608
manbearpig (quokk.au)
submitted 7 months ago by [M] to c/peoplemastodon@quokk.au
360 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent