Why, though? They'd be way easier to beat up compared to a regular dude if they tried something. But then again, the soy aura they emanate might be too overpowering.
Women are champions at fear-based motivated reasoning and we as a society encourage it, because we implicitly assume that whenever a woman says she feels scared or creeped out there must be someone who made her feel that way.
I thought destiny would mention that TENS of THOUSANDS of bears if not HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of bears are euthanized every single year just for displaying aggression towards humans. Thus dramatically effecting the number of interactions with humans. Not to mention parks and recreations even euthanize bears that humans feed. Imagine if these hundreds of thousands of aggressive bears were allowed to roam freely what the violent encounters would look like
@@tardigrade8019 sorry I was saying world wide. Bears are regulated across Eastern Europe/russia, Japan, Canada, and Mexico. Also look at the numbers of bears that are hunted in the US as well.
“Would you rather be stuck in a room with a 4 month old baby or a 20 foot crocodile with laser beams and razor hands who wants to eat you? Well I’d have to choose the crocodile because I’ve had bad experiences with 4 month olds”
Why are most of you playing dumb about this? What do you get out of it? Just being contrarian by nature? Men are main ones who’ve been saying that other men are dangerous, so why is it an issue when women are weary?
There is sociological term about this that is called fear of crime gender paradox, wherw despite women bwing extreme minority victims of violence crime (yes in every single country mwn are majority victims of violent crime), they fear of supposwd crime more. Its the real thing look up online.
I asked on Twitter about what if it’s a trans man or black man in the woods. All the answers were you’re just doing a gotcha the question isn’t about that. So no they’ll hold firm and stick with bear. Even if it means indirectly saying that trans men aren’t men and they’d rather chose a bear over a black man as less dangerous Edit: have gotten a few people to just straight up say a young boy, elderly man, black man are all worse than a bear. They really are holding strong on this
If both are hostile, you’re easily surviving the man vs the bear. I’ve known people who have been jumped by multiple people, stabbed, shot and chased. If you switched them out with bears they wouldn’t be with us anymore. I understand that the convo is on women’s safety but if a bear was near them and started attacking they’re gonna expect the man next to them to save them even if they don’t know each other. That already happens when men are the assailants so I don’t see why it’d be any different if the assailant was a bear. Picking black bear over man makes sense tho since you can scare off a black bear as a lone person. You can’t scare off a black man and I’m saying this as a black man myself. I’d pick black bear over anyone I don’t know. Male or female. Gay or straight, it doesn’t matter. I think it’s also relevant that whenever a woman shows footage of a bear being docile the common denominator is black bear. Most of the dialogue here just reeks of lack of basic research on these beings. “Bears only attack when threatened” isn’t always true either. Just recently there have been stories of people merely minding their own business and getting mauled. One of them was a veteran and a EMT. Black bears will get scared off but that doesn’t work easy on any species above it. Grizzlies chase you if you run and if you flinch when they get near you I hope you cleared your bucket list. People have died doing that too. People need to do more research before they speak. It’s not like you have to go to the library to learn all this.
The funny thing is that none of the women who answered bear look like they could survive a single cold night in the woods if they weren't lucky enough to run in to a man to help them. Forget the bear, if you just ask the question would you rather be trapped in the woods alone? Or trapped in the woods with a man? You are basically asking them if they'd rather run in to a man who will most likely have some kind of shelter and fire to keep them from freezing to death and are overwhelmingly more likely to offer aid then harm? or would they rather almost certainly be dead within 24 hours because they can't light a fire to save their life.? Men alone in the woods aren't looking for Victims. They are looking for nature because they are the outdoorsy type, deer to hunt, or some peace and quiet. If someone was looking for people to hurt they wouldn't look for them in the wilderness where you are more likely to find bigfoot then you are another human.
@@alexc4159 obviously a bear is more dangerous than the typical dude rationally. thats not the point tho. but its not a rational argument lmao, ofc u cant see it as anything other than that
Bears are remarkably well known for not giving a shit if their food is dead. The worst thing a bear can do is eat your intestines in front of you while you watch in agony and horror.
Man the weirdest shit that comes from this discourse is missinformation about bears. I dont even care about the rape discourse, bears will actively avoid you. If you go to nearby forrest regularly then you probably met dozens of them but don't know it because they smelled you first. And they actually prefer eating honey, berries, trash and carcasses before humans. Only cases of bear attacks in my country are happening because people accidentally sneak up on them, run into a mother with cubs or try to befriend them. Or maybe it's just different in europe idk.
Isn't it natural to ask the question "would you rather encounter a bear or man in the woods?" when a guy says that encountering a man is much scarier than encountering a bear? You're making this more serious and making random women seem more evil than they really are
@@cowyeti21 People say stupid crap all the time, doesn't make it natural to ask such a question. You can play with hypothetical scenarios but that doesn't change the fact that the original question is intentionally vague yet people will assume the worst out of the man or bear and not out of both of them.
He has to claw back his reputation from revealing the ********** getting ******* by horses images saved on his pc somehow. Even if it means being a contradictory condescending freak.
I think Vaush is purposefully trying to be more palatable to the far left on everything. He's realized that he has boxed himself into a corner where that's the only audience where he can expand. I legitimately feel like his views on this type of stuff just used to be very different back then and changed later on.
No one is prejudiced, it’s just that there is a small group of men who are highly predatory which causes women to be more cautious around all men due to the difference in physical strength.
The question essentially boils dowm to "Would you rather be murdered or r*ped?" Which I think is just super disrespectful to both victims of r*pe and SA as well as people who have been or have attempted to be murdered
The steel man version of this and a more interesting question is " would you fear a man you meet in a consequence free environment?" to say,in an environment he could get away with it.
