The bear is honest, either it eats you or it fucks off. The bear would never pretend to be friendly to gain your trust, or pretend to fuck off and instead stalk you for days. I can more accurately surmise a bears intentions than i can for any random man because all the bear could possibly want out of me is a meager amount of food.
Men getting angry about this are being upset by the possibility that they could potentially be considered threatening, by a completely uninformed third party nonetheless. And their chosen recourse is to demonstrate threatening behavior.
Some men are real snowflakes tbh
I’m a man and I endorse this message.
One thing about being a man is other men drop their guards around you and say the things they believe about their roles regarding women and masculinity. In my experience, most men are fine. Many are confused about who they are and their place in the world but do their best to be good people. Other men are just rotten, selfish, and/or broken people for many reasons. They’re often victims of abuse who perpetuate that abuse.
Some, though, are also confused and do their best, but what their best looks like is informed by people like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson. They believe women are somehow subhuman and that treating them as such is natural, right, and good. They believe in a social hierarchy and that might makes right. These are the men to worry about. The bad men I mentioned before generally know they’re bad or are broken enough that one can notice. These guys, though, appear normal but will absolutely fuck you over to get what they believe they deserve, all the while patting themselves on the back for being such an upstanding person who is “just enforcing the natural order”.
That’s why I’d also choose the bear.
Ugh. I hate it when some misogynistic asshole assumes I agree with his views on women because I have the same downstairs anatomy as he does. Fuck you and stop “🙄 women…” around me. You’d be the first one to whine about a woman doing the same thing about men.
Animals fear men for a reason. Men’s BO triggers an acute fear response in rabbits, guinea pigs, rats, mice and hamsters. This experiment did require the animal to be sacrificed, hence why it only involves common laboratory animals.
Anyway. They noticed men would underestimate the suffering of a laboratory animal. They already knew that prey animals hide their pain when they are scared. This is to make them less of an easy target for birds of prey to hunt. Because a limping rabbit, is a much easier meal.
The reason why there was a difference in welfare scoring done by men and women, was because this fear response got triggered. They did an experiment where they had shirts be worn by a man, woman or both for 24 hours. Found that the animals didn’t care for smells of women, but feared BO from men. It wasn’t a skill issue, or lack of empathy.
We also find in wolves who are used to humans, that they are more hostile towards strange men than they are towards strange women.
Testosterone is not a friendly hormone. It leads to being easily agitatated in all mammals. The only reason higher levels of androgens in humans, correlates with decreased aggressive behaviour is because when we produce more androgens, we produce more estrogens. Which in turn fascilitate communication between two regions in the brain that determine emotional impulses and whether or not the person acts on it. Hence why men are less aware of their emotions (it’s not just societal influence), more impulsive and more easily agitated/aggressive than women.
With bears you know what you can expect. And there are even things that can be done to save yourself. But with men? You never really know their intentions. It’s why women’s intuition exists at the level it does.
I try to understand your post, and my conclusion is that you arbitrarily chose to abbreviate “body odour”(?) as BO? That’s the only possibility I can think of what it could mean in order for the post to make sense
I don’t think it’s too arbitrary but may be generational and/or regional. I grew up with BO being a common abbreviation used for referring to body odor.
I used to think abbreviation overuse was the result of things like SMS and twitter, but then I found out O. J. Simpson had a nickname “The Juice” long ago, so I guess it’s just an American thing.
OJ was his initials which is also the initials of orange juice, it’s a somewhat creative nickname.
Yes. Sorry. It was about body odour.
anyone who even for a moment considers ‘bear’ is just showing they have absolutely no real experience in any sort of wild situation. Never choose an encounter with a bear, it is a predator and the apex predator of wherever you are to boot, its a ridiculous exercise meant to rile people up.
with this same argument id 100% take a dinosaur over any woman, because hell, she might knife me when I least expect it, but the allosaurus has a clear motive.
Anyone who is afraid of bears has absolutely no experience in the wild. It might do you some good to actually get that experience in the wild. A hike is much better for your brain than writing a post about how outraged you are that someone “made a ridiculous exercise meant to rile people up”
Remember all the women getting angry about the Pence Rule (never be alone with a woman who isn’t your wife) and some men saying they follow it because it’s a good idea because while most interactions aren’t going to result in false accusations any of them potentially could and the stakes are too high to leave it to chance? Remember all the claims that that is wildly misogynistic?
This bear thing is essentially the same.thing with the genders flipped.
deleted by creator
Women here. I too would choose bear. Everytime. I’d rather get ripped apart than take a chance on a strange man.
