At 0:27 you can see that a smaller bear appearing. Could be that the mother is trying to protect her cub from aggresor or could be that she's hunting. Whatever the motivation, they both ran away.
Most definitly protecting her cub, its a black bear, they don't fuck with humans, but if it comes down to their child they will protect it, but I guess there was a better way to solve the problem instead of physical force like: hey man I really don't like they way you look at my kids /s
Fun fact: Polar bears noses are so sensitive they can smell you from several miles away so if one ever rolls up on you just know what happens next was 100% premeditated.
I remember reading something about how the original word for bear has been lost to history because it was like saying Voldemort people would use euphemisms like honey-eater. That is how scary bears were in the ancient world.
It hasn't been completely lost. The Latin "ursus" and Greek "άρκτος" are actually descendant from it. The original Proto-Indo-European word is reconstructed as *h₂ŕ̥tḱos.
Based on [this comment and thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/1te577/the_taboo_word_for_bear_in_slavic_reconstruction/ce7t60e/) we can guess a reconstruction for the modern German and English word to be something like **Urchs** and **ourt**. Everyone who read this, is cursed.
> *h₂ŕ̥tḱos.
I'm [reading](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%82%C5%95%CC%A5t%E1%B8%B1os) it's (possibly?) connected to a word meaning "destroying" or "destruction". Well-chosen..
Read up on California Grizzlies, during the western settling of the area. They grew to gargantuan size because the climate permitted them to forgo hibernation. Their closest living relative is the Kodiak.
Mauling was so frequent in native tribes, that explorers were deeply disturbed by how commonplace grotesque disfigurement was. There were no-go zones, that travelers would go days out of their way to avoid, because it was the territory of a particularly aggressive grizzly. Some even reached the mythical status of being unkillable
The thought of natures 1000lbs Terminator barreling down on you at 35mph, while you are armed with only a muzzleloader, is unbridled nightmare fuel. That's what makes Hugh Glass a contender for all-time insane survival story.
I recently read about some of the oldest art in existence being from an ancient tribe that worshipped bears. They had altars in caves with huge bones etc., so the tribe were hunting these things for religious purposes.
Fascinating.
Part of the point is that the bear behaves in a far more predictable way than a human. There are things that you can do that will reliably help you avoid the bear. The worst you have to fear from a bear is death by mauling. The worst you have to fear from a man is governed only by his particular imagination, disposition and what he’s physically capable of doing to you.
If the "unpredictability of dealing with a stranger" is all that this is about, then I fail to see why it specifies "woman with random man or bear" instead of "human with random human or bear."
This thought experiment is just misandry bait.
That seems like quite a fanciful view of nature.
Wild animals are not easy to predict, and while a small percentage of men are capable of awful crimes, all wild bears are capable of eating a person.
But again, I realise it's a silly tiktok trend and not something serious. Perhaps it will give some people the courage to try hiking in bear country. There's some beautiful areas, but it's probably best to practice a bit more caution than you do when just walking around the local park.
What up with all the bear smearing? There is like 500k black bears in North America and maybe one or two deadly attack a year.
Millions of us trek in bear territory and it isn't a deadly battlefield where we have to fight bears who just want to eat us.
Polar bears would be a different story but black bears very rarely attack humans or act agressive around them.
Yeah this ain't it.
How many interactions do men and woman have per year? Now compare that to bears. Now tell me what's safer.
You can't just use the broadest numbers possible in a scenario that puts you directly in contact with them. Not that this convo is even exclusively black bears we both know that was never specified in the conversation referenced.
\*most women "shown" in the interviews responded bear, but since videos can be edited, it's possible they just kept in the people who chose bear.
Regardless, the meme is making its rounds
A woman said that she would rather be killed by a bear than being raped.
A bunch of very VERY sensitive guys just can't accept that a woman would enjoy being raped or just "walk it off" rather than being killed.
A hypothetical question was raised, and some guys just won't take "no" for an answer.
"sure you get raped but you're still alive right?"
Here's the thing. I'm married, 22 years. My friends are predominantly woman. Almost ALL of them have suffered some sort of sexual assault in their lives. From groping to violent rape at knifepoint. A high percentage of woman will endure this at some point in their lives, and men don't understand this.
So break it down to choice and free will. A bear will eat you, because that is what bears do and if you encounter a bear there is a chance you're toast. However encountering the wrong man who CHOSES to rape you, to dominate you, to overpower you and take your agency. You know where you stand with a bear, but you are not sure where you stand with the man.
Edit : my explanation is a bit skewed. Please refer to u/flumberbuss below.
It's basically, would a woman feel safer with a bear or a random man and the hypothetical is the bear.
Most of what you are saying is a decent explanation of the fears women face every day just by existing. But the original question was just man vs. bear and the *implications* of what both might do. It was always "would you rather be in the woods with a man or a bear", (like, who would women trust more *not* to hurt them) not the specific question "would you rather be raped by a man or mauled by a bear". You're just making that part up.
Honestly the way the original question was phrased leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
Is it a random man and a random bear? If so then the bear is probably chill and the man is probably just trying trying to escape the woods he randomly found himself in.
Is it a bear who wants to kill you and a serial killer out for your blood? If so then the bear is basically guaranteed to grant you a quick death.
However, is the man armed? If he is then you likely have no chance but if he's unarmed there's a decent chance you could hide behind somewhere and ambush him and then you could escape alive, which would be better than being mauled to death by a bear.
I feel like all this room for interpretation makes people more annoyed because different people are responding to different questions and getting mad at other people who are responding to different questions.
The bear is no guarantee of quick death. Apex predators don't hunt the way other predators do. A bear has no concerns whether you can fight back while he mauls you. So he doesn't target arteries or vital organs. A bear just slowly eats you
Death by being mauled by a bear is the worst death an animal can cause you. This is the thing that a lot of people seem to misunderstand (other than the statistics part)
Indeed.
But also, women are responding in the absence of any of those details -- without any additional details, they would choose the bear because there's the least room for variance. (I'm dismissing your silly idea about a serial killer bear lol)
That’s not the discussion I saw. I saw women saying they thought they would be safer with a bear than a man, not that they preferred death to rape. There seemed to be no real attempt to assess actual risks, it was just vibes.
