“b-but bears are actually dangerous!” Shut the hell up.
I’m doing my part by playing with Arch Linux in my mom’s basement instead of going outside. Where women are. And Arch Linux isn’t. I use Arch btw.
Well I’ll have you know I do the same but with Fedora Linux (like arch Linux but imo better). I use fedora btw.
I’ll have you know my Linux runs on bears. Makes me, and all my many female friends who hang out, more comfortable.
I don’t like much bloat in my Linux though; just the bare necessities.
Downvoted not because it isn’t true, but because they aren’t automatically mutually exclusive and because it is an unnecessary jab at half of the human species. Why are we paying attention to divisive bullshit instead of focusing on things that actually have the potential to help?
What will help?
Because the solution to women getting assaulted is to make men think about their actions. The post wasn’t anymore divisive than the average black twitter meme. It was a simple tongue in cheek piece about how women have the impossible task of figuring out if a man is going to be their life partner or their rapist & murderer.
“Hey, would you rather be alone with a bear or a man?”
“A bear. And you should think about what you’ve done.” "… Huh? "Imo this doesn’t impact the men who would do such a thing in the slightest. You’re just making the ones who have empathy feel bad, those who would rape are just getting their egos stoked by this fad: “Look at me, I’m more dangerous than a bear! That means I’m badass”
The problem is a large portion of rape is not done by serial rapists who rapes every chance they get, it’s done by average dudes once or twice when an opportunity arrives. Most rape cases involve someone known to the victim.
Rape culture (as awkward and taboo of a phrase as it as) is a real thing that this bear analogy is pointing to. You may not have anything to examine in yourself that is the result of that culture but a metric fuck-ton of men do have internalized rape cultural aspects that need to be examined and extracted. The fact that so many women picked the bear is a testament to how pervasive that culture is, at least in their eyes.
The point isn’t to stoke the egos of the serial rapists with no empathy, it’s to use empathy to make the “average-Joe” rapist examine his internal biases before they turn into an actual rape.
to make men think about their actions
Do you not understand that, as a very straight man, I’ve never once even thought about hurting a woman?
It’s absolutely divisive. Stop.
But have you thought about challenging a man who does?
Ah yes, let me open myself up to physical violence because I’m a man and that’s my place in the world.
Shut the fuck up
Are you aware that you get to make that choice and that women don’t?
Are you aware that, as a man, I still have the right to protect myself?
God, go fuck yourself you troglodyte.
I’ve never once even thought about hurting a woman?
then you’d know it’s not about you. I don’t think women want to potentially be mauled to death by the bear, it’s simply preferable to the horrible shit men do to women with astonishing regularity. kidnapped and raped to death, or kidnapped and raped for decades.
do you need links, to show how unfortunately regular this kind of thing is? because they’ll turn your fucking stomach. just because you’re ignorant about how often it happens doesn’t mean you should take it personally when women make a logical choice. they’re safer with the bear. You’ve never thought about hurting a woman, that’s great, but it doesn’t do shit for the women who have had this shit done to them by men for the history of the species.
It’s absolutely divisive. Stop.
oooOoh poor boy, it hurts your feelings huh? get over yourself.
then you’d know it’s not about you.
It absolutely is. You are saying no man, myself included, is safe. That no matter what good we might do individually, we will always be viewed as monsters. Can you not see why men find that hurtful?
It absolutely is. You are saying no man, myself included, is safe. That no matter what good we might do individually, we will always be viewed as monsters. Can you not see why men find that hurtful?
look mate if you want to self identify as a rapist / creep, be my guest. if you want to identify that way and then wonder why people find it creepy, well, I don’t have the crayons.
If you think women assume all men are rapists, you’re wrong. if you think women assume some men are rapist creeps, that would be EXTREMELY RATIONAL. Now, compare those two categories with the number of times a woman has had to worry about being raped by a bear.
Come on, you can do it. Count on your toes if you need to. There we go: it’s none.
So some, vs. None.
Now work it out.
I’m not self identifying as anything. You are saying woman should be more scared of me or any other man. And bears may not rape, but they do other damage.
You are saying woman should be more scared of me or any other man
I mean… the historical record is replete with horrible shit men do to women:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_violence_against_women
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Incidents_of_violence_against_girls
https://www.nativehope.org/missing-and-murdered-indigenous-women-mmiw
https://people.com/crime/gallery-elizabeth-smart-jaycee-dugard-kidnapping-survivors/
https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-serial-killers-of-women/ranker-crime
https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvv.pdf
so you figure it out for yourself mate, I have neither the time nor crayons.
Is vague with their wording, immediately backpedals to “I dOn’T mEaN aLl MeN”
Shut up
there’s some real delusional entitlement going on here. one for all the supposedly ‘good guys’ who feel blamed for rapists - I don’t rape women but would never begrudge their need to defend themselves. telling women they need to take literal risks for the sake of ‘not hurting the good guys’ feelings’ seems kinda fucking gross.
I don’t get why any man would jump to defend the chuds, unless they feel pointed out as a chud.
In reality, it’s not attacking half the human species. It’s actually attacking people who perpetrate SA, and other people who cheerlead for them. One problem is that many men react just the way you reacted. Instead of saying “let’s solve this problem”, you say “quit being so divisive”. Unfortunately, those are your values.
“I realized men are evil, masculinity is toxic, these are statements of truth and the only ones who deny this shit are cis men themselves.” - CheesyCheese1 This thread
☝️ Top comment when i got here. This issue brings out as many misandrists as it does misogynists.
Even my gf who wasn’t aware of this meme picked the bear vs a random man when i asked her, so obviously there is a problem. But in reality i don’t give a shit if some rando woman would prefer a bear over me in the woods, whatever makes her feel safer i guess. I do care about being tarred with the rape brush though, and this topic is being used to attack all men rather than just the problem ones.
I support sexual assualt because I think associating all men with sexual assault is divisive? Eat shit and die.
Here’s my hot take on all this:
Fellas, it’s not that your feelings don’t matter, everyone’s feelings matter, it’s that your feelings don’t matter more than the safety of others.
You’re getting mad at the wrong shit here. You’re mad at the women for not wanting to be stuck in a forest with a random dude, when in all actual fact, that decision was borne from a plethora of experience with random dudes, most of that experience being negative.
Almost all of that negativity is because there’s to fucking many creepy ass dudes making us all look bad. To be blunt, I have high hopes, and expectations from my fellow man; especially when it comes to respecting women. Yes, there’s a nontrivial number of crazy bitches out there, in the same breath, there’s a lot of crazy dudes too. They’re making us all look bad. Be mad at them.
The women are only making the best decision for their own health and safety, based on their experience. Be the change you want to see in the world, my brothers. Be that change.
When people justify racism with statistics: That’s stupid and you’re a bigot
When people justify sexism with statistics: Only one side’s feelings matter! I’m going to post this divisive meme everywhere!1!
Edit Sexists know how to downvote, but not present a logical argument.
Stay tuned for the next “men suck” cycle: ‘toxic masculinity is bad you should express your feelings instead of bottling them’, more after the break
This rage bait is so old the Simpsons parodied it:
“Today’s topic…”
The thing is, I’ve seen statements like this before. Except when I heard it, it was being used to justify ignoring women’s experiences and feelings in regard to things like sexual harassment and feeling unsafe, since that’s “just a feeling” as well. It wasn’t okay then, and it’s not okay the other way around. The truth is that feelings do matter, on both sides. Everyone should feel safe and welcome in their surroundings. And how much so that is, is reflected in how those people feel.
The outcome of men feeling being respected and women feeling safe are not mutually exclusive. The sad part is that someone who is reading this here is far more likely to be an ally than a foe, yet the people who need to hear the intended message the most will most likely never hear it nor be bothered by it. There’s a stick being wedged here that is only meant to divide, and oh my god is it working.
The original post about bears has completely lost all meaning and any semblance of discussion is lost because the metaphor is inflammatory by design - sometimes that’s a good thing, to highlight through absurdity. But metaphors are fragile - if it’s very likely to be misunderstood or offensive, the message is lost in emotion. Personally I think this metaphor is just highly ineffective at getting the message across, as it has driven people who would stand by the original message to the other side due to the many uncharitable interpretations it presents. And among the crowd of reasonable people are those who confirm those interpretations and muddy the water to make women seem like misandrists, and men like sexual assault deniers. This meme is simply terrible and perhaps we can move on to a better version of it that actually gets the message across well, instead of getting people at each other’s throat.
Honestly I am so goddamn tired of this shit, everytime something like the bear question comes up it blatantly tilted in one side or the others favor and dissent is crushed in both sets of spaces and no one learns anything.
Best take in this thread by a long shot. I’d like to add that there’s nothing wrong with a little thought experiment to illicit a point. But the internet has become such an inhospitable place to any kind of discussion requiring nuance and patience.
