There have been 3 black bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal, and one brown bear attack, also fatal. I might also be missing some nonfatal attacks since theres not a well maintained list for those. Humans also generally leave you alone if you’re not in their immediate vicinity, I think it warrants assuming you’re not just on the same mountain as the bear.
using the lower number from 2021, and the bear fatalities from the same year (6 total, only 4 were women), women are 36.5 times more likely to be killed by a man than a bear… and this is not counting rape.
By gender, the overwhelming majority of accident drivers are men (13,085 : 5,212). So if you’re worried specifically about dying and you exclude all murderers, just getting in a car makes other male drivers vastly more dangerous than bears.
Holy shit, that’s nuts! This should be in the top comments for this silly hypothetical lol. I think you just checkmated nearly everyone trying to argue against the bear.
By gender, the overwhelming majority of accident drivers are men (13,085 : 5,212). So if you’re worried specifically about dying and you exclude all murderers, just getting in a car makes other male drivers vastly more dangerous than bears.
Probably a bad example for your case of being an obtuse asshole almost every time any subject comes up (we recognize our own.)
Mosquitos are incredibly deadly to humans but they’re also like hundreds of trillions of them at any given time, so an average mosquito is still significantly less dangerous to a woman than an average man.
Quite the opposite, the murder rate would be higher if there were 110,000,000,000,000 men and even higher still if it were bears, it has perfectly helped my point significantly.
edit: no I’ve been trying to figure out what that has to do with this conversation and I’m still lost. Where did you get 110 trillion men from? What does that have to do with anything? Why are we multiplying bears?
Are you telling me that’s not enough death to warrant caution? Imagine if there were 170 Million Bears, maybe thats a better visual for you to compare.
Are you really trying to present this argument as people saying you shouldn’t be cautious around bears? Have you lived around bears? Yeah, be cautious around bears - but that caution takes the form of “make sure you don’t surprise the bear”. Bears don’t want to be involved with you any more than you want to be involved with them. They will avoid you.
I can’t tell if you’re thoroughly disingenuous or you actually can’t tell what this discussion is about. Involvement with the bear or avoidance of the bear were explicitly declared non-optional.
You’ve actually perfectly encapsulated my point that your personal bias has caused a random and illogical dismissal of the potential harm a bear can cause. It’s like bears don’t exist at all in your mind, the options are men or not men to you.
Honestly confused, do you mean in your initial comment you were asserting that the choices were either “interact with man” or “interact with bear”? Because if so that was never the premise of the initial question, and nobody else here appears to be discussing it like it was.
The bear and man options are presented as equivalent, so you’re either interacting with either or simply on the same mountain as either, you can’t just pick and choose for each instance or the question needs to be reformatted.
… The initial question doesn’t frame it like that, yes; however I don’t see anyone here implying it does, so I’m unclear on how it’s at all relevant. The initial question is “would you rather be in the woods alone with a bear or with a man you didn’t know” - being alone in the woods with a bear is an extremely common thing (I was alone in the woods with countless bears not moments ago when I stepped outside), and the risks carried by either option are the entire point of the question.
Explain how the bear is statistically safer; you would need to factor in not just total incidences, but total interactions, otherwise it’s a sharpshooter fallacy.
The average woman likely has tens of thousands of hours with strange men and no incident, and it would be extremely surprising that the bear stats would be better than that.
I wouldn’t be surprised that even if you only selected men convicted of violence on women, the bears would still be statistically more dangerous (or it would at least be a somewhat close comparison).
This is getting into the weeds a bit though and not really in the spirit of the original question.
It doesn’t matter if there is a bus full of men and only one is a creep. The woman isn’t going to remember the 99 men who left her alone, she’s going to remember the 1 that stared at her the whole time.
If this was your experience every day it would not be surprising at all to not want to be around a random man.
Not all men are creeps, but all women have been creeped on.
no i can’t. i can only imagine two million bears in a large space, like say the washington dc mall. that’s the most i can realistically comprehend. two million shirtless bears. would someone get me a mai tai?
I can’t tell if this a serious comment. There were only three in the entire United States? God damn dude, maybe I’ll take the bear as well… And I’m a guy.
I guess you’ve sold us all on how much better the bear is. For the record, I encountered a bear earlier this year and yelled at it. It walked away.
There have been 3 black bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal, and one brown bear attack, also fatal. I might also be missing some nonfatal attacks since theres not a well maintained list for those. Humans also generally leave you alone if you’re not in their immediate vicinity, I think it warrants assuming you’re not just on the same mountain as the bear.
Now do men.
There were 3,849 women murdered in the US in 2023. But it does not list who killed them.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1388777/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-gender/
https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2024/07/04/census-details-how-often-men-kill-women
using the lower number from 2021, and the bear fatalities from the same year (6 total, only 4 were women), women are 36.5 times more likely to be killed by a man than a bear… and this is not counting rape.
Bear attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America
You didn’t figure in factors like number of men total or number of bears total, and the amount of exposure to either.
You are such an asshole.
I’m not the first to say that, not the last, but you need to be reminded of that constantly.
Fuck you, fuck your bad faith arguments, and go away.
You are also the reason why people choose bears.
That was my thought reading every single one of their replies.
I don’t know who this guy is, nor do I want to read their history… But I agree, they do seem like an asshole.
I’ve never met this person before in my life.
You didn’t factor in the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow.
How many men existed in 2021 and how many bears existed in 2021?almost got the per capita rates
Also if you’re going to include the rape statistics you gotta include them for bears too.
100% of bear sexual encounters are rape.
I’m sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere.
Is that scaling for interactions? Total amount of women who’ve interacted with a bear VS a man.
Murder isn’t the only way to be killed. Case in point, 2,958 women’s deaths are classified as “passenger vehicle accidents”, plus another 2,126 pedestrian deaths.
By gender, the overwhelming majority of accident drivers are men (13,085 : 5,212). So if you’re worried specifically about dying and you exclude all murderers, just getting in a car makes other male drivers vastly more dangerous than bears.
Holy shit, that’s nuts! This should be in the top comments for this silly hypothetical lol. I think you just checkmated nearly everyone trying to argue against the bear.
You can’t control other peoples sexuality, dork.
Now do cars
2,958 women’s deaths are classified as “passenger vehicle accidents”, plus another 2,126 pedestrian deaths.
By gender, the overwhelming majority of accident drivers are men (13,085 : 5,212). So if you’re worried specifically about dying and you exclude all murderers, just getting in a car makes other male drivers vastly more dangerous than bears.
Your mind is going to be blown when you find out about the number of man attacks this year.
Better yet, what about Mosquitos?
Probably a bad example for your case of being an obtuse asshole almost every time any subject comes up (we recognize our own.)
Mosquitos are incredibly deadly to humans but they’re also like hundreds of trillions of them at any given time, so an average mosquito is still significantly less dangerous to a woman than an average man.
so… yeah just a smidge unbalanced.
The irony of saying it’s bad to compare mosquitos to men based on number of each and interactions, while comparing men to bears.
No its just bad for you to do it, since mosquitoes are even safer to be around than bears and thus the comparison does not at all aid your argument.
Quite the opposite, the murder rate would be higher if there were 110,000,000,000,000 men and even higher still if it were bears, it has perfectly helped my point significantly.
… what.
edit: no I’ve been trying to figure out what that has to do with this conversation and I’m still lost. Where did you get 110 trillion men from? What does that have to do with anything? Why are we multiplying bears?
I bet even male toddlers killed more people in the us
Probably. It’s hard to research, though, since there’s so much material about how more and more kids are dying these days
There are also a lot more of them, and surprisingly they have more access to firearms and vehicles.
“Humans also generally leave you alone if you’re not in their immediate vicinity”
You should talk to a women one day.
I bet you haven’t even touched grass in 5 months.
And is 3 + 1 within the range [2, 5]? I know it’s a tough question, but I have faith you can manage to figure it out!
I never said it was anything but.
Four is between two and five, though? Which is exactly what they said?