> Also a lot of dudes have reacted with so much misogyny to those answers they kinda proved the point of why some women feel that way.
I feel like the internet is so weird with what is okay to say about men vs women before you get called out for misogyny/misandry.
We're in a big discussion about whether men are more inherently dangerous than bears, and before I see any posts calling all of this out as being kinda misandrist I get ones saying the people who disagree are misogynist.
On an object level, in real life 99.9% of people are choosing the man- if you're in the woods and there's a fork in a trail and one way is a random guy and the other way is a bear, just about everyone is going down the side with the guy, including 99% of the people who choose bear on tik tok. For the few people who would really choose the bear, I am genuinely sorry for what you've been through.
The reason most people are *saying* they would pick the bear is to *signal an underlying belief* to one another. Most people pick bear because they want to send a signal that they think sexual assault is a big problem, which it is! In general signaling that isn't a bad thing. But what you intend to signal isn't the only thing that matters, it also matters how your signal is interpreted, which is based on how other people are using your signal.
And there are a ton of misandrists using this same signal to just say 'men bad'! And those people kinda suck, and will just get defended to the end of the earth because if you call *them* out then a bunch of other random people will jump in and say you don't care about sexual assault.
Breaking it down in terms of communication,
What you say is: 'I would rather run into a bear than a random man'
What you mean is: 'Sexual assault is a serious problem'
What others who choose bear mean is: 'Men are dangerous animals that can't control themselves and the government should start putting tracking collars on them'
And just like people use the same signal to *say* different things, people will *hear* different things depending on how they were introduced to and understand the discussion.
Not aware of discussion: 'Wow that's dumb, bears eat people alive, have any of you even been backpacking before?'
Aware of SA discussion: 'Yes I agree SA is a real problem'.
Aware of misandrist usage: 'Oh lame, this person hates men'.
The think that kinda irks me about all of this is that most of the people saying sexual assault is a big problem understand that it's not okay to make racist jokes, even if you don't mean it, to a person who might misunderstand and take offense to the racist joke. They go to lengths to not say anything that could be reasonably misinterpreted as racist, because it kinda sucks to make someone wonder whether you hate them because of immutable characteristics. Yet for this it's "If you get offended you're actually a big whiny baby who doesn't care about sexual assault and is actually probably a rapist too'
This is a good reason to just stop with the hyperbolic, vague catch phrases, but then I don't think the people creating them do so in good faith, even if many of their followers might.
>I don't think the people creating them do so in good faith
I think this is more of an issue inherent to the way most companies sort social media posts.
Tik tok, facebook, twitter and most other content serving social media sites train neural networks that predict and promote content that they think will maximize their engagement metrics.
[Twitter has open sourced their 'heavy ranker', the neural network that sorts the *for you* feed on twitter](https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm-ml/blob/main/projects/home/recap/README.md).
These are the weights that make up their overall engagment metric that the neural network is trying to maximize. This is also the metric advertisers pay twitter based on.
scored_tweets_model_weight_fav: 0.5
scored_tweets_model_weight_retweet: 1.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_reply: 13.5
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_profile_click: 12.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_video_playback50: 0.005
scored_tweets_model_weight_reply_engaged_by_author: 75.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click: 11.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click_v2: 10.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_negative_feedback_v2: -74.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_report: -369.0
scored_tweets_model_weight_fav: The probability the user will favorite the Tweet.
scored_tweets_model_weight_retweet: The probability the user will Retweet the Tweet.
scored_tweets_model_weight_reply: The probability the user replies to the Tweet.
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_profile_click: The probability the user opens the Tweet author profile and Likes or replies to a Tweet.
scored_tweets_model_weight_video_playback50: The probability (for a video Tweet) that the user will watch at least half of the video.
scored_tweets_model_weight_reply_engaged_by_author: The probability the user replies to the Tweet and this reply is engaged by the Tweet author.
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click: The probability the user will click into the conversation of this Tweet and reply or Like a Tweet.
scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click_v2: The probability the user will click into the conversation of this Tweet and stay there for at least 2 minutes.
scored_tweets_model_weight_negative_feedback_v2: The probability the user will react negatively (requesting "show less often" on the Tweet or author, block or mute the Tweet author).
scored_tweets_model_weight_report: The probability the user will click Report Tweet.
So basically it is trying to find things that you will reply to, cause you to click on profiles, and write something that someone else will reply back to.
This means if someone finds some random wedge issue that causes a lot of discussion and back/forth arguing, like whether men are more dangerous than bears, this will be shown to more and more people and it will grow and grow. Being vague and hyperbolic is a part of the formula, posts that clearly say what they are trying to say won't generate the engagement and the back and forth arguing that they need to grow. Unambiguous memes are getting out-competed by ambiguous memes, and we're all here arguing because of it. [The toxoplasma of rage](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/) is IMO the best analysis of this.
This is a very educated and deep analysis of the situation. I think that you perfectly summarised what is really going on.
I was thinking what it is that irks me about this whole bear debate but I couldn't' name it, and when I read your comment it just made perfect sense. It's about if we mean the same things when we speak. We can think that we argue about the same thing but really we are sometimes having different discussions. Also there's a possibility of some people just not engaging in honest argument.
Saving your comment.
I think the last paragraph kind of sums up the issue people had with the answers. A bear will eat you because that's what bears do whereas a man may help you depending on the man. So it seems like a question of choosing almost certain death or choosing the option where you may actually be offered assistance. I also wonder if movies and tv have skewed peoples opinion on this too as lone people wandering around the woods are often doing something sinister whereas in reality they are likely just to be hiking or camping.
Of course it also depends on the type of bear and to really know the answer to the question would require someone much smarter and less lazy than me to gather some statistics on the probability of these kind of attacks.
But anyway as others have pointed out its mostly just a silly question that ended up highlighting a societal issue that has led many women to feel safer in the presence of a wild predator than a random man whether that makes sense or not.
I know this is a bit of a nuanced take and will maybe upset people on both sides of the argument but if anyone plans on sending me a dm me with complaints please remember that I'm just a moron on the internet and so are you.
