187
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 79 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] STRIKINGdebate2@lemmy.world 33 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 46 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world 29 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

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

[-] cannibalkitteh@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] Drusas@kbin.run 8 points 6 months ago

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

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 17 points 6 months ago

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 30 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] butter@midwest.social 14 points 6 months ago

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] slowwooderrunsdeep@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

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…

[-] Letstakealook@lemm.ee 12 points 6 months ago

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Drusas@kbin.run 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
[-] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 50 points 6 months ago

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

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 28 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] SPRUNT@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] totally_notAcat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 6 months ago

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...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 6 months ago

The Louis C.K. who pulled out his little Louis and masturbated in front of female coworkers without their consent? That one?

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 6 months ago

Yes, sadly. That one.

Found it Here under Dating Takes Courage

A woman saying yes to a date with a man is literally insane and ill-advised, and the whole species’ existence counts on them doing it, and I don’t know how they– How do women still go out with guys when you consider the fact that there is no greater threat to women than men? We’re the number-one threat to women. Globally and historically, we’re the number-one cause of injury and mayhem to women. We’re the worst thing that ever happens to them...

How do they still do it? If you’re a guy, try to imagine that you could only date a half-bear, half-lion, And you’re like, “I hope this one’s nice. I hope he doesn’t do what he’s going to do.”

I mean yeah, Louis is a putz and a predator, but he did make a valid point.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Krauerking@lemy.lol 19 points 6 months ago

Society is made of the stories we tell ourselves.

Our stories have been pretty bad lately and selling fear and power fantasy still works as well as it always did.

I know it feels like bullshit and we all just say that people should just know and act better but they don't and they won't. They operate on what they think in their head is right.

I dunno. Maybe we need less stories maybe we need to tell better ones to inspire better. Maybe we do just need to BE better. I don't see it happening. We love the bad just way to much. Far more interesting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

We really gonna keep this going instead of just being better men? Hub McCan would be disappointed.

[-] Leg@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

Some men would rather die than to empathize with a woman.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Rakonat@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago

As man, all the men getting offended or angry over the women picking the bear are the exact reason the bear is the correct choice.

I'd be a little disturbed to find out some stranger picked me to roam around the woods lost with. The fuck are you planning?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] maniii@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

When people play no-win games it is better to never play.

If you want relationships you work on your social skills.

If you want to go bear-hunting, well you go after bears.

If you want peace of mind just ignore these type of games.

[-] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

I'd be offended if a women thought a pussy ass bear was more dangerous than me I'm on that gang shit for real

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 13 points 6 months ago

Yeah this is gonna be a whole measured and productive comments section

[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

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!

[-] 3volver@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

The true solution is to be single. It's great, I suggest everyone try it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 10 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 8 points 6 months ago

Wow, y'all cannot handle a little trolling huh. Are incels really taking this whole thing seriously? Just remember guys, it is personal, hahaha

[-] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
187 points (84.5% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9752 readers
25 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS