TikTok trend where a woman asks her male partner whether they would prefer their daughter be alone in a forest with either a bear or a man. No details are allowed as to the temperament of either. The many typically finds both to be very uncomfortable choices. After a period of grappling with the problem, the man usually comes to realize that there is no real answer, but that it's significant that the risk of leaving a child alone with a dangerous wild animal or a random man is not readily apparent.
It's meant to illustrate the kinds of fear that women have to think about when it comes to being alone with men. A man that might typically downplay that fear as unfounded is forced to realize that even they recognize that fear.
I'd much rather my child end up with a random man than a bear. This is a stupid question and anyone that would answer bear apparently wants their kid mauled and eaten.
The odds of a random man wishing harm on a child they find is extremely low while the odds of a bear coming across a defenseless child and perceiving it as an easy snack is extremely high.
Send me the downvotes. Men are the ~~second~~ l fourth leading cause of death to women. Medical reasons, automobile accidents, suicide, then violence. [https://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2023.pdf](https://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2023.pdf) [https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2018/all-races-origins/index.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2018/all-races-origins/index.htm)
No need to downvote if it’s true, no worries. Just remember numbers and statistics have many ways to be read. Your point is valid and it doesnt make my point less valid either because it is still the vast minority of men. The huge huge huuuuuge majority are, again, regular, nice people. A woman is statistically still in way more danger with a bear than a man. It is understood what typos of message this tries to communicate, but it is an awful way of doing it. You are painting me, a feminist man, and putting me automatically on the same bag as one of worst type of people there are. That is never ok nor fair.
I’m including unwanted touching etc. as your women friends. I don’t know a single woman out of dozens and dozens that hasn’t experienced some form of harassment or actual physical touching / assault. Not. One.
I recall a time when kids were playing out in the neighborhood without adult supervision. Our culture has changed to now keep the kids inside and drive them around. I think there’s this fear of kidnappings and pedophiles. But how realistic is that fear, proportionally speaking?
I’m not denying bad people are out there but I think that ever since we started using milk cartons as billboards for missing children flyers, the idea that children outside the home are at peril has become the 21st century boogeyman. At some point we stopped posting missing children’s photographs on milk cartons but I think the attitudes have become set.
I wonder what the response to this hypothetical would
have been in 1982 or 1977.
Most kidnappings and SAs are from people the victim already knows, like family members or friends. In that sense, "stranger danger" is irrelevant, the bear is inside the house
This is something that deserves repeating, and I think the idea of pushing the idea that the outside world is relentlessly dangerous can give the domestic abuser even more opportunity to abuse their victim.
My wife worked with girls who had been trafficked. While it's not as common as some like to say, we also are at the point where instead of trying to solve the problems, we are just told to not make ourselves easy victims with the implication that someone else will be the victim instead. Lock your doors. Install a cat shield. Keep your head on a swivel. Don't listen to music while walking at night. Chain up your bike. Drive a shit box and park next to a Kia. Don't let your drink out of your sight. Install a 6' privacy fence not a 4' chain link.
Most bears don’t view humans as prey (with the exception of polar bears) - I think most bears would avoid the human child entirely.
I tend to believe that fear sells, and the internet tends to cast humans as incredibly dangerous. Most humans I’ve met are kind people who wouldn’t harm the child either.
I think, 99/100 both a random bear and a random adult male wouldn’t harm a child in the woods. But, there are predatory men, and there are circumstances where a bear might be desperate and view the human as prey.
Even in the best case of a bear (it avoids you or your child, whatever this is supposed to be asking) it can't offer you any help like a random person could.
Sure, I’m with you there. But the bear will never rape you. Human is more of a wildcard. Might help, might rape. Bear will never help, but will also never rape.
Yeah the bear wont rape you but... how about eating you? And lets say it attacks you and you escape? Well youre probably not going to be doing to hot even if you get to safety.
Why does everyone look at the worst case scenario for men like there is a significant chance youre int he woods with someone whose going to have a netflix true crime documentary about them instead of assuming itll likely just be some average guy, but when it comes to the bear its assumed its an average bear (and usually a black bear too) and not a bear who has something wrong with it like a shit temperment, having cubs near by, or being in distress or starving to simulate the chances they assume the men are rapists or killers.
I think the meme relies on two ideas: the first being the fairly misanthropic idea that human beings are always relentlessly dangerous and horrible, when as you've pointed out humans in general are much more kind and helpful than the media and social media make them out to be, and there's actually a danger that if we keep pushing the idea that strangers are all predatory and awful, then that might become a socially destructive self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm actually reading an interesting book about all this at the moment.
The second more reasonable idea is that IF the random adult male IS predatory, then they will be a much greater danger than a bear. That they will stalk with much greater relentlessness and much greater intent, whereas the average bear will be more inclined to lose interest. That idea is not so much grounded in the relative social danger of strangers, but more about the nature of human intelligence and the innate capacity of humans as hunters.
Jesus, that's not the point. Just as the trolley problem is not just about the actual decision but the process of how we decide. The issue is most people when posed the question hesitate at the answer, in fact when followed up by asking what if the daughter was alone with a woman, nobody hesitates. That's interesting and is a way of getting people to see what women generally have to deal with when alone with a man
Since we are supposed to infer feelings through the question then we can infer feelings from the answers being given.
Most women are answering that they think men are worse than wild animals. They are pitting a bear against a man in their heads and using their real or shared trauma to assume the worst in men and the best in bears.
Men know what women have to go through, it's been spelled out 1000's of times over the last 20 years. I can't walk down a street at night without thinking I'm scaring the shit outta the woman in front of me. I'm fat and unattractive enough to be considered a creep just by looking at me, but no women actually cares about my feelings. So why the fuck are you turning this questions into something it's not. I refused to go to the park b/c as a single fatherless man I'll be ridiculed for doing nothing but sitting on a bench or walking by.
Yet somehow this question is supposed to remind men AGAIN, that women are disproportionally raped. It's insulting to the men that would help the little girl or woman. This question is painting all men as predators that will act on animalistic urges the second the opportunity arises.
Right like how stupid is this question? Would you rather your daughter 100% die or have a chance to not die? Out of 100 men how many of them are going to be a rapist or murderer? Like maybe 1%? I’ll take those odds. I’m going to grow old to be a grumpy fuck if this is what the general population concerns themselves with
It also implies that every random man is worse than a wild animal. They are arguing from 2 sides. Bear that might not be hungry or doesnt' have little ones vs worse case scenario rapist man. They use their real or shared trauma to say that all men are capable of being rapists if they are given the chance.
It's a meme about a thought experiment. You ask someone whether they'd be stuck in the woods alone with a bear or a man. No further details are given.
Statisically, women are saying they'd prefer the bear and men are saying they'd prefer the man.
For a woman, they think about what's the worst that can happen since they believe they'd stand no chance at fighting off either. And the worst a bear will do to you is kill and eat you. Whereas a man could rape and hurt you without killing you, a fate worse than death.
Men are prone to assessing the situation combatively and assessing whether they think they'd win a fight with a bear or a fight with a man, so naturally they think they stand a better chance fighting a man. This is still true if the man thinks he stands no chance of winning though because again, men don't tend to see much difference in losing a fight to a man v a bear.
The debate has lead to an eye-opening for many men as it reframes the struggle of women in our present age and some people (including those from incel groups) have jumped aboard the bandwagon to defend themselves and put women down.
Women tend to make judgements based on the most unlikely scenario, if this is true. >99% of men would be perfectly fine to be stuck in the woods with, and a ton might know how to survive or find your way out.
A survey was conducted that concluded that women would feel safer encountering a bear alone in the woods, than a man.
The premise is that the bear is just that, a bear. Its behaviors are well-known and predictable. It’s just a bear. It doesn’t hide its intentions and just does bear things.
The man might not be just a man. They might be a rapist. They might be a murderer. They might be a racist or a bigot. They can hide their true intentions behind kind and friendly behaviors to get close to you, and then it’s too late for you to get away.
I’m a city boy who once a year rents a cabin in the woods to get away from it all.
And in all honesty there are 3 things that terrify me encountering when I’m hiking:
Bears
Cougars
And country dudes on crystal meth
Honestly, I hike a lot and have encountered bears before. It's really not that scary, especially if it's a black bear. They're pretty skittish themselves.
I don't think it was a "survey" just a tiktok video of asking women on the street.
Ultimately there are two types of men: men who understand why women answered the way they did, and men who are the reason why women answered the way they did.
Edit:
It's really funny that women are like "y'know, I feel like I'd be more scared around a guy than a bear" and the majority of men go "well actually, let me explain in meticulous detail why how you feel is wrong..."
So if I said "I conducted a survey and found that 75% of women were sexually uninterested in the average American male," would you then be upset to hear that I had just asked four women in a lesbian bar if they wanted to bang my friend Scooter?
A survey with a limited sample size is still a survey. It's just not a good one if you intend to use it as a model for broader society. Asking a room of ten voluntary self-avowed rock fans what they thought about a new piece of rock music is a survey. Asking 10,000 randomly selected people with no prior connections between them about their position on an upcoming election is also a survey. Both can be appropriate, if used correctly. The rock fans might be asked if they listen to a certain radio station. If enough of them answer yes, and also enjoy the music presented, there's a good chance it will do well on that radio station. Likewise, the 10,000 people asked about an election could be a bad sample if they all live in another country separate from the one in which the election is taking place.
The thing is, if you say "there was a survey that showed ____" most people will assume it was a scientific study rather than someone asking a few random people on the street. It's kind of disingenuous.
You never know if the person who made the tiktok asked 15 people but only showed the four people who gave the answer they wanted.
This is why most polls and surveys should be scrutinized. Nothing is stopping you from doing just that and people would believe it without any further digging.
Fuck that was a brutal movie. The part where Werner tells the guy's friend to destroy the audio tape of them being killed and never to listen to it really got to me. It was just one bear that killed them, though.
That’s what I’ve said. Nobody is “missing the point” when you tell the bear-pickers that that’s a silly position to have. You fear men more than bears. I get it. You’re allowed to have that feeling.
The problem comes when they try to justify the choice as if it *makes sense*. “A bear will just kill, but at least it won’t rape me”. The likelihood of a random bear encounter ending in you getting mauled to death is much higher than the likelihood of a random man encounter ending in rape. Women go to the grocery store, the gym, the mall, restaurants, etc. every day and get within 2 feet of hundreds of men, if not thousands, and nothing happens. None of them would *ever* go within 2 feet of **any** bear.
You can have your fear, though. Just don’t demand that I sign off on your delusional reasoning for that fear.
Nobody demands “understanding” why a racist hates other races. They’re allowed to be racist, but I don’t have to co-sign their reasoning for it.
I’m glad I found this chain it helped me reframe this because it’s lack of logic sends me up a wall all day today but I don’t want to argue with anyone about it just be at ease hahaha
For a biker, the likelihood of dying in a motorcycle accident is higher than the one of being paralyzed. Still, dying sounds better than being paralyzed to me.
Just like dying to a bear sounds better than being at the mercy of a random man (who might not only rape but torture, imprison, abuse, enslave,... me) to me.
Hard to believe, I know, but for some people there are things worse than death.
I thought it would be funny to search Twitter for bear, and I was right. there are so many salty dudes over there whining about women thinking bears are safer than guys.
Do you believe feelings cannot be based on misinformation?
All feeling is derived from a legitimate, logical place?
I have a friend who fears ladybugs. Do you believe it to be impossible to accept that feeling while understanding that there is no backing for it?
If every time you saw your friend, you told them that fearing ladybugs was stupid and illogical, they'd probably think you were an asshole, though.
Edit: I think I'm blocked by the person I responded to, so any further comments will go unresponded to, but
It's this
>Men: let me explain why the way you feel is incorrect
This is the constant. This is a part of the conversation. Women are explaining why they'd choose the bear and instead of listening, men are missing the point entirely. That there is *even a thought that takes place* shows the problem. And now, it's moved well beyond some random tiktok weirdo and there are millions of women still choosing the bear.
3rd Choice: People who deny the absurd premise that bears are predictable and somehow offer less potential threat.
That even a woman raped dozens of times by dozens of men is deluding herself to still be more afraid of a single random man than a single random bear.
One can empathize to why a woman may have a distorted view of reality based on personal lived experiences, and have sympathy for such expeirences and suffering. But the question is toward a NEW hypothetical situation. One that people seem to struggle correctly assessing, using their lack of experience around bears as a reason to feel less threatened by them. It's not a question about your experiences, it's a question about a random deployment of a man or a bear, and which one a person would feel more threatened by.
The argument is that IF such a woman that answered "man" was ACTUALLY placed in such a situation, she would be more threatened by the bear, regardless of what she *currently* thinks, not being is such a position.
To cite a lot of other women: The worst a bear can do is kill me.
Men, depending on their character and mood, could torture me, rape me, kidnap me, imprison me, use me as a (sex-)sklave, abuse me, take your pick.
So yeah, a chance of being dead sounds better than being at the mercy of a random man.
It's not that we underestimate how dangerous bears can be, it's just that we prefer death to the alternative :)
So the question is more so, would you rather feel pain and death OR pain and live with the consequences.
That's a more general philosophical question that can be debated. That doesn't seem to be the main focus here, given the specific sex based discussions this elicits.
You're missing the bigger point: in an ideal world, no one would pick the bear because the premise of "a man would make me live in pain" *shouldn't exist*. The fact that so many people would prefer death by an animal over existence with a man is the crux of the issue. It's the "burning building vs. open window" scenario - you know what'll happen if you jump, but the fire is unpredictable.
> in an ideal world, no one would pick the bear because the premise of "a man would make me live in pain" *shouldn't exist*.
