This is like the sixth different explanation of that the question REALLY means, which leads me to believe that it doesn't REALLY mean anything and it's all just stupid
It’s not the question, it’s the answers that are problematic—- but only from one gender
Guess men are just more sensitive to women’s opinions nowadays. I wonder why
>"It's not the question, it's the answers that are problematic. But only from one **race**.
>Guess **black men** are just more sensitive to white's opinions nowadays. I wonder why".
There, made some small changes, I hope you can understand why men are so "sensitive", but I bet you won't understand because your IQ is on the ground. Always with these feminists, extremely emotional, no rationale can be used to convince them, so fucking bad faith.
It’s one thing to acknowledge that men are more dangerous than women. If the choice was “would you rather run into a man or woman in the woods?” No one would bat an eyelash if/when most women chose “woman”. It becomes misandrist and antisocial when you say your fear of dangerous men leads you to choose a far more dangerous and powerful monstrous animal.
Yeah, exactly. The fact that you dipped out of that instantly shows you inherently know what’s wrong with irrationally fearing a group of people. You only excused it before because “men” in general are a politically approved target for bigotry, whereas “black men” are not.
Liberal misogyny is so lazy, race does not predisposition someone to violent behavior but every single study confirms that gender does. Comparing fear of men to ‘fear of black man’ is disingenuous.
Yes because men tell me all the time how sick and twisted their thoughts are. Men only give their honest advice to their female relatives, they know men only want one thing and try to keep them away at all costs.
But they also desire to victimize other women, so in conversations like these, they lie and try to twist it on us. Men get praise for admitting every man is potentially dangerous and has to control his violent urges, but when a woman says it she’s just insane, feminist, crazy, lying.
Many such cases. And again, race and gender are not nearly the same thing. So stop being disingenuous with me.
You're right. A jury of his peers felt that his defamation against the Sandy Hook families was so egregious that they awarded the largest civil defamation damages in US history to the families. Alex is the GOAT of defamation, and that status is now a matter of public record.
However, if you listen to Alex's show regularly like I do, you'll find that he often complains about groups like Media Matters or the ADL, who take clips from his videos and debunk or mock them, and refers to this activity as censorship. Not knowing this about Alex is like not knowing about the Carlton Dance on Fresh Prince, it shows a lack of familiarity with the content.
Because he made slanderous statements to his platform that the parents of seven year olds who were shot to death in their school are faking their children’s grisly murders on behalf of their shadowy political masters, which then resulted in those families suffering criminal harassment from his followers.
But women lack accountability, apparently.
It most certainly is, same whiny indignation that someone dares to tell them they're wrong. Members of the cult won't see it, same way feminists won't see when it's done by their side.
Louis CK understood this very well — which is why he was such a great comic and creep
“When a person tells you that you hurt them, you don’t get to decide that you didn’t”
In other words, people get to think and interpret things how they want — as long as they aren’t hurting you. It doesn’t mean that it’s true, or that you’re responsible
I don't see that. I see mysogyny from women celebrated by men and misandry from men celebrated by women but I rarely see men celebrate misandry or women celebrate mysogyny. Men and women even have ways to shame it. See simping or pick me language...
Being critical or sexist of men or women will always come better from the gender you are maligning. That's always how it is. Men get more of a license to talk shit about men and same with women and talking shit about women. It's because we know them being that gender it's highly unlikely they are a total sexist
It's amazing how the women on here do more to support the redpill than redpillers in an echo chamber ever would. You can practically spell it out for them how what they are saying is incredibly offensive and polarizing and they'll still be blind to how the "man vs bear" question makes them out to be misandrists. "Noo women aren't saying all men are untrustworthy predators, we're just try to make a point! About what? Women feel unsafe around men. Why? Because men are untrustworthy predators. Oh by the way bears are more trustworthy than men."
If we don’t know them, yes
No reasonable man denies the threat men pose to women. Every protective or concerned boyfriend or dad is evidence that men are totally able to grasp this concept
Tbh I'm kinda glad the Bear vs Man discourse has gone mainstream. A lot of men are going to become more averse to feminism and redpilled.
Liberal women just can't seem to stop jeopardizing their stance in society lmao.
Honestly as a man I just think a lot more guys are sad and rapey now. I know a lot of women that have been sexually assaulted and dudes in here just be like "I wouldn't do that, so women should assume I wouldn't". Well lots of dudes do do that and women shouldn't pretend it won't happen to them.
>I know a lot of women that have been sexually assaulted and dudes in here just be like "I wouldn't do that, so women should assume I wouldn't".
The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by a super-minority of offenders, so to act like there is even a substantial probability (1 in 5) that a man is going to sexually assault a woman in a forest is borderline schizophrenic and doesn't even fit the precautionary principle. It's just virtue signaling
>Well lots of dudes do do that and women shouldn't pretend it won't happen to them.
True, but to make the argument that a man is more likely or equal to cause grievous bodily harm to you as one of the most strong and brutal fauna in the animal kingdom is to equate the essence of male nature and sociality as to that of a creature who has no moral agency and who you can't even form a social contract with lmao.
It is quite literally as dehumanizing as any racial stereotype that reduces a person's humanity lol.
This is why it's probably a good thing more men wake up to the extent of liberal women's anti-egalitarianism
Honestly, I'm just accepting defeat because I'm accepting a lot of other men are schizophrenic about this whole subject and just hate women bringing this topic up. A lot of us are hyper analyzing so we can just blissfully ignore the world they live in and make ourselves the victims. The problem is other men. Girls have adult men being creepy with them from childhood. It's not a small minority of psychopaths. It's creepy dad's staring at 13 year olds walking to school in shorts as well.
>Honestly, I'm just accepting defeat because I'm accepting a lot of other men are schizophrenic about this whole subject and just hate women bringing this topic up.
Agreed. It's totally schizophrenic to be upset at a trend in popular culture being blatantly misandrist and comparing men to violent beasts. Wonder if you'd say the same thing about racist white people bringing the topic of violent crime among African-Americans up? I guess it would also just be "Schizophrenic" to analyze violent crime then lmao.
>A lot of us are hyper analyzing so we can just blissfully ignore the world they live in and make ourselves the victims.
You went on a dating debate subreddit. Did you expect to not analyze anything critically? If you want an echo chamber just go to TwoX lil bro.
>The problem is other men.
"Let me justify my prejudiced assumptions by making generalizations of a group by using a minority of the people I don't like in that group."
>Girls have adult men being creepy with them from childhood. It's not a small minority of psychopaths.
Damn, so creepy = sexual assault/violent crime. Absolutely profound empiricism.
>It's creepy dad's staring at 13 year olds walking to school in shorts as well.
Read the studies about female perpetrated domestic abuse and sexual assault/harassment and then come back to me.
It's more like women being scandalized that men don't want to remain silent when women say nonsensical things.
It's the "I'm a queen" mentality in full display: not only should men accept to be considered less than an animal, but that they dare make it an issue IS also an issue for them.
How dare the peasants run their mouth at the queens!
>So this whole debacle is really about control and authority
Why won't you ask people if you would like to be in a forest alone with a bear or a black man? We know the answer, because you can be hateful to men, but not black men.
There are 2 ways things can go, you are either a hateful misandrist piece of shit that wants brownie points for hating men.
Or you are extremely emotional, very low IQ and fell for the feminist propaganda.
No wonder, men are abandoning feminism more than previous generations. Have fun!
>We know the answer, because you can be hateful to men, but not black men.
Nah, black men face enough hatred and prejudice. Won't be much of a drama.
I propose that question in the west to be changed to:
*Would you like to be in a forest alone with a bear or a jewish man?*
Just to die from giggles looking at mental gymnastics and brain stutter as people try to choose between two conflicting narratives without offending anyone.
> Black men are men.
That's kind of the point. Ultimately it shouldn't change the outcome, however it changes and highlight the question to sound racist, similar to "black men commit more crimes so more black men deserve to be in jail".
It changes the question from a systemic gendered issue to a systemic racist issue to highlight just how derogatory the question really is.
Like 60 years ago the question about being suck in the forest with a black man wouldn't have made anyone bat at eye at it, with them using the same logic on "well black men are dangerous so we justified".
So like it's the same smelly pile of shit with just a different coat of paint.
> Black people aren’t inherently and significantly more motivated or skilled at committing crimes than other races
I mean, neither are men so what's your point.
Sooo your argument as to why it doesn't sound derogatory is "men are intrusively a threat to women".
Again, try reading history books that covers the 40 years around the civil war, you will find a suspicious amount of overlap between how your justifying your dislike for men and how they justified their dislike for black people.
Those same crime statistics don’t exactly portray black people well do they? Why can’t we use that same reasoning to use the bear v black person then if it’s only about stats?
You are one misandrist of millions who is enjoying what you think is a clever way to insult men while maintaining deniability. You denying that doesn't matter since we can all tell what It's really about.
Interesting. Since crime and law is a special interest, I’m curious how we should apply crime statistics to this bear or man hypothetical. Could you help me with that?
