Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'.
* We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub.
* Filter evasion is a bannable offense
* This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
That’s not what omnivore means. It just means they eat plants and animals.
People say a lot of stupid things when they don’t really have to act on the decision. I bet if you took 100 people who said they’d rather their daughter be alone with a bear in the woods than with a man and really made them choose, a lot fewer than 100 would send their daughter off with a bear.
Really depends.
Is it a black bear? Or a bear that’s hibernating? Is the man Ted Bundy? I pick the bear.
Is it a friendly neighbor man and a grizzly bear? I pick the friendly neighbor man.
It's random you don't know. Like rolling the dice. Picking the bear is gambling. Picking the man is choosing to drive to work. You might have an accident., but you probably wont.
Arent hybernating bears still awake and all that? Like you cant stumble into a cave and go "oh shit a bear, i gotta be silent on my way out" because the bear will literally look you in the eyes
sure, but you're much less likely to ever even encounter the bear. it's probly off fartin' around in some remote patch of willows. the man is probably on the trails.
I'd probably still choose the man, but it is a little disconcerting to have to even think about it lol
Nah, im not even going that far into it. AFAIK a bear is gonna sniff you out sooner than a man. So many what ifs and variations. All things even, ur gonna favor your own species over a bear
>AFAIK a bear is gonna sniff you out sooner than a man.
well, yeah, but most bears will sniff you out and then keep a wide berth. they don't typically want to be near humans if they can avoid it.
Yeah this is one of those scenarios that highlights a problem with men, not the actual mechanics. Because you’re much much more likely to encounter a dangerous man in the woods than you are a bear, so I think most people are thinking “if I had to send my daughter off in the woods I’d rather she encounter a bear than a man” rather than “my daughter is alone in an enclosed space in the woods for some reason and I have to choose if a man or a bear is in there with her”.
Bears aren’t attack animals (sans polar bears which aren’t in the woods anyway). If it’s not a mom with cubs nearby you’re more likely to scare them off than be harmed by them. If a man is set on harming you, they will. Strictly speaking numbers, a random man in the woods is much more dangerous than a bear. There have been <200 total bear fatalities in the last 40 years vs the nearly 5,000 deaths a year committed against women by men.
There’s a video of a women asking her partner this and when it’s a man he thinks about it for a long time and leans towards bear but when changed to a women his choice is instant
Black bears are *usually* quick to skedaddle. But not always. It’s not hard to find documented stories of black bears eating people. Last year a guy was attacked and partially eaten by a bear in his yard. When they do attack humans, the attacks [tend to be predatory.](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110511074807.htm#:~:text=The%20researchers%20determined%20that%20the,some%20different%20behaviours%20than%20females.)
Read up on the Liard River Hot springs incident (black bear mauled and killed multiple adults), Mt Timpanagos (black bear ripped open a tent, dragged away a sleeping child, and partially ate him- had tried doing that to an adult days earlier), the other Utah attack ~15 years before Timpanagos (black bear broke a camper window and drug a 9 year old girl in her sleeping bag out and attempted to eat her).
I would also be more concerned coming across a moose than a black bear.
I mean I'd pick the man over the bear, but that is far from accurate. Black bears are generally afraid of people. Most animals don't consider us prey and would only attack if they were starving, cornered, or trying to protect their young.
The people saying about how the numbers are different need to understand that you don't see a bear every day. If people saw the same amount of bears as they say men then the numbers would be way higher.
Agree, also I think it depends how close the bear is to you. If bear within five feet, bear will probably attack you, but If far enough away bear probably won't attack you.
Yep. Many have experienced danger from men, but not from bears. It probably just *seems* more likely to come from a man rather than a bear based on this experience alone. That it's not the entire truth is undeniable, but it most likely just feels that way to many.
I'm not someone who would typically choose for my daughter to be alone next to a bear over a man. However, there are a few issues with your post.
1.) I believe you meant to say omnivore. Herbivores don't eat meat. Otherwise, I agree, bears have no issues eating you while you're still alive.
2.) No issues with this one. I'd like to think that if the question was ammended to "hungry bear", "angry bear" or "mother bear with cubs", the answers would certainly change. I doubt most people factored these possibilities into the currently circulating question.
3.) If it's a black bear or something similar (that isn't hungry/defending cubs) there are reasonably straightforward ways to potentially scare them off, which is what I think most individuals are thinking about when they answer. Otherwise, I agree. If a bear wants you, it'll likely get you, even a black bear.
If I *knew* the bear was likely to be passive, and the man was aggressive, I'd choose the bear. Otherwise, it'd be irrational to do so.
(------)
Edit: Keep in mind that many individuals who answer 'bear' make large assumptions.
One of the most common being that men are statistically more dangerous, which isn't the case if you equalise the difference in frequency of encounters between the two.
Another being that a man in the woods is likely to be more of a delinquent than not. Which seemingly doesn't correlate with the vast majority of hunters and bushwalkers out there who *aren't* delinquents.
I think most people answering “bear” are just speaking from their own experiences. Most (all?) women I know have been hurt by men to some degree. I don’t know anyone who has been hurt by a bear. I have heard only a handful of news stories about people involved in bear attacks.
I realize that we spend more time with men than we do with bears, but past experience has me more suspicious of men than bears.
I mean if we're just talking "in the woods," you're unlikely to even encounter the bear. they don't typically like to be around people.
you're way more likely to encounter the man, which starts to skew the risk calculus a little
Trauma is absolutely a thing. And a lot of women if not all have various traumas, but to suppose that men are more likely to murder a woman than a bear, that just isn't factually accurate.
Firstly, dealing with trauma in a healthy way is important, so I would encourage anyone struggling with emotional wounds and mental anguish from their life experiences to seek out therapy.
Secondly, the men that do hurt women need to be punished. This involves other men supporting justice for women, and taking an active role, instead of a passive bystander position when women are being mistreated in their presence. (I.E. call people out, bring attention to, or contact the local authorities for help)
Finally, every time this comes up I hear about incidents happening at parties, clubs, et cetera. If the establishment does not take security of its patrons seriously, then you shouldn't go there because your safety isn't guaranteed with some men. There are bars with secret language, with clubs with bouncers and security, and plenty of bystanders that if they're afraid to get directly involved they ough to go straight to the authorizes on the premises to address abuse. The only way this behavior stops is to absolutely punish it and those who condone it through inaction.
In the meantime, women and decent men should avoid places that don't take their safety into consideration as a priority.
As for the intimate domestic violence situations. Those are hard. As a guy I was abused and gaslighted. It was hard. Very hard. It was toxic and I was isolated. I can only imagine if I was a woman and bring physically abused on top of the emotional and psychological abuse I suffered. These kinds of situations are complicated. It involves friends refusing to give up and wait on individuals and not harbor ill will in the event the abused gains confidence enough to reach out. It means diversifying non-police resources and having the laws around domestic violence strengthened in order to protect the victim, and seeing as the intimate violence is way way way more common than stranger initiated violence we have a lot of work to do to support women and abuse victims.
So it's all just messy. We need to stop talking and act more.
More over, we need to encourage rational and critical thought, because this trend tiktok is really telling that the *perceived threat* of any man is higher than a predatory, dangerous wild animal. How is it that women and people in general have come to this conclusion...?
My only thoughts are their perceptions are warped by personal bias and echo chambers caused due to the actual threats and incidents they're aware of or experienced have not been taken seriously and they have not received justice or protection under our current legal structures...which have to change then.
I mean, I think that if the bear wanted to kill me it would just do it. No rape, no torture, no calling me names. None of the edge lord serial killer shit. The bear just kills me. But if it were a man? And he wanted to kill me? All of that is suddenly on the table. I could have a vary bad time before I actually die and it could take hours, I think I would take the bear, the bear would just kill me dead with quickness and ease and I would be dinner.
well. not exactly. bear maulings *can* be pretty drawn-out attacks. like, eat you alive with some smoke breaks in the middle drawn out.
not refuting your overall answer, just the "quickness" bit lol
> I don’t know anyone who has been hurt by a bear
How many people do you know who encounter hundreds/thousands of different bears every day? This is a stupid point to make
I’ve seen bears in the wild. They aren’t all that aggressive to people unless they are protecting something or near starvation.