I disagree. Clearly the meme is highly effective. It brought a topic that ought to be in the light back into the light. Considering the frequency of SA, this should be something that people are considering how to handle on a regular basis, but that’s not what you see if you watch the news, listen to the city council, or talk with the school board.
Your opening paragraph sounds similar to the expression “All lives matter.” It didn’t sound like you wrote that ironically.
And the final paragraph is classic heckler’s veto. Two sides disagree, and rather than talk about the serious issue, you make a comment about how people should all try to get along better by speaking in less aggressive terms. But the underlying problem is not about aggressive speech. It’s about aggressive action. So maybe we can focus on that.
Clearly the meme is highly effective.
It was highly contagious, that is, it spread widely. But so was the whole “would you still love me if I were a worm” thing and it was “effective” for the same reason: Gals thought “Oh I want a ‘yes’ to that answer that’d be so emotionally satisfying” and guys thought “WTF why would I want a worm if there’s something more behind it why can’t my SO speak plain English”: It spread by exploiting the emotional kick gals get out of tripping over guys for having a particular default interpretation. No, it is not a “wrong” interpretation to think of the question as “rather with a bear or a man like me”. If you don’t want men to interpret the question like that then pose it differently. Simple as that. But then it wouldn’t be as inflammatory and with that not as contagious.
Each and every time one of these things comes around one of two things happens for the average guy: We a) fall right into a trap and then get accused of being insensitive or b) we recognise the trap, lift our hands, walk back slowly, then faster, then even faster, until making a go at the 10km parcour world record. Because yes that kind of shit is a giant red flag.
It’s like those people who are proud of being “brutally honest” but in reality what they care about is not the truth, but the brutality, just from the other side of the gender distribution.
You’re right, feelings do matter, and this post did not dispute that. It’s just that safety matters more.
It saddens me that the default interpretation of this is accusatory and requiring of defense. Not to personally blame you, this is very common and clearly a systemic reaction, but I don’t know enough psychology/politics/sociology to understand why, just enough to know it’s bad.
It saddens me that the default interpretation of this is accusatory
It’s saying men are inherently unsafe to be around. How is that not accusatory?
This isn’t about women’s safety versus men’s feelings, it’s about women’s feelings (of safety) versus men’s feelings (of respect).
But it doesn’t say you personally are unsafe, it says that the odds that a man chosen at random is unsafe is high enough that women - understandably - fear being left alone with a random stranger to a level at least comparable with being left alone with a bear.
An enormous number of men fail to understand just how common and how terrifying it is for women to be harassed, assaulted and raped by men. And that is exactly what the bear/man hyperbole is pointing out.
And the reason people with takes like yours get chewed out for it is because you could do some reflection and consider
what is this systemic issue, what behaviours might make women around me scared, what can we as a society do to change this, and what can I do to avoid women around me fearing I may be unsafe?
But instead, they take it as a personal attack, and so respond
why am I being attacked for someone else’s behaviour?
Edit: here’s another example in a similar format to demonstrate how the meme is being misinterpreted, note how your first response wouldn’t be “why are you accusing all priests?!”
“Who would you rather babysit your child, a bear or a Catholic priest?”
It’s what it says to me and many of us. Perhaps it’s the messaging.
What do you mean what behaviors? I don’t harass women. I barely talk to people I don’t know. But yet people are still scared of me.
And I would 100% pick a catholic priest. What a dumb choice. And, yeah, you are accusing everyone.
I clearly said: it’s not targeted at you specifically, but at that fact that women are disproportionately more likely to be harassed or assaulted, and when that happens, the aggressor is almost exclusively men.
They’re not scared of you because you’re personally scary, they’re scared of you because there’s an ingrained culture of sexual harassment of women by men. So when you say “that’s a nice dress” to a woman you don’t know, she’s not thinking “aww cute”, she’s thinking “is this guy being nice, or will they threaten me if I turn them down?”
Seriously, ask literally any woman you know if they’ve ever been sexually harassed, and the answer is almost guaranteed to be yes.
I would 100% pick a Catholic priest
Yes, I know that, that’s how hyperbole works. My point is that such a statement shouldn’t be interpreted as “every priest is a child molester” but as “there’s a concerningly high rate of them, and they’re probably not a good option for childcare.”
You are accusing everyone
When did I say “all men are <whatever you’re saying I’m accusing all men of>?” Stop making this about you, and actually try to understand why interactions with men can be terrifying for women.
If you are not targeting all men, stop talking about men as one generalized body.
Sorry, when you say “I’d rather encounter a bear than a man” it sure as hell sound like you are saying all men are dangerous. If that isn’t what you are saying, you are saying it poorly.
But it doesn’t say that
Yes, feelings matter. Beautifully put.
But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies. No secret society is plotting to prevent you from sending any message of safety. The metaphor is not designed, or created for a specific purpose. You have to realise how crazy and for real dangerous this way of agumenting is.
You aim for a good purpose, then use basically the debate version of biological weapons of mass destruction to make your point.
Just for any small argument about a small thing between sexes, like always it’s fun for people to discuss, and some get mad, but
For you to use the narrative of psy ops, learned no doubt subconsciously, to speak like there is a secret cabal that want you to be fearful, we must unite against some kind of expression just because they are coming for you… No
If anyone takes it too far it’s talk like that, and you unironically talk about how reasonable people are hard to come by
Gee
Wonder why that is brother
But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies.
The purpose of a system is what it does.
There are plenty systems that are not controlled by a cabal, yes
Just because noone sets out to do a thing on purpose, individually, as a group, organically, conspiratorially, whatever, doesn’t mean that the resulting system of action does not act with a particular purpose in the wider system.
Life, for example, has the purpose of hastening the heat death of the universe: We reduce entropy locally and to do that increase the rate of entropy increase in the wider universe. It’s what we do. It’s our purpose, as far as the universe is concerned, whether we like it or not, whether we intend to or not, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we try to or not.
These kinds of memes (bear, worm, what have you) have a particular impact. That impact is their purpose. If you don’t like the impact I suggest advocating against the practice instead of saying “but nobody meant to”. Have some Goethe.
Exactly, which is why your rhetoric is damaging
Purpose implies intent more than outcome. I agree with your overall stance but think something like “result” would be more effective. Calling it the “purpose” makes a similar accusation to anyone who wants to have this debate to what it itself is making about men in general, which will just increase the divide. I don’t think you’re deliberately trying to do that, but I think it could end up being the result.
Your overall point does capture how this whole thing has made me feel. Even as someone who didn’t get offended, understands what women who would “prefer the bear” are actually saying and doesn’t think I’m owed any attention from anyone that doesn’t want to give it to me, the only thing this meme makes me want to do is disengage even more. And a younger version of me would have really resented being made to feel like my mere presence was offensive or scary.
It’s a system thinking heuristic. The reason “purpose” is used instead of result is a) “the result of a system is what it does” doesn’t actually make sense, as systems aren’t events in time but, well, systems which have non-negligible timespans – it sounds something like “what is the result of a dishwasher” – I dunno, what is it doing? Is it standing there? Short-circuiting and on fire? Washing dishes? All that is part of what “a dishwasher” is, does, and therefore, its purpose in the grand scheme of things. And b) precisely to stop people trying to find purpose in motives, intentions, etc, to go with a materialistic instead of idealist interpretation of things. To quote Beer: “There is no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do.” The purpose of prisons is to rehabilitate? Well maybe in some countries, in other countries no matter what the stated intent is their purpose is to be a place where people can get degrees in how to do crime.
No it’s not and that’s a terrible way to view the world.
Are you the same idiot who argued with me before because he thought he’d found the Word of God in this random philosophical exercise?
Edit: nope, different moron. I wonder why this silly thing is making the idiot rounds lately? It’s like when a 19 year old has their first philosophy 101 class and thinks they’ve gained supreme knowledge of how the world works.
It’s systems thinking and if you think it’s terrible then because it’s terribly good at getting rid of excuses. “Oh but you see the intent of the prison system is to reduce crime, never mind it doing the opposite, move along, nothing to see because intent is all that matters”.
Yes, it’s a thought exercise, not a tautology. And it’s not a great thought exercise either, because people of low intellect apparently assume it’s a tautology because of how it’s worded.
It’s not a thought exercise but a modelling discipline.
Those are more or less synonymous.
I can tell you’ve been huffing too much philosophy because you insist on weird hair splitting like this lol
So there mere presence of a man implies a lack of safety? It may be your feelings but it is also major misandry.
Lived experience shapes our reality. It’s an absurdist analogy that paints the picture of women feeling unsafe around men they don’t know due to their lived experience. It’s not misandry, it’s caution, anxiety, fear, and uncertainty. The outrage at such meme is pretty much indicative of the issue at hand. Men tend not to feel unsafe around women they don’t know whereas the flipped scenario is the opposite. That says something about society, not women.
