Tap for context

Some woman on the internet said she would feel safer spending a night in the woods with a random bear rather than with a random man

  • Basilisa@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    There are two kinds of men:

    The one that understands why the answer is the bear.

    And,

    The one that is the reason why the answer is the bear.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      i’m just trying to figure out why this is becoming a colloquialism, i mean we’ve had would you rather for a while. But this is a very different format from it, and it’s rather, obtuse. Is the most polite way i can think to explain it.

      I hate that i enjoy sociology sometimes, this is one of those times. People suck.

    • endhits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Or maybe people don’t like being roped in with terrible people based on a part of them that they have no control over? Just a thought.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        In this scenario the woman has limited information. She has no choice but to assume average chances of a man or a bear killing her, regardless of the individual.

        When you’re facing down a threat in the woods, how much they enjoy being stereotyped isn’t your problem.

        • endhits@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          If you believe you’re less likely to be in danger with a bear than a man, you’re just sexist.

    • Gonzako@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, the bear pick is the sneaky way women try to rob the average man of status by implying that we are mindless beasts willing to do the worst at the first chance we get.

      • mrcleanup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        The fact that you think the point of this is your status and not someone else’s safety says so much.

        • Gonzako@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Because it is about insulting men. No one’s actually getting trapped with bears because they’re answering either way. It’s there to prove a view, would you rather be stuck with a bear or a black person? A gay person? A trans person? A jew? A Muslim?

          It’s there to rile up people about their prejudices and I’m just sad we’re all getting piled on like this.

          • mrcleanup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Look, I’m a man, I’m not feeling insulted by this at all. If you are, maybe it’s time to ask why.

            I have no problem being a man while also acknowledging that sexual assault by men is a problem that is big enough that it has created a “caution culture” where people teach their daughters to be vigilant and women will cross the street if someone is walking behind them to stay safe. It isn’t like this is overblown, studies vary but all agree it’s somewhere more than one in ten women are victims of sexual violence in their lifetime. That’s a non-dismissible statistic.

            Sure sexual assault by women is a thing too, but men tend to handle it differently than women do. All we are doing here is acknowledging that in our culture “male stranger danger” is a thing that exists and is pervasive and strong enough that many women would be willing to risk the bear because at least it won’t rape them.

            Why would you be taking that personally?

            • Gonzako@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Well, because it’s prejudice being directed and reinforced towards us! I am the average man, and so are you! I am down for all the #metoo movements ya’ll need but it needs to be pointed towards specifics. I won’t allow to be put in the same cage I supportedsome people to get out of.

  • Landsharkgun@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Are we talking brown bears or black bears?

    Brown bears are violently territorial and will attack you for being in eyeshot.

    Black bears are basically giant racoons and will move away from people - especially if you’re making loud noises and making yourself look big - because they don’t want that smoke. They’ll only get aggressive if you surprise them or get anywhere near their younglings.

    I’d probably take a black bear over a lot of dudes. As long as we got a good hundred feet or so of distance, Mr Bear and I ain’t gonna bother each other.

    • Soulcreator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Totally agreed, the question is so vague it’s absurd. Are we talking a panda or a grizzly? Is the man a locked-in paraplegic or an violent ex con?

      Regardless how you answer there’s always another possibility that makes your decision look stupid.

      • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yeah but that’s a different scenario all togther. Not all men are dangerous rapists, obviously. But enough are prone to assault and SA that it’s statistically safer to have some random bear (possibly grizzly or teddy) than some random man. If you don’t feel like the random guy walking down the street is dangerous, that’s probably because random men on the street don’t regularly harass you, which is unfortunately still a very common occurance to most women.

        • Soulcreator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          While I understand and respect your viewpoint, I’m not quite sure you understand what I’m saying here… The question is designed to be a no win scenario, it’s phrased in such a vague way that no matter how you answer someone else can chime in and say oh no, your not imagining the terrible scenario I’m imagining. There’s literally no way of answering it in a way that someone is going to chime in and tell your wrong.

          It’s literally designed to be a test designed to gauge your reaction more than it is to be answered seriously.

          Without more info one can’t possibly respond in a legitimate manner. And any responses without additional information is more of a mirror to your own personal disposition and fears than it is a legitimate response to the question.

  • jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I get the sentiment, but realistically I’ll still pick the random man. A man could kill or rape me. A bear is likely to kill me.

    • Skkorm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Actually a bear is very unlikely to come after you. I come from an extremely rural part of Alberta, Canada, and large bears would sometimes wander in and near town. They wouldn’t run around swiping people up and murdering them, they would just basically wander around eating garbage and looking for food. The reality is that if you were in the woods with a random bear, unless it was starving or you were near its Cubs, it likely wouldn’t see you as important.

      I’ll tell you what though. The bodies of indigenous women would get found in the woods sometimes. Bears didn’t put them there, men did.

      • Grumpy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Actually statistics show that an encounter with a bear is orders of magnitude more dangerous than an encounter with a man. Obviously. I encounter 1000s of men as I was down the street and I’m not dead yet.

        Yes, it’s very unlikely to run into a bear. But if that’s the point you’re making, you’re missing the predicate of the question where the encounter is already assumed.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Statistical error. Unlikely to encounter a bear; but per bear encounter, less likely to survive than per men encounter.

