There was a woman (IIRC a feminist) who posted a rage bait question of “women if you had to choose to be in the woods with a bear or a strange man, what would you choose?” (Paraphrasing)
Then got a bunch of hate mail from men and used that to exclaim that the hate mail was the exact reason women would choose a bear over a man in the woods.
You should read the link up top, because it sounds like you’re making a lot of assumptions. It wasn’t a rage bait at all, but a response to video of taunting a bear in the woods about how taunting a man would be more dangerous.
And then it turned in to a bunch of different people discussing variations of the scenario.
Ah, well I apologize for not recognizing the original source. I was going off memory from where I saw the tweet of the question. I hadn’t realized it was from a response video. Though I still feel it was made to get a rise from people
This whole conversation is the equivalent to stranger danger of the 80s, it is shocking how far the publics social awareness is. Just like stranger danger it enphasizes fear over rational truth, and encourages isolation over community. The truth of the matter is that some random man isn’t a bigger threat to you than a random bear, when looking at statistics and physical threat to women it’s domestic violence.
This bear shit is some whack ass 4th wave feminism that completely lacks any kind of internal self criticism. The public conversation surrounding it provides no purpose than to feed into incel radicalization of young men feeling the strains of alienation under capitalism.
That’s not what the linked study says:
In June 2021, the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (OPN) showed that 28% of women and 16% of men had experienced at least one form of harassment in the previous 12 months. Of adults aged 16 to 34 years, 58% of women had experienced harassment, compared with 24% of men (Figure 4).
And don’t get me wrong, I am not here to justify harassment of anyone, but you’re grossly misrepresenting the study right now. Perceptions are absolutely influenced by experience of harassment but the actual threat to a woman is not random men on the street, it’s a man that has power over her or within her circle of trust. That could be a boss, a husband or relative.
However that reality is not what is shaping public perception, I would ask you why do you think that is? It’s a very important part of this bear conversation that is completely lost on everyone.
I don’t want to get in the weeds here, at least once in the last 12 months is not regularly, that’s my point on your misrepentation. Does it happen too much, absolutely, does the study present enough data to say it’s happening regularly, no.
Again when talking about actual threats to women it is not strangers but men already in their circle, yet that is not what the bear discussion revolves around.
Please answer: Why do you think the actual threat doesn’t shape public consciousness the same way perceived threats do?
I understand that this information is against your internal narrative, but a quick look at data for 2021 shows:
One in two women and one in five men felt unsafe walking alone after dark in a busy public place.
And data from 2022 shows 45% for the same measure.
As for harassment:
2022 - 55% of women 16-34 felt harassed
2021 - Three out of five, 60% felt harassed during the year.
Twice as many women reported being harassed as men, and several reported changing their behaviour because of harassment.
This is also echoed in international studies over multiple cultures. Women are much more often harassed than men, almost exclusively by men, and have more limited freedoms, expressions and rights than men.
This is not controversial, it is well established in study after study, there is an actual right answer to this, and it’s not the one you’re proposing.
How is it that you keep ignoring data when faced with it, and instead of presenting supportive data resort to arguing feelings and whataboutisms?
Unsure what that quote is supposed to imply. Either she does associate herself with the movement or she does not. I don’t know the person or follow any of their social stuff. So if she does not, in fact, self associate with that group than I misremembered and I’m wrong. If she does than she is.
Feminism is very clearly defined in what it is and does. Posting divisive man hating rage bait is not part of it. Just calling yourself something does not make yourself something.
Sure does, but as far as I’m aware, subscription to the ideology is the only bar to entry. Just because someone uses distasteful methods does not mean they do not subscribe to the ideology. So in this case, I would argue that stating it does make it.
That’s a good question for the person who we’re talking about. I can’t speak on behalf of their reasoning but they seem to feel justified in it, somehow.
This one flew over my head. Could someone please cue me in on what this meme is referencing?
EDIT: I’m I dumbass who didn’t notice the link. Thank you for the explanation, though.
Oh no you’re not. I edited it in immediately after I saw your comment but then got busy irl and didn’t have time to reply until now.
Thanks for doing so anyhow. I’d only been seeing memes, and while I got the gist, I appreciate the full explanation.
There was a woman (IIRC a feminist) who posted a rage bait question of “women if you had to choose to be in the woods with a bear or a strange man, what would you choose?” (Paraphrasing)
Then got a bunch of hate mail from men and used that to exclaim that the hate mail was the exact reason women would choose a bear over a man in the woods.
You should read the link up top, because it sounds like you’re making a lot of assumptions. It wasn’t a rage bait at all, but a response to video of taunting a bear in the woods about how taunting a man would be more dangerous.
And then it turned in to a bunch of different people discussing variations of the scenario.
Ah, well I apologize for not recognizing the original source. I was going off memory from where I saw the tweet of the question. I hadn’t realized it was from a response video. Though I still feel it was made to get a rise from people
This whole conversation is the equivalent to stranger danger of the 80s, it is shocking how far the publics social awareness is. Just like stranger danger it enphasizes fear over rational truth, and encourages isolation over community. The truth of the matter is that some random man isn’t a bigger threat to you than a random bear, when looking at statistics and physical threat to women it’s domestic violence.
This bear shit is some whack ass 4th wave feminism that completely lacks any kind of internal self criticism. The public conversation surrounding it provides no purpose than to feed into incel radicalization of young men feeling the strains of alienation under capitalism.
Did… did you miss the #metoo movement?
Where like 60% of women get harassed regularly, and 50 % felt unsafe walking home in public, due to men. Or 79% of women felt unsafe while exercising, due to men. And 88% of travelling women felt unsafe, due to men.
Bears are hungry, scared, have cubs to protect, or mostly want to be left alone. They won’t stalk you, leer at you, catcall or grope you.
You sir, are the one lacking self reflection.
No, no, no. Don’t you realize? Men are the real victims here! Eyeroll to end all eyerolls
That’s not what the linked study says: In June 2021, the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (OPN) showed that 28% of women and 16% of men had experienced at least one form of harassment in the previous 12 months. Of adults aged 16 to 34 years, 58% of women had experienced harassment, compared with 24% of men (Figure 4).
And don’t get me wrong, I am not here to justify harassment of anyone, but you’re grossly misrepresenting the study right now. Perceptions are absolutely influenced by experience of harassment but the actual threat to a woman is not random men on the street, it’s a man that has power over her or within her circle of trust. That could be a boss, a husband or relative.
However that reality is not what is shaping public perception, I would ask you why do you think that is? It’s a very important part of this bear conversation that is completely lost on everyone.
From the study summary:
Three out of five is 60%.
I don’t want to get in the weeds here, at least once in the last 12 months is not regularly, that’s my point on your misrepentation. Does it happen too much, absolutely, does the study present enough data to say it’s happening regularly, no.
Again when talking about actual threats to women it is not strangers but men already in their circle, yet that is not what the bear discussion revolves around.
Please answer: Why do you think the actual threat doesn’t shape public consciousness the same way perceived threats do?
I understand that this information is against your internal narrative, but a quick look at data for 2021 shows:
And data from 2022 shows 45% for the same measure.
As for harassment:
2022 - 55% of women 16-34 felt harassed
2021 - Three out of five, 60% felt harassed during the year.
Twice as many women reported being harassed as men, and several reported changing their behaviour because of harassment.
This is also echoed in international studies over multiple cultures. Women are much more often harassed than men, almost exclusively by men, and have more limited freedoms, expressions and rights than men.
This is not controversial, it is well established in study after study, there is an actual right answer to this, and it’s not the one you’re proposing.
How is it that you keep ignoring data when faced with it, and instead of presenting supportive data resort to arguing feelings and whataboutisms?
Edit: Link to 2022 raw data
“Feminist”
Unsure what that quote is supposed to imply. Either she does associate herself with the movement or she does not. I don’t know the person or follow any of their social stuff. So if she does not, in fact, self associate with that group than I misremembered and I’m wrong. If she does than she is.
Feminism is very clearly defined in what it is and does. Posting divisive man hating rage bait is not part of it. Just calling yourself something does not make yourself something.
Sure does, but as far as I’m aware, subscription to the ideology is the only bar to entry. Just because someone uses distasteful methods does not mean they do not subscribe to the ideology. So in this case, I would argue that stating it does make it.
What are you talking about? Feminism is about equality. How does this method achieve equality?
That’s a good question for the person who we’re talking about. I can’t speak on behalf of their reasoning but they seem to feel justified in it, somehow.
Most extremists feel justified in whatever destructive shit they’re doing.