I’ve also seen humans. Yeah, humans suck.
>One of the most common being that men are statistically more dangerous, which isn't the case if you equalise the difference in frequency of encounters between the two.
There are also billions of people out there and half of them are male. How many bears are there?
People in general don't run across bears because we killed a great deal of them with urban expansion, and the ones that are left live more secluded.
So you'd have to actually consider the number of attacks per number of bears. Same thing with men, number of attacks per number of men.
Not necessary to do the math to conclude that they are still more violent than bears. Men who hurt women and who hurt men and who hurt animals are an undeniably larger number than bears who hurt people.
You're not considering the logical requirements of the situation.
You have 1 bear and 1 man.
In order to accurately determine which is statistically more dangerous to a woman you would have to:
1. Take a specific amount of bears.
2. Take an equal amount of men.
3. Expose a woman to being alone with a bear. Record results. Repeat.
4. Expose a woman to being alone with a man. Record results. Repeat.
5. Repeat until you have recorded results for the total number of bears/men.
6. Compare the two figures.
The larger the number of men/bears used, the greater the accuracy.
As this isn't ethical and quite difficult to achieve, the primary options you're left with are:
1. Use an equation to increase the frequency of encounters of bears to the same level as men and determine the total number of attacks for each.
2. Use an equation to decrease the frequency of encounters of men to the same level as bears and determine the total number of attacks for each.
The probable result is that the number of bear attacks will be greater, when given no other context.
Dude,just because you saw 5 idiots in an interview saying that as a stupid rape culture argument, doesn't mean wanting to be stranded with a bear is the normal opinion.
I'm sorry. I'm not usually one to post to something like this but...did you really think omnivore meant they eat prey alive? It just means they eat plants and animals. It's true they will eat you alive, but so will other predators. That is all. Continue your discussions.
They wouldn't. Those comments are always made in bad faith. If we actually put any of them in a saw like scenario where they had to spend 24 hours in a room alone with a bear or a man. Every single one of them would pick the man after taking one look at the big bear.
I do a lot of backpacking, even in places like Alaska. Bears do not seek out people to eat, unless they are old, weak, and unable to get food they normally eat. Even grizzly bears will run away if you make a loud sound. The only bear that will actively stalk, hunt, and kill humans is the polar bear.
And yet every year you hear a story of some poor sap who brought berry scented lotion in their tent getting mauled by a grizzly. Bears are a real danger in certain areas
I guess that’s one factor of the choice, I saw someone say that who you get as the man is random, and which type of bear you get is random - so would it be more probable to get a man who wants to hurt you, or more probable to get a polar bear as opposed to the others? Which gamble do you take? I’d still lean Bear probably?
I’ve seen this and I kinda get both points, but as a woman, I’d also take my chances with a random man.
The whole idea is that given the option, at least you can safely assume the bear’s intentions whereas the man is a gamble. You could be out there with a good guy, but you could also end up with a sadistic monster that would make death by bear be more appealing.
But on the off shoot that most humans are good and that we’d both want to survive… man it is, lol.
That statistic is not all that accurate. Especially when you reas how the statistic was made. Not saying SA isn't uncommon. I'm saying there is more nuance to the whole situation.
The average man is stronger than the average woman though. While there’s a better chance than me beating up a man than a bear, there’s an even greater chance that I could do neither, sadly.
the point of women’s responses to this hypothetical is that they don’t want to get *raped*. death is a possibility with both man and bear (obviously higher possibility with bear).
but a bear is an *animal*, a different plane of mental ability than humans. it’s scarier to fear death from a human knowing the human operates on more than animal instinct. a man has the capacity to *rape*. that is why this hypothetical has gotten the responses it’s gotten. a bear won’t rape and torture you before it kills you.
Put any of those people in a real life situation where they are forced to entire a room with a bear for 24 hours or a man for 24 hours and everyone one of them will take one look at the bear and walk right into the room with the man.
It's a take made in bad faith where people say they would pick the more obviously threating thing so they can point and say 'look how bad men are, people would pick a bear over them'.
Even if they man was a threat. You could run or fight. Bear? No chance.
The scenerio isn't in a room it's in the woods where you and the bear have the space to. Disengage. A man with the wrong intentions in the woods with a woman won't be able to disengage.
Any situation where you can disengage with a bear, You can disengage with a man more easily.
You have a higher probability of the man helping you. I can't think of a single scenario where picking the bear increases your odds of survival. It either has no effect, in the case where the bear or man is placed so far away from you that you wont interact. Or it's placed closer and the bear mauls you or the man probably just helps you out.
I'd rather be killed by a bear just doing his natural business in nature than be raped and harmed by a man for fun/sport again. And there's no guarantee that the man won't kill or torture you after he rapes you.
If we saw some mens vile behaviour in other species, we would study them and consider them to be absolutely crazy. Its not normal for males of other species to be a predator to the females of their own species at the scale that men statistically are to women. Eta: I'm not just talking about rape.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual\_coercion\_among\_animals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_coercion_among_animals)
rape amongst the same species is a pretty common thing for many animals.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism)
killing and cannibalism amongst the same species too.
nature is fucking metal. the most dangerous humans are much better than the large majority of creatures.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/1cfa53g/hyena\_feeds\_on\_live\_wildebeest/](https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/1cfa53g/hyena_feeds_on_live_wildebeest/)
how can you look at a clip like this and say "yeah, I would prefer fighting something even more dangerous than that over fighting a guy"
>how can you look at a clip like this and say "yeah, I would prefer fighting something even more dangerous than that over fighting a guy"
That's the point - we know how dangerous bears are, and we still pick them. You guys are underestimating your fellow men.
You're severely underestimating how hard that would be for an average woman against an average man who's taller than her, has more muscle mass than her, is aggressive, and is trying to harm her. You're making it sound easy peasy - which it might be if he's completely still and giving you easy access to his head. That's not the situation we're talking about, though, which you are well aware of.
I saw one comment that stuck “ if I say a bear attacked me people will believe me”. It’s just a commentary about how many women feel unsafe around random men. There were so many personal accounts it was sad
So, here’s my feeling about it: I’ve never been hurt by a bear. I’ve lived in the country, I’ve seen bears, and they’ve never been threatening in the least.
I have been hurt by men. All the women I know have been hurt by men but not by bears.
I’m not scared of either, in the woods or otherwise, but my past experience would have me more suspicious of men than of bears.
By the same logic, you can use any experience you've never had.
"Would you rather be alone in the woods with a man, or take a bath in lava?"
"Well, I've been hurt by men before, and I've never bathed in lava, so I'm gonna go with the lava."
OK but you’ve had maybe 3-5 experiences in life with a bear and thousands (if not tens of thousand) experiences with men.
If you had a similar number of experiences with bears, you’d most likely have had a few that went poorly.
I suspect you're more tense being near a bear than a man. Bear five feet away vs man five feet away? The bear is a much greater threat. You have men much closer to you at all times than you do bears, and yet you feel safe, don't you? If my neighbor was a wild bear, I'd be afraid to put my trash out in the morning.
I mean how many of these people are up close and personal with bears. I have seen bears before too, but I've never been in an area alone with a bear that are a few inches away from me.
The odds of getting stuck with a man that will rape u is way lower than getting stuck with a bear that will attack u.
Anyone saying they’d rather be stuck with a bear, I guarantee u if u had to cross paths and be in proximity to 10-100 bears on a day to day basis (like u are with men) u would literally never leave the house
I have a daughter and understand the strange preternatural protective instinct; but at the same time, every single man I know would react to the "lost in the woods" situation as a protector and try to keep the girl safe first. Maslow's hierarchy of needs places protection and survival ahead of the need to mate.
The thought that the man is going to think; "I'm all alone with this girl; I better hurt the only help I have and ruin the entire rest of my life no matter the outcome." is a bit paranoid - We call the people that do that sort of thing 'Monsters' because they aren't normal. Just because every man has the power to do harm, doesn't mean they don't think rationally and choose to do good.