Destiny is literally demonstrating Vaush's point and showing himself to be one of those red flag guys 🤦♂️ He's not even trying to understand why so many women picked the bear over the man. He simply dismisses their fears as being dramatically over exaggerating the dangers of men, and that you really shouldn't take anything that they say seriously because they are clearly to emotionally compromised to make even remotely reasonable statement about what is going on. The man vs bear hypothetical had nothing to do with women hating men and everything to do with women's genuine fears of men. Vaush was spot on with his commentary.
Y'all are proving Vaush's point, by completely misunderstanding the hypothetical and what it's meant to indicate. Out of curiosity I've been asking women around me what they'd pick since hearing of the hypothetical, and virtually all of them picked the bear. The reasoning usually being that with the bear, they can at least play dead. For all of them, it indicates, at the very least, that they expect some form of danger in either case. And the very fact that being alone with a male stranger is considered a potential danger IS the problem. There's a reason men can generally walk alone at night, wheras it's a risk for women. The whole point is about how men in society still tend to have harmful behaviors towards women. Call it culture, or patriarchy, or misoginy, whatever. It's there. It's not all men, but it's enough shit to deal with in one's lifetime that if alone in a forest, it's enough for many to consider the bear a safer alternative over a roll of dice on whether the man they come across will be respectful or a total creep if not worse.
@@prodanalexandru219 They are stupid. You primed the answer beforehand. Lots of reasons. They have never actually been in the woods or been within 25 feet of a bear in the woods. Why do my parents believe something if it isn't true??? Fantastic logic my dude. So you agree with them about everything using that logic.
@@prodanalexandru219 This is an insufficient response. The left isn't omnipotent, they can be wrong on certain issues. Conservatives aren't always completely unreasonable, they can be right on certain issues. If you can't see this, then you're just an idealogue.
It's true, there are no two ways about it. The interviewer is correct too It's okay for men to feel uneasy about the discourse, because they can't do nothing about it, and just have to let it sink in. For the normal guys, it's not them, but again, this is what happens in real life, and they can't do nothing about the ones that are really dangerous If you don't do these dangerous things to women, don't go out your way as if you did. The interviewer just puts it out like it is. There are a lot of men that do this, just be glad you're not one of them
No there aren't, and you don't have to take it. There's no other group we encourage to just stand idly by while people spout blatant generalized bigotry about them based on a handful of psychopaths.
@@zeeteepippi275If you take offense that there are women wo are afraid of men because of systematic violence you are either the perpetrator or insanely senestive. Where in the hypothetical were you attacked?
I feel like Destiny is misrepresenting the point that is being made. I wouldn't fault someone for being incredibly scared after encountering some random man alone in the woods. I don't think you can compare that to day to day interactions with men or call that "man hating"
If you as a woman are in the woods then there's probably a reason to be there and therefore other ppl go there,among them men. Why would that scare you?!
You missed the point, he was not talking about the bear and man choice. He was talking about how some men seem "soy" when saying the same thing (essentially) as other men who don't seem "soy"
@@valipunctro dude, how many horror movies are about encountering strangers in the woods? I'm not saying I agree with them, I'm just saying that this is not an irrational fear to have. Usually forests are really isolated and not places of lively social interaction
A fraction of men treat women terribly. Most men don't, but how can women tell the difference beforehand? They can't, so they exercise caution. Destiny attacking trauma responses from women is rather sad to watch.
What fraction of bears treat people well? Most people arent mauled by bears, but most people dont see bears everyday of their life, like women see men.
These aren't trauma responses, the women responding arent actually in this situation. Its people legitimately taking time to think through a hypothetical scenario and still coming up with ridiculous and nonsensical stances.
@@ryancomer6290 These are literally trauma responses. The women have been in the situation of being attacked by men. It's not actually a hypothetical scenario. The bear is meant to represent an unknown threat while the man is the threat that has already traumatized them. They would rather deal with the unknown threat than the one that has already hurt them. All you are doing is avoiding the reality that a subset of men do severe damage to women and the rest of us don't seem to care.
@@alansnyder9 The bear is meant to represent an unknown threat vs. the subset of men who cause severe harm to women. Only a small fraction of men cause this level of harm, but it is enough for women who have experienced it to prefer the unknown bear. You aren't being clever, you are just ignoring the reality of the harm caused by the small subset of men who cause the harm. The point of the question is to draw attention to this subset of men and ask for help in dealing with them.
Two funny things here honestly, ONE vaush is actually siding with women for once??? and TWO I can't believe I actually agree with vaush on something christ all mighty.
Before we had society women survived because they chose the man to protect them from the bear. They never choose the bear when it really happens. And women living in society is them choosing the man because society was built by men so men are still protecting women today. If women are saying they’d choose the bear that means they’re willing to leave society to go live in the wilderness because it’s safer, which they haven’t done yet, so I really don’t get it. They’re saying a bear but they are choosing men right now 😂. It doesn’t make sense
Considering that bears are out in the middle of the woods where there isn't any cameras or witnesses in general(there was none anywhere, let alone good "stat gathering" for most of those 200 years) there are most likely alot more encounters that were never reported because the person was never found
@@ryancomer6290 there have been over 400 shark fatalities in the past 50 years. Sharks live in the ocean. Humans do not. Double the deaths in a quarter of the time Even if we assume there's double or even triple the number of bear fatalities it's still wildly low
@@justifano7046 Most people out in the ocean where sharks are, go out in groups on a boat. The same cannot be said about bears/people and the woods. You also stated yourself that sharks live in the water, humans don't. This is a terrible comparison to bears because both bears and humans live and have lived together on land, in the woods. The rate at which humans run across bears compared to other humans is substantially different. Its part if why this hypothetical is so ridiculous
@@itsjayswelly do you think bears only exist in the deep forest? Also how many people are at the beach during fall winter and spring months? Also humans visiting the beach are only occupying a very small section.
So sick of this “we’re gonna do or say something shitty/childish and if you react appropriately, you’re basically evil and haven’t lived through 1/000% of what we have”. These are aggressors, they are not compassionate people.
