The number of people either too dense or too willfully misogynistic to understand what this is about is depressing.
If you’re arguing bear statistics or saying “not all men” or decrying misandry, then you’ve totally missed the point. If you are doing it intentionally, you’re the type of men women would choose the bear over.
The fact that anyone would choose a dangerous animal over a random man is an indictment against the culture surrounding male privilege and should spark introspection and change. Arguments against this is just ignoring women and solidifies the decision that the bear is better.
Are people arguing statistics about it? Like how many women are killed by bears every year compared to men? Lmao, they’re not even close.
I’ve seen one video on the subject that my wife showed me, then I had a conversation with my wife about it.
When you’re looking at statistics, women attacked by bears per year vs women attacked by men per year, it’s not taking into account the fact that 99% of women don’t get into situations where they are near bears. Most women (and men) don’t go hiking in bear populated woods frequently. Like how the overall odds of getting struck by lightning is low, but some people are struck 8 times are survive.
The better statistic for this argument is that a man is more likely going to kill you in an encounter, should it escalate. I didn’t fact check this, but I’ll take this video at it’s word.
Almost like that was part of the original article.
How often are you near a bear? How many bears have you attacked or wronged? Do you wonder how a bear might react if it understood English and you talked about it like you talk about men?
Honestly, no matter what side of the debate you are on its still dystopian to think that women would actually think to go to a bear over a random man when faced with the choice.
I am being introspective about this though. We created a culture of fear. A lot of it is through the consequences of rape culture and I think a large part is through an unhealthy about of true crime that’s being made. Constantly blasting worse case scenarios into people’s heads. I dunno, I just despise how we all just accepted not to trust one another and it seems like we’ve all just accepted that this to way to be about it. I just see it as a example of the alienation being pushed by capitalism.
It’s makes me a little mad tbh. Being perfectly honest it should make everyone mad. Like tbh I still think going with a random guy is the correct answer to this but we all should come together, look at this whole situation and realise the dystopian implications of this.
Yes! Thank you!
Does it hurt that women feel that way? Of course it does, so let’s work to be better so that random people can trust each other!
Angrily lashing out at the women who are pondering the benefits of a bear isn’t gonna help.
Be someone a woman would feel safe to be around. Call it out when those around you fail that test.
Create that safer environment. It isn’t impossible.
Be someone a woman would feel safe to be around. Call it out when those around you fail that test.
Create that safer environment. It isn’t impossible.
Thank you for demonstrating healthy masculinity. The rest of this thread is a trainwreck of victim blaming.
I agree totally with the first sentiment but I don’t think the recent prevalence of True Crime media really plays into it at all. This is not a new thing. Women have been making these risk assessment decisions for generations in the modern age. Girls are taught this kind of thing with how to protect themselves at a young age.
This is primarily a cultural issue and it won’t change unless the majority of people propagating (intentionally or not) realize what’s happening and work to change.
I dunno, the media and its relationship to crime is well documented. Many people accept that old people that panic about inner city crime despite it being at a record low since the 1970s are victims of this phenomenon. Why is it difficult to believe that young women who consume a lot of true crime content aren’t also effected by this phenomenon in some way. I have studied psychology and I did do a journalism course which, admittedly, I dropped out of. I just don’t like how fear based society has become. People are just too quick to assume the absolute worst and I kinda view this bear question as a reflection on that.
I don’t know a single woman who hasn’t been at the very least harrassed by men they don’t know. I know so, so many who have been assaulted, and that’s just the women who have chosen to share their experience. Thinking your couple college classes means you know more about women’s experiences than women themselves is ridiculous.
The media is bad but the sexual assault and harassment statistics are sobering. And they’re highly under reported because enforcement is often a joke.
It’s not an exaggeration to say most women either know someone who was assaulted or harassed, or they were themselves. And it was likely while they were a teenager. That kind of lesson doesn’t come from MTV.