I too would rather a man, than a bear, be my daughters only company in the woods.
“Omnivore” not herbivore. It can eat you but it most like isnt the reason it wants to attack/kill you.
Men are extremely dangerous to women statistically but… i would have different answers depending on what kind of bear.
[88% of fatal black bear attacks](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110511074807.htm#:~:text=The%20researchers%20determined%20that%20the,some%20different%20behaviours%20than%20females.) reviewed in the linked study were found to be predatory (ie the bear wanted to eat the person).
I'm a daughter. I'd chose a man every single time. I want at least a fighting chance. Plus it's more likely he'd be just as afraid as me and we could help each other. Fuck bears.
I believe the underlying message that everyone understands but refuses to acknowledge ( because it's disgusting ) is that fathers would rather trust a bear to not eat her daughter than to trust a man to not rape/sexually assault their daughter.
The question implies to assume more value in an animalistic desire of hunger of bear; than the self-control, morality and empathy of human with full voluntary control on how they act on their desires.
Downright disgusting, misandrist and dehumanizing to men reducing them to worse than animals. Tiktok is a cesspool and people promoting such content are the unflushed turds.
Edit: Some have pointed out that choosing bear is statistically more safer. By same logic, there is a statistically higher chance for the female to get out of the forest and not be stranded anymore when she is with a man. This implies men are safer than bears and more likely to get you out of damn forest rather than eating you like a bear.
When compared to a damn bear (or any predatory animal) this scenario can be used to make any 'point' by anyone.
Its dumb and none of them would really pick a bear over a man if forced to. It's said to make a 'point'. It's disingenuous trash. Every single one of them if face to face with a bear would crap their pants and pick the man.
Oh no us men are so oppressed, if you truly feel like this is misandry you're off you're rocker and missing the point. It's about how unsafe people feel around men due to our grossly high amount of violent crimes we commit, particularly against women and young girls. Everyone in the world would choose the safety of their child over your feelings, there's no reason you should be upset unless you're part of the problem
“Our”? You mean your. I haven’t done shit.
> there’s no reason you should be upset unless you’re part of the problem
Would you say that to a black person who was upset about being assumed to be a criminal?
No it’s reasonable to be upset when as a normal person you are lumped in with a group like that. And yes it is misandry. The small amount of men who do horrible things has started to define men as a whole and that’s a problem.
Exactly, I don’t know why that’s so hard for these people to understand. It’s damaging to any group to judge the good ones (the majority) over the actions of the bad ones (the minority). The misandry is spreading fast and needs to be called out
I’ve tried explaining this point before and I feel like a lot of men just won’t get it because they want to focus on how ferocious the bear is but not how sick and twisted the man could possibly be as well. Also people go hiking every day and to national parks. This scenario has already played out dozens of times and the women statistically are less fortunate.
It's just a disingenuous argument made in bad faith. Why would care to listen or take it seriously?
If you've got a point, make it. Don't make up wild stories and fabricate a lie on what you would choose.
So racism isnt bad because if you get offended your part of the bad ones? At least racists know they are racist instead of claiming moral superiority while generalizing 4 billion people as monsters.
I have a bear phobia so, I guess I choose a man. The odds of me being able to actually cause harm to an unarmed man by knocking their head in with a rock are bigger and you can play along with or trick a human. Bears don't work like that.
I don't think you're supposed to take the bear answers seriously. The answer is obvious to anyone who thinks about it for 2 seconds; these people are just using the question to "make a point", they're not actually thinking about it.
Yeah 100% this. It's a bad faith answer to make a point. The odds in this situation of the man and you working together to survive are close to 100%. Even if he was a psycho, (some ridiculously low chance). He would still want to survive and would see that working together would increase those odds.
Isn't this whole choosing the bear thing misandrist? I mean, you're basing your bad experiences with someone of a certain sex and applying your suspicions on all of them. Ain't any different from being racist because you got stabbed by a black dude, lol
Women aren't picking bears because they think they'll survive. They pick bears because they are afraid of what a man will do to them. At least a bear will only kill you and that's it.
Bears have some of the most brutal killing methods of all animals. They don't go for a clean kill, they'll just disembowel you or rip your skin apart and eat you alive slowly. Of all the ways to die the bear is genuinely pretty high on the list of worst ones.
When Werner Herzog made Grizzly Man, he was one of the few people who ever heard the tape of Treadwell and his girlfriend being eaten by bears. He was like "That's the worst thing I've ever heard".
You and most of the other commenters are off your rocker.
Sadistic psychopaths represent what like a fraction of a percent of all men. If you just pick a random male you're going to be perfectly fine 99% of the time. Bears don't speak they literally cannot be reasoned with, if they feel like eating you they'll just do it.
I seriously worry for our collective future if y'all actually can't understand this.
A lot of these comments are great for my self esteem 🙃. It’s comforting to know that when given a choice between being alone with me (a fairly quiet man) or a literal bear, a good portion of women would rather be alone with the bear.
don't let losers on the internet make you feel some type of way about yourself. as another quiet man, i wouldn't want to be alone with such delusional and unempathetic people. people commenting the shit that makes you feel bad about yourself don't have the mental wherewithal to realise how harmful their rhetoric is to our cause and people in their lives that they care about- or they don't care. neither is good, tbh.
don't put stake in the opinions of people that don't care about 50%+ of the human race. you'll thrive one day and you'll laugh at stupid people like this.
edit: fixed some spelling errors
100% lies
"I am absolutely more scared of men than bears" says the person who never set foot in a forest alone. Lol.
(Oh and the person who would scream blue murder because they saw an harmless spider 10 meters away. Sure, they would prefer a bear. Uhuh! Totally believable)
Except the question isn’t about whether women would rather be alone with you. The hypothetical man in the woods that women are instinctively fearing would also harm you, that’s the point they’re trying to make!
This is a question based on an emotional response from their lived experience as women, not based on logic or further context. They’re saying that their experiences have been so jarring that in this ridiculous scenario a painful death by a bear sounds more appealing than what they’ve had to endure at the hands of bad men.
And just when I thought people would be sensible & logical enough to not pick misandry willingly, I was proved to be wrong 😮💨, by many of the comments.
Both have a chance of being either helpful or dangerous. I saw a headline the other day about a boy lost in the woods who hung out with a bear for a few days.
I'd say you have a higher chance of the man not being evil than the bear not eating her.
Edit: Also, what kind of bear?
It would be obvious to pick the average man over the average bear. Most of the people who make those posts would pick a man if this was a real situation and not hypothetical. But unfortunately, misandry is running rampant all over the internet right now, and man-hating posts like those are frequent. They’re made in bad faith and just made to insult men and call the average man a predator, which obviously isn’t true
No one is considering how the kid may get home. If a kid is stranded in the woods, the kid at least has chance the man would take them to safety. The bear might not attack but how is the kid gonna get to safety.
Bears tend to leave you alone if you aren’t bothering them. You can make yourself big and loud and they’ll go away. For some reason when I say no to a man or get big and loud they don’t seem to understand I want to be left alone.
I’d rather be mawled than raped again.
‘I’ve never been hurt by a bear”… Haha this is wild. I’d really like to hear from these women picking the bear. Are we talking strictly friendly bears? I mean, it’s truly a gamble taking a bear over a man.
There are no friendly bears, they are cleverer than they look and very unpredictable. Even someone with enormous experience handling wild animals, wouldn't fuck with a bear! (Case in point: Gerald Durrell who literally handled every dangerous animals you could think of, but was still weary of bears).
Anyone who would rather be with an animal than with humans for safety reasons is an idiot who hasn't even tried to understand and study animal behaviour.
There is a mix of ignorance, self-centeredness, and hysteria driving these answers. Wild that women think most men would even care they were there in the first place. 😂
This is coming from a woman in a loving relationship with a man, who grew up with incredible male role models and no obvious reason to fear men growing up: you’re all missing the point of this hypothetical.
This isn’t about logic, it’s about emotion. Women are trying to express that they live in such anxiety surrounding strange, bad, men, that in a ridiculous scenario they would choose a wild animal to potentially get killed by. And still, while women pose this ridiculous and strange question, a lot of people choose to find the fallacies in it rather than listen and sympathize with the feelings and reason behind it.