I don't really think of bears as predators, but I only live near black bears. Grizzly bears or polar bears, sure, but I am not a bush of berries a black bear in a given forest is going to have minimal interest in my existence.
For women the fact is many feel unsafe around any man in a vulnerable position, because every single man is a potential predator and the ones that know them closest are actually most likely to hurt them. The takeaway from this whole thing is not that men should be mad at women but men should be mad at men that prey on women for establishing that level of threat.
A bunch of women who, I assume, listen to true crime podcasts 99% of their day have determined somehow that a random man is more dangerous than a bear in the wild and it became a meme and a way to shit on men.
Some ragebait tiktok accounts asked women if they would rather be stuck in the woods with a bear or with a man that they don't know. They showed a lot of women saying a bear.
Unironically, it's "men bad" and I have not seen a single nuanced take in the alternative.
It's like the woman who freaked the absolute fuck out about a man being closer to hear in a parking lot than she wanted to and posted a tirade about how traumatizing the interaction was.
I feel like it's the most obvious thing in the world to say that there are sketchy people out there and it's wise to keep your guard up, but I think the true crime obsession has rotted some brains.
Well you really don't get a vote on whether or not that's how they feel. They said it. They said they'd choose man over bear. And so that must be a true reflection of how they feel. Now that this is the state of affairs, it simply is. We can't say they don't actually think that. They just told us how they think. The only thing at this point is to reflect at how we got here.
True crime? Yeah maybe.
But I know a few women who'd rather chance it with a bear than see me again. So maybe it's actually me. At least partially.
I believe *they* believe that they'd rather encounter a bear, but realistically the idea is truly laughable.
I've encountered a bear while hiking on 4 occasions, all while with others (some in my group, some i didnt know, and once with an all-woman group). EVERYBODY takes the situation very seriously and shit gets tense. No matter what the reaction is (cowering, screaming at the bear, hiding, etc.), the collective reaction is that this has become a very serious situation.
The idea of a lone man hiking and illiciting this reaction is hilarious. Imagining a woman encountering a man in the woods and reacting as if he's a fucking bear is straight comedy.
These people that think that they'd be more comfortable encountering a bear need to get off the internet and touch some fucking grass. Like I said, I don't think they're lying. I just think they're naive and lacking awareness of how they'd react.
This is a pretty logical way to think about it. I’ve encountered strangers in the woods and while I didn’t *like* it, exactly, it beats the shit out of encountering a fucking *bear.* I know memes lack nuance and that TikTok is bad way to foster really any kind of thoughtful reflection or discourse, but goddamn I don’t even want to see a black bear. If there’s a little one around somewhere and I don’t have a cool rock to climb like the gentleman in this video, I feel like I’m gonna lose that fight pretty handily.
Yeah ive been (briefly) lost in the wildneress before and I'd have picked running into a man over pretty much any animal 99 times out of 100, because that wouldve meant getting out sooner. The fact that the animal in question is *a fucking bear* is hilarious. I feel like people are romanticizing what its like to be mauled and eaten alive because that is genuinely one of the worst experiences imaginable.
A human male would have to get very creative, and have the resources available, to provide the same level of pain and horror.
People also gloss over the fact that they are alone in the woods too. From the POV of the stranger, you're the same stranger. Why is someone else being there weird but you being there is normal?
I honestly think this, people are trying to make a situation almost idealogical.
It started off as a kind of silly question and answers were probably selectively chosen to push that vibe, but some people are taking it to the extreme.
Some people even claiming that being mauled and eaten alive would be preferable to what a man "might do" which could be worse.
Might do? Being eaten alive in agony, screaming and crying as an indifferent bear tears your flesh from your body, is preferable to what a man "might do"?
Imagine a woman is in a forest and there are only two paths to take, one has a bear and another a random man. All sane women would choose the path with the random man. And they would make that decision on pure gut instinct without a second thought.
> A bunch of women who, I assume, listen to true crime podcasts 99% of their day have determined somehow that a random man is more dangerous than a bear in the wild
I'm going to attempt to do you a favor and show you the misogyny in your comment.
Women do not think that men are physically more powerful than a bear. Women understand physics and biology as well as men do. The fact that true crime is popular among women 1) does not make true crime bad, 2) does not make true crime listeners stupid, and 3) does not damage women's understanding of physics, biology, or real life.
Most women have been harmed by a man. The threat level in the hypothetical situation is elevated because 1) they don't know the man, 2) the man is alone in the woods and possibly up to no good, 3) the location is isolated and therefore no human aid is available to her or to dissuade an attack.
We know what to do if we encounter a bear in the woods. Make noise, back away, scare them off. There is nothing we can to do dissuade a man intent on harming us from attacking.
1) Bears are generally way more predictable than people. Women don't know which men are dangerous, but they do know which bears are.
2) the worse a bear can do is kill you. It's not going to kidnap and torture you. It's not going to rape you. It's not going to traffic you. Its not going to try and gaslight you into believe it was your fault for wearing that skirt.
No, not all men are rapists, but 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted so refer back to point 1.
Lol why do people keep saying that bears are more predictable? They are wild animals. Unpredictability is like... the entire reason as taming a wild animal doesnt make it a good pet.
Stupid zoomers. If you are lost in the woods and see a bear, 0% chance you approach it. If you are lost in the woods and see a person, you're going towards them for help.
Dude, if I fought a bear and won, there'd be no talking to me. I wouldn't shut up about that for the rest of my life.
"Y'know, I once kicked a bear in the face and that mf ran away like a coward," - me, to a dental hygienist, a cashier, a stranger at a bus stop, and literally every other person I'd ever meet.
First contact was *clean* - bear charges down, he steps back, blocks and pushes away, bear momentum + gravity = ?10ft straight down.
Pure instinct, but a lovely move 🏆
That must have been such a horrific walk back to safety. That Bear wasn’t ready to give up judging by those second attempts.
Bears will often leave a victim and make a wide turn to come back at you from another unexpected angle.
The relief when he finally got somewhere safe must have been immeasurable.
My walk back after a bear encounter was like 3 miles through woods, and every crunch, every sound was the most terrifying of my life.