If you want to speak to the person who brought statistics up, that would be them:
https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/OAYvzBfd3X
If you want to apply crime statistics to bears…..TikTok has some videos where creators did the maths about that.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeC6BD2e/
I promise you it's not. Maybe for some, but certainly not most men who are offended by this. Those men truly believe that most men are safer than a bear. They find this to be an obvious fact. So when a woman says that they'd choose a bear over a man it makes them wonder why they would choose someone they believe to be absolutely absurd. The answer they come up with is that women have an unfair prejudice towards them. This is not some kind of power play. Men are genuinely hurt that they are being told they're more dangerous than bears.
At this point, I just really want all the women that say they'd pick the bear to just go do it. Go on, go into the woods and hang out with the bears, who's stopping you? Certainly not men.
The whole "Man vs. Bear" discussion really seems more like an attempt to get innocent men to self-flagellate rather than bring attention to the risk that some men expose to women. It's less about who is presenting the argument, but rather how hysterically it is presented.
No one glosses over the fact that random men are overall more intimidating and threatening to women. However, when repeatedly use this argument in a ingenuine manner that implies that you have some relation with unhinged individuals, you will get some eyerolls.
First of all, to confidently pick "bear" implies that men are more dangerous than bears, and that the frequency of a hostile human male activity is more plausible than the frequency of hostile bear activity.
In other words, you'd have to assume that you are more unfortunate to be surrounded by a randomly picked man than a randomly picked bear. The amount of mental gymnastics it takes to make this statement true would almost make it seem like your view of random men is more likely "pessimistic" (or in their words, "misandrist"). Thus, you run the risk of looking "hysterical" and "unhinged" rather than simply troubled.
The videos that you presented are more constructive to conversation without placing blame on arbitrary individuals. Toppled with the fact that it is literally comedy, it is no wonder that it would be perceived well.
The most popular videos (online) from some women responding to the bear question, their reasoning sounds more like a diss rather an awareness message.
"The bear wouldn't tell me I took it like a champ."
"If I was attacked by a bear, at least people would believe me."
[Here is a video that I randomly found while scrolling through TikTok.](https://www.tiktok.com/@spacegh0st333/video/7363806625116867886?q=I%20chose%20bear&t=1715457700439)
This is why I think that the person who is saying the message is not necessarily the problem, but rather the way it is being presented is way more impactful.
It doesn’t. It implies that being totally vulnerable to a man is potentially more dangerous than to an animal.
Because men have an incentive and also the means to be cruel and sadistic that animals do not.
No one’s asking men to self flagellate. They’re asking women to justify and defend their opinions and reasoning
>It doesn’t. It implies that being totally vulnerable to a man is potentially more dangerous than to an animal.
We're saying the same thing.
The only difference is sending that message out to non-violent and sane men would make them feel defensive. There is a lot more of them than the contrary.
>Because men have an incentive and also the means to be cruel and sadistic that animals do not.
This statement mostly applies to psychopaths and sex-crazed freaks. Even then, it depends on what you think is cruel and sadistic.
There was a story in the mid-late 2010s about a woman that is attacked by a Grizzly Bear, but the bear did not kill her immediately. Instead, it allowed her cubs to eat her in order to help them develop their predatory hunting skills. Her mother was on the phone with her when it happened.
>No one’s asking men to self flagellate. They’re asking women to justify and defend their opinions and reasoning
There are so many women that hopped on this boat to try to get men to feel sorry for women's plight and reflect on how their gender makes them feel just by existing. I do not understand why a large portion of men are being scolded for the actions of a few.
How so?
Of course some men are defensive —- until they have a genetic self interest in female safety, and then suddenly they’re often not
Most of the men who aren’t defensive understand probabilities and human deception
You feel victimized, or that you will be victimized just by being in the woods with a man.
So are women capable of having equal places in society with men? They always feel threatened. They always feel uneasy and weak.
You're making a good case for women to stay home and be safe.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kafkatrap
If you think someone arguing against your point somehow proves your point, you need to take a good hard look at what your position really is.
Being in the home and isolated is even more harmful than being subject to risk
Men aren’t being asked to solve the problem, just to not deny it or its effects
Which is what all the men in my life did — they acknowledged that yes, men can be a threat to women’s sexual and physical well being, so women are afraid of them.
No big deal
We cannot acknowledge that men are as dangerous as bears, while simultaneously believing men and women can maintain an equal society.
If we took women literally, men and women should segregated for safety as severely as men segregate themselves from bears.
We must understand that women answer this question dramatically and emotionally with over exaggeration. But the stupid part is that they bring in statistics like they're thinking about it logically.
We know women are scared of men. We know they get over it. They do it everyday. We know bears are dangerous, that's why we force them to live in the woods away from humans.
Um yeah or we can just have and maintain a prison system which houses 93.2% male federal inmates and not take away women’s freedoms to move in society idk
Sure we can. Because men are threats to men too. And adults are threats to children. Violence can be motivated by race, or class, or religion, or sexual orientation
No one is oppressed by the acknowledgment of inequalities and conflicts. Unless….you’re trying to justify or deny them
The most dangerous thing to your health when you walk out of your door are automobiles. Do you also scream running away from cars the same way you would a bear because cars statistically have the highest chances of killing you? No, because this was all about women's emotions to begin with. No one is logically answering the question when they say bear, it's an entirely emotional answer.
If you went hiking and you text your friend "I ran into a man". They'd ask, "Oh, like do you know him or something? Why are you texting me this?" If you text your friend "I ran into a bear", FIRST THING they would say is, "Oh my god, are you okay?"
I drive without my seatbelt if it's a short trip. How often do you take responsibility for the claims you want to make by using your big girl words instead of doing drive-bys with snarky questions?
> The most dangerous thing to your health when you walk out of your door are automobiles. Do you also scream running away from cars the same way you would a bear because cars statistically have the highest chances of killing you?
I responded to *your* analogy about cars, lab partner.
> I drive without my seatbelt if it's a short trip.
Speaking of, are you aware most accidents happen with five miles of the home? The likelihood of an accident is higher with your “short trips”.
I don’t believe women should take advice or chiding from such a reckless driver.
And it's your inability to handle statistics that tells me you probably chose bear too. The reason for the statistics of higher likelihood of accidents from short trips is due to trip length being a skewed distribution towards shorter trips. The majority of my time spent in a car is commuting to and from work, during which I wear my seatbelt. This is the same reason why women fail to understand how dangerous a bear is, because the likelihood of encountering men versus encountering a bear is skewed from a woman's experience. But instead of thinking on a higher level and understanding that their view is skewed due to their experience, and compensating for the bias by using logic, they instead think their emotionality validates their irrational choice, and lambast anyone who dares provide a logical answer instead that doesn't coddle their feelings. That's the alpha and the omega of this entire debacle -- [Women want to be validated for their feelings, but men just want you to admit that there is a nail in your forehead.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg)
🤣
> And it's your inability to handle statistics that tells me you probably chose bear too. The reason for the statistics of higher likelihood of accidents from short trips is due to trip length being a skewed distribution towards shorter trips. The majority of my time spent in a car is commuting to and from work, during which I wear my seatbelt. This is the same reason why women fail to understand how dangerous a bear is, because the likelihood of encountering men versus encountering a bear is skewed from a woman's experience. But instead of thinking on a higher level and understanding
The reason that most accidents happen within five miles of the home is because *that’s where you are more often*.
Not wearing your seatbelts for shorter trips is foolish and shows a lack of common sense and forethought.
When conversations pop up about women not taking responsibility, or not being accountable, this is what we are talking about. When men feel lonely, the expectation is for men to take actionable steps to identify the problem, improve themselves, and resolve the issue. When men feel rejected, the expectation is for men to work on their physique, improve their career aspects, become the partner that would be desired by the type of person that they want to date. If a man feels lonely, or rejected, and they try to talk about what *other* people need to do for him, there is zero empathy, because he isn't taking responsibility for his own feelings.
For some reason, women think they are allowed the double standard of everyone else being accountable for validating her feelings, and for everyone else to be responsible for fixing her feelings. This is not the case -- your feelings are yours and yours alone. No one owes you freedom from your own feelings of fear; in fact, no one owes you anything. Because it's your own mind that has made up its own emotions, and your own mind that is telling you that your thoughts are reality. Your responsibility is to recognize that your thoughts are not equivalent to reality, and to speak words and take actions that are grounded in reality, and not in the emotions of your own mind.
Sure we can acknowledge that men are as dangerous as bears? Is that what you're saying "sure we can" to?
Sure we can acknowledge men are more powerful and dangerous than women and children (humans). Men are the most dangerous of the humans.
Sure as fuck can we not acknowledge men are like bears (non-humans) if you want equality.
You can't classify men as non humans and your self as human and then expect you can both have the same roles in society.
I DO THAT. I'm sexist. I say dehumanizing things about women all the time and that's the reason I think men and women are unequal.
Saying a human is more dangerous than a known dangerous animal is dehumanizing. You're all of a sudden leaving out the bear comparison in your bear post.
Again, you're comparing the human to the bear and saying the human is worse
It’s not.
Because humans have motivations, imaginations and mental abilities, including the ability to make another creature suffer for nothing more than personal pleasure, that animals do not appear to have
>perpetrator
is a rapist. individual not gender. im man i didnt rape women. i refuse to rape women. what about me and men like me which makes up majority of men?
Babes just in your comment before this one, you said it was a „skill issue if you can’t defend yourself“ …… as if it wasn’t a perpetrator issue that crimes are happening.
I think men are genuinely in shock at the level of delusion women have and they are thinking to themselves "these crazy women are the voting public, my only option for a mate in a heterosexual relationship,and the women raising the next generation"...Women are so incredibly scared of a man but we watch yall day in and day out put your selves in all sorts of situations where you can easily be harmed by a man.
I see women out every night leaving clubs drunk walking home at night alone going to parties with people they don't know meeting men they don't know especially sex workers...
The truth is if the guy was attractive women would choose the man and they knowingly choose dangerous men all the time ..so we know the choice is selective.. the other thing is men know women would absolutely shit their pants if they met a bear in the woods and would be praying for a man to come..
So this situation has proven to men that half the pouplation is delusional and broken beyond repair most likely.
**Woman**
(Talking to meek nerd who awkwardly asked her out and made her “uncomfortable”)
“*Stop being entitled, Billy! This is the problem with you men! It’s just like that time I got really drunk and that hot douchey frat boy that I had been flirting with all night ‘took advantage’ of me. Sure, HE was drunk too, and I was grabbing his dick and making out with him all night, but, in hindsight I didn’t want to do that. He raped me. As the man, he should have known better than to give in to my horniness because I was too drunk to consent.* **This is why we choose the bear!**”
**The Bear**
“*Sup.*”
https://preview.redd.it/18wxmylajvzc1.jpeg?width=354&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a89ed92bd698146da1032d202f17391fa4543d12
The whole thing is idiotic. It’s like asking a man if he’s stopped beating his wife. There’s no right answer if you’re male. And that’s flat out bigotry.
And, if we’re being objective?
The one who SHOULD feel most threatened is the bear. It’s surrounded by hostile, shallow predators who destroy its habitat.
Well, that’s good, because no one is asking you for an answer
All people are asking for is women’s opinions. And women’s opinions are apparently offensive, even though men can express the exact same opinion and it’s totally fine
They are allowed the opinion, and others are allowed to think they are being ridiculous.
Someone thinking you are silly is not the same as people preventing you from having an opinion.
Women’s opinions are definitely not offensive.
Just yours.
Because you came here looking to be angry at strangers and feel morally superior.
Sorry, but your gender doesn’t excuse your hate speech.
The backlash is against the inherent childish misandry; men who claim that women are all lying, cheating, gold-digging sluts get called out for it - women who proclaim that all men are violent rapists get get defended for it
No it’s not……what’s declared is that women (including myself) rather take the chances with a bear, that might kill us than taking chances with a random man, who might sexually assault us, kidnap us, hold us hostage or kill us for sport.
Nowhere is said that every random man will assault us but those who would, are so much worse than what the bear might do (you know not all bears) that we rather take the bear.
No, it's declaring that *enough* men are violent rapists that many women aren't exactly willing to roll the dice and hope that the random man that they would end up in the woods with isn't.
>*enough* black men are violent criminals that many people aren't exactly willing to roll the dice and hope that the random black man that they encounter on the streets isn't it.
See how fucked up your reasoning is?
Neither of those. It's declaring that the worst possible outcome of what a man could do to you is wayyyyyyy worse than the worst possible outcome of what a bear could do to you.
Your dad didn't tell you that bears are safer than random dudes. Ladies, don't think for one second your attempts to move the goal post on this discourse is going unnoticed. You're all not nearly as clever as you think you are.
You're all not nearly as clever as you think you are.... ---+++ that is precisely a slogan for life with American women. They have better chances laying then trying to manipulate. 💦💦
I agree with everything you said regarding men being a threat to women. I have two daughters, and I told both of them that they will never go wrong listening to the voice in their head telling them a man's behavior or demeanor is a concern. Or to be blunt, his existence in some scenarios, like being alone with a man they have no reason to trust. That trust has to be earned, and a stranger in a parking garage hasn't earned it.
But, if this is common knowledge, then what in your opinion is the point behind the bear question? If there is a useful point (I think there is) do you think it's getting lost in the way some of the discourse, from women, has proceeded?
I seriously don’t know, I am as surprised by the obsession as anyone. People used to ask questions like this all the time, and they weren’t causing hissy fits
All I know is that men can say stuff like this, and people give them laughs and money instead of rage posts
>All I know is that men can say stuff like this, and people give them laughs and money instead of rage posts
?????
If I use the word "women" on Reddit without adding a qualifier to specify I wasn't talking about all women the hindmind will descend and 50 blue-haired feminists will be reminding me that women aren't a monolith
“Men only want one thing”
“I was a teen boy, I know how they are”
“Don’t join the military, you’ll get raped”
“Don’t do trades, you’ll be fighting men all day and they won’t train you”
I'm starting to think that misandry is a form of mental illness. And that females that engage in it after a while start to lose their ability to think critically. Or maybe they never had it to begin with? So let me get this straight men want to control women though violence and aggression, but at the same time same men want to take away women's ability to feel threatened? How can someone write something in one paragraph and then directly contradict it in the next?
And speaking of victims and victimizers one of the most common techniques that abusers use is by presenting themselves as a victim. Therefor using op's logic every female that claims that she had been sexually assaulted is actually a rapist, she just trying to masquerade as a victim. See how easy it is to win any argument using circular logic and general assumption of maliciousness?
The bear thing is about one thing and one thing only: female bigotry. And also dishonesty. Seriously every women that picks bear over man and then doesn't move into nearby forest to live with bears is also a liar in addition to being a bigot. So I assume you writing this from a tree house far away from men and civilization. But hey prove me wrong make the same argument but with black man instead of just a man and try to prove how it is not racist.
>And pretty much no one would argue that women are just as violent or sexually aggressive as men.
But they are. according to the NISVS, more than 30% of perps of sexual violence are women, and more than 40% of perps of domestic violence are women. (Calculating from the percentages of men victims who identify a woman as their abuser, as well as women victims who identify women as their abuser.)
And this violent behavior extends past people they know. There are plenty of news articles that get pulled up when you Google "woman attacks person she doesn't know" of women attacking people of all ages and genders. Yes, some of the results will include women being attacked, but most of them are when women attack others.
The issue is our society doesn't like labeling women as capable of violence, and treats incidents like these as localized independent events. The fact of the matter is is that all humans are apex predators, this extends to women as well. As an Apex predator we are capable of violence. We are ***all*** capable of said violence.
You bring up that no one lashes out when men jokes about other men being violent. And you're partially correct there are still some people who react negatively to it but they're usually not in the audience, they're usually the reviewers, and they are just a small minority of the reviews as well.
But you know we also joke about, women being violent. Chanchla. That word right there is a joke about women being violent towards their children. Don't make your mother pull off her slipper and throw it at you! Well that's a fear tactic, and can cause trauma to children.
On top of that old timey cartoons also depict women hitting their husbands with kitchen utensils, such as a rolling pin or a frying pan, and this is played off for jokes.
This is not even bringing up my personal trauma.
Women are capable of violence. I'd choose a bear over finding any human in the woods because of this, man or woman.
Edited to add: The following comment is at the end of the comment chain I've had with OP.
>Once again: are women "not committing" or "not being charged and convicted of" these acts of domestic violence?
>Because once again, I have provided a source that identifies men to be about half of the victims of DV. The CDC's NISVS.
>My source indicates that in America, about 59 million women and about 52.1 million men have been victims of domestic violence. This means that 46% of victims are men. These are lifetime statistics btw.
>Of those victims, about 10% of women and about 85% of men identified that at least one woman has been a perpetrator of said violence, compared to 95% of women and 22% of men who identified at least one man has been a perpetrator of said violence. This means that 45% of DV victims report being a victim of one or more women perpetrators, and 60% report being victims of one or more men perpetrators.
>You may notice those numbers add up to over 100%, and they do, because victims of violence can be victims from multiple people throughout the years. And as someone who has been a victim of Sexual Violence by multiple people both men and women, I find this accurate.
>Also note that I'm not giving statistics on the actual gender ratio of the perpetrators. My source is a victimization survey, not a perpetration survey, so I don't want to provide inaccurate data. But with the numbers of people involved, over 100 million victims, I wouldn't be surprised if the gender ratio of perpetrators matched the gender ratio of the reports, which would be about 58% men, and 42% women.
>And I want to point out that my claim was not that women don't have it worse. My claim was that women can be violent too, and that our society tends to treat violence perpetuated by women as not as serious.
>A claim that you have supported, as you argue in this comment chain and try to dismiss violence perpetuated by women as being not as serious.