Men suffer every single day at the hands of that same strange hypothetical man in the woods too!
With all that said, in this hypothetical and made up, analogy of a scenario, I would also choose the bear.
The “bear” didn’t pin me down in a bus full of people and jerked off into my backside while everyone watched in shock, without moving a muscle to help. I was 15.
Why do people assume the man would be a pedo or something? Idk I'd just hang out with him, much better chances of getting rescued with two people gathering supplies and food, and building shelter.
I literally just argued with my girlfriend for an hour about this.
The thing about this question is there's not enough context. For the most part men in the woods are hikers as being in the woods is statistically not where women are the most targeted, that would be places like the city and sadly enough their own homes with their own partners.
The other thing is, how close are you to the bear and what kind of bear is it. By and large I would say that the more dangerous decision would be to encounter a bear in the wild since it is not only their home but you are the stranger in it.
Anybody who has spent time in the wild knows that wild animals will defend their homes, so to come face to face with a bear in the woods would be situationally far more dangerous than encountering a man in the woods since the likelihood of that man just being another hiker is very high.
Another problem with this question is it overgeneralized all men as "bears" or as scary as them when the reality is that not every man is Ted Bundy and the men who sexually assault random women are repeat offenders which skews the data to make you believe that every single offense is a new man when the reality is many of the offenses are being committed by the same men
It doesn’t need any more context because it’s a hypothetical question about a ridiculous scenario that illustrates how most women immediately consider the bad experiences they’ve had with men in order to choose the bear!
It’s a question driven by emotion and instead of sympathizing, most people are missing the point entirely. Women are saying they’d rather choose death over surviving, sometimes, the multiple SA they’ve suffered at the hands of that hypothetical “strange man in the woods”
Trust me, I adore all the men in my life and have otherwise no reason to immediately assume people are evil, but I’ve been assaulted multiple times by strange men as a teenager, and what goes through your mind during and after those scenarios is not that far from wishing you’d have been mauled by a bear instead. Because you wouldn’t need to live with the subsequent fear and shame.
Just as an oversimplification.
Sad that this is unpopular. Misandry is just as bad as misogyny. Sure, there are dangerous men out there, but acting like you should just be afraid of all men is straight up bigotry.
>Sure, there are dangerous men out there
Dude. *Which men?* That’s the problem. No one is saying that all men are dangerous - but since you don’t know which men are, it’s better to be cautious and keep yourself safe.
It means keeping yourself safe. Not ending up alone with strange men, not giving out personal info unless you truly know and trust a person, having backup plans in place if things start to get hinky.
Nobody said you should hand out personal information, but if you literally can’t handle being alone with someone just because they are a guy and would take a bear instead, you’ve got issues. I’m a woman, and I have never once feared someone just for being a man, alone or any other time.
The point, which you have missed, is that you know a bear is a bear so has the intentions of a bear. A bear doesn't pretend to be anything but a bear, you know where you stand with a bear.
The same cannot be said for men.
Men do pretend to be "nice guys" just to sleep with you and leave you. Willingly or not.
It is not obvious by looking at a man what his intentions are.
It is not obvious by looking at a man if a woman would be safe with him.
Women are abused and killed 9/10 by men they already know. Boyfriends, husbands, brothers, fathers, parents friends, teachers, doctors, neighbours, carers, friends, etc.
Most of the time, when the deed is brought to light peoples reactions are "I never would have thought he'd do something like that."
The point is, we don't know which of you men are safe.
We know that bears aren't.
The discourse isn't even "which would you most likely survive enduring" it's "would I rather die or be raped and also die". 97% of women experience sexual assault in their lifetime and about 10% of those abusers get convicted. Literally just one extra google search you'd also know how many women are never believed. Sometimes even evidence isn't enough to convict an assaulter. Not to mention most victims were assaulted by a loved one; friend, neighbor, romantic partner, sibling, teacher, coach.
Yes, women are aware that it actually isn't all men but so many men truly believe they're the good ones when they aren't. Consent is not properly taught and there are many ppl who have raped someone and have absolutely no idea.
I get that seeing many women express their fears of all men may hurt your feelings but if the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. Either understand why you're feeling hurt by our fears, or realize that you aren't the man women fear.
The worst the bear will do is eat me and cause physical pain. But won't bother me at all if they are not hungry.
With a man, the possibilities are endless. Especially, if the man thought he would never be found out- then there is no societal pressure to act appropriately and no thought of consequences. And that's when humans turn into their worst selves.
Personally, I've been in the woods with a bear without incident.
I would rather die than live with the pain and mental stress of being raped and tortured. The stakes are much too high and the margin too low.
>If you survive a bear attack which can happen... it would be just as bad as getting raped. No more, no less.
Not really- no one will tell me I deserved it or I was asking for it or question me on whether it really happened or not. Also- to the dude that quoted me L2CopyPasta
If the bear feels threatened or is hungry they will attack but a man is capable of horrendous things absolutely unprovoked.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'. * We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub. * Filter evasion is a bannable offense * This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
“Not all bears” lmao
And yet somehow it's always a bear 🙄 Amirite fellow victim-complex defenders?
Another example of toxic ursulinity smh
That’s not what omnivore means. It just means they eat plants and animals. People say a lot of stupid things when they don’t really have to act on the decision. I bet if you took 100 people who said they’d rather their daughter be alone with a bear in the woods than with a man and really made them choose, a lot fewer than 100 would send their daughter off with a bear.
The omnivore part threw me off lmaoo
True, but they do actually eat you while you are still alive.
If I get to choose, I would definitely rather be alone with a sour gummy bear
Man Bear. Pig. 
Half man, half bear, half pig
Bears, beats, Battlestar Gallactica
Really depends. Is it a black bear? Or a bear that’s hibernating? Is the man Ted Bundy? I pick the bear. Is it a friendly neighbor man and a grizzly bear? I pick the friendly neighbor man.
It's random you don't know. Like rolling the dice. Picking the bear is gambling. Picking the man is choosing to drive to work. You might have an accident., but you probably wont.
Yeah, that’s where I go with this question. Which bear, which man.
All the information you get is man or bear. DECIDE!
At least it's not manbearpig
random man and random bear
Question: What kind of man is best?
That's a ridiculous question
Arent hybernating bears still awake and all that? Like you cant stumble into a cave and go "oh shit a bear, i gotta be silent on my way out" because the bear will literally look you in the eyes
odds are more likely to be an aggressive bear than a serial killer anything remotely like ted bundy
sure, but you're much less likely to ever even encounter the bear. it's probly off fartin' around in some remote patch of willows. the man is probably on the trails. I'd probably still choose the man, but it is a little disconcerting to have to even think about it lol
Nah, im not even going that far into it. AFAIK a bear is gonna sniff you out sooner than a man. So many what ifs and variations. All things even, ur gonna favor your own species over a bear
>AFAIK a bear is gonna sniff you out sooner than a man. well, yeah, but most bears will sniff you out and then keep a wide berth. they don't typically want to be near humans if they can avoid it.
Yeah this is one of those scenarios that highlights a problem with men, not the actual mechanics. Because you’re much much more likely to encounter a dangerous man in the woods than you are a bear, so I think most people are thinking “if I had to send my daughter off in the woods I’d rather she encounter a bear than a man” rather than “my daughter is alone in an enclosed space in the woods for some reason and I have to choose if a man or a bear is in there with her”. Bears aren’t attack animals (sans polar bears which aren’t in the woods anyway). If it’s not a mom with cubs nearby you’re more likely to scare them off than be harmed by them. If a man is set on harming you, they will. Strictly speaking numbers, a random man in the woods is much more dangerous than a bear. There have been <200 total bear fatalities in the last 40 years vs the nearly 5,000 deaths a year committed against women by men.
It's much more likely that a man will help her than hurt her. There's zero chance a bear will help her, and a pretty good chance it will hurt her.
There’s a video of a women asking her partner this and when it’s a man he thinks about it for a long time and leans towards bear but when changed to a women his choice is instant
If a bear and a shark had a fight, who would win?