As a man who goes out to parks alone. I evaluate threats based on who is more likely to attack me. Men commit 90% of the crime, I know this fact. Like women, men are also attacked mostly by other men. Generally speaking (all things being equal), if I see a women I will feel safer than if I see a man. Granted, there is a wide latitude in how people present themselves that could cause me to feel more or less afraid of any given man or women. Some body language is more alarming than other types of body language. How a person carries themselves with body language can cause fear or comfort in others even if that person has no intent to harm. I definitely see certain types of body language as a red flag. The importance of this can not be understated. On the other hand you should not be obsessed over everyone else's possible reaction to you either. Know yourself, and know that you have no intent to harm others and live by that. If someone is afraid of you just harmlessly walk by. Not everyone interprets body language the same. Some might see your body language as a threat even though it isn't and you know this because you have no intent to harm others. Walking harmlessly by said person will reassured them that not everyone is a threat. There are some excellent books on this subject. The Gift of Fear and Left of Bang being two excellent books on the topic of being aware of your environment. The importance of being well read on this topic can not be understated, your survival may be at stake. It's a dangerous world out there and it is best to be aware.
@@heinshaaine8153 Both of them sound like torture to me. The main difference is that with a bear it is not based on malice. The bear's knowledge is not based on calculated mental thought. Human beings on the other hand mentally calculate what they do, so much of what a human does is an act of both will and knowledge. This makes being attacked by a human that much more savage. This is also what makes violent crime in general evil. I say this as someone who is deeply influenced by the teachings of Locke. Whenever a human does something, they are acting upon the knowledge in their mind to do that thing. That knowledge is not innate, they learned that through will and effort - something Foucault (another philosopher I read) calls the will to knowledge every now and then. Animals don't think in language, they act on a different paradigm of knowledge, which also has to be learned, but in different ways which we don't fully understand in my opinion. Animals most likely act on feeling. If a bear feels that you are a threat, they will attack or flee (fight/flight psychological mechanism, which we humans share with animals). Human beings go one step further than fight/flight psychological mechanics. The bear isn't going to think to himself, oh look, here is someone I can attack today. Human beings on the other hand DO think this way. This is what makes violent crime in general evil. The violence is not based upon the fight/flight mechanism. In legal terms I believe this is called malice aforethought. I'm reaching here a bit, but I'd be willing to bet that many animals generally don't engage in malice aforethought. Human beings definitely are quite adept at malice aforethought. I believe that there is something about our capacity for language that I believe allows us and enables a greater ability for malice aforethought to a much greater degree than animals who don't use language. I'm not saying that all animals are incapable of malice aforethought - but what I am saying is that human beings are definitely adept at it. The fact that human beings are born as blank slates of zero understanding, that is we don't have an understanding of the world at birth, essentially means that our actions are based upon our understanding of the world rather than fight/flight psychological mechanics like the animals. I generally don't align with Steven Pinker's world view on the blank slate. I think there is something starkly different about the human condition than the animals and that humans are largely born with zero understanding of the world at birth as per Locke. Animals mostly seem to figure out how to move about in the world at a faster rate than humans, although this varies from animal to animal. Anyways, just my two cents on the issue.
“The worst thing a bear can do is kill you” bro have you seen the video of the bear just holding a deer down and eating it asshole first while it’s alive and wailing? Brutal
This line of argument is the same one that raicist use for their beliefs but youd never seen a feminists admit to it "your more like to be ataccked by a man then bear" "erm 13/50 thats why we need a ethno state"
fr a racist could make this same argument citing crime stats. Comparing any group of people to animals has always been super offensive, but they act like straight white men should just take it.
Fellas, what do you think is more dangerous if you are attacked by either of these weapons? A gun, or a nuke? Answer: gun, because about 43,000 people in the USA have died from gun violence. Meanwhile, how many people have been killed by a nuke this year?
Well no where in the post does it specify that being attacked by a bear is worse than by a human? I am more afraid of being attacked by someone with a gun than being nuked. But I guess you are afraid that people run around with nukes and robs people.
It is possible, but it could also be a man burying a dead body. Bears don’t attack humans unless you startle them, that’s why most bear encounters are barely lethal.
@@dianax6680 by that logic there is no notable percentage of male encounters that are lethal. less than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. How many times does a woman walk by or "encounter" (come within 30 ft of) a man with literally nothing happening? millions of times a week? Your mailman? a cable repair guy? a guy who is looking at his phone on his lunch break? EVERY man in an office minding their own business? the people driving in their cars past you every day? So that means that women choosing the bear are somehow even more retarded. If you think bear encounter is not lethal, then walk up to and TOUCH a bear in the wild. I goddamn guarantee you if you take the amount of people who touch bears in the wild and get attacked, the percentage is higher than men who are touched by women.
@@REDDAWNproject You don't even need to touch it to be attacked, if it is hungry or uncomfortable with your presence it will attack you, it may not be "lethal" but the chances of it dismembering you are high. Most non-lethal attacks leave people maimed and dismembered.
they are very cute, beautiful eyes, polite they might ask for some snacks but Ive never experienced any ask of violence. look up the numbers it rarely happens. the woods are awesome.
Y’all don’t seem to understand that most bear encounters are NOT lethal. I’ve seen bears when scouting, they’re actually pretty cute. But most encounters with a man in the forest in the middle of the night are lethal, and worse.
I live in Texas. Black bears are soy and tend to run. Now, deer is a different story. Stand in doe urine during mating season that buck is going to gore you.
True. This can even work with an unsupervised minor alone in the woods vs the group with the highest conviction rates per capita for Child abuse material.
Vaush is so morally bankrupt: “Prejudice is only bad when it's harmful.” No, prejudice is always wrong and you shouldn't prop up Prejudice A because it is less harmful than Prejudice B.
Retarded opinion, almost any oppressed group is going to harbor prejudice against the group of people who enable their oppression at large even if literally every single member of that group isn’t an oppressor, it’s a defense mechanism. Obviously not every white person in 1800s America owned slaves or hated black people but that doesn’t mean black people were in the wrong for being prejudiced against them. You could also say this about the vast majority of anti-colonialist resistance movements throughout the last 200 years, many movements were centered around painting a group of people (usually white people) largely as oppressors and enemies, that doesn’t make them racist or wrong.
Not to mention that Vaush used to say the exact opposite in regards to men and white people: both that bigotry against them is harmful even if it's less harmful than bigotry against women or black people, and that even it's less harmful that still doesn't mean the harm it causes is acceptable
@@nikibronson133It’s the same “Racism is prejudice plus power” bullshit argument the far-left always makes. Only prejudice by whites - which is their entire existence mind you (whiteness is racism;) - is harmful? Why? Well no one else in society has power to cause harm with their racism because they are just powerless victims of whiteness. It’s bullshit. It’s ill-liberal and it should be rejected. Discrimination is always wrong.
"would you rather be in the woods with a man or bear?" "A bear. Men are scary" "What about a transman or bear" "A transman" "So, are you saying transmen aren't real men?" *starts to short circuit due to cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy*
But isn't the answer very easy? Transmen are still men, but they have been socialised as women. Do you believe men have raping and murder in their nature? Or is it because we raise them in a specific way that, when other shit goes wrong, makes them into murderers and rapists? I believe the latter. That's why some of them rape and murder. And transmen, even if they are still men, they have been socialised in a completely different way.
Weirdest thing to me, even their answer... " worst thing a bear can do is kill me. " Is reflective of a strange mindset. It is effectively damage control. Even if we grant their position, one of these is a much harder opponent than the other. You're assuming a position of loss. This question reads to me, " Who would you rather fight, a random man or a random bear? " Randon man? My odds of victory are highest with a man. Like what? I'm picking the easiest fight, not based on which can cause the least psychological damage.
@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 The first few women to say it had to have been rage bait trolling. The question seems purely crafted not to spark intellectual discussion, but to make ppl triggered. At least that's the way I see it.
@@54amzaK No, dude. Talk to them. They genuinely believe their answer. The reality is that they wouldn't pick the bear if they were ever in that scenario, but they absolutely believe they would, and are vilifying men based on that, even when we all know, they'd pick the man.
@@54amzaK Yeah, that's true. I think the ones that popularised it weren't doing it for the lols but I suppose it's not really an important difference to argue over. True.
Wouldn't a bear literally eat you alive? A man may not even be hostile or may just be a hunter, a park ranger, fellow camper, or on something on that line. Am I missing anything out of this?
The number of reported fatal bear attacks per year in the US is in the single digits with an average of 1, and worldwide it's double digits. Unless the bear is provoked first, is extremely hungry, or you get too close to its cuba, chances are it will ignore you or just remain wary of your presence.
@@Soren59 1. you act like those one of those 3 things happening is rare (provoked, hungry, too close to cubs etc) when you just need ONE of them to be true at the time. 2. the question is basically saying "you randomly come in close contact with a bear or man" at that range 1. you are already provoking it 2. if they have cubs with them they will ALREADY assume that you being close to the cubs is you being in danger. Of course if you start adding uncharitable factors into the hypothethical it might change somethings. but the hypothethical is that you are ALONE in the woods walking and randomly a bear appears in front of you, like within 15 feet. no one sane in that example is going to say the bear because "well if I dont provoke it" like bro you are ALREADY provoking it by being that close to it in its environment.
@@Soren59This is a silly thing to say because if humans encountered bears at the same rate women encounter men the number of humans killed by bears would be way higher. this is just a goofy use of statistics, it's like saying that you would prefer to run into a person you don't know in the woods rather than a person you are familiar with because you are statistically more likely to be murdered by a person that you already know.
@@Aminangela but that's not a choice between bears and men because both would be possible to encounter in either situation. You're choosing between *bears and men during the day* and *bears and men at night* What you've done here is started with a conclusion and tried to work your way there.
@@Aminangela "I actively choose to go in Alaskan woods where bears will be" As if you are going into the woods to see bears and not for any other reason. "but avoid going at night because I think creeps will be there." As if you wouldn't encounter creeps during the day.
@@AydenMartinez-iv3jt I mean I'm telling u my decision making process. Ive even gone when there are bear sightings because I know how bears behave and can prevent a confrontation. And the reason there are more creeps at night is bc there are less people in general so it's incredibly risky to try attacking in daylight. Kinda common sense imo.
@@AIATCG yea, it’s all comparative and people looking out for their own image. I say it ‘cause I’m a large black man who’s relatively mild mannered and I see what women say vs how they actually behave around me. It never quite matches lol
@jcnot9712 it's funny you say that because I'm half black but I'm really light skinned, and I've noticed women will immediately change their tone and a lot of their behavior when they find out,ESPECIALLY if we are in a group setting.
@@AIATCG yea, group setting makes all the difference specially since a lot of the prejudice is either fear-based or masked as such. When there’s no one around, the fear is you’ll “hurt” them, as irrational as that may be to think. When you’re in a group, the fear is they’ll get ostracized for saying wrong thing. I live in one of the most “liberal” cities in the country (NYC) and I experience it all the time lol
Ah so it's like "if I was a worm, would you still love me?" but instead its positioned at all men and asking "alone in the woods, we pick the bear over the man. Do you support that decision?" and so if you pick the wrong option in both, you're a terrible person and that's supposed to say a lot about you.
The problem with the man/bear thing is, women are just yapping. When they say, “you should ask yourselves what it really says about misogyny for us to pick a bear over the man”, they are yapping, because they think they know what experiencing the bear would be like. But they don’t. Every woman who picked the bear, yapping about how it makes some societal point, would poo their pants and beg to change their minds the second they actually saw a bear irl, instead of meeting the bear and dying nobly like they imagine. Which renders their yapping totally vacuous and insincere.