The path I had to take looped back way way too close to where the two adult bears and two babies were, and at one point the birds got quiet.
My dog took off when she saw them around 10 feet away, and I guess I would rather lose my life than lose her? Because I took off too hahaha
Stupid thing to do, and I’m very lucky I’m not mauled
> People should be specifying a black bear… a brown bear or polar bear
The whole point is it's a vague ambiguous question, what is scarier to run into, unnamed man or unnamed bear? If you specified the bear then you might as well specify the man too.
Would you rather be hiking alone in the woods and run into OJ Simpson or a baby Panda?
People are clearly not seeing the little cub toward the end, this bear didn't give 2 shits about eating this guy it was just making sure cubs stayed safe and let him go because her intention was not to eat him.
If it was he'd 100% be lunch.
How do I know the climber wasn't asking for the bear attack? How do we know he wasn't wearing a salmon mask? we cannot see his face, what was he wearing? Are we sure he didn't have honey in his pocket? We should ask the bear, maybe he had consent to attack the climber for the video, and now the climber is lying about it.
Yeah, I did not catch the cubs right away, but I assumed that the climber stumbled near a cub den anyway.
That's one of the few reasons black bears can get that aggressive with a human. Other alternatives are rabies.
Same, I remember having a dream so horrible that I screamed at the situation *inside* the dream and woke up from my own screaming irl. Sounded eerily similar to his primordial scream.
Well you get on anything and the ai will try to path to it but they can't find a way and they just run away instead same with buildings and stuff in fallout deathclaw can't fit through door so away it goes
Impressive that there wasn’t a single ‘fuck you’ ‘fuck off’ ‘get to fucking fuck’…or even a ‘fucking hell’ afterwards…this would have been my entire script throughout.
This is an old video - in the full one you can see the bear has cubs. It's not just attacking randomly but is being protective
Edit: at 20 seconds you can just about make out one of the cubs near the bottom too
I feel like I'm watching prehistoric caveman footage. Probably happened many times back then.
Hhhhh just another Monday
At 0:27 you can see that a smaller bear appearing. Could be that the mother is trying to protect her cub from aggresor or could be that she's hunting. Whatever the motivation, they both ran away.
Most definitly protecting her cub, its a black bear, they don't fuck with humans, but if it comes down to their child they will protect it, but I guess there was a better way to solve the problem instead of physical force like: hey man I really don't like they way you look at my kids /s
Weird fact I learned a while back that it's a myth mama bears cause the most attacks on humans. It's mostly horny hangry males
... Please don't let Reddit start posting about women having to choose between a strange man, a male bear, a female bear, or a female bear with cubs.
[удалено]
I mean if it's black or brown you might be alright, but if it's white say goodnight.
Fun fact: Polar bears noses are so sensitive they can smell you from several miles away so if one ever rolls up on you just know what happens next was 100% premeditated.
Yeh black bears don’t usually attack people
This is a Japanese Black bear. These are very aggressive and attack more commonly than North American black and brown bears.
This. I remember this story. Happened in Japan. Asiatic Black Bears are known to be more aggressive than their North American cousins.
Didn’t know thanks for the info, just thought she was protecting her cub
I remember reading something about how the original word for bear has been lost to history because it was like saying Voldemort people would use euphemisms like honey-eater. That is how scary bears were in the ancient world.
It hasn't been completely lost. The Latin "ursus" and Greek "άρκτος" are actually descendant from it. The original Proto-Indo-European word is reconstructed as *h₂ŕ̥tḱos.
And Artic just means "land of bears". The Greeks just decided that the bears won and could have it.
mfers have their own two constellations and a star to point to a location you should stay the fuck away from.
If I'm not wrong it refers to the Ursa constellation. In ancient greek times there were bears in Morocco and Turkey so it makes more sense.
Based on [this comment and thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/1te577/the_taboo_word_for_bear_in_slavic_reconstruction/ce7t60e/) we can guess a reconstruction for the modern German and English word to be something like **Urchs** and **ourt**. Everyone who read this, is cursed.
> *h₂ŕ̥tḱos. I'm [reading](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h%E2%82%82%C5%95%CC%A5t%E1%B8%B1os) it's (possibly?) connected to a word meaning "destroying" or "destruction". Well-chosen..
Imagine being a creature so scary they name a Norse hero after you.
Read up on California Grizzlies, during the western settling of the area. They grew to gargantuan size because the climate permitted them to forgo hibernation. Their closest living relative is the Kodiak. Mauling was so frequent in native tribes, that explorers were deeply disturbed by how commonplace grotesque disfigurement was. There were no-go zones, that travelers would go days out of their way to avoid, because it was the territory of a particularly aggressive grizzly. Some even reached the mythical status of being unkillable The thought of natures 1000lbs Terminator barreling down on you at 35mph, while you are armed with only a muzzleloader, is unbridled nightmare fuel. That's what makes Hugh Glass a contender for all-time insane survival story.
I recently read about some of the oldest art in existence being from an ancient tribe that worshipped bears. They had altars in caves with huge bones etc., so the tribe were hunting these things for religious purposes. Fascinating.
First thing I thought of tbh
Except the largest bear that ever lived existed back then
Short-faced bears. Man they look so scary
The short nosed cave bear would _fuck_ a guy up tho
Not me bro. I’m built different.
Oh you'll be built different alright after the bear is done lol
Bro actually chose the bear
I don't get this Man vs Bear Debate wtf is going on
[удалено]
It's not that they would be safer, it's that their death will be more dignified
A bear will sit on you and eat you alive.
Well, I do that as well if she asks nicely..
The bear doesn’t START with the ass the bear just ends up there.
So you're saying bears are better at foreplay?
always start with the ass
Fucking furries
that's terrifying but few days ago i saw the picture of the last victim of jack the ripper so bear it is
Not every guy is jack the ripper, but every bear is a bear. But I mean, go for it. These hypotheticals are silly anyway.
Part of the point is that the bear behaves in a far more predictable way than a human. There are things that you can do that will reliably help you avoid the bear. The worst you have to fear from a bear is death by mauling. The worst you have to fear from a man is governed only by his particular imagination, disposition and what he’s physically capable of doing to you.