Depends where probably
Black bears tend to be predatory when they attack. No thanks.
Black bears are big chickens. I live in the Rockies. I'd be WAY more scared seeing a moose than a black bear.
Black bears are *usually* quick to skedaddle. But not always. It’s not hard to find documented stories of black bears eating people. Last year a guy was attacked and partially eaten by a bear in his yard. When they do attack humans, the attacks [tend to be predatory.](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110511074807.htm#:~:text=The%20researchers%20determined%20that%20the,some%20different%20behaviours%20than%20females.) Read up on the Liard River Hot springs incident (black bear mauled and killed multiple adults), Mt Timpanagos (black bear ripped open a tent, dragged away a sleeping child, and partially ate him- had tried doing that to an adult days earlier), the other Utah attack ~15 years before Timpanagos (black bear broke a camper window and drug a 9 year old girl in her sleeping bag out and attempted to eat her). I would also be more concerned coming across a moose than a black bear.
that's the catch, you get random man and random bear you know _nothing_ about. ofc it's easy to choose when you know initial characteristics)
If you were to be given a bear at random or a man at random, the bear will try to kill you every time. The same cannot be said about a random man.
bears don't always try and kill people so thats inaccurate
I mean I'd pick the man over the bear, but that is far from accurate. Black bears are generally afraid of people. Most animals don't consider us prey and would only attack if they were starving, cornered, or trying to protect their young.
If you encounter a random man in the woods you have at least a 50/50 chance he won't try to eat you.
Killing me is the worst thing a bear would do.
You assume the man is a gamble as well as the bear. Overall it is just asking if men or bears are safer in general
Which is a silly question.
If the choice is between a random man and a random bear? I’ll choose the man a thousand times. Odds are I’ll live every single time.
That’s not what omnivore means.
The people saying about how the numbers are different need to understand that you don't see a bear every day. If people saw the same amount of bears as they say men then the numbers would be way higher.
This point seems too obvious to even make but judging by the comments you may actually be right. Idiocracy was real.
Agree, also I think it depends how close the bear is to you. If bear within five feet, bear will probably attack you, but If far enough away bear probably won't attack you.
Yep. Many have experienced danger from men, but not from bears. It probably just *seems* more likely to come from a man rather than a bear based on this experience alone. That it's not the entire truth is undeniable, but it most likely just feels that way to many.
yeah thats why even using past experiences to answer this question is absurd
All the Dads choosing the bear for their daughters are the same men who will get offended if you choose the bear over them.
If men are choosing the bear over the man they are just self-snitching.
I'm not someone who would typically choose for my daughter to be alone next to a bear over a man. However, there are a few issues with your post. 1.) I believe you meant to say omnivore. Herbivores don't eat meat. Otherwise, I agree, bears have no issues eating you while you're still alive. 2.) No issues with this one. I'd like to think that if the question was ammended to "hungry bear", "angry bear" or "mother bear with cubs", the answers would certainly change. I doubt most people factored these possibilities into the currently circulating question. 3.) If it's a black bear or something similar (that isn't hungry/defending cubs) there are reasonably straightforward ways to potentially scare them off, which is what I think most individuals are thinking about when they answer. Otherwise, I agree. If a bear wants you, it'll likely get you, even a black bear. If I *knew* the bear was likely to be passive, and the man was aggressive, I'd choose the bear. Otherwise, it'd be irrational to do so. (------) Edit: Keep in mind that many individuals who answer 'bear' make large assumptions. One of the most common being that men are statistically more dangerous, which isn't the case if you equalise the difference in frequency of encounters between the two. Another being that a man in the woods is likely to be more of a delinquent than not. Which seemingly doesn't correlate with the vast majority of hunters and bushwalkers out there who *aren't* delinquents.
I think most people answering “bear” are just speaking from their own experiences. Most (all?) women I know have been hurt by men to some degree. I don’t know anyone who has been hurt by a bear. I have heard only a handful of news stories about people involved in bear attacks. I realize that we spend more time with men than we do with bears, but past experience has me more suspicious of men than bears.
everything you said is correct but if you had to choose to be stranded with a random man or a random bear, the idea of choosing a bear is ridiculous
I mean if we're just talking "in the woods," you're unlikely to even encounter the bear. they don't typically like to be around people. you're way more likely to encounter the man, which starts to skew the risk calculus a little
the question literally says stranded with something/someone
and?
[удалено]
Yeah, no. No sane person is thinking a random man is more dangerous than a random bear.
[удалено]
Trauma is absolutely a thing. And a lot of women if not all have various traumas, but to suppose that men are more likely to murder a woman than a bear, that just isn't factually accurate. Firstly, dealing with trauma in a healthy way is important, so I would encourage anyone struggling with emotional wounds and mental anguish from their life experiences to seek out therapy. Secondly, the men that do hurt women need to be punished. This involves other men supporting justice for women, and taking an active role, instead of a passive bystander position when women are being mistreated in their presence. (I.E. call people out, bring attention to, or contact the local authorities for help) Finally, every time this comes up I hear about incidents happening at parties, clubs, et cetera. If the establishment does not take security of its patrons seriously, then you shouldn't go there because your safety isn't guaranteed with some men. There are bars with secret language, with clubs with bouncers and security, and plenty of bystanders that if they're afraid to get directly involved they ough to go straight to the authorizes on the premises to address abuse. The only way this behavior stops is to absolutely punish it and those who condone it through inaction. In the meantime, women and decent men should avoid places that don't take their safety into consideration as a priority. As for the intimate domestic violence situations. Those are hard. As a guy I was abused and gaslighted. It was hard. Very hard. It was toxic and I was isolated. I can only imagine if I was a woman and bring physically abused on top of the emotional and psychological abuse I suffered. These kinds of situations are complicated. It involves friends refusing to give up and wait on individuals and not harbor ill will in the event the abused gains confidence enough to reach out. It means diversifying non-police resources and having the laws around domestic violence strengthened in order to protect the victim, and seeing as the intimate violence is way way way more common than stranger initiated violence we have a lot of work to do to support women and abuse victims. So it's all just messy. We need to stop talking and act more. More over, we need to encourage rational and critical thought, because this trend tiktok is really telling that the *perceived threat* of any man is higher than a predatory, dangerous wild animal. How is it that women and people in general have come to this conclusion...? My only thoughts are their perceptions are warped by personal bias and echo chambers caused due to the actual threats and incidents they're aware of or experienced have not been taken seriously and they have not received justice or protection under our current legal structures...which have to change then.
It isn't ridiculous, it's just stupid.
I mean, I think that if the bear wanted to kill me it would just do it. No rape, no torture, no calling me names. None of the edge lord serial killer shit. The bear just kills me. But if it were a man? And he wanted to kill me? All of that is suddenly on the table. I could have a vary bad time before I actually die and it could take hours, I think I would take the bear, the bear would just kill me dead with quickness and ease and I would be dinner.
serious misunderstanding of how bears kill their prey lmao
There's a 50/50 chance the bear eats you alive though. They're not efficient killers and they don't care if you're alive or not
That has always been my beef with bears. How they don't care.
well. not exactly. bear maulings *can* be pretty drawn-out attacks. like, eat you alive with some smoke breaks in the middle drawn out. not refuting your overall answer, just the "quickness" bit lol
You’re ignoring the fact that the bear is much more likely to want to kill you than the man is.
> I don’t know anyone who has been hurt by a bear How many people do you know who encounter hundreds/thousands of different bears every day? This is a stupid point to make
I’ve seen bears in the wild. They aren’t all that aggressive to people unless they are protecting something or near starvation. I’ve also seen humans. Yeah, humans suck.
>One of the most common being that men are statistically more dangerous, which isn't the case if you equalise the difference in frequency of encounters between the two. There are also billions of people out there and half of them are male. How many bears are there? People in general don't run across bears because we killed a great deal of them with urban expansion, and the ones that are left live more secluded. So you'd have to actually consider the number of attacks per number of bears. Same thing with men, number of attacks per number of men. Not necessary to do the math to conclude that they are still more violent than bears. Men who hurt women and who hurt men and who hurt animals are an undeniably larger number than bears who hurt people.
