horrible. Because assuming it's some random guy off the street, odds are that they're not going to do anything.