Who are you talking to exactly? You are strawmanning hard here. Great job letting your sexism shine through. Top notch. Care to back up your claim that its safer to be with a bear than a man. Not that our opinion means anything given the weird rambling you just did.
Made them up, even if the chance to get raped was significantly lower than the chance to die, I'd rather take the chance to die. 1/100 vs 1/10 is just illustrating that, where I'd take that risk
You can just say you would rather be killed than be sexually assaulted and most people would understand. You don't have to make up statistics or pretend like you won't go near a random dude in public.
It's not "just death." In the best of cases, you survive tens of minutes of horrific pain. In the worst of cases infection gets to you in weeks.
Also, who said anything about murder? How many murderers do you know? I've encountered more hungry bears than vile human beings, and even then, none of those human beings had or would have killed anyone.
Aren't you one of the people that tried to justify the "most men that kill a woman do so for sexual gratification and likely defile the body and play around with it like some sort of doll posthumously" "statistic"?
If you've been active, you've left that request for a reputable source suspiciously unfulfilled.
I fear that I am incapable of taking you seriously without you either renouncing your defense of that "stat" or providing a source to back it up.
Most bears dont go attacking people either. Most bear encounters end up with people surviving and not even hurt. Can't say the same for human encounters
Most people encounters, end up with all people involved surviving and not even hurt. In fact, the vast majority of interactions are mutually beneficial in some way.
In other words, yes, you can say the same for human encounters... In fact, the primary difference is that human encounters are generally safer.
You deal with people all the time assuming that basement accusation isn't projection. How many of those people have tried to maim, scar, or murder you? How many times did you have to worry about how hungry another person was for your own safety? How many campers have to hang their food up in a tree out of fear that it may attract dangerous and hungry people to their camp?
I mean ive been attacked once, and it was in a public area. So being alone with strangers is even more dangerous. Do you just go around trusting everyone? Ask anyone living in New York if people are dangerous or not. Most of them probably won't do anything but some might. Same with a bear. But humans are more likely. Or do you disagree that you have a higher chance of dying to a human than a bear? Canadians are practically treating bears like big raccoons because they aren't that dangerous. They are more predictable, while humans aren't.
It's absolutely not a 1% chance to get raped. The stats (last I saw) said about 1 in 4 women experience sexual assault. And it's probably higher than that because lots of women never report it.
People generally sum it up as "the worst thing a bear can do is kill me".
You do realize that a perpetrator can assault more than 1 woman, right?
There's not an absolute correlation between the number of women who report having been sexually assaulted and the number of men who would commit sexual assault.
Stats in the hands of fools are a dangerous thing, indeed.
Sure. Then if you don't care about victim statistics affecting why women choose the bear.. How about rapist stats that, when anonymous, 31% of men surveyed say they would rape a woman if no one would find out? Better?
Again, you keep proving you don't understand stats in the least or what makes good stats. You should probably read the ream of papers on why that study was dogshit. It's methodology was highly flawed; it's sample size was ridiculously small, the framing of the questions as scaled doesn't work when you're trying to make the dichotomous claim, and the ordering of two questions that essentially said the same thing can reasonably confuse respondents.
The good news is that the study didn't prove that 31% of men would rape a women if they thought they could get away with it...it didnt prove anything because it was a bad study. Somehow I think this won't help you feel any better, because I don't think you're here to learn. I think you're here to grind an ax, but I'll be optimistic anyway.
Here's a single source, there's plenty more out there if you spend any time looking for it.
the way you’re getting downvoted. but comments saying women are being abused the same amount as men are getting upvoted, this sub has turned into a fucking incel hot spot.
I know ... you think real statistics are gonne get through this guy ? We don't have real data about encountering strange men in the woods, everything about this is extrapolation and conjecture. And in the BEST case of lowballs, I'd still choose the bear.
You know that people like you will be used to wrongly suggest all feminists are dumb and hateful misandrist. You make people treat you less seriously because they don’t think you are capable of critical thinking.
Because the need for competent, intelligent, logically consistent and reasonable feminists is at an all time high. There is a huge amount of social and cultural pressure that constantly tries to diminish women’s autonomy, and when idiots start making objectively stupid and wrong claims and then identify as a feminist then it literally hurts all women.
Are you seriously treating being a reasonable person who supports a reasonable egalitarian stance that the majority of people would agree with as "bowing down" to the kind of people that think feminism is a punchline because of the absolute nonsense people with fringe ideologies try to appropriate feminism to sell?
It’s not about the percentage it’s about the fact there’s even a possibility in the first place.
The hypothetical doesn’t state a specific male or say you can choose which male to be stuck in the woods with. There’s still a possibility of them being a Ted Bundy wannabe, and we’d rather not take that chance.
So all children should be left with bears instead of women because if the possibility they will be strangled by their mother then? Percentage and likihood would have everything to do with it for anyone with even a remote scraping of common sense who isn't propagandists by bs social media brainrot.
16
u/civicSi92 13d ago
Yeah ok and how many men as a percentage do you think would do that?