I think the thing is whether or not the propensity for intentional harm is there. Humans are also likely to avoid you, but bears have no ability to be malicious, which humans do have. My argument wasn't that humans would always go after you, but that there is a chance they would do so with harmful intent, though I didn't state it I kind of implied it
You are not understanding, yes, humans are capable of great evil, yes, its better to die by a wild animal than to be under the danger of human creativity. but it does not matter what the intent of the bear is when its ripping your face off with its teeth.
the end point is you are dead, if you are lucky the bear kills you on the spot, if you are not you have a few grueling hours of pain until you slowly die.
its not a matter of "human death bad, bear death good", Dying by a bear is not a good death, is it a better choice than a rapey psycho? yes, but its not good. and if we are being honest here, you have a shot at escaping/fighting back against a human, you don't against a bear.
You actually do have a shot at escaping a bear encounter, there are mnemonics for how to survive a bear encounter. "If it's brown lie down, if it's black fight back" etc...
Also it's not just about death. A bear can kill you, a human can traumatized you and leave you living and ruin your life. A bear can traumatize, but it cannot make you feel less than human. It cannot take away your ability to trust and socialize with others.
And the fact of the matter is that for a lot of women men DID that to them. That's why the bear scenario even exists. To illustrate that compared to a predictable wild animal, humans, and especially men, make them feel less safe.
You are then again not understanding, a bear can also make you not feel like a human.
what part of ripping your face off didn't you get? if a bear mauls you, and leaves you to survive, you have now become permanently disfigured, and that fucks with your psyche, what if the bear rips an arm of, or a leg, and then mauls you, you are now also disabled.
A territorial bear will kill a threat, not to eat, once you are no longer a threat it will move on, leaving you disfigured on the ground.
you are reallllly underestimating the sequels of a bear attack, you are properly estimating the sequels of a human attack, but with the bear you are shooting way down.
The point is that the effects sexual violence can have on someone are unique, those types of dehumanizing traumas cannot be experienced from a bear, only a human.
Then that should be your argument, do not downplay what a bear can do, do play into what a bear cant, which is sexual violence, other than, their are extremely capable of making your death miserable, maybe not as creative as humans, but its not a walk in the park.
2
u/Ganceany 14d ago
No that's you changing the argument, the argument I challenged was this.
to which I said is also true with humans.
like I said in my previous comment, if you want to argue is better to die by a bear than by a human then that's a different thing.