I totally understand why women would pick bear, as bear society doesn’t bend over backwards to victimize women.
Most power structures cater to the people who abuse power. Police, church, courts, military, etc all tend to go crazy easy on men who abuse women.
Republicans want to take away women’s rights/independence, limit/eliminate divorce, force birth for rape/incest. Police who assault women are protected and don’t face consequences, and most religions literally view women as a subspecies that serve men.
Maybe the average man is totally normal and helpful, but the history of violence between men and women is like 98% men killing women with heaps of Rape, confinement, physical/mental abuse etc.
The worst any Bear could do is kill someone in 1-2 minutes, maybe longer.
It’s also an incredibly loaded situation in that being alone in the woods with a bear is “natural” and being alone in the woods with a strange man already sounds like a horror movie plot/murder news story.
There’s also the constant “stranger danger” fear women will pretty much always experience because men can consistently and easily overpower most women. All women I have met seem to know at least one or more women who have been sexually assaulted, had their drink spiked etc, so it’s not some obsession with crime shows or scary movies driving this fear. It’s actual rapists prevalent in society and emboldened enough by lack of consequences to act.
Even in cases where it seems obvious Rape happened, it’s a brutal gauntlet of gas lighting, victim blaming, “can’t ruin their life for a mistake”, etc that stop a huge amount of reporting and convictions.
Going back to the question itself, answer ratios would probably change depending on the area, would women be less inclined to pick bear if they were in a library instead of the woods because it’s unnatural for a bear to be in that environment?
People need to relax, and focus on the real story. Women have an incredibly long and valid list of reasons to be afraid of men and society needs to do better to make women feel safe
Ultimately, bear is the less complicated decision, not entirely because it is without danger, but because it is not subject to gaslighting. Most people understand that a bear attack is bad and won’t raise concerns about how you led the bear on or that what you were wearing was to blame.
Although, if you live somewhere that grizzlies are common, and you’re out hiking or biking without a bear bell, there will be some judgment on what you were (not) wearing.
/used to live in Alaska
Yeah I’m probably more comfortable with strange men in a library than strange bears. The woods are where strange bears go. The library is where strange people go.
Now if I have them making advances towards me, bear in a library 100%. My local bears are black bears and they can be scared off easier than some men.
It’s also amazing how people can have this argument in one thread and then go to another thread and leave a comment that just says “ACAB”.
You don’t trust cops? Why not? Because of a few bad apples?
Sounds like you get it…
That argument doesn’t hold water. One is an immutable characteristic, and the other is a career choice. A career that filters for certain personalities.
Well first off, being a man is not an immutable characteristic, because transgender people exist.
Second, the difference between the two groups you bring up isn’t relevant in this comparison, because pointing out the differences between them doesn’t negate the similarities. Both are groups with an inordinate amount of power (physical or legal) over any outgroup and are supported by cultural norms that allow them to exercise that power largely without repercussions. Both groups are also protected from consequences by others within the group, regardless if the others agree with their questionable decisions. And most importantly, both groups are human, meaning the individuals vary widely within the group along the moral spectrum. Even if most within the group are good, bad actors will always exist and there’s no way to know which one you’re dealing with at face value.
Even if it’s not a perfect comparison, it’s apt enough to support my point.
Being a man is immutable, unless you are saying being transgender is a choice.
I brought up the largest difference between the groups, not the only significant difference between the groups. One is a choice, the other isn’t. This difference alone is more important than any similarities your comparison can draw.
It is a highly flawed argument that only serves to get back pats from those that agree with you.
You have no idea how much they like the back pats.
Well first off, being a man is not an immutable characteristic, because transgender people exist.
The aspect of being a man that makes people consider you a threat by default is an immutable characteristic though, if you are a trans woman people will treat you that way even more than otherwise.
Man is not a gender. Man isn’t an aesthetic choice. Man isn’t a social role. Man doesn’t need an injection to stay man.