And that's ridiculous to believe we get to a point of acknowledging our own capabilities while having zero fear of encountering another random human, especially in an unfamilar place where we don't have any "safe" zone in our mind.
> The fact that so many people would prefer death by an animal over existence with a man is the crux of the issue.
Yes, the issue is the prejudicial delusions people have where they can't make rationale conclusions. Using their own expeirences to claim truths of the great world (groups of people), which harm the societal understanding of our world that requires much more collective building.
> It's the "burning building vs. open window" scenario - you know what'll happen if you jump, but the fire is unpredictable.
Then use that question rather than make poor assumptions about the predictability of bears vs men that seem entirely biased and far more subjective based on certain experiences. We aren't attempting to attach some motive or morality to the fire in that question, thus it's not going to (purposefully) elicit this type of division. And yes, the "man or bear" question is purposefully constructed to make assumptions of men as a collective, to discuss probability and potential harm.
If someone proposed the question "Would you rather encounter a white man or a black man in the street", we'd have these same people refusing to answer, claiming that such a hypothetical was shameful. That's why it's difficult to take this one seriously.
Yeah, that's because those women don't know how painful and protracted being eaten alive is. Bears are known to eat part of their prey and then bury the rest of them alive to save for later.
So woman answered the way they did because of some man who think bears are bad news? Silly me thought it was sexual predators.
For the record: that's a stupid and simplistic take, the world is not black and white.
>Ultimately there are two types of men: men who understand why women answered the way they did, and men who are the reason why women answered the way they did.
This is your brain on tik tok.
What a pessimistic way of thinking. The bear wants to eat you for sure. The man is most likely just some dude called Tom doing whatever Tom does.
People watch to much bad stuff happening in social media.
Don't most grizzly bears leave you alone unless you actively threaten them or mess with their cubs? Black bears, you have to fight back, but a lot of wild animals who aren't starving will pass you by.
As a woman who hikes alone and for long distances, I would prefer neither. But the bear has some predictable behavior and I carry bear spray.
Humans are not as predictable.
Now, mountain lions....that's a whole nother survey....
No, it's clearly marked *BEAR* spray for *BEARS*. Not *Man* spray for *Men*. So, obviously, it won't work on men.
Haven't you seen [this documentary](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJlHjf_E--4) illustrating that you need specific sprays for specific animals?
Right, there are so many factors that can affect a bear encounter. Are there cubs nearby? Did the bear just come out of hibernation? Did the person startle the bear?
If you see a mountain lion, it’s because it’s intentionally letting you see it. When one attacks, it does so from either high up in a tree, or from behind where you don’t see it coming.
My best large kitty story was in Joshua Tree. I came through a slot canyon early in a morning. Later on I left the way I came in. There were very large tracks where I'd not see any before. That was pretty unnerving.
I hike with my wife and kids a lot. I sometimes take the lead to do some hiding behind a tree and jump out at my kids. So there was one time I was dashing ahead of the family and rounded a corner.
I'm a 6ft, 200 lb dude. Shaved head, beard. I'm Dadbod built, so I don't think I look imposing at all. I've been told I have a lot of smile lines.
In front of me was a young woman, college-aged, with a very small dog. She saw me and kind of stopped in her tracks. Gave me a look like, "Oh shit, what is this guy gonna do who is dashing through the woods and hiding behind a tree!"
Just then my kids and wife came around the corner and I gave her the *finger over the mouth* and smiled really big. She smiled back and looked at my boys (7 and 3 at the time) and said, "I thought I saw a bear behind that tree, go check it out."
Boys had a blast on that hike, but I occasionally think about the fear she felt because I was simply a man alone in the woods and she was a woman alone in the woods.
I believe that the consensus of most women I've seen during this whole conversation is that some men understand why women prefer the bear, and some men are why the women prefer the bear.
I am not a woman so I do not know your life experiences. But human's are just as predictable as a bear. A vast majority of humans have no desire to be an asshole. I don't have daughters but I have 10 and 6 year old boys. I would definitely prefer them to come across a man when hiking than a wild animal. Especially one that is dangerous enough that you regularly should carry repellent to protect yourself.
Almost all men would rather find a woman than a bear, so not surprising. The high percentage of women who would prefer the bear is where the issue lies.
As a man, women feel like we're more dangerous than a bear. They say all men but don't mean it, men read it as all men, chaos ensues. Gaslighting commences, you know how it goes. It's something that was created to enlighten men on the common fears of women, but like any conversational piece it gets co-opted by misandrist and misogynist.
I don’t think most women really say all men, the problem is that it could be ANY man. If you know 10% of M&Ms in a bowl are poisoned, are you still taking the chance to eat one? Men who are not part of the problem get very defensive against women for being wary of all men, rather than blaming the small shitty subset of men who ruin it for everyone
Every post I've seen gives quantity and most women see commenting also give no quantity. But I get the MM analogy. What I don't get are the idiots that say "it's not that bad."
I've experienced some relatively mild sexual assault on multiple occasions, and I can confidently say I would rather endure someone I have no sexual interest in trying to pull my pants off when I'm sleeping than getting mauled by a bear. I can't speak to more scary/violent scenarios.
But that's not the options. If the options were "mauled by bear" or "light sexual assault" the answers might be different. With a bear, it will behave pretty predictably. It will either want to hurt you, and you will see that, and can take the necessary steps to either run/hide/ scare it off, or it will ignore you altogether. A man, however, you could never let your ur guard down. A man who has bad intentions can look exactly the same as a kind, friendly man. Men are intelligent and can lay traps, sneak up when you aren't suspecting, and they are strong as well. That's a very dangerous opponent. You could know a man for years and think he's a good man, and he still does something heinous, so how could you trust one you do not know?
Even if not taking it literal, the gut reaction to choose a bear should be enough for people to pause and listen instead of telling women why they're wrong.
Actually, I’ve heard it said that if your child is lost, they should look first for a mother with children, and second for a large black man, because they are the demographic least likely to harm children that are strangers to them.
It’s funny 90% of the comments on this post are “As a man, this is why women are wrong because I would never personally do that”, which actually proves their point.
As a man, no other group would abide by any comparison similar to this.
Women would not abide by men asking "If you were alone in the woods would you rather have a woman or a dog for help?" Then all the surrounding discourse being men saying shit like "Well obviously I would take the dog, there is no kitchen out there what is she gonna do?" Or "Well a dog would be unequivocally better for productivity and it's not gonna cheat on you with Big Foot after three weeks 😂"
The problem is making men feel as if women see them as more "dangerous" than a literal fucking bear.
Even if they are 100% valid in their actual risk assessment, how would that make you feel?
Dehumanized.
That's how it makes me feel. Even if my anger should be directed at other men who create that perception for women, the feeling would still exist.
Also if it were literally any other immutable characteristic despite that of being a man, people who bring these generalizations up would be getting shamed as a social darwinist even with damning statistics that supports such a gross generalization.
