“b-but bears are actually dangerous!” Shut the hell up.
People’s safety is more important than people’s feelings.
Indeed. It strikes me as pointlessly gendered. All people, safety is more important than feelings.
The whole thing was meant to be rage bait.
or it’s purposefully gendered in response to the man vs bear thing
Which is also rage bait
Yeah this meme as well as the original bear one were meant to be divisive and make people angry. That’s the point of these kinds of memes, they’re not really meant to be intelligent, they’re meant to stir up drama and make people fight.
you know what else is pointlessly gendered? the patriarchyfeminist messaging has to be gendered because the patriarchy is a gender issue.
that said, feminism is for everybody. liberating women from oppressive structures by nature does the same for men.
If it’s not gendered and is for everybody, that isn’t that just the original statement? That safety is for everybody? That seems rather circular.
But I think I get what you’re saying. We focus on lifting up women, and everyone benefits.
yeah i see how my comment was a little confusing let me try to edit :p thanks for the good faith question tho
Hey no worries. More people should act in good faith in my opinion. We don’t even have to agree with everyone but we should have mutual respect for each other and want a better world.
If this weren’t gendered I’m not sure I would connect that this was posted as result of people’s reaction to the bears vs men thing.
Ah, good point! None of us would be here in that case.
That gives me feelings of “All lives matter” which minimized the issues of black people. Can you explain why this is different?
It’s not, this tread is filled with Incels.
Except one has built in meaning and the other is a simple meme made by one person with an oversimplified idea used likely to stir up people considering all the discussions happening about bears or whatever.
dsfgasfsaf
It’s disingenuous all the way down
BLM, no sarcasm.
Are you really all lives mattering this post rn? God damn dude. I hope every person in your life belittles every problem you personally have by telling you that tons of people have that problem.
BLM, no sarcasm.
deleted by creator
And all lives matter, right? How else can we commandeer this conversation?
BLM, no sarcasm.
dsfgasfsaf
all lives matter amirite /s
BLM, no sarcasm.
the bureau of land management is on some shit istg
this statement is funny to me, because linguistically, safety is a relatively “felt” concept. We “feel” exposed in a massive open field, and we “feel” safe inside of a building, because we are no longer exposed in a massive wide open field.
In some aspects, physical safety is a thing, but given the context of this thread here, i think it’s probably appropriate to say that it’s actually the feeling of safety here, that matters more than anything. And as a result, this makes the statement a non starter.
Because to some degree, that feeling of safety, is based on well… Feelings, and if feelings are somehow less important than the safety that those feelings are capable of deriving, than how are you supposed to experience safety?
Physical safety or psychological safety?
I have some extra emotional capacity today so(see edit*) I’ll post some wrong think: but can we stop antagonizing populations that feel disenfranchised by society and therefor giving the truly evil fucks out there an easy population to brainwash and feed extra scummy ideologies to?Young nerdy men who feel excluded from society that dont have any strong female figures in their life are barraged by a constant stream of messaging that could easily be interpreted as “(white) men are evil and the source of all problems with society”
By constantly antagonizing them for not being able to navigate the political nuance of those messages, we give an incredibly easy pathway to the more toxic ideologies that the Tates of the world will pull them into to profit off of them, because they are the only figures who will give them praise and a sense of belonging.
Edit: Its a new day now, and I no longer have the energy. If you want to vent, understanding that venting in this manner will bring about little to no positive change, you do you, I will no longer be responding
yeah this pretty much.
Polarized speech does nothing for anybody. If woman are talking about this bear thing to make a point, i feel like we would be better off actually making sure that people understood that it was about making a point, rather than a literal fucking interpretation of the problem
but no, funny internet points are more important, capitalism ruins everything it fucking touches.
These kinds of things are great for letting off steam with friends, but absolutely TERRIBLE at getting a point across to people who dont already know said point
specifically the intent here is to drum up drama, controversy and attention. Which obviously worked, but the problem is that nobody is using it to do something productive with.
Some people are definitely using it to create drama sure, but others are using it to vent, and yet others dont understand why some men wouldnt just try to understand why women would choose the bear… basically its a clusterfuck of a meme
i only said drama since i think the point of it is to bring up discussion around the problem at hand here, the problem being that people dont understand that part of it.
Yeah the whole “any press is good press” idea mostly applies to things you want to make money from because for any position you can think of, there’s people out there that will support it. So, given your position, if you can get more attention by creating loud arguments, even if they are generally against you, that extra noise means you’ll reach more people that might be sympathetic to your position, and you’ll increase revenue from those people.
If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.
One of the real dangers of sexism and racism and all that is that it generates more sexism and racism. So even if you decide that you really don’t care about group x, you’re done with them and they can all die in a fire and you don’t even care if that makes you evil, expressing that will contribute to a cycle that will come back to hurt others in your group.
It’s why genocide keeps coming up in human history. That’s where this all leads when it’s a racist or cultural thing. Sexism is different because the genders can’t survive without each other, but it is a reason why we’re seeing a resurgence of conservatives willing to unironically talk about the worst parts of patriarchism as if they are good things, like women just existing as servants to men.
Though when I look at everything going on in the world, it really feels like humanity in general needs to get the fight out of their system because so many conflicts are caught in this kind of cycle with no peaceful resolution in sight for any of it that doesn’t involve some major compromises on things I’m not sure anyone is willing to compromise on. WWIII is going to be messy because I think the national conflicts might be overshadowed by domestic ones, which will cause even more issues as they spill into each other.
If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.
i think the intent was to be inflammatory to gather the obvious negative responses and double back on those so you can use the whole thing as publicity stunt essentially. Though there are going to be negative aspects of it, that’s why i’ve been pretty critical over most of it.
As for patriarchy, i think it’s both a bit of thinking back to the good old days, and trying to edge a little bit of “trust me bro, it’s going to work” out of people. Because for men, it obviously has some advantages that we don’t need to talk about, but they also have to sell it to women, so they’re selling it by claiming stuff like “you won’t have to work anymore” and the list goes on really. None of that is true or beneficial, but an incorrect statement sells a good story, so.
Honestly, i don’t forsee a world war 3, i feel like it would’ve already happened if it would have. At best north korea is going to try and pull some shit, but that will almost certainly do nothing. I think realistically a lot of places are going to collectively agree on “enemy bad” “kill enemy” and there is a non zero chance that some sort of mutiny happens during or immediately after, but given some time people won’t want it. I don’t really think it’s a significant concern to be honest, i think most of the political shit is mostly rhetoric, things seem a lot worse than they are, a lot of bark and no bite essentially.
If ww3 ever happens it’s going to be incredibly messy, because ww2 was, and ww1 even more so before it.
But many do just that, then you focus on the ones that don’t, every cycle. Over and over. You choose what to focus on. Not we as a society, literally you. You choose to engage with that negative part of it and continue to. Nobody is forcing you
it’s been getting better as of recent, initially when i first dug into it things were quite a bit worse than they are now, people seemingly have had some time to think about it, and figured out that “yeah this is kind of stupid”
You choose what to focus on. Not we as a society, literally you. You choose to engage with that negative part of it and continue to. Nobody is forcing you
i have a fascinating idea for you to consider. I being an individual person of my own accord, can simply choose what i want to think about. The problem that i have is with the people who aren’t engaging with it productively, it’d be weird for me to insult people who were, or pretty fucking pretentious for me to compliment people who do, although i’ve probably done that at least once. Given that the singular me, doesn’t constitute the whole of society, and the fact that i don’t proclaim to be god or something, i think that’s pretty reasonable.
Like here’s another fun fact, you can just ignore me. I won’t be offended.
It’d be rather weird to identify a problem in a system, and spend 50% of your time contemplating and observing the working portions of it that you already understand, no?
Instead of absorbing some kind of stance where now I am the one contradicting myself, you could just skip the defense where I get to be pretentious, and go straight into the realisation that it’s only trying to be helpful. I’m not sugarcoating it because it just makes it even harder to understand the root of your complaint, which is that you, yourself, focus on something you don’t want to. Not that others do it. Because they choose also what they focus on and have already chosen that. I focus on something I want to when I write to you, I like helping real people that deserve it, to get out of shit that I have been in. So essentially, it’s just a long dialog with society that they should x or y, that you are focusing on but you wish it was yourself you were talking to. It’s not going to make any difference who reads it and it’s easier to run over the choice to make sure stuff in general in your life don’t also get more and more compulsive
Instead of absorbing some kind of stance where now I am the one contradicting myself,
i’m not sure how that would make you contradictory with yourself. I’m just saying that this is a micro specific, not a macro specific, like you were stating. I’m aware that i’m looking at through an incredibly tight view, that’s kind of the point actually.
I’m not here to talk about the broad environment here, because if i was, i’d have written a three hundred page study on it, and published it by now. I’m here specifically to discuss the aspects that seem to capture my attention. Which leads to me micro focusing on specific details.
which is that you, yourself, focus on something you don’t want to.
no? I’m focusing on it because i think it’s interesting.