I don’t think it’s lived experience for many. Much of it is fear impressed by others. And I’ve certainly felt fear at being alone with the wrong woman, or a child. One false accusation and my life is over. I actively avoid being alone with women and children. But that doesn’t mean I’m picking bears over people.
Good lord, dude. When I was talking about fear, I meant fear for one’s life or well-being. I also said “man they don’t know,” not “wrong.” The people you should be directing your anger towards are those who have created an environment within society where women don’t feel safe, which is other men who think they’re entitled to women’s bodies, who get angry when rejected instead of moving on, who commit acts of violence against women, and any other disgusting act you can think of. Your emotions are misdirected.
Who says I can only be angry at one group? I am angry with the men in that group, but also the people that would place me in that group merely because I also possess a penis.
No one is talking about your penis.
but it is also major misandry.
STILL DON’T GET IT HUH?
Let’s reduce it down to the simplest way it can be put: how many bears rape women?
Get it now?
Misogynists can’t accept it I guess.
How many men maul women to death?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bear-b-c-squamish-attack-1.7201905
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/us/grizzly-bear-attack-yellowstone-idaho-killed/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57763443#
Implying all men are rapists is misandry, period.
How many women get raped by bears?
The part you aren’t getting is obvious, it’s not misandry. The gymnastics you’re going through to deny basic logic is impressive though. Thanks for the links, they were pointless. Trust me, if you want to compare lists, mine are longer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_violence_against_women
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Incidents_of_violence_against_girls
https://www.nativehope.org/missing-and-murdered-indigenous-women-mmiw
https://people.com/crime/gallery-elizabeth-smart-jaycee-dugard-kidnapping-survivors/
https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-serial-killers-of-women/ranker-crime
https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvv.pdf
And in the overwhelming majority of these cases, the perpetrators are men, AND NOT A SINGLE FUCKING ONE WAS A BEAR.
Edit: and cute strawman, no one’s implying ALL MEN, just the creeps. Which you might identify with but doesn’t cover the entire gender. Women making the logical choice - pick from a population that def has rapist creeps or a population that isn’t known for kidnapping and raping women, gee whiz batman…
Come on, this isn’t calculus.
You have no understanding of statistics. How many more men does the typical woman encounter a day than bears? I’m willing to bet women encounter dozens or even hundreds of men, but pretty well zero bears. The RATE of bear attack per encounter is much higher than the rate per encounter with men.
And this hypothetical man is a stranger, whereas 8 out 10 rapes are committed by someone the victim knows.
Your argument makes no sense. Sorry, anyone who thinks they are safer with a random large wild carnivore that has sharp teeth and claws than a random human male is foolish.
And, yes, you are implying that all men are rapists. After all, the statement isn’t that you merely don’t FEEL safe, but that you are not safe, period in the presence of a man. Therefore it is implied the man will 100% harm you.
now let’s talk about shark week
Oh don’t get it twisted sparky, I’m a guy. I understand why women feel threatened because I’ve seen men be fucking creeps my entire life.
The bear will never rape the women. Get it through your dense fucking nugget. Goddamn it’s been repeated over and over again.
Let me imply this: your defensiveness over this is hilarious. If you’re not a creep predating on women, you wouldn’t feel upset about this at all, it’s simple math: the bear will never rape the women, keep it in a box, kidnap it, force it to bear children, etc, etc., etc, so no matter what statistics you want to pull out, it’s NOTHING COMPARED TO THE HISTORICAL RECORD ALONE.
You do realize there are harms other than rape? You sure don’t seem to get that. You think rape is the only tragedy that can befall a woman.
I am no creep. But I am pissed that you think that the mere fact I have a penis means I’m some awful rapist women should be afraid of.
But you know what, since bears are so safe, why don’t you go have a nice encounter with a hungry mother grizzly.
Lemmy is so much nicer since I discovered tags.
You do realize there are harms other than rape?
changes the subject because he has no retort.
You sure don’t seem to get that. You think rape is the only tragedy that can befall a woman.
No, it’s simply the one we were talking about at the moment. That and how women seem to prefer death by bear than trusting many men, and how guys like you are making that logic seem pretty fucking sound every response lol.
You realize men rape other men too right?
So you know, I’d actually pick the bear myself. Because THERE’S STILL NO HISTORY OF BEARS RAPING PEOPLE - MEN OR WOMEN.
Bellend.
Women are rapists as well.
Thanks for the logical fallacy.
Just because women can be rapists, and indeed, there are women who are rapists, does not and should not have any bearing on the point.
This is the same as yelling “all lives matter” into a crowd of BLM protestors. Yeah, no shit. Just because one thing is true doesn’t mean that the inverse is impossible.
Sorry, I thought we were doing over broad, unnecessarily divisive generalities.
Point taken.
but but whataboutism at it’s finest. great job mate. fantastic work, on behalf of all men, I’d like to ask: FUCKING STOP. Stop trying to stick up for our side because it’s not helping.
There are no sides here. The fact that you think their are sides tips your bias. Every human is capable of horrible things regardless of age, race, or sex. The bear thing is so dumb and clickbait.
Funny, because every single woman I’ve spoken too IMMEDIATELY understood and picked the bear.
Don’t you think it’s odd that women everywhere are choosing a wild 800lb beast instead of putting their faith in men?
Perhaps there’s a reason you’re tiny mind just can’t comprehend.
Do you live in India?
no, I live in a state where we have bears.
I have some extra emotional capacity today so(see edit*) I’ll post some wrong think: but can we stop antagonizing populations that feel disenfranchised by society and therefor giving the truly evil fucks out there an easy population to brainwash and feed extra scummy ideologies to?Young nerdy men who feel excluded from society that dont have any strong female figures in their life are barraged by a constant stream of messaging that could easily be interpreted as “(white) men are evil and the source of all problems with society”
By constantly antagonizing them for not being able to navigate the political nuance of those messages, we give an incredibly easy pathway to the more toxic ideologies that the Tates of the world will pull them into to profit off of them, because they are the only figures who will give them praise and a sense of belonging.
Edit: Its a new day now, and I no longer have the energy. If you want to vent, understanding that venting in this manner will bring about little to no positive change, you do you, I will no longer be responding
yeah this pretty much.
Polarized speech does nothing for anybody. If woman are talking about this bear thing to make a point, i feel like we would be better off actually making sure that people understood that it was about making a point, rather than a literal fucking interpretation of the problem
but no, funny internet points are more important, capitalism ruins everything it fucking touches.
These kinds of things are great for letting off steam with friends, but absolutely TERRIBLE at getting a point across to people who dont already know said point
specifically the intent here is to drum up drama, controversy and attention. Which obviously worked, but the problem is that nobody is using it to do something productive with.
Yeah the whole “any press is good press” idea mostly applies to things you want to make money from because for any position you can think of, there’s people out there that will support it. So, given your position, if you can get more attention by creating loud arguments, even if they are generally against you, that extra noise means you’ll reach more people that might be sympathetic to your position, and you’ll increase revenue from those people.
If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.
One of the real dangers of sexism and racism and all that is that it generates more sexism and racism. So even if you decide that you really don’t care about group x, you’re done with them and they can all die in a fire and you don’t even care if that makes you evil, expressing that will contribute to a cycle that will come back to hurt others in your group.
It’s why genocide keeps coming up in human history. That’s where this all leads when it’s a racist or cultural thing. Sexism is different because the genders can’t survive without each other, but it is a reason why we’re seeing a resurgence of conservatives willing to unironically talk about the worst parts of patriarchism as if they are good things, like women just existing as servants to men.
Though when I look at everything going on in the world, it really feels like humanity in general needs to get the fight out of their system because so many conflicts are caught in this kind of cycle with no peaceful resolution in sight for any of it that doesn’t involve some major compromises on things I’m not sure anyone is willing to compromise on. WWIII is going to be messy because I think the national conflicts might be overshadowed by domestic ones, which will cause even more issues as they spill into each other.
If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.
i think the intent was to be inflammatory to gather the obvious negative responses and double back on those so you can use the whole thing as publicity stunt essentially. Though there are going to be negative aspects of it, that’s why i’ve been pretty critical over most of it.
As for patriarchy, i think it’s both a bit of thinking back to the good old days, and trying to edge a little bit of “trust me bro, it’s going to work” out of people. Because for men, it obviously has some advantages that we don’t need to talk about, but they also have to sell it to women, so they’re selling it by claiming stuff like “you won’t have to work anymore” and the list goes on really. None of that is true or beneficial, but an incorrect statement sells a good story, so.
Honestly, i don’t forsee a world war 3, i feel like it would’ve already happened if it would have. At best north korea is going to try and pull some shit, but that will almost certainly do nothing. I think realistically a lot of places are going to collectively agree on “enemy bad” “kill enemy” and there is a non zero chance that some sort of mutiny happens during or immediately after, but given some time people won’t want it. I don’t really think it’s a significant concern to be honest, i think most of the political shit is mostly rhetoric, things seem a lot worse than they are, a lot of bark and no bite essentially.
If ww3 ever happens it’s going to be incredibly messy, because ww2 was, and ww1 even more so before it.
But many do just that, then you focus on the ones that don’t, every cycle. Over and over. You choose what to focus on. Not we as a society, literally you. You choose to engage with that negative part of it and continue to. Nobody is forcing you
it’s been getting better as of recent, initially when i first dug into it things were quite a bit worse than they are now, people seemingly have had some time to think about it, and figured out that “yeah this is kind of stupid”
You choose what to focus on. Not we as a society, literally you. You choose to engage with that negative part of it and continue to. Nobody is forcing you
i have a fascinating idea for you to consider. I being an individual person of my own accord, can simply choose what i want to think about. The problem that i have is with the people who aren’t engaging with it productively, it’d be weird for me to insult people who were, or pretty fucking pretentious for me to compliment people who do, although i’ve probably done that at least once. Given that the singular me, doesn’t constitute the whole of society, and the fact that i don’t proclaim to be god or something, i think that’s pretty reasonable.
Like here’s another fun fact, you can just ignore me. I won’t be offended.
It’d be rather weird to identify a problem in a system, and spend 50% of your time contemplating and observing the working portions of it that you already understand, no?
Instead of absorbing some kind of stance where now I am the one contradicting myself, you could just skip the defense where I get to be pretentious, and go straight into the realisation that it’s only trying to be helpful. I’m not sugarcoating it because it just makes it even harder to understand the root of your complaint, which is that you, yourself, focus on something you don’t want to. Not that others do it. Because they choose also what they focus on and have already chosen that. I focus on something I want to when I write to you, I like helping real people that deserve it, to get out of shit that I have been in. So essentially, it’s just a long dialog with society that they should x or y, that you are focusing on but you wish it was yourself you were talking to. It’s not going to make any difference who reads it and it’s easier to run over the choice to make sure stuff in general in your life don’t also get more and more compulsive
Instead of absorbing some kind of stance where now I am the one contradicting myself,
i’m not sure how that would make you contradictory with yourself. I’m just saying that this is a micro specific, not a macro specific, like you were stating. I’m aware that i’m looking at through an incredibly tight view, that’s kind of the point actually.
I’m not here to talk about the broad environment here, because if i was, i’d have written a three hundred page study on it, and published it by now. I’m here specifically to discuss the aspects that seem to capture my attention. Which leads to me micro focusing on specific details.
which is that you, yourself, focus on something you don’t want to.
no? I’m focusing on it because i think it’s interesting.
I focus on something I want to when I write to you,
yeah, and you did, which is why i mentioned that you could just ignore me, because you were pretty clearly just attacking the way that i was thinking about it specifically, which you are allowed to do. But doesn’t help me, because i understand that. Notice how i never said that feminism bad? Or that women lying bad? Or anything like that, i was specifically talking about the interactions that i’ve been observing as of recent, and had been curious about, and like any good curious individual, i prodded for information, because it’s healthy to do that.
You could’ve asked me why i was being so specific, and focusing so aggressively on things, and i would’ve said what i just said now. But instead you hit with something relatively inflammatory. Acting like you somehow have knowledge of my understanding of the world, and i don’t and wanted to “inform me” about it, through a rather obtuse statement frankly. Why wouldn’t i respond in kind?
I like helping real people that deserve it, to get out of shit that I have been in.
that’s great, i haven’t been in that shit or experienced it before, so i’m not one to talk about it, which is why i’m focusing on the parts that i know i understand in a very explicit manner.
So essentially, it’s just a long dialog with society that they should x or y, that you are focusing on but you wish it was yourself you were talking to.
perhaps? Idk how you expect people to make their points more clearly understood by others. Yeah i’m essentially talking with myself here, that’s kind of the point, i’m trying to clearly identify how i think about these things so others aren’t outside of the loop, unless you think that other account is my alt account or something? In which case, that’s pretty funny.
It’s not going to make any difference who reads it and it’s easier to run over the choice to make sure stuff in general in your life don’t also get more and more compulsive
i’m not even sure how i should read this, it doesn’t really make any sense.
Escalating defense mechanisms… Yo man I’m backing slowly away okay, you good luck with your scientific studies and whatnot peace out
alright then, see you on the flip side i spose
That’s the thing about memes. They’re not really a rational form of discussing a topic, and tend to exploit emotions to boost their spread. But it seems to be more or less the only form of discussing things nowadays. The result is that as a society we no longer solve anything, and only work together to make things worse now.
Also known as: can we please stop pushing people into evil echo chambers by “moderating” them through auto ban because opinion we don’t like? Its not only men vs women, it applies to anything slightly divisive.
We wouldn’t need the super thick skin that is needed now if we hadn’t banned all the people back in the day for merely disagreeing. They went to more evil places and now, consequently, are more evil. We are kinda reaping what we sowed
good comment regarding the ongoing presentation of this meme. i encourage folks who read this to make posts that welcome young men and encourage them to understand the nuance, rather than judge them a priori for not already getting it.
that said it’s important to note that the origin of this meme was i believe just a
anonymouspoll where women expressed their lived experience and wasn’t meant to be antagonistic at all. bad men were the ones that took offense to what these women felt and made the meme what it is.not saying you don’t know any of this just feel it’s worth being said :) thank you for your nuanced and leveled criticism of the rhetorical value of the trend.
spoiler
,
This is not antagonizing men. This is important data for men. Do you want to get laid? Understand where women are coming from. Don’t do spooky shit on dates.
Listen, I understand. It’s bad news, but it is what it is. It’s reality. It’s like women saying if you never take a shower or bath in your entire life, a relationship is out of the question.
This right here is the reason I still bother to engage people on this topic. The women who honestly believe a bear is less threatening than a random man are a lost cause imo, so my goal is to help men find supportive people and spaces that aren’t dangerous idiots like Tate.
You can be a man without being forced to exist in the manufactured redpill/male feminist dichotomy.
I am a man and I am affected 0% by this meme. This meme was a chance to display some empathy and understand why it might be that the bear analogy strikes a chord with many women.
When I go to the grocery store, do I have to think about being snatched? My privilege affords me the convenience of not worrying about that. Do I need to worry about being sexually assaulted walking home? Statistically, probably not. There are a whole host of problems and horrific fates that befall women disproportionately, and very often at the hands of men.
Why would a woman feel safer with a bear?
The 750,000 black bears of North America kill less than one person per year on the average, while men ages 18-24 are 167 times more likely to kill someone than a black bear.
Most attacks by black bears are defensive reactions to a person who is too close, which is an easy situation to avoid. Injuries from these defensive reactions are usually minor.
https://bear.org/bear-facts/how-dangerous-are-black-bears
Since 1784 there have been 82 fatal human/bear conflicts by wild brown bears in North America. Yellowstone National Park has seen a mere 8 since being established in 1872, which is only one more than the number of people who have died from a falling tree.
https://bearvault.com/bear-attack-statistics/
Seems to me that even I would be safer with a bear than a man. Makes you think, doesn’t it?
The problem with your logic is it creates a situation where society at large will never talk about this important topic and think about ways to reduce the scope and impact of it.
The sad reality is that men are largely responsible for SA, and saying this is always going to make some men uncomfortable. They’re always going to react to negatively, and people are always going to post what you posted.
Don’t forget the other side, I’ve seen some of the discussions around this by women turn really TERFy. Both sides of this debate are gateways to the Alt right.
Tbh the TERF stuff isnt surprising since a lot of these memes have just a hint of Misandry to them, and when it comes to TERFs, they dont see Trans Women as women, and see them as men, so its moreso their ideas on men that are guiding their ideology, than it is about women
Man are not evil and I don’t think anyone is making that statement here, but the problem is that we can’t know which men are evil. Of course we should avoid antagonizing them, since, like you said, it often drives young lonely men towards the manosphere, but also men should try actually listening to why most women pick the bear.
I used to actively avoid women out of fear of making them uncomfortable (still do occasionally, when I have a particularly shitty day), I mean like full on 0 eye contact, lotsa distance and god forbid speaking. Being tolled I’m too fucking stupid to understand female issues and tolled that I have it so easy because I can be a literal pig without getting judged did a number on my brain. I mean I get it, women have it much harder, but being completely pushed aside and forced to associate with literal trash, all my efforts made worthless just because women have to put in much more effort, while I only chose to do a bit more. It hurts. When a girl is freaked out and starts running, because I’m taking a similar route to her’s (because I just happened to live in the same direction), I understand her reaction, but it doesn’t change the fact that it makes me wish I didn’t exist, if my fucking existence is a problem in it self. It’s shit like this that makes me wish I was at least trans or something, not born a fucking bogeyman that hurts people by breathing the same air as them.