Are you telling me that’s not enough death to warrant caution? Imagine if there were 170 Million Bears, maybe thats a better visual for you to compare.
Are you really trying to present this argument as people saying you shouldn’t be cautious around bears? Have you lived around bears? Yeah, be cautious around bears - but that caution takes the form of “make sure you don’t surprise the bear”. Bears don’t want to be involved with you any more than you want to be involved with them. They will avoid you.
A perfect juxtaposition for incels!
I can’t tell if you’re thoroughly disingenuous or you actually can’t tell what this discussion is about. Involvement with the bear or avoidance of the bear were explicitly declared non-optional.
You are missing the point of the original experiment, and continue to misdirect the discussion into your predeterminted views.
So again, fuck you for that.
The only thing that matters is that “some MEN ARE A DANGER TO WOMEN”.
Disregarding that you only support the attackers. Simple as.
You’ve actually perfectly encapsulated my point that your personal bias has caused a random and illogical dismissal of the potential harm a bear can cause. It’s like bears don’t exist at all in your mind, the options are men or not men to you.
Nobody, and I do mean NOBODY cares about bears. Everyone knows they can and will kill you.
But that’s the upside: an understood and agreed danger.
Men can and will kill men and women, in great numbers every year. And people choose to ignore that.
Like, I don’t know, derailing conversations to talk about bears.
This conversation was always about bears, go start a new thread.
Honestly confused, do you mean in your initial comment you were asserting that the choices were either “interact with man” or “interact with bear”? Because if so that was never the premise of the initial question, and nobody else here appears to be discussing it like it was.
The bear and man options are presented as equivalent, so you’re either interacting with either or simply on the same mountain as either, you can’t just pick and choose for each instance or the question needs to be reformatted.
… The initial question doesn’t frame it like that, yes; however I don’t see anyone here implying it does, so I’m unclear on how it’s at all relevant. The initial question is “would you rather be in the woods alone with a bear or with a man you didn’t know” - being alone in the woods with a bear is an extremely common thing (I was alone in the woods with countless bears not moments ago when I stepped outside), and the risks carried by either option are the entire point of the question.
“the initial question doesn’t frame it like that”
*proceeds to frame it as equivalent and still defend the bear option
Yet men killing a shit ton more women than that per year isn’t a good enough reason to warrant caution? Statistically the bear is still safer.
Edit: You also don’t have to falsely inflate the population of men to create a hyperbolic fantasy situation to justify choosing the bear.
Explain how the bear is statistically safer; you would need to factor in not just total incidences, but total interactions, otherwise it’s a sharpshooter fallacy.
The average woman likely has tens of thousands of hours with strange men and no incident, and it would be extremely surprising that the bear stats would be better than that.
I wouldn’t be surprised that even if you only selected men convicted of violence on women, the bears would still be statistically more dangerous (or it would at least be a somewhat close comparison).
This is getting into the weeds a bit though and not really in the spirit of the original question.
the average woman has had ‘no incident’ with men?
you need to listen to some women
or alternatively, you can make your statistical point without hyperbole
I’ve already committed enough of my time to this stupid as fuck conversation, it’s not worth my time.
Instead, a fun animal fact, sharks are older than both trees and Polaris, the north star.
Women existing in public: https://www.tiktok.com/@specere/video/7472932570162924831
It doesn’t matter if there is a bus full of men and only one is a creep. The woman isn’t going to remember the 99 men who left her alone, she’s going to remember the 1 that stared at her the whole time.
If this was your experience every day it would not be surprising at all to not want to be around a random man.
Not all men are creeps, but all women have been creeped on.
https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html
no i can’t. i can only imagine two million bears in a large space, like say the washington dc mall. that’s the most i can realistically comprehend. two million shirtless bears. would someone get me a mai tai?
I can’t tell if this a serious comment. There were only three in the entire United States? God damn dude, maybe I’ll take the bear as well… And I’m a guy.
I guess you’ve sold us all on how much better the bear is. For the record, I encountered a bear earlier this year and yelled at it. It walked away.