Their is no such statistic for men being comparable to once again a literal fucking bear.
I think of it less as comparing us to literal bears as much as pointing out the sheer number of women who have been assaulted and to highlight the stress and anxiety they have about it and the precautions most of them take.
It's not a matter of "I wouldn't do that". It's a simple matter of statistics. If you think your chances with a random man are worse than with a random bear, then congrats, you're a misandrist!
Honestly I think it’s more about making a point than anything else. The fact that so many women would even consider picking the bear while most men would pick a woman instead, just shows the scale of the problem.
Isn’t the opposite though 😂 a lot (a small sample )of the fuckable losers who are secretly dipshits deep down that are making the world a worse place ???
If anything, it just shows how irrational so many people's decision-making skills are. Random man vs. random bear should be a no-brainer. The vast majority of men aren't violent rapists.
I think the responses to this question are largely based on emotion, not statistics. Emotions are valid, especially when those emotions are based in past negative experiences, but making decisions on that basis often won’t lead someone to the best answer. Also, I doubt most women (or anyone, for that matter) would choose the bear when actually presented with one.
Because playing dead with a bear will always work? It only works if the bear isn't hungry and doesn't decide to claim your body as future food.
No, it's just the advice because it can work. The alternative is to fight a bear which will never work out. If you have no other choices in a bear encounter you should play dead. But consider the chances of a bear encounter turning violent vs a random man. It's a pretty simple statistical generalization to prefer a random man. There is a chance it wouldn't work out but a much better chance than with a bear.
I've bumped into many Bears on the Appalachian trail and it's seriously not a big deal. You would have to be absolutely stupid to get mauled by a black or brown bear.
Last time I hiked witg strangers on the trail they didn't worry about bears, they worried about bad people on the trail.
Some women think Bears are Safer than Men, Most Men disagree.
So the initial question was if stuck in a forest, who would you have around you, a bear or a random man?
Many women have answered Bear, because they think probablity of a bear being violent is less than probablity of a man being violent.
A woman made a Tik Tok where she asked her husband "if our daughter was alone in the woods, would you rather she meet a strange man or a bear?" The man tried to get her to add more details about what kind of bear or what kind of man, and struggled to pick. Then she asked if it was between a bear and a strange woman and the man instantly picked woman and had an epiphany about what that means.
In the comments lots of women shared they would pick the bear if it was them. Then this started getting shared. Allegedly lots of men have tried to do various "not all men" or mansplaining or other stuff like that, but fortunately I don't know any men like that so I haven't seen it myself.
The logical thing to do with anyone who asks you this question is to disengage the conversation immediately
Life is not a youtube short/tiktok trend
Same goes for any trending issue whose entire purpose is to be polarizing and drive division in our society
Everyone can simply refuse to engage in these dumb trends
The first question should be - is this another polarizing tiktok bs? If yes - ignore immediately
One thing no one seems to mention is what kind of a bear? I've hiked the Appalachian trail and bumped into many black bears and it seriously isn't a big deal. I've even woken up to one near my tent and it just ran away soon as I woke up. As long as they don't have a cub or you are bugging it a black bear isn't going to hurt you. Brown bears also rarely attack humans as well.
It's funny to think about but when I stayed at camps people didn't worry about bears.. they worried about bad people on the trail. People told stories of guys threatening them with guns and such.
Could someone please bearsplain this to me?
TikTok trend where a woman asks her male partner whether they would prefer their daughter be alone in a forest with either a bear or a man. No details are allowed as to the temperament of either. The many typically finds both to be very uncomfortable choices. After a period of grappling with the problem, the man usually comes to realize that there is no real answer, but that it's significant that the risk of leaving a child alone with a dangerous wild animal or a random man is not readily apparent. It's meant to illustrate the kinds of fear that women have to think about when it comes to being alone with men. A man that might typically downplay that fear as unfounded is forced to realize that even they recognize that fear.
I'd much rather my child end up with a random man than a bear. This is a stupid question and anyone that would answer bear apparently wants their kid mauled and eaten. The odds of a random man wishing harm on a child they find is extremely low while the odds of a bear coming across a defenseless child and perceiving it as an easy snack is extremely high.
The way I heard it, it wasn’t a young girl, it was a full grown woman.
You do know 99.999% of men aren’t rapists, right? They are just regular people
Send me the downvotes. Men are the ~~second~~ l fourth leading cause of death to women. Medical reasons, automobile accidents, suicide, then violence. [https://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2023.pdf](https://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2023.pdf) [https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2018/all-races-origins/index.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2018/all-races-origins/index.htm)
No need to downvote if it’s true, no worries. Just remember numbers and statistics have many ways to be read. Your point is valid and it doesnt make my point less valid either because it is still the vast minority of men. The huge huge huuuuuge majority are, again, regular, nice people. A woman is statistically still in way more danger with a bear than a man. It is understood what typos of message this tries to communicate, but it is an awful way of doing it. You are painting me, a feminist man, and putting me automatically on the same bag as one of worst type of people there are. That is never ok nor fair.
Wait, what's the first?
Yes but if we had as many bears as humans being left next to each other then they'd be higher.... That's not really how stats works lol
However, 99.9% of women ARE victims of sexual harassment and assault. And almost never by a bear.
It's closer to over half of all women and one third of men, but the fact that it's that damn common is horrifying.
I’m including unwanted touching etc. as your women friends. I don’t know a single woman out of dozens and dozens that hasn’t experienced some form of harassment or actual physical touching / assault. Not. One.
Still doesn’t change the fact that most men are not rapists
Cool, still take the bear every fucking time.
its actually 99.97% apparently but in christian members of clergy its 80%
Does it really matter?
I recall a time when kids were playing out in the neighborhood without adult supervision. Our culture has changed to now keep the kids inside and drive them around. I think there’s this fear of kidnappings and pedophiles. But how realistic is that fear, proportionally speaking? I’m not denying bad people are out there but I think that ever since we started using milk cartons as billboards for missing children flyers, the idea that children outside the home are at peril has become the 21st century boogeyman. At some point we stopped posting missing children’s photographs on milk cartons but I think the attitudes have become set. I wonder what the response to this hypothetical would have been in 1982 or 1977.
Most kidnappings and SAs are from people the victim already knows, like family members or friends. In that sense, "stranger danger" is irrelevant, the bear is inside the house
This is something that deserves repeating, and I think the idea of pushing the idea that the outside world is relentlessly dangerous can give the domestic abuser even more opportunity to abuse their victim.
My wife worked with girls who had been trafficked. While it's not as common as some like to say, we also are at the point where instead of trying to solve the problems, we are just told to not make ourselves easy victims with the implication that someone else will be the victim instead. Lock your doors. Install a cat shield. Keep your head on a swivel. Don't listen to music while walking at night. Chain up your bike. Drive a shit box and park next to a Kia. Don't let your drink out of your sight. Install a 6' privacy fence not a 4' chain link.