I focus on something I want to when I write to you,
yeah, and you did, which is why i mentioned that you could just ignore me, because you were pretty clearly just attacking the way that i was thinking about it specifically, which you are allowed to do. But doesn’t help me, because i understand that. Notice how i never said that feminism bad? Or that women lying bad? Or anything like that, i was specifically talking about the interactions that i’ve been observing as of recent, and had been curious about, and like any good curious individual, i prodded for information, because it’s healthy to do that.
You could’ve asked me why i was being so specific, and focusing so aggressively on things, and i would’ve said what i just said now. But instead you hit with something relatively inflammatory. Acting like you somehow have knowledge of my understanding of the world, and i don’t and wanted to “inform me” about it, through a rather obtuse statement frankly. Why wouldn’t i respond in kind?
I like helping real people that deserve it, to get out of shit that I have been in.
that’s great, i haven’t been in that shit or experienced it before, so i’m not one to talk about it, which is why i’m focusing on the parts that i know i understand in a very explicit manner.
So essentially, it’s just a long dialog with society that they should x or y, that you are focusing on but you wish it was yourself you were talking to.
perhaps? Idk how you expect people to make their points more clearly understood by others. Yeah i’m essentially talking with myself here, that’s kind of the point, i’m trying to clearly identify how i think about these things so others aren’t outside of the loop, unless you think that other account is my alt account or something? In which case, that’s pretty funny.
It’s not going to make any difference who reads it and it’s easier to run over the choice to make sure stuff in general in your life don’t also get more and more compulsive
i’m not even sure how i should read this, it doesn’t really make any sense.
Escalating defense mechanisms… Yo man I’m backing slowly away okay, you good luck with your scientific studies and whatnot peace out
alright then, see you on the flip side i spose
I wanted to post something like this but could not write it well. Thanks for posting it.
Yeah, thats why I posted this. I’m having a good day today, and so I was able to find the words that others who’ve been affected by the bear meme struggled to find the words to. If I get some flak for it, I have the emotional space to explain my reasoning
Don’t forget the other side, I’ve seen some of the discussions around this by women turn really TERFy. Both sides of this debate are gateways to the Alt right.
Tbh the TERF stuff isnt surprising since a lot of these memes have just a hint of Misandry to them, and when it comes to TERFs, they dont see Trans Women as women, and see them as men, so its moreso their ideas on men that are guiding their ideology, than it is about women
Man are not evil and I don’t think anyone is making that statement here, but the problem is that we can’t know which men are evil. Of course we should avoid antagonizing them, since, like you said, it often drives young lonely men towards the manosphere, but also men should try actually listening to why most women pick the bear.
I mean yeah, that was my point. Currently though our messaging is insanely antagonistic and there are a LOT of men without women in their lives who can explain this to them. People dont listen to those antagonizing them, the throw their shields/walls up, and seek those who are friendlier to them, which, in this case would be the manpsphere, posts like this only preach to the choir, and push away the men who need to know why women would choose the bear the most.
It’s even worse, a lot of the posts here are outright refusing to explain anything, or branding them as the problem for not understanding immediately.
It’s so insanely bad it almost feels like an incel psyop at times
These young men can … listen to women??? They don’t need to be spoon fed feminism by friends, there is a ton of information available if they care to learn. The fact that they choose to listen to sexist assholes rather than have their feelings hurt for two seconds is part of the problem dumbass
it often drives young lonely men towards the manosphere, but also men should try actually listening to why most women pick the bear.
ok, and as evidenced by the previous thread, there was a lot of nothing being explained actively happening.
Reiterating the metaphorical reasoning as to why someone would do this doesn’t explain the underlying reason why people are using a metaphorical device in the first place.
don’t tell people that you would rather be with a bear, tell people that you would rather be with a bear, because the entire point of the statement is that it’s literally fucking insane. The problem here was the second someone goes “isn’t this insane?” instead of people responding with “yes, that’s the point, it’s supposed to be!” people respond with “and you’re part of the problem” yknow, because surely that wouldn’t cause problems.
It’s not that people are saying something, or aren’t saying something, it’s that people are trying to make a point using a metaphorical device that they never drop, it’s like irony poisoning, except it’s just not irony.
TL;DR It’s hard to listen to someones reasoning when they never fucking explain it. Granted it did get better eventually, but jesus fucking christ did it take a while.
I used to actively avoid women out of fear of making them uncomfortable (still do occasionally, when I have a particularly shitty day), I mean like full on 0 eye contact, lotsa distance and god forbid speaking. Being tolled I’m too fucking stupid to understand female issues and tolled that I have it so easy because I can be a literal pig without getting judged did a number on my brain. I mean I get it, women have it much harder, but being completely pushed aside and forced to associate with literal trash, all my efforts made worthless just because women have to put in much more effort, while I only chose to do a bit more. It hurts. When a girl is freaked out and starts running, because I’m taking a similar route to her’s (because I just happened to live in the same direction), I understand her reaction, but it doesn’t change the fact that it makes me wish I didn’t exist, if my fucking existence is a problem in it self. It’s shit like this that makes me wish I was at least trans or something, not born a fucking bogeyman that hurts people by breathing the same air as them.
I’ll still purposely switch to the opposite street if its not very populated and I’m unintentionally following a woman for too many blocks (because we just happen to be going in the same direction). Remember though that the most extreme people are the ones who shout the loudest, most women wont be unempathetic to your struggles, and understand that society has challenges for you as a man that they themselves dont have to experience. You arent a boogeyman, and you and your struggles are valid, dont let shit like the bear meme convince you otherwise
This.
(Throwing my two cents in: remembering to breath in such situations seems to help alleviate the anxiety of how you might unintentionally come across, and help you appear less intense— seemingly less likely to been seen as a threat)
honestly, and i hate to say this, i’m kind of at the polar opposite end of the scale myself, where i think i’d probably actively antagonize women because the chances of someone else who would actually cause problems stopping me is significantly less due to the fact that i’m actively doing it, and have no intention of causing harm to anyone.
Perhaps that’s just my satirical commentary bleeding through into real life, but genuinely i don’t even know what to fucking do anymore.
but the problem is that we can’t know which men are evil.
It’s very much possible with these things called emotional intelligence and empathy. Used in combination they allow you to walk in another’s shoes for just a split second and see where their mind is.
I don’t think that any amount of empathy allows me to know if a stranger is dangerous.
If it’s alexithymia or such I hope you have trusted people in your life you can ask about random people.
On the flipside if that kind of thing is due to being on the schizo spectrum I can say with personal authority that yes it’s very much possible: Figures it’s not that I can’t do it it’s that I had a life-long habit of actively avoiding tuning into random people, the resonance being so strong that their neuroses get me all cramped up and swamped with random shit requiring clean-up after the fact. But deep dives aren’t really necessary for a threat radar what you’re primarily looking for is their attitude towards relating on eye level, whether there’s an inferiority/superiority thing going on.
Not OP, but look, if someone, let’s say a stranger, has nefarious motives, they have an incentive to fake their mannerisms, this means relying on your empathy and social intelligence alone is a mistake since they may be used as a vector of attack.
In order to be safe, one must make sure they are not harmed or endangered in any way, this includes avoiding certain situations with strangers.
Also, don’t just randomly pathologize people just because you don’t understand where they are coming from, even if done with no harm in mind, you will come off as very disrespectful.
Now I might be schizosplaining here but faked mannerisms are glaringly obvious. Especially when it comes to what I recommended doing, and that’s checking out the willingness to relate at eye level as the only way to do that is to actually do that – if you hide something you’re either on the demure or arrogant side of things.
Also, don’t just randomly pathologize people
I made no diagnosis, I was talking about a possibility. A possibility that might be true or false, if it’s true then I might have saved someone’s life as they finally understand that something’s different about them, if it’s false, then they can brush it off. If they’re so up their ass that they’re getting their underwear in a twist over that well then at least I tried, I’m willing to be the asshole in that situation. And so should you if you value your fellow humans.
can we stop antagonizing populations that feel disenfranchised by society and therefor giving the truly evil fucks out there an easy population to brainwash and feed extra scummy ideologies to?
Young nerdy men who feel excluded from society that dont have any strong female figures in their life are barraged by a constant stream of messaging that could easily be interpreted as “(white) men are evil and the source of all problems with society”
I think it’s a two-pronged problem.
Young men are encouraged to be aggressive, thin-skinned, and superficial. They’re sold this idea of sex as a reward for climbing to the top of some nebulously defined social hierarchy rather than an expression of intimacy with a romantic partner.
Meanwhile, young women are victims of the Madonna/Whore complex, simultaneously expected to be sexual and virginal, model-esque and down-to-earth, your plaything and your mom. They’re this thing men are expected to fight over, but also personally responsible for the drama created by this social expectation.