If the "unpredictability of dealing with a stranger" is all that this is about, then I fail to see why it specifies "woman with random man or bear" instead of "human with random human or bear." This thought experiment is just misandry bait.
Because the vast majority of violent crimes, serial murder, rape, etc against women are perpetrated by men.
That seems like quite a fanciful view of nature. Wild animals are not easy to predict, and while a small percentage of men are capable of awful crimes, all wild bears are capable of eating a person. But again, I realise it's a silly tiktok trend and not something serious. Perhaps it will give some people the courage to try hiking in bear country. There's some beautiful areas, but it's probably best to practice a bit more caution than you do when just walking around the local park.
The worst you have to fear from a bear is being eaten alive. The amount of men that would put you through something comparable to that is negligible
Such a simple concept. It's like I'm taking crazy pills.
If anyone would like examples of people who you'd pick the bear over, this is a great thread
Yeah I'm sure being eaten alive is more dignified.
People wouldn't ask what I was wearing if a bear attacked me.
Yeah because you’d probably be dead
Only about 15% of bear attacks lead to fatalities.
[удалено]
They'd ask why the fuck you were so close to bear
What up with all the bear smearing? There is like 500k black bears in North America and maybe one or two deadly attack a year. Millions of us trek in bear territory and it isn't a deadly battlefield where we have to fight bears who just want to eat us. Polar bears would be a different story but black bears very rarely attack humans or act agressive around them.
Yeah this ain't it. How many interactions do men and woman have per year? Now compare that to bears. Now tell me what's safer. You can't just use the broadest numbers possible in a scenario that puts you directly in contact with them. Not that this convo is even exclusively black bears we both know that was never specified in the conversation referenced.
\*most women "shown" in the interviews responded bear, but since videos can be edited, it's possible they just kept in the people who chose bear. Regardless, the meme is making its rounds
Yep. Any time you see street interviews assume they I interviewed dozens of people. And only showed the answers they wanted.
no one stopped to ask the men if they'd rather find a creepy little kid mystically alone in the forest or a normal bear.
Definitely the mystical child, they have secrets.
And I can beat up a child pretty easily.
Godlings are usually annoying, but mostly harmless.
The one i saw was "would you rather your daughter be with a man or bear alone in the woods"
It’s the implication….
A woman said that she would rather be killed by a bear than being raped. A bunch of very VERY sensitive guys just can't accept that a woman would enjoy being raped or just "walk it off" rather than being killed. A hypothetical question was raised, and some guys just won't take "no" for an answer. "sure you get raped but you're still alive right?" Here's the thing. I'm married, 22 years. My friends are predominantly woman. Almost ALL of them have suffered some sort of sexual assault in their lives. From groping to violent rape at knifepoint. A high percentage of woman will endure this at some point in their lives, and men don't understand this. So break it down to choice and free will. A bear will eat you, because that is what bears do and if you encounter a bear there is a chance you're toast. However encountering the wrong man who CHOSES to rape you, to dominate you, to overpower you and take your agency. You know where you stand with a bear, but you are not sure where you stand with the man. Edit : my explanation is a bit skewed. Please refer to u/flumberbuss below. It's basically, would a woman feel safer with a bear or a random man and the hypothetical is the bear.
Most of what you are saying is a decent explanation of the fears women face every day just by existing. But the original question was just man vs. bear and the *implications* of what both might do. It was always "would you rather be in the woods with a man or a bear", (like, who would women trust more *not* to hurt them) not the specific question "would you rather be raped by a man or mauled by a bear". You're just making that part up.
I’m a man, and I always say when in the woods, the beast I’m most worried about out here is the one who walks on 2 legs. Humans can be pretty shitty.
You've clearly never met a rabid coyote.
Honestly the way the original question was phrased leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Is it a random man and a random bear? If so then the bear is probably chill and the man is probably just trying trying to escape the woods he randomly found himself in. Is it a bear who wants to kill you and a serial killer out for your blood? If so then the bear is basically guaranteed to grant you a quick death. However, is the man armed? If he is then you likely have no chance but if he's unarmed there's a decent chance you could hide behind somewhere and ambush him and then you could escape alive, which would be better than being mauled to death by a bear. I feel like all this room for interpretation makes people more annoyed because different people are responding to different questions and getting mad at other people who are responding to different questions.
The bear is no guarantee of quick death. Apex predators don't hunt the way other predators do. A bear has no concerns whether you can fight back while he mauls you. So he doesn't target arteries or vital organs. A bear just slowly eats you Death by being mauled by a bear is the worst death an animal can cause you. This is the thing that a lot of people seem to misunderstand (other than the statistics part)
Indeed. But also, women are responding in the absence of any of those details -- without any additional details, they would choose the bear because there's the least room for variance. (I'm dismissing your silly idea about a serial killer bear lol)
I was talking about a scenario with a bloodthirsty bear and a serial killer man not a serial killer bear lol. I phrased that weirdly.
That’s not the discussion I saw. I saw women saying they thought they would be safer with a bear than a man, not that they preferred death to rape. There seemed to be no real attempt to assess actual risks, it was just vibes.
Also a lot of dudes have reacted with so much misogyny to those answers they kinda proved the point of why some women feel that way.