I’ll still purposely switch to the opposite street if its not very populated and I’m unintentionally following a woman for too many blocks (because we just happen to be going in the same direction). Remember though that the most extreme people are the ones who shout the loudest, most women wont be unempathetic to your struggles, and understand that society has challenges for you as a man that they themselves dont have to experience. You arent a boogeyman, and you and your struggles are valid, dont let shit like the bear meme convince you otherwise
honestly, and i hate to say this, i’m kind of at the polar opposite end of the scale myself, where i think i’d probably actively antagonize women because the chances of someone else who would actually cause problems stopping me is significantly less due to the fact that i’m actively doing it, and have no intention of causing harm to anyone.
Perhaps that’s just my satirical commentary bleeding through into real life, but genuinely i don’t even know what to fucking do anymore.
it often drives young lonely men towards the manosphere, but also men should try actually listening to why most women pick the bear.
ok, and as evidenced by the previous thread, there was a lot of nothing being explained actively happening.
Reiterating the metaphorical reasoning as to why someone would do this doesn’t explain the underlying reason why people are using a metaphorical device in the first place.
don’t tell people that you would rather be with a bear, tell people that you would rather be with a bear, because the entire point of the statement is that it’s literally fucking insane. The problem here was the second someone goes “isn’t this insane?” instead of people responding with “yes, that’s the point, it’s supposed to be!” people respond with “and you’re part of the problem” yknow, because surely that wouldn’t cause problems.
It’s not that people are saying something, or aren’t saying something, it’s that people are trying to make a point using a metaphorical device that they never drop, it’s like irony poisoning, except it’s just not irony.
TL;DR It’s hard to listen to someones reasoning when they never fucking explain it. Granted it did get better eventually, but jesus fucking christ did it take a while.
but the problem is that we can’t know which men are evil.
It’s very much possible with these things called emotional intelligence and empathy. Used in combination they allow you to walk in another’s shoes for just a split second and see where their mind is.
I don’t think that any amount of empathy allows me to know if a stranger is dangerous.
If it’s alexithymia or such I hope you have trusted people in your life you can ask about random people.
On the flipside if that kind of thing is due to being on the schizo spectrum I can say with personal authority that yes it’s very much possible: Figures it’s not that I can’t do it it’s that I had a life-long habit of actively avoiding tuning into random people, the resonance being so strong that their neuroses get me all cramped up and swamped with random shit requiring clean-up after the fact. But deep dives aren’t really necessary for a threat radar what you’re primarily looking for is their attitude towards relating on eye level, whether there’s an inferiority/superiority thing going on.
Not OP, but look, if someone, let’s say a stranger, has nefarious motives, they have an incentive to fake their mannerisms, this means relying on your empathy and social intelligence alone is a mistake since they may be used as a vector of attack.
In order to be safe, one must make sure they are not harmed or endangered in any way, this includes avoiding certain situations with strangers.
Also, don’t just randomly pathologize people just because you don’t understand where they are coming from, even if done with no harm in mind, you will come off as very disrespectful.
Now I might be schizosplaining here but faked mannerisms are glaringly obvious. Especially when it comes to what I recommended doing, and that’s checking out the willingness to relate at eye level as the only way to do that is to actually do that – if you hide something you’re either on the demure or arrogant side of things.
Also, don’t just randomly pathologize people
I made no diagnosis, I was talking about a possibility. A possibility that might be true or false, if it’s true then I might have saved someone’s life as they finally understand that something’s different about them, if it’s false, then they can brush it off. If they’re so up their ass that they’re getting their underwear in a twist over that well then at least I tried, I’m willing to be the asshole in that situation. And so should you if you value your fellow humans.
I mean yeah, that was my point. Currently though our messaging is insanely antagonistic and there are a LOT of men without women in their lives who can explain this to them. People dont listen to those antagonizing them, the throw their shields/walls up, and seek those who are friendlier to them, which, in this case would be the manpsphere, posts like this only preach to the choir, and push away the men who need to know why women would choose the bear the most.
These young men can … listen to women??? They don’t need to be spoon fed feminism by friends, there is a ton of information available if they care to learn. The fact that they choose to listen to sexist assholes rather than have their feelings hurt for two seconds is part of the problem dumbass
It’s even worse, a lot of the posts here are outright refusing to explain anything, or branding them as the problem for not understanding immediately.
It’s so insanely bad it almost feels like an incel psyop at times
L M A O white nerdy young men are not the perfect angels you think, I have multiple friends who were sexually assaulted by such people
This whole thing is bait.
Anyone engaging on any side of the debate are fools. Any topic antagonizing half the population will somehow stir up some noise.
It’s like saying all women are bad at sport because they don’t train hard enough. It’s ignorant and serves only the purpose of creating a divide in the population.
Stop engaging in the divide.
I like this logical approach.
Also: eat the rich.
Not sure what else this meme is doing other than actively creating a bigger divide between the genders…
“everything is going according to plan”
Maybe a divide for you, my SO says she’d pick the bear if it wasn’t me. And I don’t blame her.
Instead of arguing the merits of this debate, maybe its worth analyzing your own merits. Men (individually but amongst their peers) should be ashamed that women typically seem to want to pick a bear over themselves, instead of falling further into the rut that pushes everyone - not just women - away from their social circles and friend.
Someone tells you they’d rather be getting mauled by a bear? Take the hint. The divide exists within your head, make friends, be kind, and you’ll find happiness
Edited for individuals to contextualize on their peers instead of generically
Edit edit, I mean go ahead, be reactionary
Men should be ashamed that women typically seem to want to pick a bear over themselves
Shame is an individual thing. Men, plural, is a whole bunch of people. Why should I be ashamed for the actions of people that aren’t me?
…and just to be clear here: I’m not even arguing that we shouldn’t battle this one out between the genders. But collective punishment is against the Geneva convention and I really don’t like to stay quiet when people commit war crimes.
So my initial response was “jesus fuck that’s some unnecessary hyperbole, I get your point but that’s ridiculous”
And then I realized that’s the same response I have with women who pick the bear so
I dunno
Maybe you all suck?
Maybe we all care about things you don’t care about?
Or maybe hyperbole is not the best way to make a point?
It depends. Largely on whether it’s obvious that it’s hyperbole.
Though as far as the gender war is actually a war I still think that the Geneva convention should definitely apply. By, you know, analogy.
I guess I could see what you were going for there, but it was a bit of a stretch imo
Wait sorry I just read your comment, who the fuck said war crimes? You should be ashamed of your peers if they’re misogynistic, whats a war crime there lmfao
You should be ashamed of your peers
That’s exactly the war crime mentioned before. How is that different from blaming every german for being from the same country as nazis?
Edit: The nazi analogy was just me trying to find an example that even a moron could understand.
… I failed miserably
Lmfao, being socially ashamed of the peers you choose to associate with === being a German during the nuremburg trials?? You know what was probably 110% worse? Being Jewish in Nazi occupied territory.
Get a goddamn grip on reality. If I had said ship all men tp Australia sure, my apologizes my original phrasing didn’t appease you enough. Professional victimhood at its finest.
Im sorry you got rejected one too many times, hope you can figure it out.
Godwin’s Law
Ignoring Godwin’s law isn’t the argument ender you think it is, fine, how is it different than blaming all black people for violent gang crime?
Me. I said war crimes. Collective punishment is a war crime. You cannot hold people to account on the basis of group membership.
If you want to make a sensible statement, try “You should be ashamed if you don’t distance yourself from misogynists”. In that case you say someone should be ashamed for their own actions (or inaction), not for something some amorphous group did. Also changing the general “men” to “your peers” is peak goalpost moving.
I dont know what you think my goal is, clearly you’re better at phrasing, so if we go with “You should be ashamed if you don’t distance yourself from misogynists”, where is our disagreement?
You think I shouldnt be ashamed of the friends I once had? Because I certainly am. You should be ashamed of people who break social contract, because that is explicitly what that would entail.
You think I shouldnt be ashamed of the friends I once had? Because I certainly am.
Given that you said “once had” not “still have”, no I don’t think you should be ashamed. Having broken with them, having learned, what blame is there that could be laid on you?
Because I was once naïve to who they are now, and perhaps being younger at the time I could have, maybe, been a more potent guiding voice to a couple guys in specific, and only later did I learn what they had committed when I was still associated. And if that shame is a way I can guarantee my merrits, then I can live with it.
