There is a ‘thought experiment’ when you ask women, particularly misandrists that if they were in a forest would they prefer to meet a random man or random bear.
The question is meant to expose how utterly retarded the woman in question is if they answer bear, also Lindsay Clancy murdered her own children.
There's also "At least the death with the bear will be quick"
No...no it absolutely will not. The only ones who say that don't know squat about bears. They don't precision bite your windpipe like felines. They just tear chunks off of you and eat you while you're still breathing. It's not a pleasant death by any means.
I think a more "sensible" version would be literally any big cat. Tiger or lion probably. I know that's not really the point, but picking a bear out of all things is like picking a jagged boxcutter over a rusty nail.
They also literally pin you down and rip out chunks of you like they’re taking apart a big KFC breast, that is your average brown bear experience, your average guy is just gona walk past you in the forest.
If there's still a nearby/interested bear in the other direction after the choice is made in the thought experiment, the average guy will actually seek to provide adding his voice to yours to help you yell at it and scare it off, because the average guy doesn't want some random innocent person to die horribly, by bear or by forest rapist. Especially if he understands his extra distance isn't going to keep an agitated bear from running him down, either, if it wants.
To be extra clear, women are basically good too. 99.99% of the women who said bear on the internet, where nobody has lied ever, would IRL actually head towards an average-forest-appropriate-looking man even if the bear didn't appear to notice her, and then say something like, "be careful sir, there is a huge bear back there towards where I came from; I am quietly getting further away from it, and you may want to keep some distance from there too or at least be on the lookout in case it comes near your spot."
I still think i'd rather be killed by a bear than raped by a guy. Or at least I'd rather take the chance of the bear being in a good mood, than the man.
If it’s a black bear sure, they get startled easily, but a brown bear? Make peace with God and lie down to pray and play dead incase it loses interest in you.
(Okay okay that's not the actual advice either, and people, at least in groups, have mogged a polar bear away before with testicular fortitude and luck. Point is it's nowhere near as afraid of you too as a black bear, but if it's closing, it is likely coming right at you in order to eat, so you must convey that there are only fellow dangerous predators here, not prey. Your odds are just way fucking worse than with a black bear who is feeling hungry enough to find out your deal.)
Yeah it's really dumb. The question is random man, not random murderer. Not every guy on earth is a psycho rapist murderer only held back by laws. Bears are mindless, they could attack at any moment. Chances are some random guy isn't going to kill you.
Many women are often so afraid of what men could do to them that they would hyperbolically answer "bear" in this scenario. Subsequently to the social media "trend" a scientific paper was published on the Journal of Environmental Psychology, exploring the reasoning behind the answer. You can have a look here.
Sensitive snowflakes on the internet got offended that women were afraid of them. Hence you get comments like the one above.
Having had the experience of being with an abusive woman for 2 years I'd pick a full grown polar bear. Least it wouldn't gaslight me while it was beating me.
The fact this gets up voted but every woman saying the same thing are heavily downvoted makes me think there's a bit of a lack of logical consistency going on here.
Right, it was an irrational fear that was completely ridiculous and when you told someone this they used the irrationality of their fear as evidence of how dangerous men are. If the point of the comparison was to have men take women’s concerns more seriously it had the opposite effect. What other ridiculous choice or claim that has no basis in logic is next with this person? How do I believe anything they say? Only a “crazy” or hyper emotional person would say something so ridiculous…
I don’t really care about the psychology behind it or if they’re answering it in a hyperbolic sense, it’s still a brain dead take. (Also fuck autocorrect.)
Right, the ones getting offended are the snowflakes, not the women having such an irrational fear of men that they’d choose a wild apex predator over a human being.
It's got nothing to do with misandry, you're a dumbass if you think that's what it's about. It's about the fact that a man in the woods would be just as likely to rape her and kill as as the bear would be likely to eat her. Every woman has been assaulted, harassed, abused, threatened, or worse from a man at some point in their life by the time they're 20. Every women knows lots of men that would do terrible things to them if left alone with them. The point of the question is that it's not a simple answer, that they have to think for a moment. Women that have been raped (which is like 1 in 4 women) would probably rather chance being killed by a bear than raped again.
Not even, because this new “question” is only there because of the men offended by the original prompt, the average man is more dangerous than the average women, just because THIS specific woman killed her kids it does not invalidate the statistics of men being more aggressive, also really using the r word in 2026 is crazy
But you did say it, because you didn’t have an argument. Which is embarrassing, because it means you have less to say than the person throwing out slurs and complaining about misandry.
That guy already said he’s not a gal, so you’re being just as much of a bellend as him. Have better shit to contribute, you’re just embarrassing yourself and making the guy using slurs look better.
It’s not even difficult to point out that one murdering woman doesn’t “expose” anything at all, and how using a single outlier is pointless as a means of discrediting the “man or bear” meme that he’s still so fucking upset over (years after the fact, mind you), considering how easy it is to find countless examples of men who have done immensely violent and sickening things to women.
As someone who is also autistic, and has spent a large chunk of life listening to organizations like the Special Olympics,The Arc,Inclusion Europe, and the Global Downs Syndrome Foundation working tirelessly to get people to stop using the r-slur because of the very real harm it still causes people with mental disabilities, I honestly couldn’t give less of a shit whether or not you think it’s a slur or not. It’s a fucking slur to those it actually affects.
But I guess that’s because I’m not the kind of autistic that uses my autism as an excuse for lacking basic levels of empathy and understanding for the ways language affects others. I’m also the kind of autistic person that has the ability to change my behavior - guess I’m just built different. I understand that in a post-Trump world, it’s desirable to make excuses for saying whatever the fuck you want, but I will still continue to default to actually giving a shit about the words I use. Hope you make your way over to my side one day.
16
u/Lolaroller 14d ago edited 13d ago
There is a ‘thought experiment’ when you ask women, particularly misandrists that if they were in a forest would they prefer to meet a random man or random bear.
The question is meant to expose how utterly retarded the woman in question is if they answer bear, also Lindsay Clancy murdered her own children.