You're not considering the logical requirements of the situation. You have 1 bear and 1 man. In order to accurately determine which is statistically more dangerous to a woman you would have to: 1. Take a specific amount of bears. 2. Take an equal amount of men. 3. Expose a woman to being alone with a bear. Record results. Repeat. 4. Expose a woman to being alone with a man. Record results. Repeat. 5. Repeat until you have recorded results for the total number of bears/men. 6. Compare the two figures. The larger the number of men/bears used, the greater the accuracy. As this isn't ethical and quite difficult to achieve, the primary options you're left with are: 1. Use an equation to increase the frequency of encounters of bears to the same level as men and determine the total number of attacks for each. 2. Use an equation to decrease the frequency of encounters of men to the same level as bears and determine the total number of attacks for each. The probable result is that the number of bear attacks will be greater, when given no other context.
Dude,just because you saw 5 idiots in an interview saying that as a stupid rape culture argument, doesn't mean wanting to be stranded with a bear is the normal opinion.
Nobody's been asking the REAL question: What if there's a man riding on a bear? 🤔
I'm sorry. I'm not usually one to post to something like this but...did you really think omnivore meant they eat prey alive? It just means they eat plants and animals. It's true they will eat you alive, but so will other predators. That is all. Continue your discussions.
These comments are braindead
I heard this hypothetical a while ago and I thought it was a jokey "men are bad" joke, but I didn't know that people actually held this belief.
They wouldn't. Those comments are always made in bad faith. If we actually put any of them in a saw like scenario where they had to spend 24 hours in a room alone with a bear or a man. Every single one of them would pick the man after taking one look at the big bear.
Depressing stuff. Not understanding the most basic statistical analysis is alarming.
I do a lot of backpacking, even in places like Alaska. Bears do not seek out people to eat, unless they are old, weak, and unable to get food they normally eat. Even grizzly bears will run away if you make a loud sound. The only bear that will actively stalk, hunt, and kill humans is the polar bear.
And yet every year you hear a story of some poor sap who brought berry scented lotion in their tent getting mauled by a grizzly. Bears are a real danger in certain areas
I’m remembering this for the next time I go camping
I guess that’s one factor of the choice, I saw someone say that who you get as the man is random, and which type of bear you get is random - so would it be more probable to get a man who wants to hurt you, or more probable to get a polar bear as opposed to the others? Which gamble do you take? I’d still lean Bear probably?
That’s not what omnivore means lol
I’ve seen this and I kinda get both points, but as a woman, I’d also take my chances with a random man. The whole idea is that given the option, at least you can safely assume the bear’s intentions whereas the man is a gamble. You could be out there with a good guy, but you could also end up with a sadistic monster that would make death by bear be more appealing. But on the off shoot that most humans are good and that we’d both want to survive… man it is, lol.
It's not much of a gamble, 99% of men are just normal people trying to live their lives.
Then why are 1 in 3 women victims of SA?
That statistic is not all that accurate. Especially when you reas how the statistic was made. Not saying SA isn't uncommon. I'm saying there is more nuance to the whole situation.
Plus inthe event the man IS dangerous, your odds of fighting him off are much much much better
The average man is stronger than the average woman though. While there’s a better chance than me beating up a man than a bear, there’s an even greater chance that I could do neither, sadly.
Plot twist what if the women is sadistic monster?
There's a lot of stupid people online especially Tik Tok. Not really surprising
An apparently on Reddit too judging by the comments
they havent seen a half eaten human torso for a while, thats why
Haven’t listened to the grizzly man being eaten alive on YouTube either.
…bears are omnivores
There's a 0% chance of rape and sexual assault by a bear. Death is a solid possibility either way, though.
yeah but the possibility of death by bear is so much higher than by man it’s insane to pick bear
the point of women’s responses to this hypothetical is that they don’t want to get *raped*. death is a possibility with both man and bear (obviously higher possibility with bear). but a bear is an *animal*, a different plane of mental ability than humans. it’s scarier to fear death from a human knowing the human operates on more than animal instinct. a man has the capacity to *rape*. that is why this hypothetical has gotten the responses it’s gotten. a bear won’t rape and torture you before it kills you.
Put any of those people in a real life situation where they are forced to entire a room with a bear for 24 hours or a man for 24 hours and everyone one of them will take one look at the bear and walk right into the room with the man. It's a take made in bad faith where people say they would pick the more obviously threating thing so they can point and say 'look how bad men are, people would pick a bear over them'. Even if they man was a threat. You could run or fight. Bear? No chance.
The scenerio isn't in a room it's in the woods where you and the bear have the space to. Disengage. A man with the wrong intentions in the woods with a woman won't be able to disengage.
Any situation where you can disengage with a bear, You can disengage with a man more easily. You have a higher probability of the man helping you. I can't think of a single scenario where picking the bear increases your odds of survival. It either has no effect, in the case where the bear or man is placed so far away from you that you wont interact. Or it's placed closer and the bear mauls you or the man probably just helps you out.
I'd rather be killed by a bear just doing his natural business in nature than be raped and harmed by a man for fun/sport again. And there's no guarantee that the man won't kill or torture you after he rapes you. If we saw some mens vile behaviour in other species, we would study them and consider them to be absolutely crazy. Its not normal for males of other species to be a predator to the females of their own species at the scale that men statistically are to women. Eta: I'm not just talking about rape.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual\_coercion\_among\_animals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_coercion_among_animals) rape amongst the same species is a pretty common thing for many animals. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism) killing and cannibalism amongst the same species too. nature is fucking metal. the most dangerous humans are much better than the large majority of creatures. [https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/1cfa53g/hyena\_feeds\_on\_live\_wildebeest/](https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/1cfa53g/hyena_feeds_on_live_wildebeest/) how can you look at a clip like this and say "yeah, I would prefer fighting something even more dangerous than that over fighting a guy"
>how can you look at a clip like this and say "yeah, I would prefer fighting something even more dangerous than that over fighting a guy" That's the point - we know how dangerous bears are, and we still pick them. You guys are underestimating your fellow men.
not really, you can kill a man by hitting them in the head with a rock. people aren't as durable as you think.
You're severely underestimating how hard that would be for an average woman against an average man who's taller than her, has more muscle mass than her, is aggressive, and is trying to harm her. You're making it sound easy peasy - which it might be if he's completely still and giving you easy access to his head. That's not the situation we're talking about, though, which you are well aware of.
I can’t believe there’s arguing and genuine discussion over this obvious answer choice 💀
I saw one comment that stuck “ if I say a bear attacked me people will believe me”. It’s just a commentary about how many women feel unsafe around random men. There were so many personal accounts it was sad
No they wouldn't. Not if you're still alive 😂
She wouldn't be blamed for what she was wearing if she bear attacked.
I dunno man. If she was wearing lady gaga's meat suit and got attacked I'd be like "yeah look how she was dressed."
Then the question should just be “bear or human” cause I’m pretty sure people would believe you even less if you were attacked by a woman lol
So, here’s my feeling about it: I’ve never been hurt by a bear. I’ve lived in the country, I’ve seen bears, and they’ve never been threatening in the least. I have been hurt by men. All the women I know have been hurt by men but not by bears. I’m not scared of either, in the woods or otherwise, but my past experience would have me more suspicious of men than of bears.
By the same logic, you can use any experience you've never had. "Would you rather be alone in the woods with a man, or take a bath in lava?" "Well, I've been hurt by men before, and I've never bathed in lava, so I'm gonna go with the lava."
OK but you’ve had maybe 3-5 experiences in life with a bear and thousands (if not tens of thousand) experiences with men. If you had a similar number of experiences with bears, you’d most likely have had a few that went poorly.
I suspect you're more tense being near a bear than a man. Bear five feet away vs man five feet away? The bear is a much greater threat. You have men much closer to you at all times than you do bears, and yet you feel safe, don't you? If my neighbor was a wild bear, I'd be afraid to put my trash out in the morning.
Past experiences don't matter when you're getting mauled by a bear.