And so much of this engineered conflict revolves around selling you something. Gym memberships or diet supplements or fashion accessories or self-help classes or luxury status symbols are all supposed to be a thing we can buy into in order to climb the ladder to an ideal romantic life. All to commodify the idea of love.
By constantly antagonizing them for not being able to navigate the political nuance of those messages, we give an incredibly easy pathway to the more toxic ideologies that the Tates of the world will pull them into to profit off of them
Guys like Andrew Tate are ultimately just bullies. And bullying is a tool that one class of people use to force the others to conform and submit. So much of this boils down to Tate inducting new members of his cult of personality by sending older members out to jump them in.
The only real remedy is to shut these guys down. Stand together. Stick up for your friends and neighbors in the face of fascist bullying. Push back.
spoiler
,
The problem with your logic is it creates a situation where society at large will never talk about this important topic and think about ways to reduce the scope and impact of it.
The sad reality is that men are largely responsible for SA, and saying this is always going to make some men uncomfortable. They’re always going to react to negatively, and people are always going to post what you posted.
This is so extremely well put.
You do help by expressing things so succinctly
This right here is the reason I still bother to engage people on this topic. The women who honestly believe a bear is less threatening than a random man are a lost cause imo, so my goal is to help men find supportive people and spaces that aren’t dangerous idiots like Tate.
You can be a man without being forced to exist in the manufactured redpill/male feminist dichotomy.
I am a man and I am affected 0% by this meme. This meme was a chance to display some empathy and understand why it might be that the bear analogy strikes a chord with many women.
When I go to the grocery store, do I have to think about being snatched? My privilege affords me the convenience of not worrying about that. Do I need to worry about being sexually assaulted walking home? Statistically, probably not. There are a whole host of problems and horrific fates that befall women disproportionately, and very often at the hands of men.
Why would a woman feel safer with a bear?
The 750,000 black bears of North America kill less than one person per year on the average, while men ages 18-24 are 167 times more likely to kill someone than a black bear.
Most attacks by black bears are defensive reactions to a person who is too close, which is an easy situation to avoid. Injuries from these defensive reactions are usually minor.
https://bear.org/bear-facts/how-dangerous-are-black-bears
Since 1784 there have been 82 fatal human/bear conflicts by wild brown bears in North America. Yellowstone National Park has seen a mere 8 since being established in 1872, which is only one more than the number of people who have died from a falling tree.
https://bearvault.com/bear-attack-statistics/
Seems to me that even I would be safer with a bear than a man. Makes you think, doesn’t it?
That’s the thing about memes. They’re not really a rational form of discussing a topic, and tend to exploit emotions to boost their spread. But it seems to be more or less the only form of discussing things nowadays. The result is that as a society we no longer solve anything, and only work together to make things worse now.
good comment regarding the ongoing presentation of this meme. i encourage folks who read this to make posts that welcome young men and encourage them to understand the nuance, rather than judge them a priori for not already getting it.
that said it’s important to note that the origin of this meme was i believe just a
anonymouspoll where women expressed their lived experience and wasn’t meant to be antagonistic at all. bad men were the ones that took offense to what these women felt and made the meme what it is.not saying you don’t know any of this just feel it’s worth being said :) thank you for your nuanced and leveled criticism of the rhetorical value of the trend.
This is not antagonizing men. This is important data for men. Do you want to get laid? Understand where women are coming from. Don’t do spooky shit on dates.
Listen, I understand. It’s bad news, but it is what it is. It’s reality. It’s like women saying if you never take a shower or bath in your entire life, a relationship is out of the question.
The fact that you are trying to pass this off as a way to get laid is honestly disgusting
Why? Women like sex, they also like sex with men. Men like sex. Where is the problem?
You’re either a troll, being the fucked kind of sarcastic, or you have some seriously fucked values…
Ladies and gentlemen, this was their response. If they had a better one, they would have used it.
L M A O white nerdy young men are not the perfect angels you think, I have multiple friends who were sexually assaulted by such people
Downvoted not because it isn’t true, but because they aren’t automatically mutually exclusive and because it is an unnecessary jab at half of the human species. Why are we paying attention to divisive bullshit instead of focusing on things that actually have the potential to help?
The thing is, I’ve seen statements like this before. Except when I heard it, it was being used to justify ignoring women’s experiences and feelings in regard to things like sexual harassment and feeling unsafe, since that’s “just a feeling” as well. It wasn’t okay then, and it’s not okay the other way around. The truth is that feelings do matter, on both sides. Everyone should feel safe and welcome in their surroundings. And how much so that is, is reflected in how those people feel.
The outcome of men feeling being respected and women feeling safe are not mutually exclusive. The sad part is that someone who is reading this here is far more likely to be an ally than a foe, yet the people who need to hear the intended message the most will most likely never hear it nor be bothered by it. There’s a stick being wedged here that is only meant to divide, and oh my god is it working.
The original post about bears has completely lost all meaning and any semblance of discussion is lost because the metaphor is inflammatory by design - sometimes that’s a good thing, to highlight through absurdity. But metaphors are fragile - if it’s very likely to be misunderstood or offensive, the message is lost in emotion. Personally I think this metaphor is just highly ineffective at getting the message across, as it has driven people who would stand by the original message to the other side due to the many uncharitable interpretations it presents. And among the crowd of reasonable people are those who confirm those interpretations and muddy the water to make women seem like misandrists, and men like sexual assault deniers. This meme is simply terrible and perhaps we can move on to a better version of it that actually gets the message across well, instead of getting people at each other’s throat.
Honestly I am so goddamn tired of this shit, everytime something like the bear question comes up it blatantly tilted in one side or the others favor and dissent is crushed in both sets of spaces and no one learns anything.
I disagree. Clearly the meme is highly effective. It brought a topic that ought to be in the light back into the light. Considering the frequency of SA, this should be something that people are considering how to handle on a regular basis, but that’s not what you see if you watch the news, listen to the city council, or talk with the school board.
Your opening paragraph sounds similar to the expression “All lives matter.” It didn’t sound like you wrote that ironically.
And the final paragraph is classic heckler’s veto. Two sides disagree, and rather than talk about the serious issue, you make a comment about how people should all try to get along better by speaking in less aggressive terms. But the underlying problem is not about aggressive speech. It’s about aggressive action. So maybe we can focus on that.
Clearly the meme is highly effective.
It was highly contagious, that is, it spread widely. But so was the whole “would you still love me if I were a worm” thing and it was “effective” for the same reason: Gals thought “Oh I want a ‘yes’ to that answer that’d be so emotionally satisfying” and guys thought “WTF why would I want a worm if there’s something more behind it why can’t my SO speak plain English”: It spread by exploiting the emotional kick gals get out of tripping over guys for having a particular default interpretation. No, it is not a “wrong” interpretation to think of the question as “rather with a bear or a man like me”. If you don’t want men to interpret the question like that then pose it differently. Simple as that. But then it wouldn’t be as inflammatory and with that not as contagious.
Each and every time one of these things comes around one of two things happens for the average guy: We a) fall right into a trap and then get accused of being insensitive or b) we recognise the trap, lift our hands, walk back slowly, then faster, then even faster, until making a go at the 10km parcour world record. Because yes that kind of shit is a giant red flag.
It’s like those people who are proud of being “brutally honest” but in reality what they care about is not the truth, but the brutality, just from the other side of the gender distribution.
Yes, feelings matter. Beautifully put.
But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies. No secret society is plotting to prevent you from sending any message of safety. The metaphor is not designed, or created for a specific purpose. You have to realise how crazy and for real dangerous this way of agumenting is.
You aim for a good purpose, then use basically the debate version of biological weapons of mass destruction to make your point.
Just for any small argument about a small thing between sexes, like always it’s fun for people to discuss, and some get mad, but
For you to use the narrative of psy ops, learned no doubt subconsciously, to speak like there is a secret cabal that want you to be fearful, we must unite against some kind of expression just because they are coming for you… No
If anyone takes it too far it’s talk like that, and you unironically talk about how reasonable people are hard to come by
Gee
Wonder why that is brother
But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies.
The purpose of a system is what it does.
There are plenty systems that are not controlled by a cabal, yes
Just because noone sets out to do a thing on purpose, individually, as a group, organically, conspiratorially, whatever, doesn’t mean that the resulting system of action does not act with a particular purpose in the wider system.
Life, for example, has the purpose of hastening the heat death of the universe: We reduce entropy locally and to do that increase the rate of entropy increase in the wider universe. It’s what we do. It’s our purpose, as far as the universe is concerned, whether we like it or not, whether we intend to or not, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we try to or not.
These kinds of memes (bear, worm, what have you) have a particular impact. That impact is their purpose. If you don’t like the impact I suggest advocating against the practice instead of saying “but nobody meant to”. Have some Goethe.