Well I know a couple of black guys that have committed crimes, I better paint them all with the same brush.
The idea is that ACAB because one bad apple spoils the bunch. So yeah. You’re missing the point of the idiom you are using.
The bad apples are organized and lead by other bad apples and actively weed out any potential good apples who wouldn’t have a snowflakes’s chance in hell at accomplishing change anyhow. How do you think corruption works?
No. The bear choice is misandry clean and clear. The men who don’t like the idea of misandry are just reacting the same way as anyone when you give them a label and call them bad for it.
I’m sure there’s some bear people who are just cool with bears and whatnot or maybe would just rather be alone.
Nah, the choice is between a being that will likely leave you alone and one that likely won’t. Most people who aren’t seeking contact want to be left alone. Interestingly enough, most bears want to be left alone too. As people, we need to allow others the distance and boundaries they want. The best way to befriend someone is to make them feel comfortable around you. Space and respect are important.
If a woman prefers the bear, maybe consider treating her like one. Treat her with respect, don’t make sudden movements, give her space, don’t mess with her cubs, and don’t pressure her into going to a local bar with a really neat vibe.
This whole thing is just another way of pitting men and women against each other.
Men having to listen to women and be confronted with reality and the harms their gender and society are actively causing is NOT pitting people against each other. Women don’t want to fight and ostracize men. They want to be safe FROM men.
If you see this discussion and feel defensive, that’s your brain trying to tell you something’s wrong and you should probably analyze why you feel like you are being attacked.
See, this is what I mean. Stupid arguments. We immediately go to pitting gender experiences against each other.
You’re not confronting reality when you compare men to animals. You’re literally projecting your insecurities onto me by assuming I’m defensive over this topic. I’m not defending either man or woman or bear in this argument. I’m saying this whole topic is a stupid hypothetical and all it does is lead people to argue, like you literally did with me. You’re not confronting reality by saying your safe with a bear, because reality is, you’ll never go be with a bear.
If you want to have a real discussion about the very real and serious harms that women have to deal with, I’m happy to discuss that. That’s a topic worth discussing. This isn’t that discussion. This is a bad faith hypothetical designed to frame a conversation against men for the sake of stirring more shit. And honestly this’ll be the last I engage with this thread because its really already consumed too much of my time.
I hope you understand, I’m not trying to fight or belittle your opinion or attack you. If you wanna frame this as me being defensive, that’s your prerogative, but I just found this whole question to be dumb when I first heard about it a few days ago, and this article just once again reinforced how dumb I found it.
You are conflating all men with the guilty.
You’re conflating what you think argument is with what the article was actually about.
“not all men!”
Enough men that most women would choose a fucking bear. Look in the mirror: you’re the problem.
Oh damn, am I?
What with my respecting women’s choices, supporting them and all that?
Do I need to go change everyone’s opinions or is just living my life, doing right, and treating people as equals enough?
Yeah, some of us get sick of hearing how men do this and men do that.
Well guess fucking what, I’m a man who doesn’t do all the bad shit, and still yet I hear about how men are bad.
Shit gets old quick.
Is any of this going to cause me to change my life and how I act?
Not even a bit, my principles don’t require anyone’s input.
It’s like how when men start talking about how all women are bitches, if I was a woman I would get straight pissed at that as well.
That is bullshit behavior no matter who is doing it.
Wanna be safe from men? Do it the same way men do. Be able to handle yourself when you need to and don’t worry about it the rest of the time. Women having to listen to men and be confronted with reality is not mansplaining.
How does “being able to handle yourself” apply when someone else has removed your ability to handle yourself with drugs or alcohol? How does it apply when your choices are “go along with it and try to escape later” or “fight back and probably lose because you have less muscle mass and are physically smaller than them”?
How does your argument apply when you are a teenage girl in high school being harassed by adult men? Reality is a very different place when the world perceives you as a woman (or girl), and your prescriptivist approach entirely fails to account for the fact that your perspective has a lot of blind spots in it.
Try defending yourself from all of society when a girl lies about you for rejecting her.
Are you not responsible for your own drinking? I avoid the hazard of bars by not going to them. I’m also pretty good about not dating total strangers.
Carry a gun. Obviously this doesn’t apply in the teenage girl scenario. I wanna say that you gotta protect your kids, but society’s structure straight up doesn’t let that be practical. Security is hard and young girls are desirable. Judging people’s character is also hard. Dangerous machiavellians can pretty well pretend they’re totally chill. IMO, the best security is surveillance, identification, and appropriate punishment which seems unavoidable. I personally fear the future of easy to fake evidence though. It’s not something that’ll hit me directly, but someone that the rich will employ against each other eventually resulting in all of leadership positions being occupied by the worst kinds of people.
Ever wonder how election by lottery might go? I seriously believe that any random person is more likely to make good legislation than the people who seek it out and fund their way in. I’m getting on a tangent now, so I’ll stop myself here.
That’s funny. I’m finding it brings me closer to the women to understand them better.
The question is designed to be as divisive as possible. It categorizes large swathes of people into just 2 groups - man or bear. The man group contains mansplainers, but it also contains regular people who simply view humanity as naturally altruistic. The bear group contains people with concerns about men overpowering women, but also contains people who earnestly believe that most if not all men will try to do it if given the chance.
The problem is that people either are unable to or unwilling to acknowledge that these categories are not monolithic. And in claiming that all people in the man group are incels, you are inadvertently insulting everyone in that group. Likewise, in claiming that all people in the bear group are misandrists, you are inadvertently dismissing everyone in that group.
It is not productive to make claims about people based only on their answer to the question. In fact, it appears to be entirely the intention of the question to divide even rational people by exploiting the general human inability to see subgroups within larger categories
I thought it was from the woman’s perspective. She doesn’t know if the man is an incel or a regular, well behaved person.
The point is: do you roll the dice on the man, who could be anything, or the bear, who is a bear.
The known potential bad is better than the unknown potential bad. At least a bear won’t rape you before/while killing you.
IMO, the answer given exposes more about the life experiences of the women answerers, and the result seems to be that their experiences have been bad.
I’m in the bear group because I’m not scared of being in the woods with a bear. I mean that is literally going for a walk/run in the woods alone…
Yeah, that’s where bears are supposed to be! Where else do you expect them to shit?
What if you’re just a furry?
Louis CK has a bit about how women have to take a terrible risk when dating, since men very often can be aggressive to the point of violent. In the 70s and 80s this was just accepted as a thing (and there was still a debate whether wife-rape was a thing). Since then, we’ve been trying to push the notion that romantic relationships should be consensual, not something that women should just have to weather, like it’s an act of nature. And we’re seeing the pushback from the Christian nationalist movement / transnational white power movement, to the point where rolling back women’s suffrage is on the table.
This is that dominance hierarchy thing again. It seems our society likes men with prowess, especially sports chops, though money chops or political chops are also enjoyed. Our school administrators favor schoolyard bullies over their victims, which is only one example out of dozens how we favor men who are more bestial than civil.
So yeah, having to contend with a bear in the woods may not be worse than having to contend with a man in the woods.
Although, this is about the choice between a strange man and a strange bear, and the scenario comes down to hoping the beastie doesn’t get too hungry / horny or otherwise is willing to respect you and your personhood. If not, it’s a problem of escaping, and while the bear is way faster and stronger (we’re assuming one of the larger ursine species) the man is smarter and may have tools. Given a strange man in the woods, we cannot automatically assume he has the manners of a New York family man with a robust office-clerk résumé.
A related question can be applied to a lot of our elected officials. Would the public be served better if we replaced our current official with a bear? There are a lot of them – people who are allegedly exemplary citizens of our society to which our kids can aspire – who behave worse than a bear might in their position.