This seems like a slight mischaracterisation:
the possibility that they could potentially be considered threatening, by a completely uninformed third party nonetheless.
The statement is actually that the possiblity of men potentially doing something is so high or so severe that the average bear is preferable.
The rest of your post is opinion though, and if you genuinely believe that the average man is more likely to be dangerous than the average bear, I don’t think it’s possible to change your mind
You don’t know anything. There’s a reason that the real name of “bears” is taboo in many cultures. Just the act of saying its true name made the ancients shit their pants in fear of accidently summoning one. Bears are no joke. They kill on a whim. You can’t reason with bears. You can’t plead with bears. Bears are equal opportunity killers. They kill men, women, children, trans, straight, queer, ponybros, attack helicopters all the same. Your only chance is to make yourself appear too much a hassle that they rather go eat something else. Let all these women and men who approve of the OP’s post be tested irl. See if they will sing the same tune.
I’ve been in the woods, alone, with bears in the same woods, countless times, and I clearly haven’t been eaten.
I mean, you even say in your post that being too much of a hassle to eat is all you need to do. Can’t say that any men I’ve ever talked to wanted to have less sex with me when I indicated I’m a hassle to eat.
Yeah I’ve gone hiking. I’m not like going to go pet the bear, I’m going to give it a huge ass berth and be grateful it won’t get angry at me for doing so
You are so whacky a person that this took genuine effort to determine whether or not it’s satire. I know when you typed that up it probably seemed hard hitting and effective, but I’m just imagining someone earnestly saying “You don’t know anything.” as an OPENER and I cannot stop laughing about it.
To me it’s the same as people opening with “No.” and then explaining why the previous person’s statement is flawed. The only time that’s a valid opener is when the previous statement was clearly a yes or no question, otherwise it’s blatantly rude and abrasive. And extremely common on here.
Some men feel the need to prove their masculinity to this woman who’s obviously rage baiting, the rest of us are thanking the bear for taking one for the team.
To be fair, usually women don’t have to be rage baiting at all and still get the same toxic responses. We still have a loooong way to go for real equality. But we’ve also come a fair ways, so keep up the good work! ❤️
I don’t see why you think the author is rage-baiting, rather than stating a simple truth.
For one, her title is a question. She’s also writing an opinion column. So no, not stating a simple truth.
Maybe it’s just a few of us, but it does seem pretty obvious to me that such an article is chumming the waters and the outcome of seeing a few sharks is wholly unsurprising.
I suppose it depends on how you define rage-baiting. I think she’s definitely trying to make a point, but I don’t know that she’s trying to make people angry so much as trying to get people to engage. Engagement is not inherently about anger and hatred, and depending on the actual content of the article (I noticed you didn’t mention anything about it so I assume, like me, you didn’t feel like googling it) it could be more about talking about her own experiences and why she might be more comfortable with a wild animal rather than a random strange man.
Your own response seems to be exactly why she’d write the article. Rather than being interested in engaging on the topic, you’ve already made up your mind based on the barest possible metrics.
“no bears have written in”
I don’t feel any rage about that. Not even a hint of any possibility of anger, regardless of mood or whatever. I don’t think it is rage-baiting. The point isn’t to induce rage. The point is just that men are dangerous and often don’t acknowledge it.
This is terrible logic to go by.
If you generalise half the population and insult them then of course people are going to be mad at you.
This is like some boomer saying “All feminists are easily offended lesbians that just like to shout out people”
Then smugly being like “haha you proved my point” when a femininst rightly takes issue with that statement.
Also bears can’t type, which introduces a massive bias during data collection.
Nonsense.
Well they did say “smarter than the average”. Technically true, but must have meant something like… ten standard deviations from the mean.
Are you sure? How many bear caves have you been in? They might all have fiber at this point.
I thought we were all dogs using the internet while out humans are at work.
Yall are dogs to right?
This is also an indicator of the world’s best insult as per the comic Basic Instructions:
“I find you argumentative and easily offended.”
Basically no one is allowed to respond to it.
Can’t a simple answer be: “You’re wrong” ?
“Noted.”
“I’m sorry you feel that way. I hope you get the therapy you need some day”
This is like some boomer saying “All feminists are easily offended lesbians that just like to shout out people”
Then smugly being like “haha you proved my point” when a femininst rightly takes issue with that statement.
Worse than that even, as feminists are less than half the population and an ideology you choose to belong to, rather than a demographic you are born into.
I havent read the article, but from the heading and the teaser of it it seems to be a personal opinion piece of what she would prefer and asking other women about it.