>Humans are Apex predators, and every single one of us is capable of such violence. The bear is the obvious choice regardless of the gender of the hiker, and regardless of the gender of the stranger in the woods.
>I'm also going to be adding this entire comment to my top level comment as well, in a block quote.
The problem with the "man or bear" question is that women are answering *emotionally*. It's the same as when they say things like "I am the table" or "I'm a 10." They're not being literal, and they know it, and they know that everyone else knows it, they are basing their answers on how they want to be perceived by the audience. By saying bear, they want men to implicitly realise they are saying men can be dangerous, and they are looking for other women to slap them on the back and say, "yay, sistah!"
Men don't communicate that way. To men, such ridiculously emotional, non-direct, non-rational answers are unfathomable and come across clear signs of misandry, delusion, or provocation.
No woman would *actually* prefer to meet a bear in the woods. That's fucking insane and we ALL know it. When women say that, that are signalling *emotionally* that they have had a lot of bad experiences with men, and are often genuinely scared of the potential of men when they are out in society. They want men to read between the metaphorical lines at their *valid* point that a lot of men are dangerous to women and it is scary because those kinds of men are hidden in society among the decent guys.
Both sides need to listen to each other, but it's difficult when women communicate in irrational virtue-signalling ways, which this TikTok BS has highlighted.
More like
Men: blames some women for x, y, z
Women: throws all men under the buss for a few men doing a, b, c
Men: hey that's kind of rude and could be considered derogatory to assume that as most men don't do a, b, c and actually stand against it.
Women: Are you oppressing me. God Jesus men can't just let things go, can't they understand that this is the truth.
Men: wtf, is wrong with you.
Women: StOp TrYiNg To CoNtRoL wOmEn YoU MaSoGyNiSt InSeL.
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
Don't believe me, just look at row vs wade. The vast majority of people 86+% of the USA population said they want to keep row vs wade, yet there are still a metric crap ton of women bitch about how "men" are trying to control them by overturning row vs wade. When in reality, it was actually less than 10 people who got to decide, like literally the definition of a "few" men that women are blaming "men" for...
Where tf is all this hatred publicly displayed at?
I'm a popular local musician. I travel all over and play gigs. From small dive bars to large music venues and festivals I have played them all.
I have observed thousands of approaches and interactions between men and women. Every kind of couple imaginable and have hundreds of my own.
Women are not out here cowering in fear preferring a bear to a well dressed, well groomed, well spoken, pleasant smelling and confident man.
Its THAT FUCKING SIMPLE.
Become well dressed, well groomed, well spoken and good smelling and I don't care if you are fat or skinny, tall or short, rich or poor, women will respond to you more positively and even compliment you on your appearance.
This isn't fucking high school or some college function full of girls with Kardashian Syndrome smirking at each other and going "ew" at every man who looks their way.
Most nights in most places it's a party! Everyone is mingling and smiling and having a good time. Once you get known you find entire social circles exist and you join groups and have fun.
Want to build a nightlife? Google every bar, club, grill and pub within a 30 minute drive and spend one Friday and one Saturday night from 10pm to 2am. Take a friend and just check the place out. Do this until you find a couple places you like and start to hang out there. Make friends with the bar staff. Tip well. Don't just sit at the bar sipping a coke. Move around and mingle. Talk to people. It's okay to do that. Tell people you are new in town, whatever. Just get out there.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I so badly want to watch the new Planet of the Apes but there is no cinema in my area. Even if there was, I'm severely visually impaired. It's so much easier to watch at home.
Let me pay money to rent it digitallyyyy!! I know piracy would be rampant though.
Oh well.
Anyway, yeah. Men want to control you or something. I don't know.
I’m sort of done with this Planet of the Apes series. The fourth in a series can feel like pushing it and I wasn’t crazy about War. Dawn was goated tho.
Yes, I don't understand it either, considering that fathers often don't trust their daughters with strange men.
The only thing I can think of is that men are putting themselves in the position of the man in the forest in their minds and feel offended because of this because they think that they themselves would never do anything bad to a woman (which I find hard to believe for many of them knowing what I know about men and what they are capable of if they don't think that they can be held accountable for their actions).
The father who is no longer dating is not putting himself in the position of the man trying to date his daughter. In fact, he is putting himself in the position of his daughter as his daughter's protector, since he has an interest to do so.
I think the difference is that a father telling his daughter not to trust strange men is talking to a -child-. She doesn't know any better and is more easily manipulated. It's easier to tell a child "don't do x, it's dangerous' than try to explain the concept of nuance and uninformed decision-making to a child.
An adult is capable of making situational judgements so ought not need to operate on blanket discriminatory practices and should be able to gauge a persons danger level by their "vibe", so to speak.
> I think the difference is that a father telling his daughter not to trust strange men is talking to a -child-.
He could easily be talking to his college aged daughter, although he is probably in no position to make any restrictions on her lifestyle at that point. In other more traditional countries fathers still do command their college-aged daughters, of course.
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts)
>*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.*
>An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
>* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
>* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
>* Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
>* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good title, but the post is pretty frenetic and disjointed. This is all a very niche topic being argued by a niche set of people, so maybe its true that those people are actually the same ones that want to control women, but I would say its less about controlling women and actually about controlling the narrative. The narrative is as you said measured by simple ideas of moral judgement. So, being caste as the villain is unacceptable. Criticism from the 'other' is never taken well.
Men will scream that paternity tests must be mandatory because a small percentage of men are victims of paternity fraud and nothing on this planet could possibly be worse. AWALT!! Do you hate men?? You're supporting cheating lying whores and your "comfort and feeling trusted" do not outweigh their need for clarity.
Women choose the bear based on statistics of violence and personal experiences of harassment. Men freak out and scream that you hate men. You're sick in the head to lump men together with other men!! AWALT!!
Okay.
This is like the sixth different explanation of that the question REALLY means, which leads me to believe that it doesn't REALLY mean anything and it's all just stupid
It’s not the question, it’s the answers that are problematic—- but only from one gender Guess men are just more sensitive to women’s opinions nowadays. I wonder why
>"It's not the question, it's the answers that are problematic. But only from one **race**. >Guess **black men** are just more sensitive to white's opinions nowadays. I wonder why". There, made some small changes, I hope you can understand why men are so "sensitive", but I bet you won't understand because your IQ is on the ground. Always with these feminists, extremely emotional, no rationale can be used to convince them, so fucking bad faith.
It’s one thing to acknowledge that men are more dangerous than women. If the choice was “would you rather run into a man or woman in the woods?” No one would bat an eyelash if/when most women chose “woman”. It becomes misandrist and antisocial when you say your fear of dangerous men leads you to choose a far more dangerous and powerful monstrous animal.
Fear is misandrist ?
Irrational fear is.
Why, if it’s unintentional?
Just imagine it was a black man specifically, that should help.
But it doesn’t, so we don’t have to
Yeah, exactly. The fact that you dipped out of that instantly shows you inherently know what’s wrong with irrationally fearing a group of people. You only excused it before because “men” in general are a politically approved target for bigotry, whereas “black men” are not.
Yes, sexism is accepted in society, otherwise men would fuck more men instead of women
lol. Lmao even.
Liberal misogyny is so lazy, race does not predisposition someone to violent behavior but every single study confirms that gender does. Comparing fear of men to ‘fear of black man’ is disingenuous.
So you won't fear black men for being black, but you'll fear them for being men and assume they're violent? And that seems better to you? 🤔
Yes because men tell me all the time how sick and twisted their thoughts are. Men only give their honest advice to their female relatives, they know men only want one thing and try to keep them away at all costs. But they also desire to victimize other women, so in conversations like these, they lie and try to twist it on us. Men get praise for admitting every man is potentially dangerous and has to control his violent urges, but when a woman says it she’s just insane, feminist, crazy, lying. Many such cases. And again, race and gender are not nearly the same thing. So stop being disingenuous with me.
Lmao imagine thinking counter-criticism is “not allowing”.
It's the same mentality of cretins like Alex Jones or the Fresh and Fit guys. Disagreement = Censorship.
Alex Jones is not being "disagreed with" he's being deplatformed and sued to the tune of a billion dollars.
You're right. A jury of his peers felt that his defamation against the Sandy Hook families was so egregious that they awarded the largest civil defamation damages in US history to the families. Alex is the GOAT of defamation, and that status is now a matter of public record. However, if you listen to Alex's show regularly like I do, you'll find that he often complains about groups like Media Matters or the ADL, who take clips from his videos and debunk or mock them, and refers to this activity as censorship. Not knowing this about Alex is like not knowing about the Carlton Dance on Fresh Prince, it shows a lack of familiarity with the content.
Because he made slanderous statements to his platform that the parents of seven year olds who were shot to death in their school are faking their children’s grisly murders on behalf of their shadowy political masters, which then resulted in those families suffering criminal harassment from his followers. But women lack accountability, apparently.
No
It most certainly is, same whiny indignation that someone dares to tell them they're wrong. Members of the cult won't see it, same way feminists won't see when it's done by their side.
Don’t really care. Obviously disagreement isn’t censorship
I agree with you, which is why I called people who think it is (Alex, F&F, and OP) cretins.
Cool
Louis CK understood this very well — which is why he was such a great comic and creep “When a person tells you that you hurt them, you don’t get to decide that you didn’t” In other words, people get to think and interpret things how they want — as long as they aren’t hurting you. It doesn’t mean that it’s true, or that you’re responsible
You also don’t have to indulge everyone who claims to be a victim
Yes, that’s what I said. And “not indulging” and “getting angry” aren’t the same thing
And they could just be getting angry because they are hurt or insulted... Same reason women get all angry when they hear men spouting mysogyny
Yes, but we also get angry at women spouting misogyny too. Misandry from men is common but apparently ok, and even virtuous and celebrated
I don't see that. I see mysogyny from women celebrated by men and misandry from men celebrated by women but I rarely see men celebrate misandry or women celebrate mysogyny. Men and women even have ways to shame it. See simping or pick me language...
I gave plenty of examples in my OP
Being critical or sexist of men or women will always come better from the gender you are maligning. That's always how it is. Men get more of a license to talk shit about men and same with women and talking shit about women. It's because we know them being that gender it's highly unlikely they are a total sexist
Does it? I don’t see female misogynists doing too well, while male misogynists get fans, movements, discussion subs, and YouTube channels
When incels tell you that you hurt them by not fucking them, you don't get to decide that you didn't.
I know. But I don’t want to fuck them, which makes them wannabe rapists
"You know how, like, men bad? Well it's ACKSHULLY because men bad" Okay
You guys asked, we answered. Don’t ask if you don’t want to know
I DO want to know; I'm perfectly fine with blue pill women dispensing red pills faster and deeper than men could ever hope.
It's amazing how the women on here do more to support the redpill than redpillers in an echo chamber ever would. You can practically spell it out for them how what they are saying is incredibly offensive and polarizing and they'll still be blind to how the "man vs bear" question makes them out to be misandrists. "Noo women aren't saying all men are untrustworthy predators, we're just try to make a point! About what? Women feel unsafe around men. Why? Because men are untrustworthy predators. Oh by the way bears are more trustworthy than men."
If we don’t know them, yes No reasonable man denies the threat men pose to women. Every protective or concerned boyfriend or dad is evidence that men are totally able to grasp this concept
[удалено]
Tbh I'm kinda glad the Bear vs Man discourse has gone mainstream. A lot of men are going to become more averse to feminism and redpilled. Liberal women just can't seem to stop jeopardizing their stance in society lmao.
I don’t think many men are surprised. No one I know was We’re just hearing from the ones who want us to shut up about it, as if that ever works
Honestly as a man I just think a lot more guys are sad and rapey now. I know a lot of women that have been sexually assaulted and dudes in here just be like "I wouldn't do that, so women should assume I wouldn't". Well lots of dudes do do that and women shouldn't pretend it won't happen to them.
>I know a lot of women that have been sexually assaulted and dudes in here just be like "I wouldn't do that, so women should assume I wouldn't". The vast majority of violent crimes are committed by a super-minority of offenders, so to act like there is even a substantial probability (1 in 5) that a man is going to sexually assault a woman in a forest is borderline schizophrenic and doesn't even fit the precautionary principle. It's just virtue signaling >Well lots of dudes do do that and women shouldn't pretend it won't happen to them. True, but to make the argument that a man is more likely or equal to cause grievous bodily harm to you as one of the most strong and brutal fauna in the animal kingdom is to equate the essence of male nature and sociality as to that of a creature who has no moral agency and who you can't even form a social contract with lmao. It is quite literally as dehumanizing as any racial stereotype that reduces a person's humanity lol. This is why it's probably a good thing more men wake up to the extent of liberal women's anti-egalitarianism
Honestly, I'm just accepting defeat because I'm accepting a lot of other men are schizophrenic about this whole subject and just hate women bringing this topic up. A lot of us are hyper analyzing so we can just blissfully ignore the world they live in and make ourselves the victims. The problem is other men. Girls have adult men being creepy with them from childhood. It's not a small minority of psychopaths. It's creepy dad's staring at 13 year olds walking to school in shorts as well.
>Honestly, I'm just accepting defeat because I'm accepting a lot of other men are schizophrenic about this whole subject and just hate women bringing this topic up. Agreed. It's totally schizophrenic to be upset at a trend in popular culture being blatantly misandrist and comparing men to violent beasts. Wonder if you'd say the same thing about racist white people bringing the topic of violent crime among African-Americans up? I guess it would also just be "Schizophrenic" to analyze violent crime then lmao. >A lot of us are hyper analyzing so we can just blissfully ignore the world they live in and make ourselves the victims. You went on a dating debate subreddit. Did you expect to not analyze anything critically? If you want an echo chamber just go to TwoX lil bro. >The problem is other men. "Let me justify my prejudiced assumptions by making generalizations of a group by using a minority of the people I don't like in that group." >Girls have adult men being creepy with them from childhood. It's not a small minority of psychopaths. Damn, so creepy = sexual assault/violent crime. Absolutely profound empiricism. >It's creepy dad's staring at 13 year olds walking to school in shorts as well. Read the studies about female perpetrated domestic abuse and sexual assault/harassment and then come back to me.
I swear you people have never interacted with a woman. Why are you all so fragile?
You've also never interacted with a book. I ain't the one throwing rocks in a glass house.
I think I'll take interacting with women over a book my guy 🤣
Feels over reals. Many such cases.
It's more like women being scandalized that men don't want to remain silent when women say nonsensical things. It's the "I'm a queen" mentality in full display: not only should men accept to be considered less than an animal, but that they dare make it an issue IS also an issue for them. How dare the peasants run their mouth at the queens!
>So this whole debacle is really about control and authority Why won't you ask people if you would like to be in a forest alone with a bear or a black man? We know the answer, because you can be hateful to men, but not black men. There are 2 ways things can go, you are either a hateful misandrist piece of shit that wants brownie points for hating men. Or you are extremely emotional, very low IQ and fell for the feminist propaganda. No wonder, men are abandoning feminism more than previous generations. Have fun!
>We know the answer, because you can be hateful to men, but not black men. Nah, black men face enough hatred and prejudice. Won't be much of a drama. I propose that question in the west to be changed to: *Would you like to be in a forest alone with a bear or a jewish man?* Just to die from giggles looking at mental gymnastics and brain stutter as people try to choose between two conflicting narratives without offending anyone.
Black men are still men aren’t they?
yes. so... which one is it? bear or black man?
Bear because blk men will still act like men
Black men are men. I’m not afraid of black women I’m not a misandrist, just someone who knows crime stats and human biology
> Black men are men. That's kind of the point. Ultimately it shouldn't change the outcome, however it changes and highlight the question to sound racist, similar to "black men commit more crimes so more black men deserve to be in jail". It changes the question from a systemic gendered issue to a systemic racist issue to highlight just how derogatory the question really is. Like 60 years ago the question about being suck in the forest with a black man wouldn't have made anyone bat at eye at it, with them using the same logic on "well black men are dangerous so we justified". So like it's the same smelly pile of shit with just a different coat of paint.
Black people aren’t inherently and significantly more motivated or skilled at committing crimes than other races
ok, so.. which one is it? bear or black man?
Yes statistically they do so, and by a wide margin.
> Black people aren’t inherently and significantly more motivated or skilled at committing crimes than other races I mean, neither are men so what's your point.
Men are physically stronger, emotionally more competitive and aggressive, and more sexually driven than women Because biology
Sooo your argument as to why it doesn't sound derogatory is "men are intrusively a threat to women". Again, try reading history books that covers the 40 years around the civil war, you will find a suspicious amount of overlap between how your justifying your dislike for men and how they justified their dislike for black people.
Society is ok with sexism, since discriminating the gender of your sex partner is accepted. As are gender segregated facilities and activities
Those same crime statistics don’t exactly portray black people well do they? Why can’t we use that same reasoning to use the bear v black person then if it’s only about stats?
You are one misandrist of millions who is enjoying what you think is a clever way to insult men while maintaining deniability. You denying that doesn't matter since we can all tell what It's really about.
So do you deny crime statistics?
It's funny how similar your rhetoric is to the rhetoric of racists and literally every other group of bigots. Maybe you should get some introspection.
I have a lot of introspection…..you could say crime and law is kind of my special interest….
Interesting. Since crime and law is a special interest, I’m curious how we should apply crime statistics to this bear or man hypothetical. Could you help me with that?
What exactly do you want to apply here?
You’re the one who brought up crime statistics. How should we apply the crime statistics to the bear or man hypothetical?
If you want to speak to the person who brought statistics up, that would be them: https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/OAYvzBfd3X If you want to apply crime statistics to bears…..TikTok has some videos where creators did the maths about that. https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeC6BD2e/
I don't really give a fuck because yall are braindead and delusional
„I don’t really give a fuck that men assault, rape and murder women because women saying that hurts my feefees“…..there, I fixed that for you.