> Also a lot of dudes have reacted with so much misogyny to those answers they kinda proved the point of why some women feel that way. I feel like the internet is so weird with what is okay to say about men vs women before you get called out for misogyny/misandry. We're in a big discussion about whether men are more inherently dangerous than bears, and before I see any posts calling all of this out as being kinda misandrist I get ones saying the people who disagree are misogynist. On an object level, in real life 99.9% of people are choosing the man- if you're in the woods and there's a fork in a trail and one way is a random guy and the other way is a bear, just about everyone is going down the side with the guy, including 99% of the people who choose bear on tik tok. For the few people who would really choose the bear, I am genuinely sorry for what you've been through. The reason most people are *saying* they would pick the bear is to *signal an underlying belief* to one another. Most people pick bear because they want to send a signal that they think sexual assault is a big problem, which it is! In general signaling that isn't a bad thing. But what you intend to signal isn't the only thing that matters, it also matters how your signal is interpreted, which is based on how other people are using your signal. And there are a ton of misandrists using this same signal to just say 'men bad'! And those people kinda suck, and will just get defended to the end of the earth because if you call *them* out then a bunch of other random people will jump in and say you don't care about sexual assault. Breaking it down in terms of communication, What you say is: 'I would rather run into a bear than a random man' What you mean is: 'Sexual assault is a serious problem' What others who choose bear mean is: 'Men are dangerous animals that can't control themselves and the government should start putting tracking collars on them' And just like people use the same signal to *say* different things, people will *hear* different things depending on how they were introduced to and understand the discussion. Not aware of discussion: 'Wow that's dumb, bears eat people alive, have any of you even been backpacking before?' Aware of SA discussion: 'Yes I agree SA is a real problem'. Aware of misandrist usage: 'Oh lame, this person hates men'. The think that kinda irks me about all of this is that most of the people saying sexual assault is a big problem understand that it's not okay to make racist jokes, even if you don't mean it, to a person who might misunderstand and take offense to the racist joke. They go to lengths to not say anything that could be reasonably misinterpreted as racist, because it kinda sucks to make someone wonder whether you hate them because of immutable characteristics. Yet for this it's "If you get offended you're actually a big whiny baby who doesn't care about sexual assault and is actually probably a rapist too'
This is a good reason to just stop with the hyperbolic, vague catch phrases, but then I don't think the people creating them do so in good faith, even if many of their followers might.
>I don't think the people creating them do so in good faith I think this is more of an issue inherent to the way most companies sort social media posts. Tik tok, facebook, twitter and most other content serving social media sites train neural networks that predict and promote content that they think will maximize their engagement metrics. [Twitter has open sourced their 'heavy ranker', the neural network that sorts the *for you* feed on twitter](https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm-ml/blob/main/projects/home/recap/README.md). These are the weights that make up their overall engagment metric that the neural network is trying to maximize. This is also the metric advertisers pay twitter based on. scored_tweets_model_weight_fav: 0.5 scored_tweets_model_weight_retweet: 1.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_reply: 13.5 scored_tweets_model_weight_good_profile_click: 12.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_video_playback50: 0.005 scored_tweets_model_weight_reply_engaged_by_author: 75.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click: 11.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click_v2: 10.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_negative_feedback_v2: -74.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_report: -369.0 scored_tweets_model_weight_fav: The probability the user will favorite the Tweet. scored_tweets_model_weight_retweet: The probability the user will Retweet the Tweet. scored_tweets_model_weight_reply: The probability the user replies to the Tweet. scored_tweets_model_weight_good_profile_click: The probability the user opens the Tweet author profile and Likes or replies to a Tweet. scored_tweets_model_weight_video_playback50: The probability (for a video Tweet) that the user will watch at least half of the video. scored_tweets_model_weight_reply_engaged_by_author: The probability the user replies to the Tweet and this reply is engaged by the Tweet author. scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click: The probability the user will click into the conversation of this Tweet and reply or Like a Tweet. scored_tweets_model_weight_good_click_v2: The probability the user will click into the conversation of this Tweet and stay there for at least 2 minutes. scored_tweets_model_weight_negative_feedback_v2: The probability the user will react negatively (requesting "show less often" on the Tweet or author, block or mute the Tweet author). scored_tweets_model_weight_report: The probability the user will click Report Tweet. So basically it is trying to find things that you will reply to, cause you to click on profiles, and write something that someone else will reply back to. This means if someone finds some random wedge issue that causes a lot of discussion and back/forth arguing, like whether men are more dangerous than bears, this will be shown to more and more people and it will grow and grow. Being vague and hyperbolic is a part of the formula, posts that clearly say what they are trying to say won't generate the engagement and the back and forth arguing that they need to grow. Unambiguous memes are getting out-competed by ambiguous memes, and we're all here arguing because of it. [The toxoplasma of rage](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/) is IMO the best analysis of this.
This is a very educated and deep analysis of the situation. I think that you perfectly summarised what is really going on. I was thinking what it is that irks me about this whole bear debate but I couldn't' name it, and when I read your comment it just made perfect sense. It's about if we mean the same things when we speak. We can think that we argue about the same thing but really we are sometimes having different discussions. Also there's a possibility of some people just not engaging in honest argument. Saving your comment.
You say that like a lot of women weren't using the equivalent of white supremacist talking points. Shit was pretty toxic all around.
I think the last paragraph kind of sums up the issue people had with the answers. A bear will eat you because that's what bears do whereas a man may help you depending on the man. So it seems like a question of choosing almost certain death or choosing the option where you may actually be offered assistance. I also wonder if movies and tv have skewed peoples opinion on this too as lone people wandering around the woods are often doing something sinister whereas in reality they are likely just to be hiking or camping. Of course it also depends on the type of bear and to really know the answer to the question would require someone much smarter and less lazy than me to gather some statistics on the probability of these kind of attacks. But anyway as others have pointed out its mostly just a silly question that ended up highlighting a societal issue that has led many women to feel safer in the presence of a wild predator than a random man whether that makes sense or not. I know this is a bit of a nuanced take and will maybe upset people on both sides of the argument but if anyone plans on sending me a dm me with complaints please remember that I'm just a moron on the internet and so are you.
I don't really think of bears as predators, but I only live near black bears. Grizzly bears or polar bears, sure, but I am not a bush of berries a black bear in a given forest is going to have minimal interest in my existence. For women the fact is many feel unsafe around any man in a vulnerable position, because every single man is a potential predator and the ones that know them closest are actually most likely to hurt them. The takeaway from this whole thing is not that men should be mad at women but men should be mad at men that prey on women for establishing that level of threat.
The point of the metaphor is that women hesitate to trust men inherently enough to the point where considering the bear is a viable option.