Exactly, which is why your rhetoric is damaging
Purpose implies intent more than outcome. I agree with your overall stance but think something like “result” would be more effective. Calling it the “purpose” makes a similar accusation to anyone who wants to have this debate to what it itself is making about men in general, which will just increase the divide. I don’t think you’re deliberately trying to do that, but I think it could end up being the result.
Your overall point does capture how this whole thing has made me feel. Even as someone who didn’t get offended, understands what women who would “prefer the bear” are actually saying and doesn’t think I’m owed any attention from anyone that doesn’t want to give it to me, the only thing this meme makes me want to do is disengage even more. And a younger version of me would have really resented being made to feel like my mere presence was offensive or scary.
It’s a system thinking heuristic. The reason “purpose” is used instead of result is a) “the result of a system is what it does” doesn’t actually make sense, as systems aren’t events in time but, well, systems which have non-negligible timespans – it sounds something like “what is the result of a dishwasher” – I dunno, what is it doing? Is it standing there? Short-circuiting and on fire? Washing dishes? All that is part of what “a dishwasher” is, does, and therefore, its purpose in the grand scheme of things. And b) precisely to stop people trying to find purpose in motives, intentions, etc, to go with a materialistic instead of idealist interpretation of things. To quote Beer: “There is no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do.” The purpose of prisons is to rehabilitate? Well maybe in some countries, in other countries no matter what the stated intent is their purpose is to be a place where people can get degrees in how to do crime.
You’re right, feelings do matter, and this post did not dispute that. It’s just that safety matters more.
It saddens me that the default interpretation of this is accusatory and requiring of defense. Not to personally blame you, this is very common and clearly a systemic reaction, but I don’t know enough psychology/politics/sociology to understand why, just enough to know it’s bad.
It saddens me that the default interpretation of this is accusatory
It’s saying men are inherently unsafe to be around. How is that not accusatory?
This isn’t about women’s safety versus men’s feelings, it’s about women’s feelings (of safety) versus men’s feelings (of respect).
But it doesn’t say you personally are unsafe, it says that the odds that a man chosen at random is unsafe is high enough that women - understandably - fear being left alone with a random stranger to a level at least comparable with being left alone with a bear.
An enormous number of men fail to understand just how common and how terrifying it is for women to be harassed, assaulted and raped by men. And that is exactly what the bear/man hyperbole is pointing out.
And the reason people with takes like yours get chewed out for it is because you could do some reflection and consider
what is this systemic issue, what behaviours might make women around me scared, what can we as a society do to change this, and what can I do to avoid women around me fearing I may be unsafe?
But instead, they take it as a personal attack, and so respond
why am I being attacked for someone else’s behaviour?
Edit: here’s another example in a similar format to demonstrate how the meme is being misinterpreted, note how your first response wouldn’t be “why are you accusing all priests?!”
“Who would you rather babysit your child, a bear or a Catholic priest?”
It’s what it says to me and many of us. Perhaps it’s the messaging.
What do you mean what behaviors? I don’t harass women. I barely talk to people I don’t know. But yet people are still scared of me.
And I would 100% pick a catholic priest. What a dumb choice. And, yeah, you are accusing everyone.
I clearly said: it’s not targeted at you specifically, but at that fact that women are disproportionately more likely to be harassed or assaulted, and when that happens, the aggressor is almost exclusively men.
They’re not scared of you because you’re personally scary, they’re scared of you because there’s an ingrained culture of sexual harassment of women by men. So when you say “that’s a nice dress” to a woman you don’t know, she’s not thinking “aww cute”, she’s thinking “is this guy being nice, or will they threaten me if I turn them down?”
Seriously, ask literally any woman you know if they’ve ever been sexually harassed, and the answer is almost guaranteed to be yes.
I would 100% pick a Catholic priest
Yes, I know that, that’s how hyperbole works. My point is that such a statement shouldn’t be interpreted as “every priest is a child molester” but as “there’s a concerningly high rate of them, and they’re probably not a good option for childcare.”
You are accusing everyone
When did I say “all men are <whatever you’re saying I’m accusing all men of>?” Stop making this about you, and actually try to understand why interactions with men can be terrifying for women.
If you are not targeting all men, stop talking about men as one generalized body.
Sorry, when you say “I’d rather encounter a bear than a man” it sure as hell sound like you are saying all men are dangerous. If that isn’t what you are saying, you are saying it poorly.
But it doesn’t say that
I’m a woman (a trans one if that matters to you) and have experienced sexual assault and domestic violence from both men and women.
I know the point that people are trying to make with the whole bear thing.
But I think the friction comes from women talk about this as a theoretical to make a point, where men are thinking more literally.
And I do belive that no one in there right mind, if actually given this option in real life, would pick a bear (unless maybe it was definitely one of the more harmless species).
Each and every one of us, even those of us that have survived SA, have had countless uneventful interactions with men you don’t know. Even when it’s just one on one. And its mostly normal biases that makes us remember the shitty ones more. And something a lot of people forget is that the vast majority of SA victims already know their assailant, so the idea of a rando assaulting you is even less likely. So yes I would much rather be in the woods with a man, than a wild fucking animal. And if you’re a reasonable person, then you would too.
Honestly I think it depends more on the guy than the bear. Any time you’re alone in the woods (at least in the US) it’s safe to assume you’re with a bear, that’s where they live. Most bears keep to themselves though.
People tend to be less low-key, and less predictable. To me it seems more likely that a random guy could follow you around, take your stuff, or generally make life more difficult. There’s also a higher chance for a guy to assist you and make things easier, but I can understand how the potential risk could outweigh the potential benefits.
Nono you’re not allowed to judge the man individually. You’re required to judge before you see both the man and bear so that we get a properly over-essentialised judgement how else are we going to propagate in- / out-group divisions.
As a trans woman who has also been sexually assaulted, it has more to do for me with what danger is more real to me. I’ve experienced zero bear attacks. Nobody I know has experienced a bear attack. Why would I fear one? Of course, consciously yeah, I know a bear is dangerous, but I have no real world experience to back that assumption up.
Men though? Yeah, I’ve been sexually assaulted by men. I’ve been physically assaulted by men. I’ve had family and friends who’ve been physically and sexually assaulted by men. That danger is real to me. I know that if a man I don’t know is nearby me he could do those things to me, and I have the real world experience to prove that assumption correct (the assumption that they could, not the assumption that they would.)
Therefore, of course I’m more scared of the man than the bear. And of course I’d choose the bear over the man. I don’t care if it’s the wrong choice, I’ll take my chances to not have to relive that trauma, even if it means risking my life. Not like I’ll have time to regret that decision if the bear decides to kill me. Probably. And most women I know when asked expressed the same sentiment in different words. We’re more scared of men than bears, but that doesn’t mean we literally think men are more dangerous than bears.
Is it the logical choice to pick the bear? Probably not, but humans are not logical creatures. I’d rather make the wrong choice than the scary choice.I’d rather make the wrong choice than the scary choice.
Unrelated to the topic, but this mindset is exactly why far-right movements are getting so strong right now.
I agree. I never said it was a good mindset. Therapy is definitely something we need to learn to deal with this and think logically. The issue is so absurdly many women have been traumatized by men that the mental health support systems would be so overloaded that it’s just a fact that only a miniscule fraction of women would ever be able to receive help, even if we had absolutely perfect support systems.
So the only solution is to prevent them from getting traumatized in the first place. But the entirety of Lemmy seems really resistant to that conversation. Would rather quote statistics about “oh the average man isn’t likely to assault you” than to accept that the ones who do are dealing enough damage that the problem needs to be dealt with regardless of what the average man is doing.
I’ve never been shot or held at gunpoint, but I have have the shit kicked out of me. But still if given the option to face a person with a gun and a person with the bare hands. I don’t think I’m going to pick the the guy with a gun.
There’s a serious difference in the level of trauma between these examples, and the level of exposure to the dangers of the counter. Sexual trauma is a hell of a lot more scarring on your psyche than simply being beaten. In addition, at least in the US we’re exposed to gun violence every day as opposed to basically never for bear attacks. Even in other countries with better gun control, you’re dramatically more likely to hear about somebody being shot than you are to hear about somebody being mauled by a bear. Not only that, but it’s really easy to process “get shot, you’re dead.” It’s not as easy to make yourself believe you’re definitely gonna be killed by an animal that has whole guides written on how to survive them.
Those two things combined make your example far from comparable. In addition, I’m not saying in any way that the fear is justified nor that no attempt should be made to fix it, what I’m trying to point out us that people don’t realize how intense a fear it really is when they get offended at people making this choice.Obviously, therapy is important to learning how to handle that fear and think more logically, but if every woman who needs it sought therapy for this, there just aren’t enough therapists in the entire world to handle the load. Not even close. So a bigger part of the solution is, y’know, making sure women aren’t getting traumatized in the first place. But everybody here wants to skip that part for some reason.
