▲ 602 ▼ manbearpig (quokk.au) submitted 10 months ago by Deceptichum to c/peoplemastodon locked 365 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (59 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 59 child comments replies: [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 60 points 10 months ago (18 children) There have been 3 bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal. Now do men. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 45 points 10 months ago (14 children) 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/ in 2021, 147 women were killed by 144 men. 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 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] Deceptichum [S] 18 points 10 months ago (1 child) You didn't factor in the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 11 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 19 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago Is that scaling for interactions? Total amount of women who've interacted with a bear VS a man. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago (1 child) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] homura1650@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (1 child) There were 3,849 women murdered in the US in 2023 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago I'm sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 6 points 10 months ago You can't control other peoples sexuality, dork. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] SketchySeaBeast@lemmy.ca 33 points 10 months ago (9 children) Your mind is going to be blown when you find out about the number of man attacks this year. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 7 points 10 months ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (7 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (6 children) Estimates suggest there are between 110,000,000,000,000 and over 1,000,000,000,000,000 mosquitoes in the world Malaria continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death in the world, resulting in nearly 263,000,000 cases and 597,000 deaths across 83 countries in 2023. so... yeah just a smidge unbalanced. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago smidge permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 10 months ago (2 children) I bet even male toddlers killed more people in the us permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago Probably. It's hard to research, though, since there's so much material about how more and more kids are dying these days permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] ideonek@piefed.social 14 points 10 months ago (1 child) "Humans also generally leave you alone if you're not in their immediate vicinity" You should talk to a women one day. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 child) you get only 2-5 *actual attacks* reported per year. There have been 3 black bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal, and one brown bear attack, also fatal. 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! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (21 children) Four is between two and five, though? Which is exactly what they said? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 21 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago* (12 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago 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! permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (5 children) 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 5 child comments replies: [–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 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 4 child comments replies: [–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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 [–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 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? permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago* 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 60 points 10 months ago (18 children) There have been 3 bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal. Now do men. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 45 points 10 months ago (14 children) 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/ in 2021, 147 women were killed by 144 men. 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 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] Deceptichum [S] 18 points 10 months ago (1 child) You didn't factor in the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 11 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 19 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago Is that scaling for interactions? Total amount of women who've interacted with a bear VS a man. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago (1 child) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] homura1650@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (1 child) There were 3,849 women murdered in the US in 2023 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago I'm sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 6 points 10 months ago You can't control other peoples sexuality, dork. permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] nocturne@piefed.social 45 points 10 months ago (14 children) 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/ in 2021, 147 women were killed by 144 men. 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 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] Deceptichum [S] 18 points 10 months ago (1 child) You didn't factor in the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 11 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 19 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago Is that scaling for interactions? Total amount of women who've interacted with a bear VS a man. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago (1 child) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] homura1650@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (1 child) There were 3,849 women murdered in the US in 2023 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago I'm sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Deceptichum [S] 18 points 10 months ago (1 child) You didn't factor in the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 11 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 19 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] msage@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] nocturne@piefed.social 8 points 10 months ago You are also the reason why people choose bears. That was my thought reading every single one of their replies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago Is that scaling for interactions? Total amount of women who've interacted with a bear VS a man. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago (1 child) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] homura1650@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago permalink fedilink source parent
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (1 child) There were 3,849 women murdered in the US in 2023 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago I'm sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago I'm sure your keen criticism of statistical assessments of the situation will change the minds of woman everywhere. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 6 points 10 months ago You can't control other peoples sexuality, dork. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SketchySeaBeast@lemmy.ca 33 points 10 months ago (9 children) Your mind is going to be blown when you find out about the number of man attacks this year. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 7 points 10 months ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (7 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (6 children) Estimates suggest there are between 110,000,000,000,000 and over 1,000,000,000,000,000 mosquitoes in the world Malaria continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death in the world, resulting in nearly 263,000,000 cases and 597,000 deaths across 83 countries in 2023. so... yeah just a smidge unbalanced. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago smidge permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 7 points 10 months ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (7 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (6 children) Estimates suggest there are between 110,000,000,000,000 and over 1,000,000,000,000,000 mosquitoes in the world Malaria continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death in the world, resulting in nearly 263,000,000 cases and 597,000 deaths across 83 countries in 2023. so... yeah just a smidge unbalanced. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago smidge permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (7 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (6 children) Estimates suggest there are between 110,000,000,000,000 and over 1,000,000,000,000,000 mosquitoes in the world Malaria continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death in the world, resulting in nearly 263,000,000 cases and 597,000 deaths across 83 countries in 2023. so... yeah just a smidge unbalanced. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago smidge permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (6 children) Estimates suggest there are between 110,000,000,000,000 and over 1,000,000,000,000,000 mosquitoes in the world Malaria continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death in the world, resulting in nearly 263,000,000 cases and 597,000 deaths across 83 countries in 2023. so... yeah just a smidge unbalanced. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago smidge permalink fedilink source parent [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 4 points 10 months ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago* (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (1 child) ... 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? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 10 months ago (2 children) I bet even male toddlers killed more people in the us permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago Probably. It's hard to research, though, since there's so much material about how more and more kids are dying these days permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago Probably. It's hard to research, though, since there's so much material about how more and more kids are dying these days permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ideonek@piefed.social 14 points 10 months ago (1 child) "Humans also generally leave you alone if you're not in their immediate vicinity" You should talk to a women one day. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] grue@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 child) you get only 2-5 *actual attacks* reported per year. There have been 3 black bear attacks in the USA this year, all three fatal, and one brown bear attack, also fatal. 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! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (21 children) Four is between two and five, though? Which is exactly what they said? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 21 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago* (12 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago 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! permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (5 children) 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 5 child comments replies: [–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 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 4 child comments replies: [–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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 [–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 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? permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago* (12 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago 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! permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (5 children) 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 5 child comments replies: [–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 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 4 child comments replies: [–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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 [–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 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? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago* (12 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago 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! permalink fedilink source parent [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago 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! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] msage@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 3 points 10 months ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] msage@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 2 points 10 months ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (4 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (2 children) ... 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it replies: [–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (5 children) 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 5 child comments replies: [–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 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 4 child comments replies: [–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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 [–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 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 4 child comments replies: [–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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 [–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RaccoonBall@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago* 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 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
[–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 45% to 55% of women have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15 in the European Union. https://interactive.unwomen.org/multimedia/infographic/violenceagainstwomen/en/index.html permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago 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? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago* 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. permalink fedilink source parent