Men won't stop yapping long enough to realize why someone would say bear. We'd rather be eaten alive than tortured and raped for days, months, or years. With every dip shit answer you guys give it only proves our point even more.
No joke I posted a comment on a similar video about “maybe women should think about how awful being eaten alive is before they say the worst a man could do is definitively worse” You know the response I got back “I’m sure Jeffrey Dahmers victims would’ve chosen bear” The people blindly arguing for bears are just using the greatest extreme they can to justify the rule. Insane
@@hdl3044 If woman really thought this, they’d be dumb not to be pro gun. If men are truly more dangerous than a bear and you encounter them everyday, you’re single digit IQ to not want to have a gun to protect yourself. But I don’t think woman are that dumb so this is just obvious rage bait that does nothing but divide ppl and create unnecessary attention in the name of clout
People are missing a more fundamental part of the question… exactly what kind of bear are we talking here? A grizzly bear is far more dangerous than a black bear.
@@KrzysztofMarchański and I am not sorry you signal yourself as a pitifuk human each time you speak. Nobody like you for you, its not some conspiration.
If it was black man vs man They would choose the black man to not look racist. While the sane people would choose the man in general knowing statistics and the crimes in Africa.
I think it depends. When you say "alone in the woods" im thinking like deep in the woods i fucked up got lost type. So the guy im imagining i run into is the lock you in the basement kinda guy lol I think we watch too much horror.
"Few have stories of bears trying to kill you..." Actually, many do...many people who are outdoorsy, bear stories are inescapable...my own mother had her experiences.
Men are more _potentially_ dangerous than bears, bears are more dangerous _on average_ than men, the best lesson is that both sides don't understand a) risk and probabilities and b) that the other side might have different priorities
its not a question about statistics / probability. its not even supposed to be a question answered rationally. bc obviously bears are more dangerous than men on average.
An interesting deviation on the question: a woman is in the woods, say a vast national park, and she is totally lost and the sun is going down. Bear of man? I know being a damsel in distress is not vogue at the moment but I seriously question a woman in good faith saying she would rather see a bear opposed to her literal only ticket out of there. (What caliber of men do you find in the woods? Mostly hunters. If in a national park: park rangers. Men who camp/hike. And of course hobos.) I totally get how a sizable chunk of men would see this as an opportunity to abuse their physical strength, no witnesses and all, but how can you expect men in general to not be aghast and frankly saddened that a woman thinks 50% or above of men would be predators if given the situation. "THERE IS WORSE THINGS THAN DYING, A BEAR CAN ONLY KILL YOU." So the idea immediately goes to becoming a basement slave to some rural hick'
The point isn’t surviving, the point is that the worst a bear can do is kill you, another person could do anything to you. Like it’s not about what realistically is worse, it’s about what feels worse and the potential for harm (aside from death)
@@Arc77crA a bear can rape you. A bear can eat you. A human can do terrible things, but a bear can do 3/4 of those things while weighing 1000 pounds. Also, you can't outrun a bear. you can't fight a bear. all you can do is pray to your god that the bear is scared of you. which, good thing, they generally are. But you don't know if they have a baby nearby, or they haven't eaten in weeks, or you smell just right. And even if they don't, if a bear just swats at you, you are losing limbs. A human can treat you as an equal. A human can reasoned, bartered or talked to. a human can ignore you or be scared of you. a human can help you. you do not understand how fucking scary bears are. this whole discussion is because women have spent the last 15 years exclusively jacking off on true crime documentaries
It's all about stereotyping men and it's the most acceptable stereotype in this society. You can talk misandry about men and be okay with it. Reverse the question and ask them, "Would you rather feel safer encoutering a grizzly bear/polar bear or a BLACK man?" And see their cognitive dissonance work.
I would love to see a reality show where women who picked the bear are taken to the woods left alone, and given a choice of two clearly marked paths: one says bear and the other says man and watch where they actually go. Also, quit picking up men on tinder and going to their homes the first night for sex. That behavior proves you aren’t afraid of men.
To Vaush these types of hypotheticals are pretty realisitic, cause he imagines himself being a horse and stalking women through the woods, every damn day.
I really don't understand why are so many men are offended by women choosing the bear, please just let them choose whoever they want what's so offending about that ? add to that i saw the video where women were asked most of them were answering and laughing it pretty clear they weren't serious !
I’ve talked to a few women about this and I think the real driving factor in this a lot of people don’t realize that it’s very dangerous to run into a bear in the woods.
@@dianax6680and you know how bears can be provoked? By you just existing near them, being too close to them, their cubs, their den, etc. if they’re hungry too that can provoke them.
Next ask some random horses if they'd rather be alone in a forest with a Bear or Vaush?
It’ll probably go more poorly for Vaush than for the horse. Just ask Mr Hands.
😂😂😂😂
@@jcnot9712 I'd google "Mr. Hands" but I'm worried what I would find
Is there a bucket nearby or is the horse jrhnbr?
@@jcnot9712 Do I even want to know?
I would pick the bear over a male feminist.
Why, though? They'd be way easier to beat up compared to a regular dude if they tried something. But then again, the soy aura they emanate might be too overpowering.
Women are champions at fear-based motivated reasoning and we as a society encourage it, because we implicitly assume that whenever a woman says she feels scared or creeped out there must be someone who made her feel that way.
Repeal the 19th
You're getting the narrative right. Good.