It could be a good place for introspection. If you are a guy, and ended up stuck in a survival situation with a woman, would she be lucky she encountered you and not a bear? Similarly, if a woman drank to much at a social gathering and was too inebriated to think clearly, or even needed a place to rest, would your presence improve her safety or pose an additional risk? Not being a threat to our fellow humans is a very low bar, but it is a bar that a lot of people fail to clear.
I opine this is not fully their doing. US society really resents its teenagers and young adults, and did so even when I was a kid in the 1970s-1980s, which drove a lot of guys towards the alt-right even before Steve Bannon worked to turn it into a voting bloc. Here in the States we have a longstanding tradition of letting our young men turn into War Boys, join up with Immorten Joe, ever looking for an opportunity to go out in glory all shiny and chrome. ( Witness me! ) I got out by pure luck in the early 1990s, never quite finding my divine wind moment.
This Louis CK? Said that?
So wonderful that Joseph Allen is here to tell us what women think. This is the kind of investigative journalism the world needs more of!
We really gonna keep this going instead of just being better men? Hub McCan would be disappointed.
Some men would rather die than to empathize with a woman.
I don’t think it’s that they don’t want to empathize so much as that they are unable to do so, largely due to upbringing and a male-centric society.
You may be right. It’s a shame that this is a division we’ve yet to collectively overcome.
Wow, y’all cannot handle a little trolling huh. Are incels really taking this whole thing seriously? Just remember guys, it is personal, hahaha
Trolling might have been where it started, but this is the natural amplification process of reactionary media.
The question is bull shit, the answers don’t really matter, and the articles generated from it are just there to capture your time and attention. This whole article and the social media posts that started it are all pointless.
It didn’t start with trolling, it started with an article trying to get people to think for once instead of just react.
It’s just people are dumb, so they thought it was trolling.
Well yeah, it’s an impossible hypothetical, it’s not supposed to have a point. Actually, it did have a point, which it very easily accomplished: trigger incels. Just remember, there would be no reactionary media without media consumers being reactionary.
I’m so sick of hearing about this bear thing. I don’t care. It’s a thought experiment. A reminder that humans are easily controlled by the internet. Everyone has an opinion about this stupid shit.
Yeah this is gonna be a whole measured and productive comments section
This whole thread is absurd lol. Like always these are extremist arguments that most than not paint a black or white scenario that is created to be divisive.
…it’s about whether women are safer around a strange man or a bear. Of course it’s extremist, it’s meant to be an exaggerated hypothetical.
The true solution is to be single. It’s great, I suggest everyone try it.
Being single and sticking to your guns i.e standards when it comes to dating. Don’t be flexible. Don’t be lenient. Don’t compromise. Showing either means exploitation and people will want you to do things that’ll undermine your standards.
i think you are better off single
Single away from shitbags like you, yes, I agree being better off single than trying to chance being with people like you thanks.
I’m pretty sure it’s mostly just talk, when actually faced with a 🐻.
I dunno, I’ve seen a few bears in forests, and mostly they wandered off annoyed that they couldn’t reach the food, or just sat around minding their own business.
I’ve had zero issues with every bear I’ve ever seen.
Obviously, I’ve seen more humans than bears, but the score is wildly in the bears favour.
People are taking this way too literally. It’s just a goofy meme that’s expressing a general sentiment.
Memes are propaganda in the modern age. For women, this question is essentially “man bad, amirite?” And for men, it’s essentially “woman dumb, amirite?”
There is no right side of this hypothetical argument. It’s designed to stir shit and nothing else.
Shit stirring on the internet? Preposterous!
It’s not the women who are spreading the “man bad, amirite?” part. It was originally just meant to provoke thought, and the person who wrote the article wasn’t actually intending on spending time in the woods with a bear any time soon.
It’s always interesting how people take trying to provoke thought as “stir shit” thought. Really shows how desperate people are to get any kind of intelligent thought from people on the internet.
“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.
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 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?
“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.
“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?