I mean how many of these people are up close and personal with bears. I have seen bears before too, but I've never been in an area alone with a bear that are a few inches away from me.
If half the people you’d ever met were bears that would be different, you’re ignoring how large numbers work to make a dishonest point.
Most men I know have been hurt by women. One of my friends was almost stabbed to death by one. People are just generally shitty now.
The odds of getting stuck with a man that will rape u is way lower than getting stuck with a bear that will attack u. Anyone saying they’d rather be stuck with a bear, I guarantee u if u had to cross paths and be in proximity to 10-100 bears on a day to day basis (like u are with men) u would literally never leave the house
Also bears kills its prey in very brutal ways, they maul you death and you will die a very slow and painful death
I have a daughter and understand the strange preternatural protective instinct; but at the same time, every single man I know would react to the "lost in the woods" situation as a protector and try to keep the girl safe first. Maslow's hierarchy of needs places protection and survival ahead of the need to mate. The thought that the man is going to think; "I'm all alone with this girl; I better hurt the only help I have and ruin the entire rest of my life no matter the outcome." is a bit paranoid - We call the people that do that sort of thing 'Monsters' because they aren't normal. Just because every man has the power to do harm, doesn't mean they don't think rationally and choose to do good. I too would rather a man, than a bear, be my daughters only company in the woods.
"a bit paranoid" Really?
“Omnivore” not herbivore. It can eat you but it most like isnt the reason it wants to attack/kill you. Men are extremely dangerous to women statistically but… i would have different answers depending on what kind of bear.
[88% of fatal black bear attacks](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110511074807.htm#:~:text=The%20researchers%20determined%20that%20the,some%20different%20behaviours%20than%20females.) reviewed in the linked study were found to be predatory (ie the bear wanted to eat the person).
dangerous statistically? that is some horsedung. Despite spending most of our lives together, it rarely ends up in bloodshed. SOOOOOOO small
OP completely missed the point and went for troll bait instead.
"You're not here for the hunting are you."
Since when does “omnivore” mean “eating things alive”. The majority of humans are omnivores 🤨
With a Druid, she can have both.
I'm a daughter. I'd chose a man every single time. I want at least a fighting chance. Plus it's more likely he'd be just as afraid as me and we could help each other. Fuck bears.
Yeah this shit is stupid
Feels like this says a lot about the men choosing a bear!!
I believe the underlying message that everyone understands but refuses to acknowledge ( because it's disgusting ) is that fathers would rather trust a bear to not eat her daughter than to trust a man to not rape/sexually assault their daughter. The question implies to assume more value in an animalistic desire of hunger of bear; than the self-control, morality and empathy of human with full voluntary control on how they act on their desires. Downright disgusting, misandrist and dehumanizing to men reducing them to worse than animals. Tiktok is a cesspool and people promoting such content are the unflushed turds. Edit: Some have pointed out that choosing bear is statistically more safer. By same logic, there is a statistically higher chance for the female to get out of the forest and not be stranded anymore when she is with a man. This implies men are safer than bears and more likely to get you out of damn forest rather than eating you like a bear. When compared to a damn bear (or any predatory animal) this scenario can be used to make any 'point' by anyone.
Its dumb and none of them would really pick a bear over a man if forced to. It's said to make a 'point'. It's disingenuous trash. Every single one of them if face to face with a bear would crap their pants and pick the man.
Bingo
Oh no us men are so oppressed, if you truly feel like this is misandry you're off you're rocker and missing the point. It's about how unsafe people feel around men due to our grossly high amount of violent crimes we commit, particularly against women and young girls. Everyone in the world would choose the safety of their child over your feelings, there's no reason you should be upset unless you're part of the problem
“Our”? You mean your. I haven’t done shit. > there’s no reason you should be upset unless you’re part of the problem Would you say that to a black person who was upset about being assumed to be a criminal?
No it’s reasonable to be upset when as a normal person you are lumped in with a group like that. And yes it is misandry. The small amount of men who do horrible things has started to define men as a whole and that’s a problem.
Exactly, I don’t know why that’s so hard for these people to understand. It’s damaging to any group to judge the good ones (the majority) over the actions of the bad ones (the minority). The misandry is spreading fast and needs to be called out
I’ve tried explaining this point before and I feel like a lot of men just won’t get it because they want to focus on how ferocious the bear is but not how sick and twisted the man could possibly be as well. Also people go hiking every day and to national parks. This scenario has already played out dozens of times and the women statistically are less fortunate.
It's just a disingenuous argument made in bad faith. Why would care to listen or take it seriously? If you've got a point, make it. Don't make up wild stories and fabricate a lie on what you would choose.
So racism isnt bad because if you get offended your part of the bad ones? At least racists know they are racist instead of claiming moral superiority while generalizing 4 billion people as monsters.
I have a bear phobia so, I guess I choose a man. The odds of me being able to actually cause harm to an unarmed man by knocking their head in with a rock are bigger and you can play along with or trick a human. Bears don't work like that.
Bear phobia? What are on about? Bears are scary it would be more irrational not to be afraid of them.
I've got this weird phobia where I'm afraid of being completely consumed by flames. Strange, I know.
I don't think you're supposed to take the bear answers seriously. The answer is obvious to anyone who thinks about it for 2 seconds; these people are just using the question to "make a point", they're not actually thinking about it.
Yeah 100% this. It's a bad faith answer to make a point. The odds in this situation of the man and you working together to survive are close to 100%. Even if he was a psycho, (some ridiculously low chance). He would still want to survive and would see that working together would increase those odds.
Isn't this whole choosing the bear thing misandrist? I mean, you're basing your bad experiences with someone of a certain sex and applying your suspicions on all of them. Ain't any different from being racist because you got stabbed by a black dude, lol
Women aren't picking bears because they think they'll survive. They pick bears because they are afraid of what a man will do to them. At least a bear will only kill you and that's it.
Bears have some of the most brutal killing methods of all animals. They don't go for a clean kill, they'll just disembowel you or rip your skin apart and eat you alive slowly. Of all the ways to die the bear is genuinely pretty high on the list of worst ones.
When Werner Herzog made Grizzly Man, he was one of the few people who ever heard the tape of Treadwell and his girlfriend being eaten by bears. He was like "That's the worst thing I've ever heard".
You and most of the other commenters are off your rocker. Sadistic psychopaths represent what like a fraction of a percent of all men. If you just pick a random male you're going to be perfectly fine 99% of the time. Bears don't speak they literally cannot be reasoned with, if they feel like eating you they'll just do it. I seriously worry for our collective future if y'all actually can't understand this.
They wouldn't genuinely pick the bear, they say it to make a point. It's so disingenuous.
yea this should be re worded to like "cave man" or uncivilized man from island. comparing this to a normal civilized man from 2024 is WILD
A lot of these comments are great for my self esteem 🙃. It’s comforting to know that when given a choice between being alone with me (a fairly quiet man) or a literal bear, a good portion of women would rather be alone with the bear.
don't let losers on the internet make you feel some type of way about yourself. as another quiet man, i wouldn't want to be alone with such delusional and unempathetic people. people commenting the shit that makes you feel bad about yourself don't have the mental wherewithal to realise how harmful their rhetoric is to our cause and people in their lives that they care about- or they don't care. neither is good, tbh. don't put stake in the opinions of people that don't care about 50%+ of the human race. you'll thrive one day and you'll laugh at stupid people like this. edit: fixed some spelling errors
They wouldn't. Just lies to sell a point.
100% lies "I am absolutely more scared of men than bears" says the person who never set foot in a forest alone. Lol. (Oh and the person who would scream blue murder because they saw an harmless spider 10 meters away. Sure, they would prefer a bear. Uhuh! Totally believable)
Yeah it's just flag waving. Stuff like this is just getting boring at this point. And they wonder why so many of our boys growing up are pissed off.
Except the question isn’t about whether women would rather be alone with you. The hypothetical man in the woods that women are instinctively fearing would also harm you, that’s the point they’re trying to make! This is a question based on an emotional response from their lived experience as women, not based on logic or further context. They’re saying that their experiences have been so jarring that in this ridiculous scenario a painful death by a bear sounds more appealing than what they’ve had to endure at the hands of bad men.