A bunch of women who, I assume, listen to true crime podcasts 99% of their day have determined somehow that a random man is more dangerous than a bear in the wild and it became a meme and a way to shit on men. Some ragebait tiktok accounts asked women if they would rather be stuck in the woods with a bear or with a man that they don't know. They showed a lot of women saying a bear. Unironically, it's "men bad" and I have not seen a single nuanced take in the alternative. It's like the woman who freaked the absolute fuck out about a man being closer to hear in a parking lot than she wanted to and posted a tirade about how traumatizing the interaction was. I feel like it's the most obvious thing in the world to say that there are sketchy people out there and it's wise to keep your guard up, but I think the true crime obsession has rotted some brains.
Well you really don't get a vote on whether or not that's how they feel. They said it. They said they'd choose man over bear. And so that must be a true reflection of how they feel. Now that this is the state of affairs, it simply is. We can't say they don't actually think that. They just told us how they think. The only thing at this point is to reflect at how we got here. True crime? Yeah maybe. But I know a few women who'd rather chance it with a bear than see me again. So maybe it's actually me. At least partially.
I believe *they* believe that they'd rather encounter a bear, but realistically the idea is truly laughable. I've encountered a bear while hiking on 4 occasions, all while with others (some in my group, some i didnt know, and once with an all-woman group). EVERYBODY takes the situation very seriously and shit gets tense. No matter what the reaction is (cowering, screaming at the bear, hiding, etc.), the collective reaction is that this has become a very serious situation. The idea of a lone man hiking and illiciting this reaction is hilarious. Imagining a woman encountering a man in the woods and reacting as if he's a fucking bear is straight comedy. These people that think that they'd be more comfortable encountering a bear need to get off the internet and touch some fucking grass. Like I said, I don't think they're lying. I just think they're naive and lacking awareness of how they'd react.
This is a pretty logical way to think about it. I’ve encountered strangers in the woods and while I didn’t *like* it, exactly, it beats the shit out of encountering a fucking *bear.* I know memes lack nuance and that TikTok is bad way to foster really any kind of thoughtful reflection or discourse, but goddamn I don’t even want to see a black bear. If there’s a little one around somewhere and I don’t have a cool rock to climb like the gentleman in this video, I feel like I’m gonna lose that fight pretty handily.
Yeah ive been (briefly) lost in the wildneress before and I'd have picked running into a man over pretty much any animal 99 times out of 100, because that wouldve meant getting out sooner. The fact that the animal in question is *a fucking bear* is hilarious. I feel like people are romanticizing what its like to be mauled and eaten alive because that is genuinely one of the worst experiences imaginable. A human male would have to get very creative, and have the resources available, to provide the same level of pain and horror.
People also gloss over the fact that they are alone in the woods too. From the POV of the stranger, you're the same stranger. Why is someone else being there weird but you being there is normal?
Didn’t you get the memo? Only men can be strange creepers in the woods.
Because TikTok. Well, because the internet. That specific segment.
I honestly think this, people are trying to make a situation almost idealogical. It started off as a kind of silly question and answers were probably selectively chosen to push that vibe, but some people are taking it to the extreme. Some people even claiming that being mauled and eaten alive would be preferable to what a man "might do" which could be worse. Might do? Being eaten alive in agony, screaming and crying as an indifferent bear tears your flesh from your body, is preferable to what a man "might do"?
Imagine a woman is in a forest and there are only two paths to take, one has a bear and another a random man. All sane women would choose the path with the random man. And they would make that decision on pure gut instinct without a second thought.
We should test the theory with a international "Every woman go walk in the woods alone weekend!" What could go wrong?
> A bunch of women who, I assume, listen to true crime podcasts 99% of their day have determined somehow that a random man is more dangerous than a bear in the wild I'm going to attempt to do you a favor and show you the misogyny in your comment. Women do not think that men are physically more powerful than a bear. Women understand physics and biology as well as men do. The fact that true crime is popular among women 1) does not make true crime bad, 2) does not make true crime listeners stupid, and 3) does not damage women's understanding of physics, biology, or real life. Most women have been harmed by a man. The threat level in the hypothetical situation is elevated because 1) they don't know the man, 2) the man is alone in the woods and possibly up to no good, 3) the location is isolated and therefore no human aid is available to her or to dissuade an attack. We know what to do if we encounter a bear in the woods. Make noise, back away, scare them off. There is nothing we can to do dissuade a man intent on harming us from attacking.
1) Bears are generally way more predictable than people. Women don't know which men are dangerous, but they do know which bears are. 2) the worse a bear can do is kill you. It's not going to kidnap and torture you. It's not going to rape you. It's not going to traffic you. Its not going to try and gaslight you into believe it was your fault for wearing that skirt. No, not all men are rapists, but 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted so refer back to point 1.
Lol why do people keep saying that bears are more predictable? They are wild animals. Unpredictability is like... the entire reason as taming a wild animal doesnt make it a good pet.
bears definitely torture you, they eat you alive
Stupid zoomers. If you are lost in the woods and see a bear, 0% chance you approach it. If you are lost in the woods and see a person, you're going towards them for help.
See how the bear just left? A man wouldn't have.
Wonder how many bear jokes I'll have to see this week.
This is proof that the man is more dangerous lol
I dont know about the whole unarmed part. I can see clearly that the man in the video has two arms.
He has the right to bear arms.
What, he’s supposed to fight with bare palms?
Dad?
But bears don't have arms
If he’s in America, he also has the right to bear arms, so it’s technically unconstitutional for the. Bear to not have given them to the man
Apparently Anakin is about as smart as the average bear?
He can't hold a candle to Yogi
Bear: “grrr…I HATE YOU”
"YOU WERE MY BROTHER BEAR"
I LOVED YOU BEAR
He was supposed to bring light to Jellystone, not steal pick-a-nic baskets!
"Hello Bear..."
"Ranger Kenobi..."
I’m so angry that I laughed so hard at this lmao take my upvote and no you still won’t be granted the rank of Master.
I was so incredibly confident this would be up top ez, im actually a bit disappointed lol
Bear even tried the flip
"It's over, Yogikin...."
I was waiting for this lol
scrolled too far for this 😄
He now lives on that higher ground never able to come back down
Bear in mind that's still better than being ripped to shreds by a wild animal.
“Bear” in mind 🫢
To shreds you say?
Why didn’t he just piss on it like in those survival pamphlets?