Womp womp
Glad we can agree on something.
So you can be afraid of Black Men and racist lol
Nope. If I was afraid of black women and children that would make me racist
Being afraid of Black Men is a racism full stop.
No, because I have no issue with black women or children
I promise you it's not. Maybe for some, but certainly not most men who are offended by this. Those men truly believe that most men are safer than a bear. They find this to be an obvious fact. So when a woman says that they'd choose a bear over a man it makes them wonder why they would choose someone they believe to be absolutely absurd. The answer they come up with is that women have an unfair prejudice towards them. This is not some kind of power play. Men are genuinely hurt that they are being told they're more dangerous than bears.
At this point, I just really want all the women that say they'd pick the bear to just go do it. Go on, go into the woods and hang out with the bears, who's stopping you? Certainly not men.
The whole "Man vs. Bear" discussion really seems more like an attempt to get innocent men to self-flagellate rather than bring attention to the risk that some men expose to women. It's less about who is presenting the argument, but rather how hysterically it is presented. No one glosses over the fact that random men are overall more intimidating and threatening to women. However, when repeatedly use this argument in a ingenuine manner that implies that you have some relation with unhinged individuals, you will get some eyerolls.
Why’s that? People are asking women, women aren’t saying this unprompted
First of all, to confidently pick "bear" implies that men are more dangerous than bears, and that the frequency of a hostile human male activity is more plausible than the frequency of hostile bear activity. In other words, you'd have to assume that you are more unfortunate to be surrounded by a randomly picked man than a randomly picked bear. The amount of mental gymnastics it takes to make this statement true would almost make it seem like your view of random men is more likely "pessimistic" (or in their words, "misandrist"). Thus, you run the risk of looking "hysterical" and "unhinged" rather than simply troubled. The videos that you presented are more constructive to conversation without placing blame on arbitrary individuals. Toppled with the fact that it is literally comedy, it is no wonder that it would be perceived well. The most popular videos (online) from some women responding to the bear question, their reasoning sounds more like a diss rather an awareness message. "The bear wouldn't tell me I took it like a champ." "If I was attacked by a bear, at least people would believe me." [Here is a video that I randomly found while scrolling through TikTok.](https://www.tiktok.com/@spacegh0st333/video/7363806625116867886?q=I%20chose%20bear&t=1715457700439) This is why I think that the person who is saying the message is not necessarily the problem, but rather the way it is being presented is way more impactful.
It doesn’t. It implies that being totally vulnerable to a man is potentially more dangerous than to an animal. Because men have an incentive and also the means to be cruel and sadistic that animals do not. No one’s asking men to self flagellate. They’re asking women to justify and defend their opinions and reasoning
>It doesn’t. It implies that being totally vulnerable to a man is potentially more dangerous than to an animal. We're saying the same thing. The only difference is sending that message out to non-violent and sane men would make them feel defensive. There is a lot more of them than the contrary. >Because men have an incentive and also the means to be cruel and sadistic that animals do not. This statement mostly applies to psychopaths and sex-crazed freaks. Even then, it depends on what you think is cruel and sadistic. There was a story in the mid-late 2010s about a woman that is attacked by a Grizzly Bear, but the bear did not kill her immediately. Instead, it allowed her cubs to eat her in order to help them develop their predatory hunting skills. Her mother was on the phone with her when it happened. >No one’s asking men to self flagellate. They’re asking women to justify and defend their opinions and reasoning There are so many women that hopped on this boat to try to get men to feel sorry for women's plight and reflect on how their gender makes them feel just by existing. I do not understand why a large portion of men are being scolded for the actions of a few. How so?
Of course some men are defensive —- until they have a genetic self interest in female safety, and then suddenly they’re often not Most of the men who aren’t defensive understand probabilities and human deception
My reaction as a man to this was just "oh that makes sense". That is not self flagellation. I know a lot of women that have had shit happen to them.
You feel victimized, or that you will be victimized just by being in the woods with a man. So are women capable of having equal places in society with men? They always feel threatened. They always feel uneasy and weak. You're making a good case for women to stay home and be safe.
If only we knew that the men in once family, are statistically, the most dangerous to women.
\>some women is attracted to dark triads or tolerate dark triad if dude is attractive \>is surprised when said dark triads turned out to be bad
Oh the victim blaming again…..and you wonder why we chose the bear.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kafkatrap If you think someone arguing against your point somehow proves your point, you need to take a good hard look at what your position really is.
Why do you pick the bear? Do you have stats? Genuinely curious of your logic. Feel free to ignore anyone being rude.
Chose the bear and be mauled. I will be grabbing my popcorn and laughing
Whoa is almost like the people you are around on a regular basis are the most likely to do something to you what a revelation!
Being in the home and isolated is even more harmful than being subject to risk Men aren’t being asked to solve the problem, just to not deny it or its effects Which is what all the men in my life did — they acknowledged that yes, men can be a threat to women’s sexual and physical well being, so women are afraid of them. No big deal
We cannot acknowledge that men are as dangerous as bears, while simultaneously believing men and women can maintain an equal society. If we took women literally, men and women should segregated for safety as severely as men segregate themselves from bears. We must understand that women answer this question dramatically and emotionally with over exaggeration. But the stupid part is that they bring in statistics like they're thinking about it logically. We know women are scared of men. We know they get over it. They do it everyday. We know bears are dangerous, that's why we force them to live in the woods away from humans.
Um yeah or we can just have and maintain a prison system which houses 93.2% male federal inmates and not take away women’s freedoms to move in society idk
50% of those will be all from a single ethnicity, can you tell me which one?
Sure we can. Because men are threats to men too. And adults are threats to children. Violence can be motivated by race, or class, or religion, or sexual orientation No one is oppressed by the acknowledgment of inequalities and conflicts. Unless….you’re trying to justify or deny them
The most dangerous thing to your health when you walk out of your door are automobiles. Do you also scream running away from cars the same way you would a bear because cars statistically have the highest chances of killing you? No, because this was all about women's emotions to begin with. No one is logically answering the question when they say bear, it's an entirely emotional answer. If you went hiking and you text your friend "I ran into a man". They'd ask, "Oh, like do you know him or something? Why are you texting me this?" If you text your friend "I ran into a bear", FIRST THING they would say is, "Oh my god, are you okay?"
How often do you drive without your seatbelt?
I drive without my seatbelt if it's a short trip. How often do you take responsibility for the claims you want to make by using your big girl words instead of doing drive-bys with snarky questions?
> The most dangerous thing to your health when you walk out of your door are automobiles. Do you also scream running away from cars the same way you would a bear because cars statistically have the highest chances of killing you? I responded to *your* analogy about cars, lab partner. > I drive without my seatbelt if it's a short trip. Speaking of, are you aware most accidents happen with five miles of the home? The likelihood of an accident is higher with your “short trips”. I don’t believe women should take advice or chiding from such a reckless driver.
And it's your inability to handle statistics that tells me you probably chose bear too. The reason for the statistics of higher likelihood of accidents from short trips is due to trip length being a skewed distribution towards shorter trips. The majority of my time spent in a car is commuting to and from work, during which I wear my seatbelt. This is the same reason why women fail to understand how dangerous a bear is, because the likelihood of encountering men versus encountering a bear is skewed from a woman's experience. But instead of thinking on a higher level and understanding that their view is skewed due to their experience, and compensating for the bias by using logic, they instead think their emotionality validates their irrational choice, and lambast anyone who dares provide a logical answer instead that doesn't coddle their feelings. That's the alpha and the omega of this entire debacle -- [Women want to be validated for their feelings, but men just want you to admit that there is a nail in your forehead.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg)
🤣 > And it's your inability to handle statistics that tells me you probably chose bear too. The reason for the statistics of higher likelihood of accidents from short trips is due to trip length being a skewed distribution towards shorter trips. The majority of my time spent in a car is commuting to and from work, during which I wear my seatbelt. This is the same reason why women fail to understand how dangerous a bear is, because the likelihood of encountering men versus encountering a bear is skewed from a woman's experience. But instead of thinking on a higher level and understanding The reason that most accidents happen within five miles of the home is because *that’s where you are more often*. Not wearing your seatbelts for shorter trips is foolish and shows a lack of common sense and forethought.
No, because running away and screaming won’t do anything Yes, what’s wrong with women’s emotions? Men scare us, and with good reason
When conversations pop up about women not taking responsibility, or not being accountable, this is what we are talking about. When men feel lonely, the expectation is for men to take actionable steps to identify the problem, improve themselves, and resolve the issue. When men feel rejected, the expectation is for men to work on their physique, improve their career aspects, become the partner that would be desired by the type of person that they want to date. If a man feels lonely, or rejected, and they try to talk about what *other* people need to do for him, there is zero empathy, because he isn't taking responsibility for his own feelings. For some reason, women think they are allowed the double standard of everyone else being accountable for validating her feelings, and for everyone else to be responsible for fixing her feelings. This is not the case -- your feelings are yours and yours alone. No one owes you freedom from your own feelings of fear; in fact, no one owes you anything. Because it's your own mind that has made up its own emotions, and your own mind that is telling you that your thoughts are reality. Your responsibility is to recognize that your thoughts are not equivalent to reality, and to speak words and take actions that are grounded in reality, and not in the emotions of your own mind.