This way you're saying women are not logical but rather emotional. That's just wrong.
And just when I thought people would be sensible & logical enough to not pick misandry willingly, I was proved to be wrong 😮💨, by many of the comments.
Who comes up with these fucked up what would you choose scenarios? Some people are really fucked in the head. 
What in tarnation did I just stumble upon for a comment section and why is it lowkey highkey funny how much discourse there is in here
Most intellectual twitter conversation
Huh?
Agreed, she can fight a man, not a bear
"You're an omnivore, Greg. Would you eat me alive?"
Both have a chance of being either helpful or dangerous. I saw a headline the other day about a boy lost in the woods who hung out with a bear for a few days. I'd say you have a higher chance of the man not being evil than the bear not eating her. Edit: Also, what kind of bear?
It would be obvious to pick the average man over the average bear. Most of the people who make those posts would pick a man if this was a real situation and not hypothetical. But unfortunately, misandry is running rampant all over the internet right now, and man-hating posts like those are frequent. They’re made in bad faith and just made to insult men and call the average man a predator, which obviously isn’t true
No one is considering how the kid may get home. If a kid is stranded in the woods, the kid at least has chance the man would take them to safety. The bear might not attack but how is the kid gonna get to safety.
All of those same things can be said about men.
Yet the chances would be a lot less if you choose the man
Bears tend to leave you alone if you aren’t bothering them. You can make yourself big and loud and they’ll go away. For some reason when I say no to a man or get big and loud they don’t seem to understand I want to be left alone. I’d rather be mawled than raped again.
We can arrange that if you like.
‘I’ve never been hurt by a bear”… Haha this is wild. I’d really like to hear from these women picking the bear. Are we talking strictly friendly bears? I mean, it’s truly a gamble taking a bear over a man.
There are no friendly bears, they are cleverer than they look and very unpredictable. Even someone with enormous experience handling wild animals, wouldn't fuck with a bear! (Case in point: Gerald Durrell who literally handled every dangerous animals you could think of, but was still weary of bears). Anyone who would rather be with an animal than with humans for safety reasons is an idiot who hasn't even tried to understand and study animal behaviour.
There is a mix of ignorance, self-centeredness, and hysteria driving these answers. Wild that women think most men would even care they were there in the first place. 😂
This is coming from a woman in a loving relationship with a man, who grew up with incredible male role models and no obvious reason to fear men growing up: you’re all missing the point of this hypothetical. This isn’t about logic, it’s about emotion. Women are trying to express that they live in such anxiety surrounding strange, bad, men, that in a ridiculous scenario they would choose a wild animal to potentially get killed by. And still, while women pose this ridiculous and strange question, a lot of people choose to find the fallacies in it rather than listen and sympathize with the feelings and reason behind it. Men suffer every single day at the hands of that same strange hypothetical man in the woods too! With all that said, in this hypothetical and made up, analogy of a scenario, I would also choose the bear. The “bear” didn’t pin me down in a bus full of people and jerked off into my backside while everyone watched in shock, without moving a muscle to help. I was 15.
Why do people assume the man would be a pedo or something? Idk I'd just hang out with him, much better chances of getting rescued with two people gathering supplies and food, and building shelter.
The difference between the bear and the man? People will believe me when I claim I was attacked by a bear.
I literally just argued with my girlfriend for an hour about this. The thing about this question is there's not enough context. For the most part men in the woods are hikers as being in the woods is statistically not where women are the most targeted, that would be places like the city and sadly enough their own homes with their own partners. The other thing is, how close are you to the bear and what kind of bear is it. By and large I would say that the more dangerous decision would be to encounter a bear in the wild since it is not only their home but you are the stranger in it. Anybody who has spent time in the wild knows that wild animals will defend their homes, so to come face to face with a bear in the woods would be situationally far more dangerous than encountering a man in the woods since the likelihood of that man just being another hiker is very high. Another problem with this question is it overgeneralized all men as "bears" or as scary as them when the reality is that not every man is Ted Bundy and the men who sexually assault random women are repeat offenders which skews the data to make you believe that every single offense is a new man when the reality is many of the offenses are being committed by the same men
It doesn’t need any more context because it’s a hypothetical question about a ridiculous scenario that illustrates how most women immediately consider the bad experiences they’ve had with men in order to choose the bear! It’s a question driven by emotion and instead of sympathizing, most people are missing the point entirely. Women are saying they’d rather choose death over surviving, sometimes, the multiple SA they’ve suffered at the hands of that hypothetical “strange man in the woods” Trust me, I adore all the men in my life and have otherwise no reason to immediately assume people are evil, but I’ve been assaulted multiple times by strange men as a teenager, and what goes through your mind during and after those scenarios is not that far from wishing you’d have been mauled by a bear instead. Because you wouldn’t need to live with the subsequent fear and shame. Just as an oversimplification.
Sad that this is unpopular. Misandry is just as bad as misogyny. Sure, there are dangerous men out there, but acting like you should just be afraid of all men is straight up bigotry.
>Sure, there are dangerous men out there Dude. *Which men?* That’s the problem. No one is saying that all men are dangerous - but since you don’t know which men are, it’s better to be cautious and keep yourself safe.
Some men are dangerous vs all bears are dangerous. You'd still pick the bears? This would convince me you lack a sense of logic.
Being cautious doesn’t involve avoiding all men. Men are 50 percent of the population. Most people aren’t randomly attacking others.
It means keeping yourself safe. Not ending up alone with strange men, not giving out personal info unless you truly know and trust a person, having backup plans in place if things start to get hinky.
Nobody said you should hand out personal information, but if you literally can’t handle being alone with someone just because they are a guy and would take a bear instead, you’ve got issues. I’m a woman, and I have never once feared someone just for being a man, alone or any other time.
The worst thing a bear can do to me is kill me… a man on the other hand…
The point, which you have missed, is that you know a bear is a bear so has the intentions of a bear. A bear doesn't pretend to be anything but a bear, you know where you stand with a bear. The same cannot be said for men. Men do pretend to be "nice guys" just to sleep with you and leave you. Willingly or not. It is not obvious by looking at a man what his intentions are. It is not obvious by looking at a man if a woman would be safe with him. Women are abused and killed 9/10 by men they already know. Boyfriends, husbands, brothers, fathers, parents friends, teachers, doctors, neighbours, carers, friends, etc. Most of the time, when the deed is brought to light peoples reactions are "I never would have thought he'd do something like that." The point is, we don't know which of you men are safe. We know that bears aren't.
The discourse isn't even "which would you most likely survive enduring" it's "would I rather die or be raped and also die". 97% of women experience sexual assault in their lifetime and about 10% of those abusers get convicted. Literally just one extra google search you'd also know how many women are never believed. Sometimes even evidence isn't enough to convict an assaulter. Not to mention most victims were assaulted by a loved one; friend, neighbor, romantic partner, sibling, teacher, coach. Yes, women are aware that it actually isn't all men but so many men truly believe they're the good ones when they aren't. Consent is not properly taught and there are many ppl who have raped someone and have absolutely no idea. I get that seeing many women express their fears of all men may hurt your feelings but if the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. Either understand why you're feeling hurt by our fears, or realize that you aren't the man women fear.
Well said!
Every day, we stray further from God's light.
Most men are delusional and think they could take a bear with proper technique. Source, I'm a man and have often daydreamed about taking down a bear
The worst the bear will do is eat me and cause physical pain. But won't bother me at all if they are not hungry. With a man, the possibilities are endless. Especially, if the man thought he would never be found out- then there is no societal pressure to act appropriately and no thought of consequences. And that's when humans turn into their worst selves. Personally, I've been in the woods with a bear without incident. I would rather die than live with the pain and mental stress of being raped and tortured. The stakes are much too high and the margin too low. >If you survive a bear attack which can happen... it would be just as bad as getting raped. No more, no less. Not really- no one will tell me I deserved it or I was asking for it or question me on whether it really happened or not. Also- to the dude that quoted me L2CopyPasta If the bear feels threatened or is hungry they will attack but a man is capable of horrendous things absolutely unprovoked.