Sexual trauma is a hell of a lot more scarring on your psyche than simply being beaten.
Very hard disagree.
You’re free to disagree, but for me and many others, I’ve been through both, and I’m definitely waaaay more scared of being sexually assaulted again than being beaten half to death again. They have very different effects on your psyche. Physical violence I react far more with anger than fear, even if I was terrified in the moment. When it looks like it’s happening again, my brain says “Fight back.” When I’m afraid of sexual trauma being relived, my brain says “Escape, now. Can’t escape? Submit. Maybe that way they won’t kill you too at least.”
How about you Google the man who’s face was eaten by bear and then decide
How about you miss the entire point and get aggressive for no reason?
Seriously, what kind of response to “I’ve been traumatized by men” is “you should traumatized by bears too?”
👍
it makes me happy that this is near the top of this thread, but this comment is also only 15 minutes old, so i’m not sure how far down the pipeline of this post, it’ll track.
(This is me being glib) It depends on what kind of bear we’re talking about. Blackbear be big noisy and confusing, grizzly play dead, big hairy gay guy like best case scenario.
Most bears would just walk away from you when you make a loud noise. Men would approach you. So even I as a man, would pick a bear
How many female teachers have been caught fucking their barely pubescent students this year alone so far?
It isn’t a men-women problem. People just suck.
dsfgasfsaf
Yes, but divided people == profit?
True.
deleted by creator
Do we need to start throwing out the stats for how many rapist are men compared to women?
Spoiler alert, most rapist are men and it’s not even close.
Yeah, those are very helpful, minority victims don’t deserve help as we all know.
dsfgasfsaf
Do we need to start throwing out the stats for how many rapist are men compared to women?
Sure, just as long as you define rape in such a way that female-on-male rape actually counts as rape, which it doesn’t in the vast majority of “rape statistics” that get put out. Quote http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers :
And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011). In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.
I don’t disagree that both men and women do heinous things, but women
don’talmost never physically attack or kill a man when he shuns her advances, but men absolutely attack women every day for shunning a man’s advances, and sometimes women get straight up murdered for it.#NotAllMen, but enough men that many women choose the bear.
This isn’t the 1950s, Scooter. Women aren’t viewed as fragile incapable little things anymore because they never really were.
dsfgasfsaf
yes 80+% of violent crime is perpetrated by men. 95% of murders are done by men. 95% of all sexual violence is done by men, and this comes with the caveat that it is highly under reported.
men absolutely attack women every day for shunning a man’s advances
This is a completely weightless statement, considering that it’s true if as few as 365 men a year do this, out of ~4,000,000,000. In other words, 0.000009125%.
Pretty low bar for shitting on half the world, no?
I’m not shitting on half the population, I’m highlighting the reality of men reacting violently at women to being rejected or ignored. It’s every day. It’s constant. Walk a mile in a young woman’s shoes and you’ll get to experience it firsthand.
It’s every day.
Already established to be a pretty much meaningless statement. It’s also a fact that mothers abuse children every day, on average, too.
Do you think it’s fair to say mothers “constantly” abuse children, based on the above technically-correct fact?
I’ll bet you don’t. But you’re happy to do it about a demo you’re biased against.
It’s constant.
That’s bullshit. You’re just bad at statistics, and/or letting things like social media warp your perception of reality.
A tiny minority of men react violently to rejection.
Walk a mile in a young woman’s shoes and you’ll get to experience it firsthand.
I was raped by a woman, but you won’t find me making dumbass statements implying all women are rapists because of it, because I’m capable of logical, rational thought.
How’s this for “reality” when it comes to gendered violence: research out of Harvard showed that, among male/female relationships where one of the two ‘members’ is domestically violent and the other isn’t, the violent one is the woman over 70% of the time.
Statistically the disparity is significant.
It’s a drastic disparity. Men do 80%+ of violent crime, 95% of murders, and 95% of sexual violence, with the caveat that we know, for sure, is severely under reported.
Yet people are entitled to not be prejudiced against for their immutable qualities.
Correct.
Every time a woman gets attacked there is a large contingent of the population who start to blame the fact that they weren’t living under the assumption of being in danger from men. In this post’s comment section you can see people making comments about not carrying a gun, not taking self defense seriously, etc. These are also often people who are in the “not all men” crowd. So women are shit on both for treating men like a danger, while also being shit on for not doing just that. People will also demand that women, in any social environment, discuss the subject in a dispassionate, and clinical, manner, or in a warm and friendly manner, in which the subject, men, are treated with kid gloves. Who gives a shit that this has left the person speaking with life long trauma issues, you better be nice about it, or it’s your fault nothing changes. This is the type of thing that is the problem here. This isn’t the only commonly seen way women are forced into a catch 22 situation. Society has pushed them into an impossible situation where, no matter what they do, they are wrong. I think society, especially men, have to come to terms with just how insanely prolific harassment, and violence, directed at women, primarily from men, is.
Another trend you commonly see, when this topic comes up, is people doing any mental gymnastics possible, to either claim it’s way blown out of proportion, while all people who work in, or study, this subject are pretty much in universal agreement that the reality of it is actually far worse than what we have on record. That, or they cry “but men too” ignoring that men are far less likely to be on the receiving end of this behavior, and also primarily victimized by other men when they are. When I was doing data analysis for the corrections system I found out (through experts on the subject, I didn’t discover this) that, while disparities in antisocial behaviors within different demographics of people based on things like, race/ethnicity/culture/etc., narrow as the economic, and societal status, disparity of that demographic narrows, the same cannot be said for the disparity between men and women. While men of good economic, and societal, standing are less likely to act in antisocial ways over-all, the disparity between them, and women in similar standing, stays roughly the same.
Without society, men in particular, coming to an understanding about this, rather than too just knee-jerk reject it, claiming so many reasons, that seem logical on a very surface level, to “prove” their position, we will never be able to truly begin to tackle the issue at hand. The deepest rooted, worst issues, are between men and women, but men are also the reason for that proportion of violence, and other antisocial behavior, towards men. Where men are more often the victim than women, such as murder, men are also responsible for the vast majority of it. The societal structures that encourage, at least on the environment side, this at a systemic level are also the product of men being largely in control. We have greatest control over the creation of an array of cultures, the most prevalent of which, at the very least, create an environment that allows this continue, sometimes even promoting aspects of it. In order for this to happen men, collectively, are going to have come to terms that the women’s side of this conversation will often have hostility, and many other negative emotions, woven into it, because they are relaying their trauma. While speaking about deeply, personally, emotional things, It is not realistic to expect anything else.
Would you rather be in the wood with a bear rather than a woman because you fear she could rape you? No? Then what the fuck are you even talking about?
I’m a woman and the same way that women feel about men in this whole meme thing, is the exact same way I feel about women…
I don’t trust women within a hairs inch of my life and I would rather be with a bear than a Woman but I bet you I’ll get super downvoted for this opinion.
My wife shares the same opinion. It’s not something she can discuss in her social circles, but she feels like she’s been backstabbed in more awful ways by her fellow women.
When she gets in that pattern, I try to remind her that people tend to suck and you have to be choosy regardless of gender.
I hear you, but as a dude, I feel like there’s significantly more risk of bodily harm from men than than women. This doesn’t mean women are Nice, just less likely to try to rape or murder someone in an alley :(
You’re right… a woman would take you home first before she fucking drugged your tea or whatever the Hell she’s going to do to you. Just because women have less muscles don’t mean they’re not just as psychopathic as any dude murderer. The long-term damage that women can cause on the mind and body is fucking creepy and terrifying. Even creepier and more terrifying when you realize how many women utilize manipulative psychopathic actions in regular day-to-day life. Women are total horror shows for me. Unknowable, unsafe, unreliable, unstable. Terrifying.
deleted by creator
dsfgasfsaf
Nope I definitely trust men more than I trust women. I don’t know what part of what I said sounds like that when I said I don’t trust women, not people.
dsfgasfsaf
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted nobody has ever actually just acquiesced and listened to me so thank you for listening to me and not arguing with me.
spoiler
,
Thanks back to you
Hey there, I’ve just downvoted you. The reason why is that you would have never told this to a woman who said “I definitely trust [women] more than I trust [men]. I don’t know what part of what I said sounds like that when I said I don’t trust [men], not people.”, therefore you’re patronizing this person, dismissing their claims and experiences and unusual and ultimately unworthy of being taken seriously. Yes, of course it sounds like there’s very likely some trauma behind her position, just as there’s trauma behind the women who say they’d choose the bear, but that is no proper reason to dismiss them when they want to use their experiences as a parting point to discuss social issues.