I think that's the case as well
Collective biases and fear based prejudice is prejudicial to men and women
I thought destiny would mention that TENS of THOUSANDS of bears if not HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of bears are euthanized every single year just for displaying aggression towards humans. Thus dramatically effecting the number of interactions with humans. Not to mention parks and recreations even euthanize bears that humans feed. Imagine if these hundreds of thousands of aggressive bears were allowed to roam freely what the violent encounters would look like
Didn't know this
Can’t find a number on euthanized bears, but it’s, at most, in the thousands. There are less than 1 million bears total in the entirety of the us
@@tardigrade8019 sorry I was saying world wide. Bears are regulated across Eastern Europe/russia, Japan, Canada, and Mexico. Also look at the numbers of bears that are hunted in the US as well.
How could that even sustain a bear population if you kill like 900k bears every year?
“Would you rather be stuck in a room with a 4 month old baby or a 20 foot crocodile with laser beams and razor hands who wants to eat you? Well I’d have to choose the crocodile because I’ve had bad experiences with 4 month olds”
Why are most of you playing dumb about this? What do you get out of it? Just being contrarian by nature? Men are main ones who’ve been saying that other men are dangerous, so why is it an issue when women are weary?
@@chickenisindeedmystyle7316 rofl
There is sociological term about this that is called fear of crime gender paradox, wherw despite women bwing extreme minority victims of violence crime (yes in every single country mwn are majority victims of violent crime), they fear of supposwd crime more. Its the real thing look up online.
It's called a hate movement. Feminism is a female led hate movement and misogyny doesn't exist.
I asked on Twitter about what if it’s a trans man or black man in the woods. All the answers were you’re just doing a gotcha the question isn’t about that. So no they’ll hold firm and stick with bear. Even if it means indirectly saying that trans men aren’t men and they’d rather chose a bear over a black man as less dangerous
Edit: have gotten a few people to just straight up say a young boy, elderly man, black man are all worse than a bear. They really are holding strong on this
A young boy???? Christ on a cross.
Twitter being twitter lol
Bro what’s your twitter I gotta see this
If both are hostile, you’re easily surviving the man vs the bear. I’ve known people who have been jumped by multiple people, stabbed, shot and chased. If you switched them out with bears they wouldn’t be with us anymore.
I understand that the convo is on women’s safety but if a bear was near them and started attacking they’re gonna expect the man next to them to save them even if they don’t know each other. That already happens when men are the assailants so I don’t see why it’d be any different if the assailant was a bear.
Picking black bear over man makes sense tho since you can scare off a black bear as a lone person. You can’t scare off a black man and I’m saying this as a black man myself. I’d pick black bear over anyone I don’t know. Male or female. Gay or straight, it doesn’t matter. I think it’s also relevant that whenever a woman shows footage of a bear being docile the common denominator is black bear.
Most of the dialogue here just reeks of lack of basic research on these beings. “Bears only attack when threatened” isn’t always true either. Just recently there have been stories of people merely minding their own business and getting mauled. One of them was a veteran and a EMT. Black bears will get scared off but that doesn’t work easy on any species above it. Grizzlies chase you if you run and if you flinch when they get near you I hope you cleared your bucket list. People have died doing that too. People need to do more research before they speak. It’s not like you have to go to the library to learn all this.
Dan has a great point, most women would have a stroke before choosing a bear over a black man
Women hate black men.
The funny thing is that none of the women who answered bear look like they could survive a single cold night in the woods if they weren't lucky enough to run in to a man to help them. Forget the bear, if you just ask the question would you rather be trapped in the woods alone? Or trapped in the woods with a man? You are basically asking them if they'd rather run in to a man who will most likely have some kind of shelter and fire to keep them from freezing to death and are overwhelmingly more likely to offer aid then harm? or would they rather almost certainly be dead within 24 hours because they can't light a fire to save their life.? Men alone in the woods aren't looking for Victims. They are looking for nature because they are the outdoorsy type, deer to hunt, or some peace and quiet. If someone was looking for people to hurt they wouldn't look for them in the wilderness where you are more likely to find bigfoot then you are another human.
WOAH, you're definitely proving the point. we women really need those men for protection and aren't afraid of them at all 🙄
@@snowrubu If you were truly afraid of us you wouldn't be on camera saying "BEAR TEEHEE MEN BAD".
@@snowrubu I don't care about your weird phobias and hang ups with men. You can keep coping or you can tell me how I'm wrong?
@@alexc4159 obviously a bear is more dangerous than the typical dude rationally. thats not the point tho. but its not a rational argument lmao, ofc u cant see it as anything other than that
@@mrniceguywinkyface1524 is that a threat lmao
I'd rather meet a bear than vaush honestly
Vaush IS a bear, a gay(pansexual) bear.
Bears are remarkably well known for not giving a shit if their food is dead.
The worst thing a bear can do is eat your intestines in front of you while you watch in agony and horror.
Man the weirdest shit that comes from this discourse is missinformation about bears. I dont even care about the rape discourse, bears will actively avoid you. If you go to nearby forrest regularly then you probably met dozens of them but don't know it because they smelled you first. And they actually prefer eating honey, berries, trash and carcasses before humans. Only cases of bear attacks in my country are happening because people accidentally sneak up on them, run into a mother with cubs or try to befriend them. Or maybe it's just different in europe idk.
You are assuming that a vast majority of the folks answering the question have come across a wild animal, let alone seen them rip their prey apart.
@@Sid00077 True, or rather: I'm assuming the majority of people have more than a surface level understanding of bears.
If a child was alone in the forest they would 100% choose meeting a bear over meeting Vaush
0:40 it never being a "would you Rather" scenario makes it so much worse. Why would women spread it as such and then pick the bear?
Isn't it natural to ask the question "would you rather encounter a bear or man in the woods?" when a guy says that encountering a man is much scarier than encountering a bear? You're making this more serious and making random women seem more evil than they really are
@cowyeti21
Nah, if you proliferate a scenario where you generally trust bears over men then you are on some weird man hatred delusions.
@@cowyeti21 People say stupid crap all the time, doesn't make it natural to ask such a question. You can play with hypothetical scenarios but that doesn't change the fact that the original question is intentionally vague yet people will assume the worst out of the man or bear and not out of both of them.