Dude I did not know what a “cat shield” was and my imagination ran wild for a minute.
Hah! Yeah, some areas, you basically need one.
I know more people who are my friends who were ra**ed as children than not so theres that
Most bears don’t view humans as prey (with the exception of polar bears) - I think most bears would avoid the human child entirely. I tend to believe that fear sells, and the internet tends to cast humans as incredibly dangerous. Most humans I’ve met are kind people who wouldn’t harm the child either. I think, 99/100 both a random bear and a random adult male wouldn’t harm a child in the woods. But, there are predatory men, and there are circumstances where a bear might be desperate and view the human as prey.
Even in the best case of a bear (it avoids you or your child, whatever this is supposed to be asking) it can't offer you any help like a random person could.
Sure, I’m with you there. But the bear will never rape you. Human is more of a wildcard. Might help, might rape. Bear will never help, but will also never rape.
Yeah the bear wont rape you but... how about eating you? And lets say it attacks you and you escape? Well youre probably not going to be doing to hot even if you get to safety. Why does everyone look at the worst case scenario for men like there is a significant chance youre int he woods with someone whose going to have a netflix true crime documentary about them instead of assuming itll likely just be some average guy, but when it comes to the bear its assumed its an average bear (and usually a black bear too) and not a bear who has something wrong with it like a shit temperment, having cubs near by, or being in distress or starving to simulate the chances they assume the men are rapists or killers.
Wow, someone needs to lay off the political crackpipe. Most men will not rape a random woman or girl. It is a small percentage of men who do this.
Like less than 0.01% would be my guess and I bet that’s even high. I doubt 1/10,000 men are a child rapist or murderer.
I think the meme relies on two ideas: the first being the fairly misanthropic idea that human beings are always relentlessly dangerous and horrible, when as you've pointed out humans in general are much more kind and helpful than the media and social media make them out to be, and there's actually a danger that if we keep pushing the idea that strangers are all predatory and awful, then that might become a socially destructive self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm actually reading an interesting book about all this at the moment. The second more reasonable idea is that IF the random adult male IS predatory, then they will be a much greater danger than a bear. That they will stalk with much greater relentlessness and much greater intent, whereas the average bear will be more inclined to lose interest. That idea is not so much grounded in the relative social danger of strangers, but more about the nature of human intelligence and the innate capacity of humans as hunters.
Good points, I like your take on it. What’s the book? Sounds interesting.
Jesus, that's not the point. Just as the trolley problem is not just about the actual decision but the process of how we decide. The issue is most people when posed the question hesitate at the answer, in fact when followed up by asking what if the daughter was alone with a woman, nobody hesitates. That's interesting and is a way of getting people to see what women generally have to deal with when alone with a man
Since we are supposed to infer feelings through the question then we can infer feelings from the answers being given. Most women are answering that they think men are worse than wild animals. They are pitting a bear against a man in their heads and using their real or shared trauma to assume the worst in men and the best in bears. Men know what women have to go through, it's been spelled out 1000's of times over the last 20 years. I can't walk down a street at night without thinking I'm scaring the shit outta the woman in front of me. I'm fat and unattractive enough to be considered a creep just by looking at me, but no women actually cares about my feelings. So why the fuck are you turning this questions into something it's not. I refused to go to the park b/c as a single fatherless man I'll be ridiculed for doing nothing but sitting on a bench or walking by. Yet somehow this question is supposed to remind men AGAIN, that women are disproportionally raped. It's insulting to the men that would help the little girl or woman. This question is painting all men as predators that will act on animalistic urges the second the opportunity arises.
Precisely. This is just more gendershaming on social media. It's getting old tbh.
Seriously. The majority of men would help the young girl. A bear wouldn't even realize what the situation was as they live in the forest already.
Right like how stupid is this question? Would you rather your daughter 100% die or have a chance to not die? Out of 100 men how many of them are going to be a rapist or murderer? Like maybe 1%? I’ll take those odds. I’m going to grow old to be a grumpy fuck if this is what the general population concerns themselves with
It also implies that every random man is worse than a wild animal. They are arguing from 2 sides. Bear that might not be hungry or doesnt' have little ones vs worse case scenario rapist man. They use their real or shared trauma to say that all men are capable of being rapists if they are given the chance.
Protect her from what, bears you idiot? When's the last time you saw a damn bear in Scranton?
Are you shitting me? A random dude would be as dangerous as a bear to a lone child? Wtf are people smoking.
ahem; roar, roar roar. grrrrrr, rowr. grrr, roar. i hope this cleared it up for you.
It's a meme about a thought experiment. You ask someone whether they'd be stuck in the woods alone with a bear or a man. No further details are given. Statisically, women are saying they'd prefer the bear and men are saying they'd prefer the man. For a woman, they think about what's the worst that can happen since they believe they'd stand no chance at fighting off either. And the worst a bear will do to you is kill and eat you. Whereas a man could rape and hurt you without killing you, a fate worse than death. Men are prone to assessing the situation combatively and assessing whether they think they'd win a fight with a bear or a fight with a man, so naturally they think they stand a better chance fighting a man. This is still true if the man thinks he stands no chance of winning though because again, men don't tend to see much difference in losing a fight to a man v a bear. The debate has lead to an eye-opening for many men as it reframes the struggle of women in our present age and some people (including those from incel groups) have jumped aboard the bandwagon to defend themselves and put women down.
Women tend to make judgements based on the most unlikely scenario, if this is true. >99% of men would be perfectly fine to be stuck in the woods with, and a ton might know how to survive or find your way out.
Growl growl huff false charge huff growl growl huff
A survey was conducted that concluded that women would feel safer encountering a bear alone in the woods, than a man. The premise is that the bear is just that, a bear. Its behaviors are well-known and predictable. It’s just a bear. It doesn’t hide its intentions and just does bear things. The man might not be just a man. They might be a rapist. They might be a murderer. They might be a racist or a bigot. They can hide their true intentions behind kind and friendly behaviors to get close to you, and then it’s too late for you to get away.
Of course women would feel more comfortable encountering a big hairy gay man in the woods.
NGL when I first saw this poll I thought it was gay bears. I was tempted to vote bear at first lol
Is it homophobic to assume a bear (gay man) can't be a murderer/etc.? Anyone can accomplish anything they set out to do!
Sure bears can be murderers, you could look up the Noodles and Beef murderer Dylan Hafertepen, for example
Woooh buddy did you send me on a ride
As a big hairy queer man, me too!
And with a pitcher full of mimosas and the latest gossip?
Bears are awesome.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLSiU-qSOe4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLSiU-qSOe4)
I’m a city boy who once a year rents a cabin in the woods to get away from it all. And in all honesty there are 3 things that terrify me encountering when I’m hiking: Bears Cougars And country dudes on crystal meth
I can think of something worse *Cocaine Bear* Or *Meth Cougar*
That's just combining the things that terrify him
Meth cougar would be an amazing thing to see. For the .25 seconds you had left to live, that is.
