Nobody has claimed that bears aren't dangerous.

The fact is: despite the fact that everyone knows bears are dangerous, many women when asked say they would rather encounter a bear than a man. That isn't saying they don't think bears are dengerous, it speaks volumes about their regular encounters with men.

Saying "um acksully bears are very dangerous" is ignoring the point to have an argument that no one is actually arguing against.

What the... No, your objection was "picking and choos[ing]" (ex:) if you were just in the woods with a bear vs. had to interact with a man

I said yes, that's not the initial question, and presented that simply being alone in the woods with a bear is an extremely common occurence, a reference to the "170 million black bears of prigozhin" comment from earlier.

Now you're mad I'm presenting those two options as always having been treated as their equivalent forms, and yet still maintaining my earlier position after explaining the details of the question. But... why would my answer have changed? My position or the premise it was based on never changed. I never misunderstood anything about the question. You were the one that interpreted the discussion incorrectly.