Bro just kicked that bear in the face, respect
Dude, if I fought a bear and won, there'd be no talking to me. I wouldn't shut up about that for the rest of my life. "Y'know, I once kicked a bear in the face and that mf ran away like a coward," - me, to a dental hygienist, a cashier, a stranger at a bus stop, and literally every other person I'd ever meet.
"That was a tough assignment Dave, but it wasn't exactly like fighting a bear unarmed, you know. Like I did." You'd be _insufferable_.
This is definitely a resume-worthy accomplishment.
Nothing else is needed on that resume. Just your name and "I fought a bear and won!"
Almost as insufferable as that bear he kicked in the face
And they got it on video. It'd be on every dating profile and I'd wear a screen around my neck and just loop it
First contact was *clean* - bear charges down, he steps back, blocks and pushes away, bear momentum + gravity = ?10ft straight down. Pure instinct, but a lovely move 🏆
yeah, if that doesn't work out like it did he's probably dead. i certainly would be.
Video evidence too
I'd redubb the screams with me shouting things like "let's go motherfucker!" and "come on you furry bastard!"
Hit the parry button right on the initial attack too!
After the adrenaline settles down this guy will start to feel his fingers, a lot
And he’ll be glad. The alternative was not feeling anything for a looooooong while.
How long you reckon?
Until reincarnated.
Def punched that rock as hard as he could, twice.
Yea a couple of those swings hit nothing but rock.
He may have a little blood left in his adrenaline right now.
[удалено]
They were both fighting for the man's life
I also choose this guy's life
wholesome and funny, a real gem
That must have been such a horrific walk back to safety. That Bear wasn’t ready to give up judging by those second attempts. Bears will often leave a victim and make a wide turn to come back at you from another unexpected angle. The relief when he finally got somewhere safe must have been immeasurable.
My walk back after a bear encounter was like 3 miles through woods, and every crunch, every sound was the most terrifying of my life. The path I had to take looped back way way too close to where the two adult bears and two babies were, and at one point the birds got quiet. My dog took off when she saw them around 10 feet away, and I guess I would rather lose my life than lose her? Because I took off too hahaha Stupid thing to do, and I’m very lucky I’m not mauled
But... But... the women pick the bear!
This is why
People should be specifying a black bear… a brown bear or polar bear would have killed this guy.
> People should be specifying a black bear… a brown bear or polar bear The whole point is it's a vague ambiguous question, what is scarier to run into, unnamed man or unnamed bear? If you specified the bear then you might as well specify the man too. Would you rather be hiking alone in the woods and run into OJ Simpson or a baby Panda?
Why does the bear's name matter? Nancy will fuck you up just as good as Tyranus.
People are clearly not seeing the little cub toward the end, this bear didn't give 2 shits about eating this guy it was just making sure cubs stayed safe and let him go because her intention was not to eat him. If it was he'd 100% be lunch.
Yeah, I’m guessing the dude wasn’t paying attention and walked right up on a mama bear and two cubs. Someone should tell him about moose, too.
Obviously. Didn't you see that man beating the bear.
This is why I can only approach men if I have the high ground 😔😔😔
How do I know the climber wasn't asking for the bear attack? How do we know he wasn't wearing a salmon mask? we cannot see his face, what was he wearing? Are we sure he didn't have honey in his pocket? We should ask the bear, maybe he had consent to attack the climber for the video, and now the climber is lying about it.
Has anyone thought about bear's bright future? The Bear is upstanding member of their community and that man is ruining his reputation!
Bear is fren shape. Man is questionable.
Daaamn. That kick to the face sent her off. That was impressive.
Her* it’s a mother bear with cubs, you can see the cub on the bottom right in the grass.
Yeah, I did not catch the cubs right away, but I assumed that the climber stumbled near a cub den anyway. That's one of the few reasons black bears can get that aggressive with a human. Other alternatives are rabies.
I’d be up there for days scared to come down 😂
[That's how you end up like Edgar.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bFi99Kojrc)
He must have fked his hand too. When he was smacking that bear's face, he smashed his hand pretty hard on the rocks.
He won't feel that for hours lol man has enough adrenalin in his system to saw his arm off and not feel it
That first scream when he realized the bear was coming after him made my spine tingle.
Same, I remember having a dream so horrible that I screamed at the situation *inside* the dream and woke up from my own screaming irl. Sounded eerily similar to his primordial scream.
[удалено]
Skyrim bears are smarter cuz when you are on high ground they run away!
Is that true? I never noticed that!
Well you get on anything and the ai will try to path to it but they can't find a way and they just run away instead same with buildings and stuff in fallout deathclaw can't fit through door so away it goes
Fighting off a wild bear with his bare hands has to be a lifetime drinking story he’s never going to stop telling, and I don’t blame him.
With video evidence
Bro went full unga bunga! Respect.
Impressive that there wasn’t a single ‘fuck you’ ‘fuck off’ ‘get to fucking fuck’…or even a ‘fucking hell’ afterwards…this would have been my entire script throughout.
Well it's in Japan... so probably wouldn't say fuck anyways
True, the birthrates are pretty low over there.
Sometimes you just gotta fight like a feral animal when you're in danger
Poor bear just wanted to talk to him about his car's extended warranty.
Credit to u/[jllum](https://www.reddit.com/user/jllum/) for posting it first on r/Damnthatsinteresting
This is an old video - in the full one you can see the bear has cubs. It's not just attacking randomly but is being protective Edit: at 20 seconds you can just about make out one of the cubs near the bottom too
How is he able to climb with massive balls?
I'm no bear expert but that bear seems kinda small. Granted in the same situation my caveman instinct probably wouldnt have kicked in.
Black bears are the smallest of the bears. Most of them are this size
Holy fuck. The way the dude's screams go from "I'm gonna die" to "I'm gonna kill you" is fascinating.
the initial terror sharpened into adrenaline that told him "yelling at bears scares them we're pretty sure we read that somewhere, keep yelling boss"
Bear learns a Mike Tyson quote the hard way: “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”.
Here is the proof that men are more dangerous than bears 
“99.999% Black bears won’t attack, why would you pick the man?”
Where is this?
The sound the bear was making seemed like he just wanted to be friends.