        Serial killers and rapists are very clever and because there exist serial killers who want to kill indigenous women in the woods, they will likely succeed. Bears have no such desire, and because indigenous women are clever they will avoid the bears.

        But I’m willing to bet that the odds of a random man being a rapist/murderer are much lower than a random bear deciding to kill me.

        It’s hard thing to think about because our brains want to rephrase the situation into taking account how likely it is to encounter men vs bears in the first place. That’s why this isn’t very applicable to, say, staying safe at night or in bars.

        …except it is. This is why, if you have to take a ride home with a strange man, it’s much safer to go with an arbitrary man of your choosing than the one who offers.

  • SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Context: Some woman on the internet said she would feel safer spending a night in the woods with a random bear rather than with a random man

    Some woman

    Not “some woman” — quite a few women. Lots of women.

  • Leon_Frotsky [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m incredibly bear pilled ngl, as long as I stay a decent distance from it and don’t do anything dumb I’ll be fine, with a random guy idk what might happen, there’s no certain set of rules to follow to get me out of the situation safely - I’ll probably be with a perfectly normal well adjusted guy or I might be with some super transphobe who sees a small visibly trans girl alone in the woods away from all civilisation with no witnesses or some incel who sees his opportunity to get some, regardless of consent. In the bear scenario, all of the power is in my hands to just make sure that I don’t do anything dumb and as long as I don’t I’ll be fine, in the man scenario I just have to trust the luck of the draw to give me a decent man to be alone in the woods with.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Right, this is what folks aren’t understanding.

      Yes a big ass bear is clearly more dangerous but like in reality the random man is much more variable and there are WAY more examples of what we’re capable of as opposed to what a bear does.

      A bears nature is understood.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes a big ass bear is clearly more dangerous

        If it is a black bear, which 99 percent of the time it would be, nah, the man is more dangerous. Black bears are scaredy cats.

  • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I am unironically bearpilled in this context. Men can be fucking scary with women. At least I’m unlikely to be SA’d before I die, with the bear.

    • liuther9@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why by default man is a serial killer and sa? What are the odds that dude is a psycho? What are the odds that bear is a killer? Do you understand how hard it is psychologically to murder someone if you are a normal person?

      • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        The man is not “by default” a serial killer and sa, its just a possibility I don’t want to entertain.

        And yes, hello, I am normal person. I understand how hard it is psychologically to murder someone. I also know how hard it is psychologically to SA someone. And yet…

        This is a “this is the option I would take” situation. I didn’t insult anyone, I didn’t say YOU have to take the bear. If you disagree, that’s perfectly okay, but you can’t tell me how I should feel, despite many men thinking that’s acceptable.

    • Mubelotix@jlai.luOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      A colored flag means a sign giving a clue on something. It doesn’t define a person, and can only be used to describe some abstract fact. You can say “getting angry when talking about the bear discourse” is a redflag, but saying “a man is a red flag” is not correct

          • Taleya@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Syntactically they should have used ‘displays’ not ‘is’ a green or red flag, but everyone divined the meaning of the damned sentence and the internet is garbage so who gives a rats

    • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The thing these arguments never take into account is a fate worse than death.

      That’s the point you’re missing.

      Think about why someone would prefer the much more likely bear mauling to the much less likely worst case scenario with a man. If you can wrap your head around that, then consider why these women had that answer ready to go with very little thought. Considerations of a fate worse than death is something that women live with from the age where they first notice grown men noticing them. That averages 11 or 12 years old by the way. Maybe younger if their parents were a little more candid with them than the generic “stranger danger.”

      • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I knew I had to have the talk about men when my girls turned nine. They were playing basketball and one of the dads made a comment about a girl and said “she is going to grow up and look like Mia Kalif (I don’t know how to spell her name, the porn star) and be a hot piece of ass.”

        Oh, yeah…you mean that nine year old? The fuck is wrong with you.

  • gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    That post frustrated the fuck out of me. Like I get and agree with the point you’re trying to make. But no, if you were actually given that choice no reasonable person is actually going to pick the bear.

    • Why wouldn’t a reasonable person pick the bear? Plenty of people have just ordinary, totally safe experiences with bears in their normal lives. Meanwhile, they have ordinary SV committed against them by men in their normal lives. Why shouldn’t they pick the group that hasn’t been a constant threat to them? Its not asking you to try to pick a fight with the bear.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Why wouldn’t a reasonable person pick the bear?

        Because you’re comparing a wild animal that can easily kill you with a single swipe, with a random normal person?

        Plenty of people have just ordinary, totally safe experiences with bears in their normal lives.

        I can, with 10,000,000,000% certainty tell you that way more people have vastly more ordinary, totally safe experiences with random men in their normal lives than with bears.

        • Because you’re comparing a wild animal that can easily kill you with a single swipe, with a random normal person?

          Can easily kill is different than likely to. Plus, the same is true of any human, but they’re also much more likely to have outcomes far worse than quickly being just being killed. Its a random person in the woods, not just a *normal *person (whatever “normal” is supposed to mean). But honestly, I don’t think I’d put it past many “normal” humans (men and women) to commit at least minor SV in the “right” circumstances.

          I can, with 10,000,000,000% certainty tell you that way more people have vastly more ordinary, totally safe experiences with random men in their normal lives than with bears.

          Sure, but I’m just as certain that women have far more experiences with SV from humans than any violence from bears. Even if they’re actual survivors of bear attacks, they’re likely the victim of far more SV by men.