Yeah they just wanted to throw random shit out - like women picking the bear is a war crime because it punishes all men. I think they want women to choose to take the risk of potentially gambling their life away AND be raped / kidnapped, they shouldn’t just be able to risk a life threatening mauling because that would punish all men…
jfc the gymnastics these fucks will go in order to deny that rape and kidnap are genuinely things men do, and have historically done to the point where women literally have to carry the stress of self defense 24/7 and even worse, their most frequent assailants are known.
SO FUCK YEAH BRING ON THE BEAR, they probably don’t know them personally so that’ll up the odds that the bear will just ignore them. And even if the bear kills them brutally, it’s not going to rape them, so they got that going. But it’s a war crime to pick the bear jfc
like women picking the bear is a war crime because it punishes all men.
Not what I said. Demanding that I feel ashamed because there’s men who do shitty things is the collective punishment, the war crime.
Have you ever considered that there’s humans who do shitty things? Why aren’t you ashamed of that? Why are you shirking responsibility? Are you secretly in league with them? Why are you not experiencing crippling guilt, knowing that Hitler and Pol Pot exist and are of your group, as I just randomly assigned it? Why aren’t you flagellating yourself yet?
Yes, the statement is hyperbolic – obviously. But you should be able to see how the general pattern, not just its extreme, is toxic.
Demanding that I feel ashamed because there’s men who do shitty things is the collective punishment
where did I do that? seriously, point out where I told you to feel ashamed.
Never did. Are you a rapist? then you have nothing to worry about.
You’re hyperbole is pointless. I don’t feel guilt for hitler and polpot because I’m not a racist genocidal maniac.
So what’s the root of your guilt mate?
Past coming back to haunt you? If not, pick team bear dude, it’s the logical choice.
where did I do that? seriously, point out where I told you to feel ashamed.
You didn’t, someone else did and that’s where I brought up the whole collective punishment being a war crime thing. Simply wanted to set the record straight on what it was a reference to.
So what’s the root of your guilt mate?
Well, two decades ago I did engage in gang-tickling of gals. Nope I’m not sorry, they’re not traumatised, also I got a date out of it but I can definitely see how some people would like to tie a noose from that one.
Would you choose the bear, the guy with downcast eyes boiling with repressed rage, or the one pushing you into the swimming pool while you test the temperature?
Never got good at stealing scrunchies, I’ll have to pass on that one. And don’t tell me only guys do that kind of thing I once had to fish my home keys out of panties.
Ah well there’s that pesky language thing, I do mean individually, if I intended carrying the burden of sins of all my fathers I would be weighed down to hell.
Edit: Actually, I don’t mean individually, if you have a friend that you tolerate some of their more misogynistic views, try to actually be the better influence, Ive failed some former friends in that regard, and they will fall deeper into that pit.
Edit edit: some nice upstanding men here, you wouldnt hold your friend accountable to SA?
I don’t have misogynistic friends for the simple reason that I don’t make friends with assholes.
What a gotcha, im sure you never got to know someone well enough their true colors start to show? Because from my experience, they know to hide their true intentions because it tends to push people away. And thats when you cut them out. Whats so complicated?
Ok ok, let me understand you:
- You had bad experiences with people of the other gender.
- You think now that every man is exactly the same, and if they don’t, they’re just evil manipulators who want to hide their true evil nature.
- You’re complaining about people who generalize with the other gender because of their past experiences (aka. sexists).
- You 100% agree with the post, so you support neglecting people’s feelings as long as they’re from the other gender.
So… Are you a sexist incel? Why should men respect your feelings or validate your past experiences then? Stop trying to solve sexism with more sexism, it doesn’t work like that. And please don’t disrespect me or assume shit from my personal life amymore, it’s just lame.
Where the fuck did you come from? It aint my fault some men are sensitive and cant just ignore comments online lol
They want confirmation, acknowledgement, so the second a tastefully edgy joke is cracked their true colours are going to come flying because they’ll say something that’s just offensive, not actually funny.
Excuse me?!
The fuck should I be ashamed for?
Why am I responsible for the actions of other men?
Go have your fucking guilt trip if you want to but don’t include me.
Reading comprehension, my apologies for the poor original phrasing, but yes you should be ashamed if you dont get the point.
Assume I didn’t get the point: what was your point when you said ‘men should be ashamed that women pick the bear?’
Im proud my SO would rather pick me, and I can likely speak on her behalf that she would choose the bear over you, whoever you are, and no offense intended.
Thats the person you should be to who you choose, as soon as you’re trying to convince a woman that you’re a better pick, you’re fighting a loosing battle.
Im really perplexed how this is complicated
I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.
Explain exactly what you meant when you said ‘men should be ashamed that women pick the bear.’
Why should I be ashamed.
Explain.
Talk to your mother more, it’ll go a long way.
People’s safety is more important than people’s feelings.
Indeed. It strikes me as pointlessly gendered. All people, safety is more important than feelings.
The whole thing was meant to be rage bait.
or it’s purposefully gendered in response to the man vs bear thing
Which is also rage bait
Even then it’s contradictory. Men wouldn’t be upset about being chosen over a bear and women wouldn’t be safe if the bear was chosen, so in that specific context it’s nonsensical.
What wat? What do you want to know?
Most bears don’t seek out and attack women, but many men do. One of those happens far more often than the other, and you’re either uninformed or willfully ignorant about that fact.
Yet another exhibit of people not knowing anything about bears. If bears and women had anywhere near the same amount of interactions as men and women, maulings would be up by a percentage with an alarming number of zeroes. This is like the literal equivalent to the Face Eating Leopard Party supporters being surprised that the Leopards are eating their faces.
Yeah this meme as well as the original bear one were meant to be divisive and make people angry. That’s the point of these kinds of memes, they’re not really meant to be intelligent, they’re meant to stir up drama and make people fight.
you know what else is pointlessly gendered? the patriarchyfeminist messaging has to be gendered because the patriarchy is a gender issue.
that said, feminism is for everybody. liberating women from oppressive structures by nature does the same for men.
If it’s not gendered and is for everybody, that isn’t that just the original statement? That safety is for everybody? That seems rather circular.
But I think I get what you’re saying. We focus on lifting up women, and everyone benefits.
If this weren’t gendered I’m not sure I would connect that this was posted as result of people’s reaction to the bears vs men thing.
That gives me feelings of “All lives matter” which minimized the issues of black people. Can you explain why this is different?
It’s not, this tread is filled with Incels.
Some people seriously can’t hold any conversation about sexism without introducing the word “incel” for the sake of it.
I wonder, can that be cured?
Found the incel
Got his ass
alright that’s enough for today
Except one has built in meaning and the other is a simple meme made by one person with an oversimplified idea used likely to stir up people considering all the discussions happening about bears or whatever.
dsfgasfsaf
It’s disingenuous all the way down
BLM, no sarcasm.
Are you really all lives mattering this post rn? God damn dude. I hope every person in your life belittles every problem you personally have by telling you that tons of people have that problem.
BLM, no sarcasm.
this statement is funny to me, because linguistically, safety is a relatively “felt” concept. We “feel” exposed in a massive open field, and we “feel” safe inside of a building, because we are no longer exposed in a massive wide open field.
In some aspects, physical safety is a thing, but given the context of this thread here, i think it’s probably appropriate to say that it’s actually the feeling of safety here, that matters more than anything. And as a result, this makes the statement a non starter.
Because to some degree, that feeling of safety, is based on well… Feelings, and if feelings are somehow less important than the safety that those feelings are capable of deriving, than how are you supposed to experience safety?
And all lives matter, right? How else can we commandeer this conversation?
BLM, no sarcasm.
all lives matter amirite /s
BLM, no sarcasm.
dsfgasfsaf
Christ, this comment section is a dumpster fire.
I really struggle to empathize with the mindset required to come into a post (both the original bear post and this one) about women being sexually assaulted and going “BuT wHaT aBoUt MeN’s FeELiNgS!?!?111!!???”
You people need to crawl out of your own assholes.
I don’t think that’s where we all came out of
I’m just going to say it. Any arguments of “what about…” Are effectively pointless banter.
It’s not adding anything to the discussion, and bluntly it’s actively trying to distract people from the point, and change the discussion into something different.
Fuck off with that shit.
This post, and most of the other bear ones, are in normie forums full of people not familiar with feminist discourse. The reason for that? It’s funny, cathartic, shocking, and a little inflammatory. And that’s fine, it’s meant to be. It gives it reach and allows people to learn and others to teach. The problem is that when men do find this to be shocking and inflammatory, they need to channel that emotion somewhere, and antagonistic/angry internet discourse is not the correct way respond to that.
There was a popular post the other day of “If you don’t understand why women pick the bear, you are the bear”, that directly antagonises the exact people who need to hear about why women choose the bear, and those people don’t need to be antagonised, they need a little empathy and non-confrontational discussion to get there.