Where exactly does she actively insult all men?
Okay, let’s reframe this to be about a different specific group.
Let’s say this woman wrote this exact same opinion piece, but instead of it being about men in general, it was about black men specifically.
And she is just saying that she would rather take her chances with a wild animal than be alone with a black man. Is that perfectly okay and not insulting/demanding to black men in your eyes?
The issue with your example is that black men are not in a position of power in society, while men (as a whole) are the dominant gender in society.
This makes making fun of men punching up, questioning their power, while making fun of black men in specific would be just racist.
I’m in a piss-filled trench! The wealthy have the power! Though I am stronger than the average woman, which I acknowledge is a useful trait. Especially for digging trenches with piss seeping into them. Now that’s wielding social power.
Where exactly does she actively insult all men?
The part about saying she would prefer being alone in the woods with an animal that would maul and eat her alive than being with [insert trait you were born with].
If you don’t think it’s insulting, switch out the word “men” with gay/jew/trans or any other group of people and ask if those people would feel insulted.
It’s a statement that very likely would be removed by moderators and gotten you banned on certain instances on Lemmy if you did. I honestly don’t believe you’re asking that question in good faith.
I can’t say that I blame her and I’m a guy. Besides, you know she’s just being over the top to make a point. Take five seconds, look at what she’s really saying and stop looking for reasons to be angry at her.
I was merely replying to the other person who seemed to be arguing in bad faith.
I don’t really have much interest the online gender debate. From the few tidbits I’ve seen, it’s not a healthy debate and it doesn’t align with anything I’ve seen in real life in Norway.
But, I mean, are you acquainted with said bear?
Are you on terms with each other’s intentions?
'Cause if you’re in the woods with a stranger, there is a 50 percent chance you’re going to have a bad time. Human or bear.
Stupid city folk. Comparing a BEAR with a honeybear…
I’d generally pick a bear too, most of the time you could just walk away. A human might try to talk to me or something.
My first thought would be “maybe we can be friends”
With the bear, obviously
What species of bear? Because that makes a lot of difference.
Somewhere between gummy and grizzly
Somewhere between gummy and *polar
I would not want to meet a polar bear in a forest
Global warning: soon coming to your location.
I think I’d actually feel safe with a polar bear in the kind of forest I’m used to. It’ll heat stroke out in no time
Gay lumberjack bear.
Those sound pretty safe for a woman TBF
Oh I’m friends with several. I’d bring some picnic supplies
Also, is it smarter than the average bear?
I wouldn’t trust a man with a pic-a-nic basket either
I mean, do I know if the bear is hungry? What type of bear? I’d take a well fed black bear over a random person, they ain’t gonna fuck with you. Pretty much any other scenario and I ain’t messing with the bear.
Water bear. Ravenously hungry.
Awh. Cute lil guy
A spectacled bear that has eaten his fill of marmalade sandwiches.
Though honestly same could be said about the man in question, is he nice or hostile, can he control his urges or not, is he stable or a complete psycho. This question really goes both ways
The same could be said by both the man and the bear about Kate. So this question goes three ways.
Soo many people in the tread showing their true colours.
imo for pedants like myself, it needs to be made clear if the bear is LIKELY to harm you
If its a black bear, red panda, or the like that is not even fair, EVERYONE would rather be with a bear that doesnt want to be near you rather than some potentially dangerous rando
From what I’ve read, unless you’re doing something like going between a mother and her cubs, if it’s not a grizzly or polar bear, it’s likely more scared of you than you are of it.
red panda
I don’t think that’s a concern, because pandas (red or otherwise) aren’t technically part of the Ursidae family and wouldn’t qualify.
I’ll spot you that polar bears and brown bears would likely be more of a problem in person. I believe the other kind of bear could conceivably be more of a threat online, but only because they tend to have sharper wits and tongues than the heterosexuals in their genus.
Pandas are ursidae, but not ursinae
Red Pandas are Ailuridae. So even farther away.
Here’s the thing. You said a “red pandas are ursidae.” Are they in the same order? Yes. No one’s arguing that. As someone who is a scientist who studies red pandas, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls red pandas bears. If you want to be “specific” like you said, then you shouldn’t either. They’re not the same thing. If you’re saying “bear family” you’re referring to the taxonomic grouping of ursidae, which includes things from short-faced bears to dog bears to giant pandas. So your reasoning for calling a red panda a bear is because random people “call the cuddly ones bears?” Let’s get raccoons and koalas in there, then, too. Also, calling someone a human or an ape? It’s not one or the other, that’s not how taxonomy works. They’re both. A red panda is a red panda and a member of the ailuridae family. But that’s not what you said. You said red pandas are ursidae, which is not true unless you’re okay with calling all members of the carnivora order bears, which means you’d call cats, dogs, and other mammals bears, too. Which you said you don’t. It’s okay to just admit you’re wrong, you know?
it’s strange tho. could it be strangely rabid?