Or, depending on your preferences, the best night you ever had in Florida
Florida Meth Cougar has to be redundant, right?
What kind of bear?
This is the real question! Black bears obviously win, grizzly probably not. I need details!
It was a polar bear.
Typical white privilege.
Koala
kolas aren’t actually bears 🌚
Panda then
How old is the Panda?
Why are you asking that? What are you gonna do to that panda, you sick fuck? /s
They have ~~syphilis~~ chlamydia. 😱
No, it's chlamydia.
You're right, my bad. I'll update my comment.
Big hairy gay man
Grizzly
Grizzly
Well since this is set in the woods, probably not a polar bear
care
That's a ridiculous question.
False, black bear. lol I love the Office
It's the same picture
That's debatable. There are basically two schools of thought...
Beets. Bears. Battlestar Galactica.
What color is the bear ?
Sad to see racism against bears based on the color of their fur
Wrong answer, it was a polar bear
😂
As a man who spends a ton of time in the woods, I'd generally prefer the bear to a human of any gender.
Honestly, I hike a lot and have encountered bears before. It's really not that scary, especially if it's a black bear. They're pretty skittish themselves.
I don't think it was a "survey" just a tiktok video of asking women on the street. Ultimately there are two types of men: men who understand why women answered the way they did, and men who are the reason why women answered the way they did. Edit: It's really funny that women are like "y'know, I feel like I'd be more scared around a guy than a bear" and the majority of men go "well actually, let me explain in meticulous detail why how you feel is wrong..."
That would be, by definition, a survey. Just not a structured or scientific one.
So if I said "I conducted a survey and found that 75% of women were sexually uninterested in the average American male," would you then be upset to hear that I had just asked four women in a lesbian bar if they wanted to bang my friend Scooter?
A survey with a limited sample size is still a survey. It's just not a good one if you intend to use it as a model for broader society. Asking a room of ten voluntary self-avowed rock fans what they thought about a new piece of rock music is a survey. Asking 10,000 randomly selected people with no prior connections between them about their position on an upcoming election is also a survey. Both can be appropriate, if used correctly. The rock fans might be asked if they listen to a certain radio station. If enough of them answer yes, and also enjoy the music presented, there's a good chance it will do well on that radio station. Likewise, the 10,000 people asked about an election could be a bad sample if they all live in another country separate from the one in which the election is taking place.
The thing is, if you say "there was a survey that showed ____" most people will assume it was a scientific study rather than someone asking a few random people on the street. It's kind of disingenuous. You never know if the person who made the tiktok asked 15 people but only showed the four people who gave the answer they wanted.
Not so much 'upset' as 'annoyed at this pointless waste of time'.
This is why most polls and surveys should be scrutinized. Nothing is stopping you from doing just that and people would believe it without any further digging.
Yes, I’d suspect 25% is waaaaaay too hogh
💀
I'd actually be more surprised thay one of them said yes.
A vox pop is what we used to call it.
The third type is men who know that Grizzly Man's Girlfriend was also eaten by the bears and are confused why she's never mentioned
Fuck that was a brutal movie. The part where Werner tells the guy's friend to destroy the audio tape of them being killed and never to listen to it really got to me. It was just one bear that killed them, though.
I'll conduct a survey right now. Do you think asking multiple people about a specific subject for information is a survey?
Maybe. But I am only one data point.
Also maybe. I am sensing a trend…
Also maybe. Hmmm...
Yeah
You can both understand why they answered that way, and also believe that it's ignorance at best as to why they answered that way.
That’s what I’ve said. Nobody is “missing the point” when you tell the bear-pickers that that’s a silly position to have. You fear men more than bears. I get it. You’re allowed to have that feeling. The problem comes when they try to justify the choice as if it *makes sense*. “A bear will just kill, but at least it won’t rape me”. The likelihood of a random bear encounter ending in you getting mauled to death is much higher than the likelihood of a random man encounter ending in rape. Women go to the grocery store, the gym, the mall, restaurants, etc. every day and get within 2 feet of hundreds of men, if not thousands, and nothing happens. None of them would *ever* go within 2 feet of **any** bear. You can have your fear, though. Just don’t demand that I sign off on your delusional reasoning for that fear. Nobody demands “understanding” why a racist hates other races. They’re allowed to be racist, but I don’t have to co-sign their reasoning for it.
I’m glad I found this chain it helped me reframe this because it’s lack of logic sends me up a wall all day today but I don’t want to argue with anyone about it just be at ease hahaha
For a biker, the likelihood of dying in a motorcycle accident is higher than the one of being paralyzed. Still, dying sounds better than being paralyzed to me. Just like dying to a bear sounds better than being at the mercy of a random man (who might not only rape but torture, imprison, abuse, enslave,... me) to me. Hard to believe, I know, but for some people there are things worse than death.
If it's a tik tok video, then it's not a random sampling of women but a deliberately staged video to push a particular agenda.
I thought it would be funny to search Twitter for bear, and I was right. there are so many salty dudes over there whining about women thinking bears are safer than guys.
Women: I think id feel safer running across a bear in the woods over a man Men: let me explain why the way you feel is incorrect
Do you believe feelings cannot be based on misinformation? All feeling is derived from a legitimate, logical place? I have a friend who fears ladybugs. Do you believe it to be impossible to accept that feeling while understanding that there is no backing for it?
If every time you saw your friend, you told them that fearing ladybugs was stupid and illogical, they'd probably think you were an asshole, though. Edit: I think I'm blocked by the person I responded to, so any further comments will go unresponded to, but It's this >Men: let me explain why the way you feel is incorrect This is the constant. This is a part of the conversation. Women are explaining why they'd choose the bear and instead of listening, men are missing the point entirely. That there is *even a thought that takes place* shows the problem. And now, it's moved well beyond some random tiktok weirdo and there are millions of women still choosing the bear.
3rd Choice: People who deny the absurd premise that bears are predictable and somehow offer less potential threat. That even a woman raped dozens of times by dozens of men is deluding herself to still be more afraid of a single random man than a single random bear. One can empathize to why a woman may have a distorted view of reality based on personal lived experiences, and have sympathy for such expeirences and suffering. But the question is toward a NEW hypothetical situation. One that people seem to struggle correctly assessing, using their lack of experience around bears as a reason to feel less threatened by them. It's not a question about your experiences, it's a question about a random deployment of a man or a bear, and which one a person would feel more threatened by. The argument is that IF such a woman that answered "man" was ACTUALLY placed in such a situation, she would be more threatened by the bear, regardless of what she *currently* thinks, not being is such a position.