When I talked to them calmly, and acknowledged the way they feel, validated their emotions, then explained the topic to them, every single one I talked to accepted the core point and came out better for it. Take that angry energy, educate, and direct that energy in the right direction.
It’s not that men’s feelings should trump women’s safety. It’s that you need to think about why people are disagreeing so you can effectively talk to them
yea but like at the same time annoying a bunch of butthurt lonely guys really isnt solving the problem and rather pushes them towards the manosphere which is where the problems start to grow
Yes, this is the correct take.
The bear meme is meant to make men uncomfortable and surprised by how they are seen as a generalization among women. It isn’t meant to be anti-men or anything, it’s just meant to show the lived experience of women to men in a hypothetical absurdity.
How are so many people angry at a simple fucking hypothetical?
Telling on themselves
they genuinely don’t understand; they think: ah, but the bear is a much more fearsome predator than I am, the woman would choose me any day!
Nah man, the bear’s never, ever, ever going to rape the woman. Woman will roll the dice with their lives, but no one wants to be kidnapped and raped to death - an actual fear women in this day and age have - and the bear will never ever 100% will not rape a woman.
clear cut logic to me, I don’t fault women one bit.
I see it as simply the combination of: “the devil that you know is better than the devil that you don’t”, and “there are fates worse than death”.
To be plain: the worst the bear can do is kill you and eat you (hopefully in that order). That’s what we all know. We 100% know that and I don’t think anyone is going to argue that point.
But a complete fucking stranger? They could be Hannibal for all you know. Keeping you alive by cutting off your appendages and feeding them to you.
The main culprit of this is toxic men who will send unsolicited dick pictures to unsuspecting women as an opening line, then put them on blast for not responding positively to being assaulted by penis pictures they didn’t ask for.
The kind of guy that wouldn’t see anything wrong with saying “you should smile more, you’re so pretty when you smile”.
The fact is, being a woman on the internet, you can, quite easily, get bombarded by complete strangers with all kinds of fucked up shit that sexualizes you and reduces you to an object only worthy of living if you can pleasure a man.
With the mountain of fucked up shit random dudes do to women online, I do not understand why anyone would ever be surprised that they would pick a wild fucking animal over the likely outcome of being stuck in the woods with any of the kinds of creepy fucking guys that troll around the internet, showing their dick to everyone with tits.
I’m a guy, I’m not surprised by any of this, and I don’t blame anyone for saying “bear”, it’s honestly, a safer bet.
Yup. I’d add: Men rape more MEN than bears rape humans.
This easily understood statement will probably make them bonkers.
I don’t even get it. Like if I’m hiking in the woods alone, it’s because I want to be alone. Please pick the bear, I don’t want company.
At least when I get to the bear, he’ll be sated and less likely to eat me.
Fragile ass masculinity
I’m a woman (a trans one if that matters to you) and have experienced sexual assault and domestic violence from both men and women.
I know the point that people are trying to make with the whole bear thing.
But I think the friction comes from women talk about this as a theoretical to make a point, where men are thinking more literally.
And I do belive that no one in there right mind, if actually given this option in real life, would pick a bear (unless maybe it was definitely one of the more harmless species).
Each and every one of us, even those of us that have survived SA, have had countless uneventful interactions with men you don’t know. Even when it’s just one on one. And its mostly normal biases that makes us remember the shitty ones more. And something a lot of people forget is that the vast majority of SA victims already know their assailant, so the idea of a rando assaulting you is even less likely. So yes I would much rather be in the woods with a man, than a wild fucking animal. And if you’re a reasonable person, then you would too.
it makes me happy that this is near the top of this thread, but this comment is also only 15 minutes old, so i’m not sure how far down the pipeline of this post, it’ll track.
Honestly I think it depends more on the guy than the bear. Any time you’re alone in the woods (at least in the US) it’s safe to assume you’re with a bear, that’s where they live. Most bears keep to themselves though.
People tend to be less low-key, and less predictable. To me it seems more likely that a random guy could follow you around, take your stuff, or generally make life more difficult. There’s also a higher chance for a guy to assist you and make things easier, but I can understand how the potential risk could outweigh the potential benefits.
Nono you’re not allowed to judge the man individually. You’re required to judge before you see both the man and bear so that we get a properly over-essentialised judgement how else are we going to propagate in- / out-group divisions.
(This is me being glib) It depends on what kind of bear we’re talking about. Blackbear be big noisy and confusing, grizzly play dead, big hairy gay guy like best case scenario.
As a trans woman who has also been sexually assaulted, it has more to do for me with what danger is more real to me. I’ve experienced zero bear attacks. Nobody I know has experienced a bear attack. Why would I fear one? Of course, consciously yeah, I know a bear is dangerous, but I have no real world experience to back that assumption up.
Men though? Yeah, I’ve been sexually assaulted by men. I’ve been physically assaulted by men. I’ve had family and friends who’ve been physically and sexually assaulted by men. That danger is real to me. I know that if a man I don’t know is nearby me he could do those things to me, and I have the real world experience to prove that assumption correct (the assumption that they could, not the assumption that they would.)
Therefore, of course I’m more scared of the man than the bear. And of course I’d choose the bear over the man. I don’t care if it’s the wrong choice, I’ll take my chances to not have to relive that trauma, even if it means risking my life. Not like I’ll have time to regret that decision if the bear decides to kill me. Probably. And most women I know when asked expressed the same sentiment in different words. We’re more scared of men than bears, but that doesn’t mean we literally think men are more dangerous than bears.
Is it the logical choice to pick the bear? Probably not, but humans are not logical creatures. I’d rather make the wrong choice than the scary choice.I’d rather make the wrong choice than the scary choice.
Unrelated to the topic, but this mindset is exactly why far-right movements are getting so strong right now.
I agree. I never said it was a good mindset. Therapy is definitely something we need to learn to deal with this and think logically. The issue is so absurdly many women have been traumatized by men that the mental health support systems would be so overloaded that it’s just a fact that only a miniscule fraction of women would ever be able to receive help, even if we had absolutely perfect support systems.
So the only solution is to prevent them from getting traumatized in the first place. But the entirety of Lemmy seems really resistant to that conversation. Would rather quote statistics about “oh the average man isn’t likely to assault you” than to accept that the ones who do are dealing enough damage that the problem needs to be dealt with regardless of what the average man is doing.
This is a great look into the mindset of someone who’s been through SA. Thanks for sharing.
The point I think a lot of men are trying to make is that: In the same way that somebody who commits SA may have been abused themselves, women who are prejudiced against men create a new victim. Treating a harmless man as worse than a dangerous animal is an experience that most every man goes through and that sucks.
I can understand and sympathize with your position. But it doesn’t absolve you of your behavior. Just like someone who commits SA isn’t off the hook because they were beaten as a child and that screwed them up. I feel for someone who was abused growing up, but they don’t get to throw up their hands and say it’s not their fault they victimize others. Compassion is crucial, but at the end of the day, everyone is responsible for their own actions.
But what’s going on here isn’t something within the control of most people. When you’re abused by somebody you don’t choose to fear those people, you fear them because that’s what your brain is wired to do to avoid repeated trauma. Like I said, therapy is the solution, but only part of the solution. The other part is fixing the issue causing the trauma in the first place. Men aren’t being victimized by the women who fear them, they’re being victimized by the other men who caused that fear.
And I want to be clear, because I’ve realized at this point that this isn’t obvious anymore in today’s world, fear is not an excuse for misandry. At the same time, fear of men is not misandry. Somebody saying they’d rather pick the bear should be met with “oh, we should fix the issue causing them to fear men more than bears,” not “oh, they should fear bears more.”
I also want to be clear that this isn’t even a gendered issue despite the fact that it’s been made into one. A man who’s been abused by women and would rather pick the bear should also be met with compassion and “how can we reduce the number of female abusers?” I’ve actually been abused by women too. In fact, more often than I have men. I want to be clear that even though this discussion has been about men specifically, I feel the exact same way about women. That we still need to be compassionate to their victims and accept that the people who traumatized them are the problem, not their trauma.
Fearing somebody is not an action you perform, it’s a state you’re in.You seem incredibly well adjusted for what you’ve been through and clearly you’ve learned a lot from your life experience. Thanks for laying all that out. It was very insightful. I think we agree on 99% of this. So at the risk of splitting hairs, I’m going to put a magnifying glass on that last 1%.
I think fear absolutely victimizes people. I’ve seen xenophobia and homophobia do plenty of damage. Men are far from a disenfranchised minority and I think the issue of women’s safety is much more pressing than men being treated unfairly in some situations. But it still shouldn’t happen.
