The thing is, they’re not. Even those self proclaimed bear experts who say this eventually get mauled to death by them. Bears are wild animals, they’re inherently a dangerous predator. A random guy could be a predator, but even then he’d be less dangerous than a bear. The chance that he IS a predator however, are much lower. People who chose the bear are simply delusional and just help rage baiters with the social divide.
The question of the bait however isn’t worded in a way that takes your local fauna into consideration. It’s just you, in a forest, with either a random man or a wild bear.
How dangerous a bear is is pretty much irrelevant to the whole discourse but I want to talk about bears.
Black bears are absolute cowards and aren’t that dangerous unless you are an idiot
Brown bears will fuck you up if you threaten it or if it has cubs but will in most cases not attack.
Polar bears will kill you because they are bored.
My country has the highest amount of bear per person but we only have brown bears and most people have encountered a bear in the forest, it’s not as scary as the idea of getting roofied and rapes. Also getting attacked by a bear is more unlikely even here than getting roofied and raped. You don’t have to worried about a bear attack while you do need to guard your drink.
1.2 deaths by black bears a year in the US. 400,000 black bears. So 3.0x10^-6 chance of being murdered by a bear adjusted per capita.
26,000 homicides a year (2021, I think it’s slightly lower now but these were the first I saw whatever) for 330M puts you at 7.9x10^-5 chance of being murdered by a human adjusted per capita.
Sorry, bears win. Plus seeing a bear is cool as hell and seeing another human while hiking is annoying at best.
I’m genuinely curious on what the math works out to, but I think you’d need to account for time spent around each, or a “per encounter” statistic or something.
Otherwise there could be a scenario where the bear encounter is 100% deadly for example, but if most bears are never encountered it’d make them seem safer.
Of course, this scenario is specifically an encounter in the woods, so it’d need to be something like: total encounters between women and bears in the woods vs total encounters with women and men in the woods, and then factor in non-deadly encounters, other forms of assault, etc. That probably has next to no useful data though so good luck…
I mean, yeah I A: have no real fucks to give about this argument. B: Bears are cooler than humans men can get over it. C: used the stats I could get from a quick google, not gonna do an entire scientific study just to tell men to get fucked, as funny as it would be.
A lot of homicides happen within an inner circle of family & friends. You’re not that close around bears to the point where they are a threat to you.
Also, the US is a terrible example for homicide statistics since it is already such an outlier. But I’m sure you know all those facts already and just try to push an agenda here.
Nah man if I wanted to push an agenda I would’ve adjusted the homicide rates to men instead of just humans. Lol. My only agenda is that bears are objectively cooler than humans and you should probably get over it.
But I don’t have to. It’s about perception. Fear is not based in reality. It doesn’t matter what is actually true but what is perceived to be true. People see people being murdered 30x more often by people than by bears per capita. Ignoring per capita, and it’s 23,000x more than bears. It makes plenty of sense to fear humans more than bears based on that alone. Fear is not going to go “oh but actually statistically speaking in order to be afraid I really should do a scientific study to see who in a “alone in the woods at night” scenario is more likely to kill me before I am afraid!” It’s gonna go with the fact that you see and experience humans killing other humans a LOT more than you experience bears killing humans. Also, I’ve conveniently ignored plenty of stats other than literal homicide you have to worry about from men.
Also, again, none of this matters what does is that bears are objectively cooler than humans, the end.
Now consider that any woman you tell that to is still likely to pick the bear than the strange man who spouts statistics about bear attacks in order to be picked to spend time alone with her in the woods.
This discussion isn’t about statistics. The fact that a woman can tell you directly what she wants, and you can tell her she’s wrong because of xyz, is why it will always and forever be the bear.
Now consider that any Evangelical Christian you tell that to is still likely to pick the bear than the strange Muslim who spouts statistics about bear attacks in order to be picked to spend time alone with her in the airport.
This discussion isn’t about statistics. The fact that an Evangelical Christian can tell you directly what she wants, and you can tell her she’s wrong because of xyz, is why it will always and forever be the bear.
The point is that women can also be bigots - including sexists. It’s benevolent misogyny to presume that they’re too weak and naive to do so
This was never meant to be taken that literally. All it ever was supposed to be was a metaphor for violence perpetuated against women by showcasing how those numbers far exceed the numbers for injuries inflicted by a known danger to humans. Anyone seriously discussing the real-world dangers of bear encounters vs men has already entirely lost the plot from the very start.
The ones who entirely lost the plot are those who are supporting this completely moronic claim, as they’re an accomplice to how our societies become more and more divided, which is exactly the whole point of this rage bait & spread through meme formats like this.
which is exactly the whole point of this rage bait & spread through meme formats like this
Do you truly believe this meme was intentionally crafted and released as part of some coordinated effort with specific intent of stewing division between the sexes?
No one can prove who created this meme - at least as far as I’m aware.
However, after it was created, it certainly has been boosted and magnified by right wing organizations and intelligence operations to cause the working class to turn on itself and dehumanize one another. Which is always what fascism does to distract from oligarchic wealth and societal decay.
This meme is evil. It isn’t funny or cute. It’s intentionally cancerous and we need to stop spreading such hate.
Because it isn’t white men in wealthy suburban communities who will suffer from this. Rather, it will be the black, brown, and migrant men who are already dehumanized and seen as superpredators.
After all, why was it so wrong for the police to murder George Floyd - he was more dangerous than a bear and (white) women were afraid of him. Given that, it seems that those hero cops acted in accordance with our society’s values, doesn’t it? Or, if we reject that notion, then we must also reject “memes” like this that further the dehumanization that leads to his murder
My friend, I genuinely think you are expressing paranoid and delusion behavior. I’m not trying to be funny, I’m not trying to win any arguments, I genuinely believe that is an unhealthy amount of very specific narrative subtext to read into this. Trying to equate this mild trend making almost milquetoast commentary on real violence trends against women with the state-sanction murder by police of George Floyd is borderline unhinged thinking.
The superstructure of society encourages dehumanization of black and brown and “foreign” men because they are seen as dangerous violent animals. This is a centuries old rhetorical ploy by the ruling class to subordinate the masses through fear. This meme contributes to and furthers such ideology
Did a single individual anti Semitic poster in 1934 Germany cause Dachau? Of course not. But that single individual poster was one of millions of contributing factors that caused the conditions that allowed for the Holocaust
We should recognize and denounce such hatred when we see it
The thing is, they’re not. Even those self proclaimed bear experts who say this eventually get mauled to death by them. Bears are wild animals, they’re inherently a dangerous predator. A random guy could be a predator, but even then he’d be less dangerous than a bear. The chance that he IS a predator however, are much lower. People who chose the bear are simply delusional and just help rage baiters with the social divide.
I note you did not dispute my cocane claim.
There hasn’t been a wild bear sighting in my country for hundreds of years, so my fear of people is way higher than my fear of bears
The question of the bait however isn’t worded in a way that takes your local fauna into consideration. It’s just you, in a forest, with either a random man or a wild bear.
Like I said my frlear levels of people I don’t know male or female and everyone in-between is way higher than my fear levels of a bear.
Same, but I still don’t think everyone is a predator based on their gender or sex, despite a lot of anecdotal evidence gathered throughout my life.
How dangerous a bear is is pretty much irrelevant to the whole discourse but I want to talk about bears.
Black bears are absolute cowards and aren’t that dangerous unless you are an idiot
Brown bears will fuck you up if you threaten it or if it has cubs but will in most cases not attack.
Polar bears will kill you because they are bored.
My country has the highest amount of bear per person but we only have brown bears and most people have encountered a bear in the forest, it’s not as scary as the idea of getting roofied and rapes. Also getting attacked by a bear is more unlikely even here than getting roofied and raped. You don’t have to worried about a bear attack while you do need to guard your drink.
1.2 deaths by black bears a year in the US. 400,000 black bears. So 3.0x10^-6 chance of being murdered by a bear adjusted per capita.
26,000 homicides a year (2021, I think it’s slightly lower now but these were the first I saw whatever) for 330M puts you at 7.9x10^-5 chance of being murdered by a human adjusted per capita.
Sorry, bears win. Plus seeing a bear is cool as hell and seeing another human while hiking is annoying at best.
I’m genuinely curious on what the math works out to, but I think you’d need to account for time spent around each, or a “per encounter” statistic or something.
Otherwise there could be a scenario where the bear encounter is 100% deadly for example, but if most bears are never encountered it’d make them seem safer.
Of course, this scenario is specifically an encounter in the woods, so it’d need to be something like: total encounters between women and bears in the woods vs total encounters with women and men in the woods, and then factor in non-deadly encounters, other forms of assault, etc. That probably has next to no useful data though so good luck…
I mean, yeah I A: have no real fucks to give about this argument. B: Bears are cooler than humans men can get over it. C: used the stats I could get from a quick google, not gonna do an entire scientific study just to tell men to get fucked, as funny as it would be.