It’s funny that you downvoted this person because you didn’t take the time to wonder if his question was genuinely asked or not … I took the time, as the person who was supposed to be offended in the first place, to tell this person that they were wrong… and then they corrected themselves… it’s almost like you want to be offended on my behalf, but this guy did not upset me as much as your comment currently is upsetting me so that’s fucking hilarious.
spoiler
,
Lol I got you my homie. To be fair, I did feel patronized… but we solved it so that’s wonderful and fantastic and we are still having a good end of our weekend, goddammnit are we not.
spoiler
,
Dismissing someone’s concerns as a mental health issue. That’s actually horrifyingly toxic and completely illogical in this case. This is what people mean when they talk about concern trolling.
spoiler
,
People need to talk to a therapist about their fear of airplanes, whether it’s rational or not. People have to talk to a therapist about car crashes, whether it’s rational or not. If you are worried about something and it causes you anxiety, you should talk to a therapist. The source is not my concern, the help you need is.
That’s not what therapy is for. If there is a real life problem causing you anxiety or anger the solution is to fix that problem of to remove yourself from the situation. Talking to a therapist is not a solution to real life problems. Anxiety, fear, and anger all exist for a reason and they can all be productive emotions in the right context. The only time you should see a therapist for a rational concern is if said concern can’t practically be escaped or fixed.
spoiler
sdfsaf
I’ve never been downvoted anywhere for expressing that opinion. Lemmy especially there’s a huge disparity where saying you’d rather be with a bear than a man is unacceptable, but saying you’d rather be with a bear than a woman? A-okay. Source? I’ve said both. Only one was I not attacked for. Guess which?
Seriously, I’ve expressed my trauma regarding men countless times and every time been attacked for it. I’ve expressed my trauma at the hands of women and not a single downvote or attack or disparaging remark any time. Lemmy has a very clear bias.
I wouldn’t have a single problem with men getting upset about this bear thing if they got equally upset when somebody says something similar or worse about women, but they don’t.It’s because nobody wants to talk about trauma at the hands of women… everybody goes extremely, extremely quiet when the topic of the capable violence of women enters the room. I have a personal feeling, as a woman, that if we talk about all of the tools and tricks and things that women do to manipulate and abuse, less women will get away with it, and women don’t want that, so they stay silent in order to enable basically a fucking gang, operating with impunity, in a way as a woman, I kind of feel held hostage at the sleepover if you know what I mean…
IRL, sure, but on Lemmy that’s not what’s happening. If you talk about trauma at the hands of women on Lemmy, you get outpourings of support and people sharing their experiences as well. Which is good. That should be happening everywhere.
The problem is you can’t do the same thing on Lemmy if you were traumatized by men. Instead, you get down voted to hell, get statistics quoted at you as if that’ll magically fix it, and when surprise, still traumatized after the stats, now you must be a misandrist so your trauma is invalid anyway.I was just hoping one place would exist on the internet where men’s and women’s issues could get equal screen time and be respected just as much, but no, the genders have to be treated like sports teams and if you support one apparently you have to hate the other. I just don’t get why people are like this.
Why does it have to be like this? Because men are constantly vilanized as being the violent, manipulative, and exploitative gender. This man and bear thing sums it up pretty well. Women get a free pass to do a lot of stuff, including women rappers admitting publicly to drugging and stealing from men and not facing any real consequences.
Feminism is used as an excuse to push both transphobia and misandry. Like sure there might be feminists out there who actually want equality, and there are plenty of people who do want equality who aren’t calling themselves feminists. That’s not the majority of people calling themselves feminists though. It’s a shame as feminism started out as seeking equality, or at least pushing back against inequality.
Men being hurt by women is not an excuse for men to hurt women in return. It is possible for both groups to acknowledge they’ve been hurt by each other and work toward a solution. Pushing “they hurt me so they deserve to be hurt” helps nobody, especially when both groups are doing it.
That’s what I’m complaining about. This mindset that being hurt by men/women completely absolves you of the responsibility to allow them to feel safe. Any space dominated by women will be filled with “Well men are responsible for the majority of violence and sexual assault so actually you deserve to feel like shit.” every time a man speaks up. Any space dominated by men will be filled with “Well it makes me feel bad when you discuss the repercussions of your trauma so shut the fuck up.” every time a woman speaks up.
We can have a place where both genders can talk freely about the way these things effect them and the changes we need to make to fix them. The issue is people are only pretending to want such a space. What they really want is the other gender to sit down, shut up, and agree with them uncritically. Because in their head they’re definitely in the right and they’d rather not be confronted with alternate viewpoints from people who have lived experiences they’ll never have.Worse, as a trans woman, you’d think people would be more willing to accept our viewpoints because trans people are some of few people who can have both lived experiences. But no, our experiences are only valid if they 100% allign with the men or women we share them with. Otherwise we’re brushed off like somehow our experience doesn’t count because we had the wrong experience to reaffirm their biases.
On Lemmy, dominated by men, when I say I fear women due to my lived childhood experience as a boy, being taken advantage of while I was still too young to fight back, I’m met with outpourings of support. People talk about why “this is why trans people’s life experience matters.” When I mention later in the same conversation that I also fear men due to my lived experience as a woman and not being able to fight back due the the hormonal muscle loss, suddenly, my experiences don’t count anymore. People think they get to pick and choose which of my experiences were valid and valuable and which aren’t based on whatever reaffirms what they already believe. And of course you can bet the exact same thing happens the other way around when I tell the same story to women.I kind of get what you are saying. People want to defend their in-group when it comes under attack even when it doesn’t deserve that defence.
I think such a space as you describe would need to be built upon the understanding that all genders are capable of shitty things and that no person or group of people is perfect. I don’t think we have that in this world. What we have is a world that’s unfair to everyone, and instead of acknowledging that things need to change for everyone, people are instead bickering over who has it worse and who gets the blame. Blaming this group or that group for all the problems that exist.
What we have at the moment is almost a cold war between different groups of people. Some people who only care about women, others who care only about men, and a select few who care equally about both. I am sure there are other situations where this is the case too. This I think is what people are talking about when they mention the culture wars.
With a bear, really ?
This whole thing is bait.
Anyone engaging on any side of the debate are fools. Any topic antagonizing half the population will somehow stir up some noise.
It’s like saying all women are bad at sport because they don’t train hard enough. It’s ignorant and serves only the purpose of creating a divide in the population.
Stop engaging in the divide.
So if men are statistically safer than bears and women’s safety is most important, then you agree “bear” is the incorrect choice?
I’m just trying to figure out all these incoherent memes.
dsfgasfsaf
You’re just discarding every opinion as “toxic masculinity” which is actually worse than engaging in logical discourse.
I’ll do everything in my power to empower women and make them feel safe. This thought experiment has unfortunately been detrimental and used to attack men.
“It’s not you” - yes, and nothing I said made it about me at all. See how fast you went on the offense on a completely neutral comment? You should listen to your own advice and listen the points being made equally as much as you’re lobbying others to do.
dsfgasfsaf
i am not like that
Congrats, you pass the bare minimum for human decency, dudes. Accept that part and you won’t spend time having to ‘defend’ yourself.
I’m not like that, so I don’t need to worry about it, type of thinking
I read some of these, more to get insight into how other people think, but often I come to the conclusion that there is very little I can do to help and that people who behave that way aren’t people I want to help. My ego is just fine, thanks, but blind hostility isn’t something I welcome into my life.
Here’s the thing…if you get upset that a random woman that you don’t know would take the hyperbolic position that they would rather be in the same room as a bear than with you, you’re likely the exact type of man that these memes are talking about. They are meant to expose fragile egos that don’t understand how intimidating they are to women. They know how dangerous a bear is. They don’t know how dangerous you are. That’s the point…
Here’s the thing…if you get upset that a random woman that you don’t know would take the hyperbolic position that they would rather be in the same room as a bear than with you, you’re likely the exact type of man that these memes are talking about.
What the heck? Expressing resentment at the implication that you are more threatening than a bear based solely on gender is evidence that you are, in fact, more threatening than a bear? How does that follow? You don’t need to have a fragile ego to recognize the unfairness of it.
They know how dangerous a bear is.
If they would rather be alone with a bear than a random stranger of any gender I’m going to say they don’t.
The original post was a bad-faith engagement farm that became much more popular than it ever should have been. It ended up bringing up a bit of good discussion and a lot of insane takes.
dsfgasfsaf
Once again, it’s a hyperbolic statement. They don’t really want to be alone with a bear. They are merely pointing out that they trust you less than a bear. A bear would simply kill them. What a man could do to them is far worse than anything a bear could do. If you can’t understand that, that’s the entire problem.
Do you have those stats? I would love to actually see a comparison, instead of a slap-fight
Very few people someone gets near enough to be grabbed by want to rape them. Nearly every bear someone gets near enough to be grabbed by wants to kill them. A large number of women feel it is better to be killed by a bear than live with their irrational fear that every man they get near shall rape them. The fear not being rational is irrelevant as the fear is based upon a more than likely chance, approx. 25% is reported, that at some point the fear was justified and not irrational. However those numbers are screwy as folks that get raped are more likely to get raped again.
I’d give percentage chances of each occurring, (the National Park Service estimates the odds of being attacked by a bear are about one in 2.1 million.), but the media seems to only report percentage of gender raped not chance of rape.
dsfgasfsaf
Bears do not want to kill you. They want to be left alone.
I’m not a bear, but same.
Please show where I stated anything of the desires of the bear. I’m hinging nothing on proximity. You are simply assuming things I did not state. I covered that it wasn’t a risk assessment. Only thing bogged down is so bogged with your assumptions.
I responded to what you wrote. Yes there was some inference based on your words. I’m not getting bogged down in prescriptive nonsense.
No, you did not. You wrote in response to what you pretended I posted. You again are only bogged by your choice to pretend I posted something very different than I posted.
deleted by creator
spoiler
,
What percentage of women do you suppose have had a man threaten to rape or kill them? Get violently angry at them? Sexually assault them or a friend? I reckon it’s near 100%.
The fear isn’t that all men will assault them, it’s that any man might. It’s not irrational, it’s based on experience. There are men in this thread arguing that women should be arming themselves to stay safe, right alongside men arguing that fear is irrational.
Fuck the men with hurt feelings. Your fellow men have proved themselves dangerous, time and again. Women will treat you like dangerous predators until men as a group start policing their own and building a world where women don’t have reason to fear.
Not relevant to my statement.
Ok. If you don’t want to discuss why post?
I’d happily discussed what I posted. I have no interest in discussing your imaginary post which you chose to address rather than my post. I also have no interest in discussing anything with someone that wishes to pretend I posted anything other than I did.
What aspect of your post are you interested in discussing? I found your assertion that the fear was irrational interesting, but if that’s off-limits we can talk about some other part…
Bruh, it’s not even about rape. A dude negatively impacting a woman’s physical or emotional well being compromises their safety.
The odds you mentioned of bear attacks seem a lot lower than the odds of a woman having to deal with shit from men. I say this as a man who worked in the boreal for 10 years and with a pile of construction folks (men and women).
None of which is relevant to my statement.
dsfgasfsaf
So what people are meaning to say is women’s feelings are more important than men’s? I think the statistics should matter xD. But I don’t think bears attack people as often as people are trying to make out.
dsfgasfsaf
Wait, you’re saying the meme, instead of saying “women’s safety”, could say “women’s feelings” and still be accurate? That’s quite the take…
dsfgasfsaf
You’re asking for statistics in bad faith of the argument. Seems like you’re the one slap-fighting here - if you wanted to actually engage in logical discourse, you’d have presented statistics yourself, which you have not.
There’s obviously no statistics on the rate of how many bear-human and male-female interactions happen. One rarely happens, the other happens billions of times per day. We can prove that bears are more aggressive and dangerous than humans though.
In one black bear study 88% of fatal attacks were a result of the bear being the aggressor. Note that black bears are known to be timid of humans, and notoriously not aggressive.
- https://sapl.ucalgary.ca/evds_info/content/black-bears
- https://bear.org/bear-facts/how-dangerous-are-black-bears
So, statistically even the more timid bear species are wildly more aggressive to humans than humans to bears. Unless you have data that proves that men are more aggressive to women than bears are to humans, this is the closest we get to proving men are statistically safer than bears.
In one black bear study 88% of fatal attacks were a result of the bear being the aggressor.
Lmfao what a useless fact.
How many rapes or instances of physical assault on a woman were a result of the man being the aggressor?
It’s almost like there’s more men than bears.
I would love to know how you went from percentages, which you quoted and I replied to, to overall numbers. You realize that’s not what you were talking about, right?
Forgot to include this in my post
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I’d specify further - a solo man/bear interaction with a woman in a remote location
I don’t want cubs or captivity involved, and no bystanders. It might be more fair to make it strangers only too… That data is going to be a lot harder to quantify through
deleted by creator
From your last paragraph, that’s what I was discussing with my spouse. She has been harassed/assaulted. All the women she knows have been as well. Hell my mom was as well. She was telling me about how men started to look at her when she was 12. I cannot put myself in her shoes, but because it’s so wide spread it’s a no brainer to me that women will choose the bear, and I don’t blame them. I hate that there is a hesitation, and I hate that you, and all the women I know went through shit like that.
deleted by creator
I appreciate your kind words. Her sharing her experiences with me has been eye opening, im sure a decade ago I would have scoffed at the women choosing the bear, but listening to her stories, and the stories of others has thankfully helped me mature.
And bears will most likely leave you alone if you leave them alone.
Im a little shocked at the general sentiment in this thread, I’m not a woman but most of my friends are afab and just hearing stories about how men will act normal until they’re in an isolated situation like the scenario describes makes it a no-brainer why so many people pick bear
There are some issues & experiences that women go through that men will just simply never “get”, and that’s fine. But invalidating the answers & experiences from women is why I believe there are no longer many women participating in conversations on Lemmy anymore.
I mean… looking at all this, why would they want to?
Is it controversial to say that I’d rather converse with a bear? Or do you suppose folks get upset about it?
Maybe, just maybe, folks who do not understand it should listen to what women have to say about it? But many are thinking about it completely removed from the contextual experiences of women. It’s… awful.
I realized this a long time ago when I made a simple complaint that I thought women’s issues were downplayed a lot here, and in response I was downvoted, ridiculed, people demanded sources for my claims then claimed my sources were invalid for whatever reason they could pull out of their ass, and one person even, and trigger warning on this, told me I should die giving birth to a rapists baby.
I’ve even picked up a downvote stalker during the course of this whole bear thing. Same time every day somebody goes through and downvotes every single new thing on my profile.So yeah, Lemmy’s never been a great place for women. I only continue to participate because I’m disabled and have so few connections to the outside world that I’ll take anything now.
deleted by creator
- Suicidal person never eaten alive by a bear.
deleted by creator
You read the comment but were not listening. Try again. Disapointing.
If you don’t get why a lot of women pick the bear, shut the fuck up and listen to why.
ok so im spitballing a little bit here, since this is a cultural divide. Perhaps instead of trying to “empathize, or sympathize” with women, it would be more beneficial for both parties to be capable of meeting on a “level playing field”, where experience isn’t a factor, because the fundamental problem with experience is that nobody cares until they have it themselves. You ever watch a video of someone who is a master at their craft doing something and going “wow, that must be hard” but then have that subconscious thought of “i could totally do this if i wanted to” which you probably could, but you’re almost certainly going to underestimate the amount of effort required. As is a pretty typical for a human.
you have to remember that you exist inside a small bubble, specifically a small bubble made of three inch thick plate steel, like it’s the pressure hull of a submarine. You need to come outside of that bubble in order to be able to interact with others. Which in this case, probably means explicitly identifying that the very real fear that you have is completely insane/unfounded, and shouldn’t exist. And then it would probably be beneficial to cover why. Because the why is the underlying problem. Nobody cares about the problem at hand, they only care about the solution that fixes it.
The only thing that normal people with an outside perspective, and the inability to have the experiences listed (i.e. men in this case) are going to see is (to use an example from my life) is that i don’t like interacting with people, as I’m dysfunctional (for no particular reason, i just don’t like people) and as a result, when i have to interact with people, it’s often very weird and uncomfortable. But instead of someone else seeing me as a person who doesn’t like social norms and rules and just doesn’t follow them, they see someone who is quite literally a dysfunctional human being, who cannot do the one job that they are supposed to be able to do.
The difference here is that i am acutely aware of this fact, and often like to abuse it, because it makes other people uncomfortable, and i think being uncomfortable is a healthy thing. Social rules? Yeah turns out you can just not follow them, nobody cares. You wash your hair regularly? Stop doing it, see how many people actually care, which if they do care, you don’t have to care about them either. As long as you aren’t being an actual asshole people simply do not have the time of day to think about it. Most people don’t even understand this, because they don’t even understand the concept of social rules. Social rules are how you interact, not a way to interact, for most people.
if you don’t understand the spiel i’ve given just prior, it’s the same exact reason people don’t understand you. And if you understand it, than good on you, it’s the reason you think that this is going to understood by everybody. It’s important to remember that everybody is not capable of understanding everything, nor are they capable of experiencing everything. It’s really difficult to communicate across that gap effectively, but once you can, it works really fucking well. (the underlying problem here is the same reason that racism continued to exist for so long, and does to this day in smaller capacity. It’s the same reason people were scared about gay marriage, and it’s the same reason people are scared of trans people now. These people don’t know how to understand these things, so they just don’t. That’s where bigotry comes from.)
Anyway, i only left this comment after seeing how much of an apparent cultural misunderstanding there seems to be around this. I know i certainly didn’t understand it initially. I could see the reasoning behind it, but that doesn’t mean i understood it properly, to me it was just people yelling about nonsensical shit in lieu of making a good point, and it seems like that was almost what was happening, but that’s besides the point now. I see no other reason for this to be so hotly debated otherwise.