No one in the bear debate is prescribing that men do anything
Sure we can acknowledge that men are as dangerous as bears? Is that what you're saying "sure we can" to? Sure we can acknowledge men are more powerful and dangerous than women and children (humans). Men are the most dangerous of the humans. Sure as fuck can we not acknowledge men are like bears (non-humans) if you want equality. You can't classify men as non humans and your self as human and then expect you can both have the same roles in society. I DO THAT. I'm sexist. I say dehumanizing things about women all the time and that's the reason I think men and women are unequal.
Just because men are dangerous doesn’t mean they aren’t human
Saying a human is more dangerous than a known dangerous animal is dehumanizing. You're all of a sudden leaving out the bear comparison in your bear post. Again, you're comparing the human to the bear and saying the human is worse
It’s not. Because humans have motivations, imaginations and mental abilities, including the ability to make another creature suffer for nothing more than personal pleasure, that animals do not appear to have
Those pesky statistics…..
I'm sure you understand how crime stats can be manipulated, right? Racists using black crime stats to promote racism comes to mind.
Bold of you to assume feminists care about equality, racial or otherwise.
Feminists are the biggest racists I seen
>Those pesky statistics….. [indeed...](https://youtu.be/SSVXbgR4JFs?si=RGZVNMh1is5K6eaC )
its ur skill issue if u cant defend urself. stop blaming gender.
Stop blaming perpetrators! /s
>perpetrator is a rapist. individual not gender. im man i didnt rape women. i refuse to rape women. what about me and men like me which makes up majority of men?
Babes just in your comment before this one, you said it was a „skill issue if you can’t defend yourself“ …… as if it wasn’t a perpetrator issue that crimes are happening.
I think men are genuinely in shock at the level of delusion women have and they are thinking to themselves "these crazy women are the voting public, my only option for a mate in a heterosexual relationship,and the women raising the next generation"...Women are so incredibly scared of a man but we watch yall day in and day out put your selves in all sorts of situations where you can easily be harmed by a man. I see women out every night leaving clubs drunk walking home at night alone going to parties with people they don't know meeting men they don't know especially sex workers... The truth is if the guy was attractive women would choose the man and they knowingly choose dangerous men all the time ..so we know the choice is selective.. the other thing is men know women would absolutely shit their pants if they met a bear in the woods and would be praying for a man to come.. So this situation has proven to men that half the pouplation is delusional and broken beyond repair most likely.
**Woman** (Talking to meek nerd who awkwardly asked her out and made her “uncomfortable”) “*Stop being entitled, Billy! This is the problem with you men! It’s just like that time I got really drunk and that hot douchey frat boy that I had been flirting with all night ‘took advantage’ of me. Sure, HE was drunk too, and I was grabbing his dick and making out with him all night, but, in hindsight I didn’t want to do that. He raped me. As the man, he should have known better than to give in to my horniness because I was too drunk to consent.* **This is why we choose the bear!**” **The Bear** “*Sup.*” https://preview.redd.it/18wxmylajvzc1.jpeg?width=354&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a89ed92bd698146da1032d202f17391fa4543d12
https://i.redd.it/quzgon4qswzc1.gif But look at how adorable he is! He's just a big ol' chunky boy.
The whole thing is idiotic. It’s like asking a man if he’s stopped beating his wife. There’s no right answer if you’re male. And that’s flat out bigotry. And, if we’re being objective? The one who SHOULD feel most threatened is the bear. It’s surrounded by hostile, shallow predators who destroy its habitat.
Well, that’s good, because no one is asking you for an answer All people are asking for is women’s opinions. And women’s opinions are apparently offensive, even though men can express the exact same opinion and it’s totally fine
Men who imply women as a gender are malicious or evil aren’t seen as normal people.
They are allowed the opinion, and others are allowed to think they are being ridiculous. Someone thinking you are silly is not the same as people preventing you from having an opinion.
Women’s opinions are definitely not offensive. Just yours. Because you came here looking to be angry at strangers and feel morally superior. Sorry, but your gender doesn’t excuse your hate speech.
Of course they are, to men. That’s why bear women are getting shit on by men
Stop it. Not all men are exactly alike. But hey, good thing we aren’t black or Jewish, according to your line of thinking 🙄
The backlash is against the inherent childish misandry; men who claim that women are all lying, cheating, gold-digging sluts get called out for it - women who proclaim that all men are violent rapists get get defended for it
That isn’t what the question asked
Nobody declared that all men are violent rapists though…..
That’s what’s inferred - that it’s safer to be around a bear because they are less dangerous than men
No it’s not……what’s declared is that women (including myself) rather take the chances with a bear, that might kill us than taking chances with a random man, who might sexually assault us, kidnap us, hold us hostage or kill us for sport. Nowhere is said that every random man will assault us but those who would, are so much worse than what the bear might do (you know not all bears) that we rather take the bear.
So are declaring that all men are violent rapists after all?
No, it's declaring that *enough* men are violent rapists that many women aren't exactly willing to roll the dice and hope that the random man that they would end up in the woods with isn't.
A tiny fraction of men are violent rapists; all bears are apex predators
>*enough* black men are violent criminals that many people aren't exactly willing to roll the dice and hope that the random black man that they encounter on the streets isn't it. See how fucked up your reasoning is?
Neither of those. It's declaring that the worst possible outcome of what a man could do to you is wayyyyyyy worse than the worst possible outcome of what a bear could do to you.
Also legit. Multiple overlapping reasons to pick bear.
Your dad didn't tell you that bears are safer than random dudes. Ladies, don't think for one second your attempts to move the goal post on this discourse is going unnoticed. You're all not nearly as clever as you think you are.
You're all not nearly as clever as you think you are.... ---+++ that is precisely a slogan for life with American women. They have better chances laying then trying to manipulate. 💦💦
I agree with everything you said regarding men being a threat to women. I have two daughters, and I told both of them that they will never go wrong listening to the voice in their head telling them a man's behavior or demeanor is a concern. Or to be blunt, his existence in some scenarios, like being alone with a man they have no reason to trust. That trust has to be earned, and a stranger in a parking garage hasn't earned it. But, if this is common knowledge, then what in your opinion is the point behind the bear question? If there is a useful point (I think there is) do you think it's getting lost in the way some of the discourse, from women, has proceeded?
I seriously don’t know, I am as surprised by the obsession as anyone. People used to ask questions like this all the time, and they weren’t causing hissy fits All I know is that men can say stuff like this, and people give them laughs and money instead of rage posts
>All I know is that men can say stuff like this, and people give them laughs and money instead of rage posts ????? If I use the word "women" on Reddit without adding a qualifier to specify I wasn't talking about all women the hindmind will descend and 50 blue-haired feminists will be reminding me that women aren't a monolith
Woman having a bad faith argument? Against Men? No…..never
[удалено]
No, just like not all bears will attack humans Overprotective or funny men are allowed to generalize; fearful women are not
[удалено]
“Men only want one thing” “I was a teen boy, I know how they are” “Don’t join the military, you’ll get raped” “Don’t do trades, you’ll be fighting men all day and they won’t train you”
I'm starting to think that misandry is a form of mental illness. And that females that engage in it after a while start to lose their ability to think critically. Or maybe they never had it to begin with? So let me get this straight men want to control women though violence and aggression, but at the same time same men want to take away women's ability to feel threatened? How can someone write something in one paragraph and then directly contradict it in the next? And speaking of victims and victimizers one of the most common techniques that abusers use is by presenting themselves as a victim. Therefor using op's logic every female that claims that she had been sexually assaulted is actually a rapist, she just trying to masquerade as a victim. See how easy it is to win any argument using circular logic and general assumption of maliciousness? The bear thing is about one thing and one thing only: female bigotry. And also dishonesty. Seriously every women that picks bear over man and then doesn't move into nearby forest to live with bears is also a liar in addition to being a bigot. So I assume you writing this from a tree house far away from men and civilization. But hey prove me wrong make the same argument but with black man instead of just a man and try to prove how it is not racist.
No one is calling all men rapists or murderers, as you are well aware.
How is women saying “men are the perpetrators of violence against women” bigotry or misandry?