If prejudice against the oppressor group is fine what exactly was his problem with professor flowers?
He has to claw back his reputation from revealing the ********** getting ******* by horses images saved on his pc somehow. Even if it means being a contradictory condescending freak.
Take a wild guess.
I think Vaush is purposefully trying to be more palatable to the far left on everything. He's realized that he has boxed himself into a corner where that's the only audience where he can expand. I legitimately feel like his views on this type of stuff just used to be very different back then and changed later on.
No one is prejudiced, it’s just that there is a small group of men who are highly predatory which causes women to be more cautious around all men due to the difference in physical strength.
@@maryanchabursky9148a woman has a much better chance fighting off a man than they do a bear.
The question essentially boils dowm to "Would you rather be murdered or r*ped?" Which I think is just super disrespectful to both victims of r*pe and SA as well as people who have been or have attempted to be murdered
I had no idea vaush was still posting and getting views
I think bear vs man kinda gave him some views but he’s struggling
The steel man version of this and a more interesting question is " would you fear a man you meet in a consequence free environment?" to say,in an environment he could get away with it.
well lots of men say theyd commit rape if theyd be no consequences to it ..
@@elise9537 a huge " citation needed" on that one 😂
would you fear a woman you meet in a consequence free environment?
@@valipunctrolook at the amount of Andrew tate fans and you get a pretty good picture
ok gatcha women would rather see smokey bear then Mr. clean, what a great hypothetical 😂
Destiny is literally demonstrating Vaush's point and showing himself to be one of those red flag guys 🤦♂️ He's not even trying to understand why so many women picked the bear over the man. He simply dismisses their fears as being dramatically over exaggerating the dangers of men, and that you really shouldn't take anything that they say seriously because they are clearly to emotionally compromised to make even remotely reasonable statement about what is going on.
The man vs bear hypothetical had nothing to do with women hating men and everything to do with women's genuine fears of men.
Vaush was spot on with his commentary.
Yeah but what if the man was George Floyde?
Y'all are proving Vaush's point, by completely misunderstanding the hypothetical and what it's meant to indicate.
Out of curiosity I've been asking women around me what they'd pick since hearing of the hypothetical, and virtually all of them picked the bear. The reasoning usually being that with the bear, they can at least play dead.
For all of them, it indicates, at the very least, that they expect some form of danger in either case. And the very fact that being alone with a male stranger is considered a potential danger IS the problem. There's a reason men can generally walk alone at night, wheras it's a risk for women.
The whole point is about how men in society still tend to have harmful behaviors towards women. Call it culture, or patriarchy, or misoginy, whatever. It's there. It's not all men, but it's enough shit to deal with in one's lifetime that if alone in a forest, it's enough for many to consider the bear a safer alternative over a roll of dice on whether the man they come across will be respectful or a total creep if not worse.
You're in an airplane. Would it be worse if you saw a snake, or a random citizen of Burkina Faso?
Does anyone remember Warrior poet Society? It's a shame that debate never happened.
The worst thing a bear can do is eat you alive. Just putting that out there.
Destiny misses the point completely, divorce really read pilled him.
What did he miss mate
m8 what do you think he missed?
the point of the thought experiment watch Vaush second video about it
@@comicsans6487vaush is wrong on this one. This question is dehumanising to men in general
@tinyrobot6813 no it is not, how?
This is the one time I will agree with Destiny on anything
I actually agree with Vaush on this one. And it's not just hatred towards men that makes women say that
Yes it is.
@@STARK0181 well why do my parents say the same answer then? and they both conservative
@@prodanalexandru219 because conservatives are really really really really dumb. I’d be surprised if your parents could spell “bear”.
@@prodanalexandru219 They are stupid. You primed the answer beforehand. Lots of reasons. They have never actually been in the woods or been within 25 feet of a bear in the woods. Why do my parents believe something if it isn't true??? Fantastic logic my dude. So you agree with them about everything using that logic.
@@prodanalexandru219 This is an insufficient response.
The left isn't omnipotent, they can be wrong on certain issues. Conservatives aren't always completely unreasonable, they can be right on certain issues.
If you can't see this, then you're just an idealogue.
It's true, there are no two ways about it. The interviewer is correct too
It's okay for men to feel uneasy about the discourse, because they can't do nothing about it, and just have to let it sink in. For the normal guys, it's not them, but again, this is what happens in real life, and they can't do nothing about the ones that are really dangerous
If you don't do these dangerous things to women, don't go out your way as if you did. The interviewer just puts it out like it is. There are a lot of men that do this, just be glad you're not one of them
No there aren't, and you don't have to take it. There's no other group we encourage to just stand idly by while people spout blatant generalized bigotry about them based on a handful of psychopaths.
@@zeeteepippi275If you take offense that there are women wo are afraid of men because of systematic violence you are either the perpetrator or insanely senestive.
Where in the hypothetical were you attacked?
I feel like Destiny is misrepresenting the point that is being made.
I wouldn't fault someone for being incredibly scared after encountering some random man alone in the woods. I don't think you can compare that to day to day interactions with men or call that "man hating"
If you as a woman are in the woods then there's probably a reason to be there and therefore other ppl go there,among them men. Why would that scare you?!
You missed the point, he was not talking about the bear and man choice. He was talking about how some men seem "soy" when saying the same thing (essentially) as other men who don't seem "soy"
@@valipunctro dude, how many horror movies are about encountering strangers in the woods? I'm not saying I agree with them, I'm just saying that this is not an irrational fear to have. Usually forests are really isolated and not places of lively social interaction
@@creepmon1786 yeah but thats movies
@@lampad4549 and this conversation is about fear. People can express or instill fear through media
Honestly, If I was a woman around Vaush, I would choose the bear.
lets go dan, asking the real questions
A fraction of men treat women terribly. Most men don't, but how can women tell the difference beforehand? They can't, so they exercise caution. Destiny attacking trauma responses from women is rather sad to watch.