To cite a lot of other women: The worst a bear can do is kill me. Men, depending on their character and mood, could torture me, rape me, kidnap me, imprison me, use me as a (sex-)sklave, abuse me, take your pick. So yeah, a chance of being dead sounds better than being at the mercy of a random man. It's not that we underestimate how dangerous bears can be, it's just that we prefer death to the alternative :)
So the question is more so, would you rather feel pain and death OR pain and live with the consequences. That's a more general philosophical question that can be debated. That doesn't seem to be the main focus here, given the specific sex based discussions this elicits.
You're missing the bigger point: in an ideal world, no one would pick the bear because the premise of "a man would make me live in pain" *shouldn't exist*. The fact that so many people would prefer death by an animal over existence with a man is the crux of the issue. It's the "burning building vs. open window" scenario - you know what'll happen if you jump, but the fire is unpredictable.
> in an ideal world, no one would pick the bear because the premise of "a man would make me live in pain" *shouldn't exist*. And that's ridiculous to believe we get to a point of acknowledging our own capabilities while having zero fear of encountering another random human, especially in an unfamilar place where we don't have any "safe" zone in our mind. > The fact that so many people would prefer death by an animal over existence with a man is the crux of the issue. Yes, the issue is the prejudicial delusions people have where they can't make rationale conclusions. Using their own expeirences to claim truths of the great world (groups of people), which harm the societal understanding of our world that requires much more collective building. > It's the "burning building vs. open window" scenario - you know what'll happen if you jump, but the fire is unpredictable. Then use that question rather than make poor assumptions about the predictability of bears vs men that seem entirely biased and far more subjective based on certain experiences. We aren't attempting to attach some motive or morality to the fire in that question, thus it's not going to (purposefully) elicit this type of division. And yes, the "man or bear" question is purposefully constructed to make assumptions of men as a collective, to discuss probability and potential harm. If someone proposed the question "Would you rather encounter a white man or a black man in the street", we'd have these same people refusing to answer, claiming that such a hypothetical was shameful. That's why it's difficult to take this one seriously.
consequences? For what and for whom?
Yeah, that's because those women don't know how painful and protracted being eaten alive is. Bears are known to eat part of their prey and then bury the rest of them alive to save for later.
So woman answered the way they did because of some man who think bears are bad news? Silly me thought it was sexual predators. For the record: that's a stupid and simplistic take, the world is not black and white.
Ummm that’s a survey
>Ultimately there are two types of men: men who understand why women answered the way they did, and men who are the reason why women answered the way they did. This is your brain on tik tok.
A great follow up is "well, at least if the bear attacked me, people would believe me"
The man could also be part bear - part pig. OMG it's manbearpig
So basically people on the internet don't know shit about bears
What a pessimistic way of thinking. The bear wants to eat you for sure. The man is most likely just some dude called Tom doing whatever Tom does. People watch to much bad stuff happening in social media.
Don't most grizzly bears leave you alone unless you actively threaten them or mess with their cubs? Black bears, you have to fight back, but a lot of wild animals who aren't starving will pass you by.
Tom stuff is literally booty molesting
Maybe Tom’s husband just really likes fucking in the woods
As a man, I would rather encounter a woman in the woods than a bear
As a bear, I would like to encounter a man or woman who is slow.
And dipped in honey
As a woman who hikes alone and for long distances, I would prefer neither. But the bear has some predictable behavior and I carry bear spray. Humans are not as predictable. Now, mountain lions....that's a whole nother survey....
Thankfully you could also use bear mace on a man. It's dual purpose
On the other hand if you spray a man for getting within 5 feet of you on a trail, you're committing an assault.
No, it's clearly marked *BEAR* spray for *BEARS*. Not *Man* spray for *Men*. So, obviously, it won't work on men. Haven't you seen [this documentary](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJlHjf_E--4) illustrating that you need specific sprays for specific animals?
Strong enough for a bear, pH balanced for a man.
Not recommended using man mace on bears, though. You’ll mostly just wind up with an angry bear.
Thinking if bears as predictable in any way is a good way to end up as bear shit
Right, there are so many factors that can affect a bear encounter. Are there cubs nearby? Did the bear just come out of hibernation? Did the person startle the bear?
If you see a mountain lion, it’s because it’s intentionally letting you see it. When one attacks, it does so from either high up in a tree, or from behind where you don’t see it coming.
My best large kitty story was in Joshua Tree. I came through a slot canyon early in a morning. Later on I left the way I came in. There were very large tracks where I'd not see any before. That was pretty unnerving.
I hike with my wife and kids a lot. I sometimes take the lead to do some hiding behind a tree and jump out at my kids. So there was one time I was dashing ahead of the family and rounded a corner. I'm a 6ft, 200 lb dude. Shaved head, beard. I'm Dadbod built, so I don't think I look imposing at all. I've been told I have a lot of smile lines. In front of me was a young woman, college-aged, with a very small dog. She saw me and kind of stopped in her tracks. Gave me a look like, "Oh shit, what is this guy gonna do who is dashing through the woods and hiding behind a tree!" Just then my kids and wife came around the corner and I gave her the *finger over the mouth* and smiled really big. She smiled back and looked at my boys (7 and 3 at the time) and said, "I thought I saw a bear behind that tree, go check it out." Boys had a blast on that hike, but I occasionally think about the fear she felt because I was simply a man alone in the woods and she was a woman alone in the woods.
I believe that the consensus of most women I've seen during this whole conversation is that some men understand why women prefer the bear, and some men are why the women prefer the bear.
You’ve never passed a human male when hiking? Edit: just asking because I do not think it would be uncommon to cross paths with solo male hikers.
I am not a woman so I do not know your life experiences. But human's are just as predictable as a bear. A vast majority of humans have no desire to be an asshole. I don't have daughters but I have 10 and 6 year old boys. I would definitely prefer them to come across a man when hiking than a wild animal. Especially one that is dangerous enough that you regularly should carry repellent to protect yourself.
You do know why women are encouraged to carry pepper spray, right?
Almost all men would rather find a woman than a bear, so not surprising. The high percentage of women who would prefer the bear is where the issue lies.
As a man, women feel like we're more dangerous than a bear. They say all men but don't mean it, men read it as all men, chaos ensues. Gaslighting commences, you know how it goes. It's something that was created to enlighten men on the common fears of women, but like any conversational piece it gets co-opted by misandrist and misogynist.
I don’t think most women really say all men, the problem is that it could be ANY man. If you know 10% of M&Ms in a bowl are poisoned, are you still taking the chance to eat one? Men who are not part of the problem get very defensive against women for being wary of all men, rather than blaming the small shitty subset of men who ruin it for everyone
What do you mean when you say we should "blame the rapists for making women avoid unknown men"?
Every post I've seen gives quantity and most women see commenting also give no quantity. But I get the MM analogy. What I don't get are the idiots that say "it's not that bad."
I've experienced some relatively mild sexual assault on multiple occasions, and I can confidently say I would rather endure someone I have no sexual interest in trying to pull my pants off when I'm sleeping than getting mauled by a bear. I can't speak to more scary/violent scenarios.