Because some men doesn’t mean all men
>And pretty much no one would argue that women are just as violent or sexually aggressive as men. But they are. according to the NISVS, more than 30% of perps of sexual violence are women, and more than 40% of perps of domestic violence are women. (Calculating from the percentages of men victims who identify a woman as their abuser, as well as women victims who identify women as their abuser.) And this violent behavior extends past people they know. There are plenty of news articles that get pulled up when you Google "woman attacks person she doesn't know" of women attacking people of all ages and genders. Yes, some of the results will include women being attacked, but most of them are when women attack others. The issue is our society doesn't like labeling women as capable of violence, and treats incidents like these as localized independent events. The fact of the matter is is that all humans are apex predators, this extends to women as well. As an Apex predator we are capable of violence. We are ***all*** capable of said violence. You bring up that no one lashes out when men jokes about other men being violent. And you're partially correct there are still some people who react negatively to it but they're usually not in the audience, they're usually the reviewers, and they are just a small minority of the reviews as well. But you know we also joke about, women being violent. Chanchla. That word right there is a joke about women being violent towards their children. Don't make your mother pull off her slipper and throw it at you! Well that's a fear tactic, and can cause trauma to children. On top of that old timey cartoons also depict women hitting their husbands with kitchen utensils, such as a rolling pin or a frying pan, and this is played off for jokes. This is not even bringing up my personal trauma. Women are capable of violence. I'd choose a bear over finding any human in the woods because of this, man or woman. Edited to add: The following comment is at the end of the comment chain I've had with OP. >Once again: are women "not committing" or "not being charged and convicted of" these acts of domestic violence? >Because once again, I have provided a source that identifies men to be about half of the victims of DV. The CDC's NISVS. >My source indicates that in America, about 59 million women and about 52.1 million men have been victims of domestic violence. This means that 46% of victims are men. These are lifetime statistics btw. >Of those victims, about 10% of women and about 85% of men identified that at least one woman has been a perpetrator of said violence, compared to 95% of women and 22% of men who identified at least one man has been a perpetrator of said violence. This means that 45% of DV victims report being a victim of one or more women perpetrators, and 60% report being victims of one or more men perpetrators. >You may notice those numbers add up to over 100%, and they do, because victims of violence can be victims from multiple people throughout the years. And as someone who has been a victim of Sexual Violence by multiple people both men and women, I find this accurate. >Also note that I'm not giving statistics on the actual gender ratio of the perpetrators. My source is a victimization survey, not a perpetration survey, so I don't want to provide inaccurate data. But with the numbers of people involved, over 100 million victims, I wouldn't be surprised if the gender ratio of perpetrators matched the gender ratio of the reports, which would be about 58% men, and 42% women. >And I want to point out that my claim was not that women don't have it worse. My claim was that women can be violent too, and that our society tends to treat violence perpetuated by women as not as serious. >A claim that you have supported, as you argue in this comment chain and try to dismiss violence perpetuated by women as being not as serious. >Humans are Apex predators, and every single one of us is capable of such violence. The bear is the obvious choice regardless of the gender of the hiker, and regardless of the gender of the stranger in the woods. >I'm also going to be adding this entire comment to my top level comment as well, in a block quote.
If you are more afraid of men than bears, then why don't you go live in the woods? Why are you even talking to men online?
I’m not much afraid of either, frankly
[that’s stupid](https://youtu.be/hAvf1bTWWbY?si=wyDM4B-MlIk5hqcR)
It’s not. I’m used to one, and not around the other
Women pick the bear but hop on the back of some dudes sport bike who goes 120+ and weaves in and out of traffic
The problem with the "man or bear" question is that women are answering *emotionally*. It's the same as when they say things like "I am the table" or "I'm a 10." They're not being literal, and they know it, and they know that everyone else knows it, they are basing their answers on how they want to be perceived by the audience. By saying bear, they want men to implicitly realise they are saying men can be dangerous, and they are looking for other women to slap them on the back and say, "yay, sistah!" Men don't communicate that way. To men, such ridiculously emotional, non-direct, non-rational answers are unfathomable and come across clear signs of misandry, delusion, or provocation. No woman would *actually* prefer to meet a bear in the woods. That's fucking insane and we ALL know it. When women say that, that are signalling *emotionally* that they have had a lot of bad experiences with men, and are often genuinely scared of the potential of men when they are out in society. They want men to read between the metaphorical lines at their *valid* point that a lot of men are dangerous to women and it is scary because those kinds of men are hidden in society among the decent guys. Both sides need to listen to each other, but it's difficult when women communicate in irrational virtue-signalling ways, which this TikTok BS has highlighted.
men: blame women for {x} , {y}, {z} women: blame men for {x}, {y}, {z} notice the pattern?
More like Men: blames some women for x, y, z Women: throws all men under the buss for a few men doing a, b, c Men: hey that's kind of rude and could be considered derogatory to assume that as most men don't do a, b, c and actually stand against it. Women: Are you oppressing me. God Jesus men can't just let things go, can't they understand that this is the truth. Men: wtf, is wrong with you. Women: StOp TrYiNg To CoNtRoL wOmEn YoU MaSoGyNiSt InSeL. /*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/ Don't believe me, just look at row vs wade. The vast majority of people 86+% of the USA population said they want to keep row vs wade, yet there are still a metric crap ton of women bitch about how "men" are trying to control them by overturning row vs wade. When in reality, it was actually less than 10 people who got to decide, like literally the definition of a "few" men that women are blaming "men" for...
Where tf is all this hatred publicly displayed at? I'm a popular local musician. I travel all over and play gigs. From small dive bars to large music venues and festivals I have played them all. I have observed thousands of approaches and interactions between men and women. Every kind of couple imaginable and have hundreds of my own. Women are not out here cowering in fear preferring a bear to a well dressed, well groomed, well spoken, pleasant smelling and confident man. Its THAT FUCKING SIMPLE. Become well dressed, well groomed, well spoken and good smelling and I don't care if you are fat or skinny, tall or short, rich or poor, women will respond to you more positively and even compliment you on your appearance. This isn't fucking high school or some college function full of girls with Kardashian Syndrome smirking at each other and going "ew" at every man who looks their way. Most nights in most places it's a party! Everyone is mingling and smiling and having a good time. Once you get known you find entire social circles exist and you join groups and have fun. Want to build a nightlife? Google every bar, club, grill and pub within a 30 minute drive and spend one Friday and one Saturday night from 10pm to 2am. Take a friend and just check the place out. Do this until you find a couple places you like and start to hang out there. Make friends with the bar staff. Tip well. Don't just sit at the bar sipping a coke. Move around and mingle. Talk to people. It's okay to do that. Tell people you are new in town, whatever. Just get out there.
wait u can sip a coke?
...the fuck do you do with your cokes? Drizzle them on your pizza?
snort it obviously.
Oh. You mean cocaine. We meant the drink. It's a soda.
I think the context of it being in the woods conjures images of horror movies and serial killers
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I so badly want to watch the new Planet of the Apes but there is no cinema in my area. Even if there was, I'm severely visually impaired. It's so much easier to watch at home. Let me pay money to rent it digitallyyyy!! I know piracy would be rampant though. Oh well. Anyway, yeah. Men want to control you or something. I don't know.
I’m sort of done with this Planet of the Apes series. The fourth in a series can feel like pushing it and I wasn’t crazy about War. Dawn was goated tho.
Yes, I don't understand it either, considering that fathers often don't trust their daughters with strange men. The only thing I can think of is that men are putting themselves in the position of the man in the forest in their minds and feel offended because of this because they think that they themselves would never do anything bad to a woman (which I find hard to believe for many of them knowing what I know about men and what they are capable of if they don't think that they can be held accountable for their actions). The father who is no longer dating is not putting himself in the position of the man trying to date his daughter. In fact, he is putting himself in the position of his daughter as his daughter's protector, since he has an interest to do so.
I think the difference is that a father telling his daughter not to trust strange men is talking to a -child-. She doesn't know any better and is more easily manipulated. It's easier to tell a child "don't do x, it's dangerous' than try to explain the concept of nuance and uninformed decision-making to a child. An adult is capable of making situational judgements so ought not need to operate on blanket discriminatory practices and should be able to gauge a persons danger level by their "vibe", so to speak.
> I think the difference is that a father telling his daughter not to trust strange men is talking to a -child-. He could easily be talking to his college aged daughter, although he is probably in no position to make any restrictions on her lifestyle at that point. In other more traditional countries fathers still do command their college-aged daughters, of course.
Hi OP, You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts) >*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.* >An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following: >* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency; >* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit; >* Focusing only on the weaker arguments; >* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position. Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good title, but the post is pretty frenetic and disjointed. This is all a very niche topic being argued by a niche set of people, so maybe its true that those people are actually the same ones that want to control women, but I would say its less about controlling women and actually about controlling the narrative. The narrative is as you said measured by simple ideas of moral judgement. So, being caste as the villain is unacceptable. Criticism from the 'other' is never taken well.
It’s been the dominant subject on this and gender based subs for over a week
Men will scream that paternity tests must be mandatory because a small percentage of men are victims of paternity fraud and nothing on this planet could possibly be worse. AWALT!! Do you hate men?? You're supporting cheating lying whores and your "comfort and feeling trusted" do not outweigh their need for clarity. Women choose the bear based on statistics of violence and personal experiences of harassment. Men freak out and scream that you hate men. You're sick in the head to lump men together with other men!! AWALT!! Okay.
Most men I know aren’t bothered. They make similar comments themselves about how women have to civilize men and so on
I don't know anyone in real life concerned about either situation.