Stop antagonizing all men. There is a low probability that random men will sa you, there is very high probability that bear will eat you alive while you experience both pain and violence role-playing a KFC meal
It is fucking atrocious that you attacked a person sharing their experiences with “stop antagonizing all men.”
Right there she was expressing how every time she speaks up she gets immediately shut down, and there you were to do it again. This is me calling you out for it. Shame.
I see OP noticed how much traction and drama this post stirred up last week so they decided to try it for themselves.
And good for them. It’s an important topic. If you’ve already had your fill of it, you know what to do. But many people here are seeing it for the first time, and many other people are commenting for the first time.
The underlying issues so important that I hope we’re still talking about it next week and next month and next year.
It’s so tiring seeing the men coming in and deliberately misunderstanding what’s being discussed. They will do literally anything, appear dumb as rocks, to not recognize rape culture and admit potentially any fault or responsibility towards it’s continued existence. They take everything personally instead of being able to see that societal problems there are also responsible for helping to fix.
Are we also going to tolerate the same with Islam and terrorism? POC and safety because “crime statistics”? If those are not acceptable because it’s not anyone’s individual responsibility for others in an involuntarily assigned group, why is this ok?
Same arguments, still wrong. Fuck off misogynist.
see my comment here if you would
Not all men /s
Your comment really hits the nail on the head, esp the dumb as rocks part. I think part of that stupidity is legitimately not being able to see past our own privilege.
E: baha, downvote me harder, you nematodes
Yeah. I give some benefit of the doubt but after seeing plenty of varied and good explanations I’m tired of holding everyone’s hand who’s had plenty of chances to learn. After a while it just becomes men not listening and believing women which is too typical.
Here’s the problem with that statement. I agree that there is a problem with men committing rape. However, I (along with most men) have never raped anybody. Furthermore I have not done anything to perpetuate the actions of the minority of men who do commit sex crimes. Therefore I do NOT take responsibility or admit fault for their actions. Saying that men as a whole are the problem is offensive and unhelpful. It’s how random peaceful Muslims feel when conservatives tell them they need to take responsibility for the actions of terrorists and take action to stop terrorists “in their community” like all Muslims are in one big group chat. I would straight up give my life to prevent a woman I don’t know from being raped. Idk what more you want from me.
Your tiny bit of discomfort is clearly more important than rape culture that, yes you too, are contributing to. This is contribution to ignoring rape culture.
Your willful ignorance and not listening to women is enabling rapists.
the difference is that the patriarchy exists and favors men. there is no systematic structure that puts Muslims above others, at the expense of others, in a way that is parallel to what the patriarchy does.
i get what you are saying, and maybe not too long ago i was professing quite similar feelings, but i encourage you to self interrogate how big of a difference that is. truly hope this is helpful.
So it is the level of “privilege” that does or does not allow the commission of -isms then. The better off the target is, the more acceptable discrimination is? That is also a very Western perspective. It would be ok to tell Muslims in the Middle East that terrorism is their responsibility because their country’s power structure does put Islam firmly above others?
This “some animals are more equal than others” stuff is moral equivocating. If something is wrong if done to a group that isn’t “in power”, then it is also wrong to do it to the group “in power”. This isn’t a zero sum game. We don’t have to weight the guilt by association for a black man when compared with a white man because systemic racism competes with systemic patriarchy. If you do think that the immutable characteristics a person is born with are the most important things about them, I would encourage you to self interrogate how messed up that is.
So it is the level of “privilege” that does or does not allow the commission of -isms then.
No. It is the presence of privelege at all in the first place that holds all of us responsible to address that privelage as a reality when protecting one another.
The better off the target is, the more acceptable discrimination is?
No, I reject that characterization of what intersectionalist feminism is altogether. Read further for more.
That is also a very Western perspective. It would be ok to tell Muslims in the Middle East that terrorism is their responsibility because their country’s power structure does put Islam firmly above others?
No, because you are equivocating two different meanings of “responsibility.” Feminism calls for a brother’s keeper responsibility, not direct culpability responsibility. It is absolutely valid for example, to expect Islamic leaders or followers to speak out against violence — and they absolutely do without you or I even asking. Much similarly, I ask Christians in the U.S. to recognize their position of power and to speak out against christofascist or transphobic violence, and that happens also (though perhaps less frequently than I would like). On the same level, I ask all men to take brother’s keeper responsibility and to hold one another accountable, recognizing their position of privilege while taking steps to protect others, especially when it comes to listening to women expressing their lived experiences rather than talking over them.
It’s a subtle difference but so incredibly important, so read it again if needed. Brothers keeper responsibility, not direct culpability.
It isn’t always deliberate, I can guarantee you that.
this comment section has been so enlightening about the makeup of this side of the fediverse. and all i can say is i am so sorry. i always guessed it was a male-heavy makeup but i never thought it would precipitate this badly.
this community usually veers leftist and toward respecting human dignity, but it appears as soon as women express the pain and fear that is forced upon them for merely existing all of that is lost and their comments are getting 30/70 downvoted, even in conversations where folks have already acknowledged the caveat of the importance of non-alienating.
it’s clear there is a lot of work to be done when one of the most progressive communities i have ever followed is so packed with malinformed spite as soon as the subject comes to humans asking for the basic privilege of safety.
Agreed and well said. It’s very disheartening. For me it’s just another example of how pervasive and ingrained the patriarchy and misogyny is.
❤️
It’s this sexist statement still being made? Cool, cool, cool… I mean it’s not actually, but here we are with this crap still being said.
Plus like a lot of semi recent sexist analogies it’s a rephrasing of an older racist one with the same logic but proponents are like “that’s different for reasons”, ‘rather a black man or a dangerous animal’ is pretty common in racist circles, just like the ‘you have a bowl of M&Ms, 1/10 are poison. That’s what it’s like to deal with men’ analogy from a few years back grew from the ‘you have a package of Skittles. 1/10 are poison. That’s what it’s like to deal with Muslims’ analogy
Stop noticing things.
So there mere presence of a man implies a lack of safety? It may be your feelings but it is also major misandry.
Feel however you want, but don’t drag me into the what other people have done. I don’t deserve the prejudice, and I’d rather just not interact with you.
Who’s dragging you into stuff? No one has said that all men are worse than bears.
You are, right now. This post was, as well as every other post. I’m not just going to sit here and bite my tongue. The entire thing was designed as an attack to get a rise out of people, and here it is. Thanks to whoever made this post.
What kind of person would I be if I weren’t willing to defend myself?
Okay then defend yourself. Do you agree with the statement? Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings. And for the love of God why?
Make your arguments or be a coward.
I can’t believe I even have to explain this.
There is no way to argue against a statement like “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings” because it’s such a loaded and ambiguous statement. It’s just as loaded and misused as the statement “it’s wrong to murder children” when used by proponents of banning abortion and limiting women’s reproductive rights. You can’t argue that it’s okay to “murder children” because it’s not okay to do that, but they’re intentionally misusing the statement to their own benefit for the emotional impact.
There’s probably some name for this logical fallacy, but I don’t know what it is. But the important thing is that you’ve fallen victim to it. “Men’s feelings” and “women’s safety” don’t negate each other, and they don’t have to compete; not unless you challenge somebody to argue against the statement “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings” exactly as you’ve done here. You’re manufacturing conflict from out of nowhere, and it’s an annoying distraction from real-world issues.
Why don’t you target your statement a little better? Why don’t you hold the actions of rapists and abusers against rapists and abusers, instead of innocent men who’ve done nothing but try to live their lives and respect the people around them?
Get off your fucking high-horse and rejoin reality with me where we have mutual respect for each other, whether you’re a man or a woman.
There is no way to argue against a statement like “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings”
Yes there is. Show how the statement causes harm. If it is too ambiguous, make it concrete by interpreting it.
“Men’s feelings” and “women’s safety” don’t negate each other,
For the most part you are right (most feelings are not problematic), but there are situations where Men’s feelings do affect women’s safety.
For example. If a Man feels like he deserves sex even if a woman is not interested in having that sex. Another example is if the average man feels like they rightfully control or are better than women. Then that makes that society less safe for women.
But yeah, if a man feel sad because his favorite driver loss the race, that doesn’t harm women. To me, these kinds of feelings were never the issue.
Why don’t you hold the actions of rapists and abusers against rapists and abusers, instead of innocent men who’ve done nothing but try to live their lives and respect the people around them?
I am confused about you got here. Is this post calling you a rapist? I have yet to judge you on anything. I am just trying to understand why this post is getting you so upset. If it turns out this post is upsetting to you because you are a rapist that thinks that women shouldn’t have safety, then your reactions would make sense to me. As of now, I am still confused.