A lot of homicides happen within an inner circle of family & friends. You’re not that close around bears to the point where they are a threat to you. Also, the US is a terrible example for homicide statistics since it is already such an outlier. But I’m sure you know all those facts already and just try to push an agenda here.
Nah man if I wanted to push an agenda I would’ve adjusted the homicide rates to men instead of just humans. Lol. My only agenda is that bears are objectively cooler than humans and you should probably get over it.
You also need to adjust for amount of time spent in bear territory vs human territory, or bear encounters vs attacks to get a more accurate statistic.
But I don’t have to. It’s about perception. Fear is not based in reality. It doesn’t matter what is actually true but what is perceived to be true. People see people being murdered 30x more often by people than by bears per capita. Ignoring per capita, and it’s 23,000x more than bears. It makes plenty of sense to fear humans more than bears based on that alone. Fear is not going to go “oh but actually statistically speaking in order to be afraid I really should do a scientific study to see who in a “alone in the woods at night” scenario is more likely to kill me before I am afraid!” It’s gonna go with the fact that you see and experience humans killing other humans a LOT more than you experience bears killing humans. Also, I’ve conveniently ignored plenty of stats other than literal homicide you have to worry about from men.
Also, again, none of this matters what does is that bears are objectively cooler than humans, the end.
I mostly agree, but you’re still trying to use inaccurate statistics to justify fear
Hm I wonder if any right wing political parties have ever done this to dehumanize outgroups and promote fascism? 🤔
I wonder if anyone who is Muslim, Black, or Jewish has any thoughts on this history of such dehumanization and inaccurate perceptions 🤔
That’s how you sound. Have you been outside?
Consider what you just said about bears.
Now consider that any woman you tell that to is still likely to pick the bear than the strange man who spouts statistics about bear attacks in order to be picked to spend time alone with her in the woods.
This discussion isn’t about statistics. The fact that a woman can tell you directly what she wants, and you can tell her she’s wrong because of xyz, is why it will always and forever be the bear.
The point is that women can also be bigots - including sexists. It’s benevolent misogyny to presume that they’re too weak and naive to do so
This was never meant to be taken that literally. All it ever was supposed to be was a metaphor for violence perpetuated against women by showcasing how those numbers far exceed the numbers for injuries inflicted by a known danger to humans. Anyone seriously discussing the real-world dangers of bear encounters vs men has already entirely lost the plot from the very start.
The ones who entirely lost the plot are those who are supporting this completely moronic claim, as they’re an accomplice to how our societies become more and more divided, which is exactly the whole point of this rage bait & spread through meme formats like this.
Remember when the IRA did literally the same fucking thing with BLM? The only reason this works is because people like you become emotionally irrational, dying on this very hill of utter stupidity, because it makes you think it gives you some sort of moral high ground.
Do you truly believe this meme was intentionally crafted and released as part of some coordinated effort with specific intent of stewing division between the sexes?
No one can prove who created this meme - at least as far as I’m aware.
However, after it was created, it certainly has been boosted and magnified by right wing organizations and intelligence operations to cause the working class to turn on itself and dehumanize one another. Which is always what fascism does to distract from oligarchic wealth and societal decay.
This meme is evil. It isn’t funny or cute. It’s intentionally cancerous and we need to stop spreading such hate.
Because it isn’t white men in wealthy suburban communities who will suffer from this. Rather, it will be the black, brown, and migrant men who are already dehumanized and seen as superpredators.
After all, why was it so wrong for the police to murder George Floyd - he was more dangerous than a bear and (white) women were afraid of him. Given that, it seems that those hero cops acted in accordance with our society’s values, doesn’t it? Or, if we reject that notion, then we must also reject “memes” like this that further the dehumanization that leads to his murder
My friend, I genuinely think you are expressing paranoid and delusion behavior. I’m not trying to be funny, I’m not trying to win any arguments, I genuinely believe that is an unhealthy amount of very specific narrative subtext to read into this. Trying to equate this mild trend making almost milquetoast commentary on real violence trends against women with the state-sanction murder by police of George Floyd is borderline unhinged thinking.
The superstructure of society encourages dehumanization of black and brown and “foreign” men because they are seen as dangerous violent animals. This is a centuries old rhetorical ploy by the ruling class to subordinate the masses through fear. This meme contributes to and furthers such ideology
Did a single individual anti Semitic poster in 1934 Germany cause Dachau? Of course not. But that single individual poster was one of millions of contributing factors that caused the conditions that allowed for the Holocaust
We should recognize and denounce such hatred when we see it