That is probably their point though.
Too many humans act like dangerous randos (men and women alike, but men are usually more physical), so being near a bear that for the most time just fucks off and mind their own business is more preferred.
I am a pretty tall, broadly built man, so obv I’m a little biased because I’m reasonably confident that I could kill another man if it came to it. However, the concept of this question bothers me, because it doesn’t indicate what kind of bear. Trust me, if you ever come face to face with a fully grown grizzly, you’d prefer the man. Monsters are real, and they can destroy you on accident, while men have weak necks and unprotected kidneys.
If I was dead either way though, obv I’d rather it be an emotionless grizzly who’d tear me apart pretty quickly.
Honestly it doesn’t matter too much what species. Black bears will happily eat you too, playing dead also doesn’t work for them. Polar bears are basically instant death whenever the bear feels like it, they don’t fear humans. Koala wouldn’t be so bad I suppose. Pandas are somewhat dangerous if they decide to attack
Koalas aren’t bears though. So I guess that pushes up the average danger of your set of bears.
Maybe it’s because i’m a man, but this trend saddens me. I don’t often see what the other gender thinks of us, but the fact that a big part of us are a bother that all off us should be seen as more dangerous than a bear. Damn…
It’s because casual misandry is socially acceptable.
Not entirely. It’s also because men have historically been bad about telling creepy and misogynistic men to back off and shut the fuck up.
I would sooner see men step up and call out the bad actors – and I say that as a man who’s done so. Don’t teach your daughters that they need to be wary about what they wear, teach your sons to respect and not rape women.
I would sooner see men step up and call out the bad actors
And I would be happy to join you in doing this, but this is not the company I keep. In my life I can barely count the number of times I have, or could have, on one hand. Meanwhile, when talking to women about this sort of thing, everyone has awful stories but they all involve people that simply are not a part of their social sphere (and by extension mine) anymore.
I fear that we, as a society, have done such a good job of pushing bad actors out to the margins that we no longer have eyes on the problem.
Part of the problem is that men are simply not on alert for bad behavior. They have the luxury of being unaware. When my friend’s dad groped me at a party, I was in a conversation circle with him and 3 of my male friends. None of them noticed him doing it, none of them noticed me going stiff and pale. None of them questioned why I suddenly felt sick and immediately called an Uber to leave.
The dad felt totally comfortable to do that literally less than 2 feet from three other men because you guys aren’t looking out for it in a way that women are. Alternatively, I’ve had stranger women come up to me in public to ask me if I’m uncomfortable because a guy at a gas station is talking to me while I pump my gas. We’re looking out for each other.
“We all a society” have absolutely not pushed out bad actors. If anything, women have closed ranks, but in my experience the men have not, without explicit instruction, called out bad behavior.
Thank you for this insight. We all really need more of this kind of dialogue to build awareness around what to look for.
Well no, the real root cause is a lot of women are afraid of creepy men. Your point is tertiary at best is people are actually picking the bear.
Men in real life (in my experience) are mostly lovely folks. Men in places like Lemmy and Reddit can be pretty decent too, depending on the thread. But honestly, at what point has it been ‘safe’ to self identify as a woman on the wider Internet? Like to have a female voice in a game chat? Or in a random chat room? Between a lot of online harassment (which only needs a small slice of men participating in to be felt much more broadly) and the political and cultural attempts to strip women of power, I get this kind of outlook happening. It just really fucking sucks.
As a man, I’d never be stuck in a forest with Kate.
Forests are scary. Can’t we go to a zoo?
I just want to know how many bears she knows on a a personal level to make it possible for there to be a “strange bear”.
How are you a bot?
you can choose to be one in your profile settings
But you shouldn’t if you aren’t a bot. People filter them out.
Thanks, TIL
I read her post some days ago and thought “she got some kinky humor”.
Now I think “She has no humor at all and was dead serious”.
Irony on the public side of internet died with Gamergate. It’s all been downhill since then.
Honestly I’d rather have the man. I would stand a chance against him. Can’t say the same about a bear.
I wanna see the strange bear, and I don’t wanna see a strange man, so the choice is fairly easy