You’re right that in a way it’s the fault of the dangerous men who abuse women. But in a way, hypothetically, it’s really the fault of their parents who sexually assaulted them. But in a way it’s the fault of their parents genetics that made them mentally unstable, etc, etc all the way back to the first multicellular organism. This thinking, however true, isn’t very useful. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.
We agree fear is not an excuse for misandry. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for women to fear men after having a traumatic experience. However I can still point out the problem here. I think a good example is the trolley problem. If you pull the lever to only kill one person instead of six, I can both: agree with your decision but also point out that you killed someone. You can argue that’s insensitive to your difficult dilemma, but I think it’s worse to pretend like someone isn’t getting hurt. That one person who died still was a life with people who will mourn them.
I think what’s irking men about this whole bear thing is not that the result is not what they want or even what they expect. It’s that a huge chunk of people seem to not even see it as a problem that most men are being judged for something they have nothing to do with.
I’ve never been shot or held at gunpoint, but I have have the shit kicked out of me. But still if given the option to face a person with a gun and a person with the bare hands. I don’t think I’m going to pick the the guy with a gun.
There’s a serious difference in the level of trauma between these examples, and the level of exposure to the dangers of the counter. Sexual trauma is a hell of a lot more scarring on your psyche than simply being beaten. In addition, at least in the US we’re exposed to gun violence every day as opposed to basically never for bear attacks. Even in other countries with better gun control, you’re dramatically more likely to hear about somebody being shot than you are to hear about somebody being mauled by a bear. Not only that, but it’s really easy to process “get shot, you’re dead.” It’s not as easy to make yourself believe you’re definitely gonna be killed by an animal that has whole guides written on how to survive them.
Those two things combined make your example far from comparable. In addition, I’m not saying in any way that the fear is justified nor that no attempt should be made to fix it, what I’m trying to point out us that people don’t realize how intense a fear it really is when they get offended at people making this choice.Obviously, therapy is important to learning how to handle that fear and think more logically, but if every woman who needs it sought therapy for this, there just aren’t enough therapists in the entire world to handle the load. Not even close. So a bigger part of the solution is, y’know, making sure women aren’t getting traumatized in the first place. But everybody here wants to skip that part for some reason.
Sexual trauma is a hell of a lot more scarring on your psyche than simply being beaten.
Very hard disagree.
You’re free to disagree, but for me and many others, I’ve been through both, and I’m definitely waaaay more scared of being sexually assaulted again than being beaten half to death again. They have very different effects on your psyche. Physical violence I react far more with anger than fear, even if I was terrified in the moment. When it looks like it’s happening again, my brain says “Fight back.” When I’m afraid of sexual trauma being relived, my brain says “Escape, now. Can’t escape? Submit. Maybe that way they won’t kill you too at least.”
How about you Google the man who’s face was eaten by bear and then decide
How about you miss the entire point and get aggressive for no reason?
Seriously, what kind of response to “I’ve been traumatized by men” is “you should traumatized by bears too?”
👍
Most bears would just walk away from you when you make a loud noise. Men would approach you. So even I as a man, would pick a bear
You spelled it wrong, the sign should say “Safety is more important than feelings”
This is specifically about the bear meme though. Way too many men feel personally attacked by women not feeling safe around men they don’t know. Instead of thinking about why that is the men cry and attack the women.
elaborate?
Everyone’s safety is more important than anyone’s feelings.
You agree with the post, why change it?
Imagine if the police brutality movement was called “Black Lives Matter More Than White People’s Need To Oppress”. It’s working a needless insult into the message.
I’d also be okay with other phrases highlighting how safety is a bigger topic for women than men realize, but not one that makes assumptions about “all men”. Even if I was a guy who largely hated the actions of my own gender, you think you’ll get 50% of the world on board by doing that?
Does the sign say “all men”? If it did, would it matter? This is the most engagement I’ve ever seen on Lemmy regarding the issue of women’s safety, sorry you don’t approve of it.
Black lives do matter more than white supremacy, which precipitates in a perceived “need” to oppress. That is in fact a very poignant statement of what critical race theory is.
You are on the wrong side of history trying to tone police how women express that they are unsafe.
Even if a statement is truthful, it can be demeaning and misleading.
“Ripping a puppy’s guts out is a very bad thing - so take it under advisement that you should not do that.”
That’s a ridiculous statement that says something truthful and slyly forms the expectation of blame for an issue on a person. Many men have been violent to women - and many whites have oppressed black people. But twisting the wording to generalizing the group makes people feel like it’s directed personally, and forms a psychological barrier to any response.
You’re even doing it in this comment about “wrong side of history” - I’ve done nothing to discourage women being vocal about their safety problems; just the pushing of blame to a group that’s too broad, especially since men need to be in that conversation about stopping sexual violence and encouraging safer spaces if we want actual change.
I’ve done nothing to discourage women being vocal about their safety problems
By participating in this conversation and telling women how best to express their experiences the moment they speak up, like it or not, you are doing precisely that.
To use more inclusive language, of course. That’s what we’re all doing now isn’t it?
Then the post wouldn’t have meaning because that’s a universally agreed upon moral sentiment on its face. The post is targeting people who would rather take offense to recent discourse rather than slowing down and considering how this moral sentiment applies to the situation. Without specifying ‘women’ and ‘men’ the post would not have contextual meaning.
You’re free to make your own ‘inclusive’ meme that states the obvious, but the people this meme is targeted toward would see it as obvious and not consider how it pertains to their behavior.
It has the exact same meaning with the inclusive wording, without being adversarial for absolutely no reason. It would work just as well when said to a man getting butthurt over women choosing the bear.
The wording in the OP is hateful, even if it is saying something morally correct. This is not a “Black Lives Matter” vs “All Lives Matter” situation.
That is exactly the situation. No part of this post is hateful; it’s adversarial because women expressed a justified fear and men just “disagreed” because they don’t like to think about it. The point is to be controversial yet morally correct as a statement. It would absolutely not work just as well if it was inclusive, people would just agree with it and no one would care.
Do you disagree with the statement? It doesn’t sound like you do. What’s the issue? Who is harmed by this post?
and what do we do if somehow safety becomes intertwined into feelings?
What happens then?
You become trauma bonded
mhm see, that makes sense. But i was speaking with regards to the hypothetical presented here specifically.
I… What? The hypothetical that some kind of saw game show makes women actually choose? If the feelings are intertwined with safety, you become trauma bonded. Then die or run. Because safety is more important than feelings
ok so in the hypothetical presented here the entirety of feelings is less important than safety, yes?
If so, than feelings that are influencing your understanding/feeling of safety, are completely invalid and null in this case. Because again, feelings are less important than safety, but the problem here is trauma bonding influences your understanding of safety, with feelings. But those feelings literally do not exist in this example, so that entire field is of null value at this specific moment in the hypothetical.
Safety would quite literally only be dependent on the statistical analysis capability of the individual if feelings are no longer present. Unless of course this statement is written incredibly poorly and does not explain the position it holds properly. In which case, you should probably be more specific.
My point here is that this statement makes little sense, given that feelings often influence the feeling of safety, ironic really. While physical safety is an isolated and quantifiable fact. I.E. a knife can cut you, you should be careful with it. The felt safety is not something that can be quantified and understood, since it’s based on emotions, and we don’t understand how those work particularly well. But what we do understand is how they influence each other. I.E. feelings can often result in feeling unsafe due to many different reasons. But since feelings in this case, do not matter more than safety does it’s possible that we can delete the entire notion of “felt safety” since physical safety is a quantifiable concept.
Of course the feelings could matter, but that would be rather silly wouldnt it? Given that the entire statement here hinges off of the fact that “feelings don’t matter” in comparison to safety, that is.
It feels like you are making a logic knot only for yourself so you then can solve it? I am sure there is something you can gain from understanding that, what is meant here. But I don’t follow your semantic reasoning, I mean… What is put up is that, when your feelings say one thing, but your brain knows another way, and it’s related to safety, you shouldn’t follow your feelings. It’s ofc extremely generalised advice but from an old man, trust me it’s truer than you think. Listen to your brain if it tells you something is dangerous, even if your heart says woohoo. Just in general, that’s super solid advice
it’s not really a logic knot, i just think the linguistic structure of that statement is really funny. It’s taking a concept that is primarily felt and experienced, and then saying “yeah actually don’t feel any of that.”
Which like, makes sense on the surface level, but that’s not what people mean when they say that, unless we’re meta shitposting on the original post here, and i missed that. Which is very possible.
Why? The sign seems fine to me.
Because thereal’s version is welcoming and non discriminatory, and the meme is antagonistic by design
Yes, it is antagonistic. But is it bad to be antagonistic to people who think that men’s feelings are more important that women’s safety?
Yeah, ok, with this response and your other one, I’m blocking you now
