You're viewing a single thread.
"Men as a rule are such scum, I'd rather spend the night with a wild animal that routinely kills and eats people given the choice!" -These women
"Why cant I find a good man?!" -Also these women
As a happily married man, I would want nothing to do with a woman that has such overt hatred towards my gender. If my wife started playing the "as a rule, men are subhuman scum more dangerous to me than wild carnivorous animals" game, I would eventually divorce her, regardless of whether she considered me to be one of the good ones.
This is good from an ecological perspective though, if you aren't on team human at least. Women hating men means less humans, which would be better for most life on earth, including bears.
As a happily married woman in her mid-30s, let me explain.
1 in 3 women are victims of violence, and I'm pretty sure the number is actually quite a bit higher. Only a few hundred women have ever been mauled by bears.
As a woman, there are very few certain methods to avoid being assaulted or harassed by humans. But bears are relatively uncomplicated and there are simple steps to avoid getting mauled that almost always work.
Now, let me get this really really clear. The question is "if you have to be in a forest with a random man or a bear". The bear is predictable, the man is not. The bear will always mind its own business and will almost always avoid you. The man might not. The man might be super nice, quite a lot of men are, but you can't know that, it's a random man. The bear is a bear, a known factor.
Almost every woman will have a story, first or second hand, where an otherwise good and trustworthy man suddenly does something unwanted. Again, most men won't, but you can't know that in advance. The bear, on the other hand, will remain a bear in all cases.
The question is not "would you prefer to be locked in a tiny cell with a man or a hungry bear". It's not "who would you rather fight?". The question is, "do you prefer a known-but-dangerous animal, or an unknown man?". And women are choosing a known and controllable quantity, over a human male they don't know and can't control for.
Only a few hundred women have ever been mauled by bears.
Don't you think this is subject to sampling bias? How much time do women spend with bears versus men?
My wife was recently in a forest with a random bear. The bear walked away.
My mother and sister told a story of meeting a bear on a trail. The bear walked away.
A large percentage of women I have met have a story about a problem with an aggressive man at some point.
Yeah, but you're contrasting 2 bear encounters with hundreds if not thousands of encounters with people. You encounter way more often men than bears and if you want to use the math argument you have to account for this.
"it's totally fine and normal that 1/3rd of all women are sexually abused by men because there are a lot of men, it's normal!" - you
You're over here. That light over there in the distance? That's their point, you missed it by a mile.
Yeah, that's kind of the point. Bears tend to avoid women rather than hunt them down.
“as a rule, men are subhuman scum more dangerous to me than wild carnivorous animals”
Lol. No one said that. But the fact that you hear that when women say they feel threatened is very telling of who you are as a person. I hope your wife finds freedom eventually.
Literally the premise of the question, random man or random bear, who do you feel safer, the opposite of in danger, with?
It's clear you are choosing not to understand the difference between what you said and what the question said. I can't save you from your willful ignorance.
We have a son, why would I ask her a question that heavily infers her infant son is or will inevitably be a dangerous, vicious monster more murderous than a bear that she should feel unsafe around?
Well, judging by your levelheadedness here, she obviously has nothing to worry about. /s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition. Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.
Even if 99% of men were not abusers, the 1% that are also tend to hide their malice and pretend to be decent until alone and the woman is vulnerable. So as women interact with hundreds or thousands of men over their lifetimes they will come across these abusers or know someone who was abused and that the system blames victims and the fear is not just about percentage chance of a horrible outcome, but that society continues the abuse.
A bear is a known factor, dangerous but never in a deceptive way and society doesn't tend to blame victims of animal attacks.
Also the percentage of abusers is way higher than 1%. Everyone knows multiple rape and abuse victims, but few people know someone who was mauled by a bear. That is the context for this question.
That’s just a numbers game, we also have way more interactions with bears, you would have to do a whole breakdown of time/incidents for bears and humans both
The point is not the literal number of incidents or ratio, because personal experience impacts that for most people.
Someone who has been in a plane crash don't care how infrequent they are, the personal experience influences how they estimate the risks.
Oh, you meant personal experience.
Yeah, 100%
I completely misread you somehow.
It’s definitely the women’s fault for preferring the bear. 🐻 /hj
Wait you’re giving out handy j’s? I’m in!
Park bathroom stall 2?
Its literally a hypothetical question being posed.
A hypothetical, by its nature, has no victims.
I also have no doubt that if these same women were abducted by some faceless squid gamey organization and subjected to this premise for real, with some random confused dude abducted from a gas station in one cage, and some random confused bear abducted from the woods in another, the number of them proudly declaring "I choose bear!" would drop to next to none.
This was just presented as yet another roundabout opportunity for the ever popular "ladies? Men are pigs/dogs: yes or no?"
"As a happily married man I'm got so triggered by an internet meme that I started ranting to strangers about divorcing my wife."
Healthy and normal...
I feel bad for this man's wife
Did you ask your wife about it or are assuming her answer?
"Sweetie pumpkin, do you think most men would murder/rape/eat you in a cannibalistic sense if they could? Like as much or more than a wild bear I mean..."
This question is making the rounds because it's an overtly ridiculous question to ask. I didn't ask her to do the cinnamon challenge either.
Ok. I see you didn't. Pretty sexist of you to assume your wife answer btw.
Obvious troll is obvious.
I respect the game, but you need more subtlety.
It’s supposed to be a knife in the back, not a bludgeon
So which made up women have you been talking with? "These women" or your wife?
Women don't hate men. They're just doing what society told them to do. Taking precautions to avoid becoming one of the 14% of women who have reported being raped. Probably while they were a teenager.
Why does your brain connect avoidance with hate?