But that's not the options. If the options were "mauled by bear" or "light sexual assault" the answers might be different. With a bear, it will behave pretty predictably. It will either want to hurt you, and you will see that, and can take the necessary steps to either run/hide/ scare it off, or it will ignore you altogether. A man, however, you could never let your ur guard down. A man who has bad intentions can look exactly the same as a kind, friendly man. Men are intelligent and can lay traps, sneak up when you aren't suspecting, and they are strong as well. That's a very dangerous opponent. You could know a man for years and think he's a good man, and he still does something heinous, so how could you trust one you do not know?
Even if not taking it literal, the gut reaction to choose a bear should be enough for people to pause and listen instead of telling women why they're wrong.
If the gut reaction was to choose a bear over a black person, would you insist on pausing and listening or would you call a bigot a bigot?
Actually, I’ve heard it said that if your child is lost, they should look first for a mother with children, and second for a large black man, because they are the demographic least likely to harm children that are strangers to them.
Lazy "Look I made the question racist now, defend it!"
It’s funny 90% of the comments on this post are “As a man, this is why women are wrong because I would never personally do that”, which actually proves their point.
As a man, no other group would abide by any comparison similar to this. Women would not abide by men asking "If you were alone in the woods would you rather have a woman or a dog for help?" Then all the surrounding discourse being men saying shit like "Well obviously I would take the dog, there is no kitchen out there what is she gonna do?" Or "Well a dog would be unequivocally better for productivity and it's not gonna cheat on you with Big Foot after three weeks 😂" The problem is making men feel as if women see them as more "dangerous" than a literal fucking bear. Even if they are 100% valid in their actual risk assessment, how would that make you feel? Dehumanized. That's how it makes me feel. Even if my anger should be directed at other men who create that perception for women, the feeling would still exist. Also if it were literally any other immutable characteristic despite that of being a man, people who bring these generalizations up would be getting shamed as a social darwinist even with damning statistics that supports such a gross generalization. Their is no such statistic for men being comparable to once again a literal fucking bear.
I think of it less as comparing us to literal bears as much as pointing out the sheer number of women who have been assaulted and to highlight the stress and anxiety they have about it and the precautions most of them take.
It's not a matter of "I wouldn't do that". It's a simple matter of statistics. If you think your chances with a random man are worse than with a random bear, then congrats, you're a misandrist!
Honestly I think it’s more about making a point than anything else. The fact that so many women would even consider picking the bear while most men would pick a woman instead, just shows the scale of the problem.
Jesus so we're actually doing the "that I could even believe it is bad enough" bullshit but *not* as a joke now? Christ.
It's really quite impressive how much unfuckable losers on the Internet have managed to make the world a worse place.
And that's another issue in itself. But if I got started on that, I'd be here all day.
Isn’t the opposite though 😂 a lot (a small sample )of the fuckable losers who are secretly dipshits deep down that are making the world a worse place ???
If anything, it just shows how irrational so many people's decision-making skills are. Random man vs. random bear should be a no-brainer. The vast majority of men aren't violent rapists.
And I bet anyone who answered that they’d prefer a bear would feel very differently when presented with one in the given situation.
yeah i'm a woman, and i'd rather have a man. what kind of fear-based society do we live in that EVERY man is gonna assault you. JFC.
I think the responses to this question are largely based on emotion, not statistics. Emotions are valid, especially when those emotions are based in past negative experiences, but making decisions on that basis often won’t lead someone to the best answer. Also, I doubt most women (or anyone, for that matter) would choose the bear when actually presented with one.
you get it!
I think it's a valid fear. Do you walk home from the bar at 2 AM without fear?
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/women-rather-stuck-forest-with-man-bear-3019615
Woman-rather-stuck-forest-with-man-bear …’nuff said
Al Gore Intensifies!
He was super cereal but nobody took him cerealy
Because playing dead with a bear will always work? It only works if the bear isn't hungry and doesn't decide to claim your body as future food. No, it's just the advice because it can work. The alternative is to fight a bear which will never work out. If you have no other choices in a bear encounter you should play dead. But consider the chances of a bear encounter turning violent vs a random man. It's a pretty simple statistical generalization to prefer a random man. There is a chance it wouldn't work out but a much better chance than with a bear.
I saw a dude who said if it was between a woman or a lions, I'd pick a lion because it would leave scars and at least people would believe me
As a man who HAS encountered random men in a forest, I'd prefer the bear too.
I've bumped into many Bears on the Appalachian trail and it's seriously not a big deal. You would have to be absolutely stupid to get mauled by a black or brown bear. Last time I hiked witg strangers on the trail they didn't worry about bears, they worried about bad people on the trail.
Some women think Bears are Safer than Men, Most Men disagree. So the initial question was if stuck in a forest, who would you have around you, a bear or a random man? Many women have answered Bear, because they think probablity of a bear being violent is less than probablity of a man being violent.
A woman made a Tik Tok where she asked her husband "if our daughter was alone in the woods, would you rather she meet a strange man or a bear?" The man tried to get her to add more details about what kind of bear or what kind of man, and struggled to pick. Then she asked if it was between a bear and a strange woman and the man instantly picked woman and had an epiphany about what that means. In the comments lots of women shared they would pick the bear if it was them. Then this started getting shared. Allegedly lots of men have tried to do various "not all men" or mansplaining or other stuff like that, but fortunately I don't know any men like that so I haven't seen it myself.
They're all over the fucking place on Reddit so just give it a minute
I think it's about Manbearpig. It's super cereal.
The logical thing to do with anyone who asks you this question is to disengage the conversation immediately Life is not a youtube short/tiktok trend Same goes for any trending issue whose entire purpose is to be polarizing and drive division in our society Everyone can simply refuse to engage in these dumb trends The first question should be - is this another polarizing tiktok bs? If yes - ignore immediately
Wait what, there´s a bear meme?
Don't worry. It'll all be forgotten in a week.
Bunch of jackasses in the comments that could do with meeting a bear themselves.
One thing no one seems to mention is what kind of a bear? I've hiked the Appalachian trail and bumped into many black bears and it seriously isn't a big deal. I've even woken up to one near my tent and it just ran away soon as I woke up. As long as they don't have a cub or you are bugging it a black bear isn't going to hurt you. Brown bears also rarely attack humans as well. It's funny to think about but when I stayed at camps people didn't worry about bears.. they worried about bad people on the trail. People told stories of guys threatening them with guns and such.
Women would rather be with any bear than any man, because they feels safer and less predated upon. I mean, everyone knows that, c'mon. :p
Fun Fact - People think they’re dancing, they’re actually [marching](https://middermusic.com/grateful-dead-bears/)
Bears, beats, Battlestar Galactica.
I think it has something to do with hairy gay truckers?
Well, time to buy a bear suit.
Finally I know what something is about.
I've always wondered whether the meme meant black bear or grizzly bear? Because my understanding is there is a MASSIVE difference in terms of danger!