What fraction of bears treat people well? Most people arent mauled by bears, but most people dont see bears everyday of their life, like women see men.
These aren't trauma responses, the women responding arent actually in this situation. Its people legitimately taking time to think through a hypothetical scenario and still coming up with ridiculous and nonsensical stances.
Oh and men haven’t? Women aren’t capable of treating men poorly apparently? Right.
@@ryancomer6290 These are literally trauma responses. The women have been in the situation of being attacked by men. It's not actually a hypothetical scenario. The bear is meant to represent an unknown threat while the man is the threat that has already traumatized them. They would rather deal with the unknown threat than the one that has already hurt them.
All you are doing is avoiding the reality that a subset of men do severe damage to women and the rest of us don't seem to care.
@@alansnyder9 The bear is meant to represent an unknown threat vs. the subset of men who cause severe harm to women. Only a small fraction of men cause this level of harm, but it is enough for women who have experienced it to prefer the unknown bear.
You aren't being clever, you are just ignoring the reality of the harm caused by the small subset of men who cause the harm. The point of the question is to draw attention to this subset of men and ask for help in dealing with them.
Vaush knows a thing or two about making women uncomfortable.
4:26 desperation about the cause and entitlement in their way of talking
Two funny things here honestly, ONE vaush is actually siding with women for once??? and TWO I can't believe I actually agree with vaush on something christ all mighty.
3:28 guy in chat says the question that Dan later stole (or maybe they both stole it from somewhere else idk)
Before we had society women survived because they chose the man to protect them from the bear. They never choose the bear when it really happens.
And women living in society is them choosing the man because society was built by men so men are still protecting women today. If women are saying they’d choose the bear that means they’re willing to leave society to go live in the wilderness because it’s safer, which they haven’t done yet, so I really don’t get it. They’re saying a bear but they are choosing men right now 😂. It doesn’t make sense
2:11 Sample bias
honestly man vs bear is too little information, Hungry bear vs Ted Bundy is the real do or die, or... mostly die in this case.
Dan, you've nailed it once again. I commented this on that Vaush video and was surprised how many people agreed
Black Man or Bear.
Bear
There have been less than 150 recorded fatal bear encounters in the past 200 years in the USA
Considering that bears are out in the middle of the woods where there isn't any cameras or witnesses in general(there was none anywhere, let alone good "stat gathering" for most of those 200 years) there are most likely alot more encounters that were never reported because the person was never found
@@ryancomer6290 there have been over 400 shark fatalities in the past 50 years.
Sharks live in the ocean. Humans do not.
Double the deaths in a quarter of the time
Even if we assume there's double or even triple the number of bear fatalities it's still wildly low
@@justifano7046 Most people out in the ocean where sharks are, go out in groups on a boat. The same cannot be said about bears/people and the woods. You also stated yourself that sharks live in the water, humans don't. This is a terrible comparison to bears because both bears and humans live and have lived together on land, in the woods. The rate at which humans run across bears compared to other humans is substantially different. Its part if why this hypothetical is so ridiculous
@@justifano7046 how many people go to the beach vs go out into the forest? Most shark attacks happen to beachgoers.
@@itsjayswelly do you think bears only exist in the deep forest?
Also how many people are at the beach during fall winter and spring months?
Also humans visiting the beach are only occupying a very small section.
this is why id pick the bear
This is why the man should walk by, if sees you and the bear hanging out in the woods. Because nothing would go wrong.
why do men take everything literally omg this is hilarious
Why do women act so sadistically and hateful to men?
Do you think the damage and suffering women have caused men is funny? Are you actually sick?
Ask Vaush: if he was in the forest, would he rather come across an adult woman, a “short-stack goblin” or a horse?
Well he wants to be the horse and fuck the little gi... goblin, so he'd pick the goblin.
💀💀💀
Blud did Vowsh dirty 💀💀💀
So sick of this “we’re gonna do or say something shitty/childish and if you react appropriately, you’re basically evil and haven’t lived through 1/000% of what we have”.
These are aggressors, they are not compassionate people.
u should aggress on them then when you're out walking in the woods if you dislike them so much then
Exactly. And if a man disagrees with them, they'll be told they're the reason women pick bear.
13/52 with it's hair dyed blue.
@@miguelhuerta5603 otherwise known as the Kafka trap. It's cult behaviour.
I love the, "the worst thing a bear can do is kill you" Like no, the worst thing a bear could do is eat you alive.
yes. Is rape wore than being eaten alive? I have no idea, is human torture worse than a bear ripping your ribs out of your body?
@@heinshaaine8153bears like to eat people’s faces first.
As a man who goes out to parks alone. I evaluate threats based on who is more likely to attack me. Men commit 90% of the crime, I know this fact. Like women, men are also attacked mostly by other men. Generally speaking (all things being equal), if I see a women I will feel safer than if I see a man. Granted, there is a wide latitude in how people present themselves that could cause me to feel more or less afraid of any given man or women. Some body language is more alarming than other types of body language. How a person carries themselves with body language can cause fear or comfort in others even if that person has no intent to harm. I definitely see certain types of body language as a red flag. The importance of this can not be understated.
On the other hand you should not be obsessed over everyone else's possible reaction to you either. Know yourself, and know that you have no intent to harm others and live by that. If someone is afraid of you just harmlessly walk by. Not everyone interprets body language the same. Some might see your body language as a threat even though it isn't and you know this because you have no intent to harm others. Walking harmlessly by said person will reassured them that not everyone is a threat.
There are some excellent books on this subject. The Gift of Fear and Left of Bang being two excellent books on the topic of being aware of your environment. The importance of being well read on this topic can not be understated, your survival may be at stake. It's a dangerous world out there and it is best to be aware.
@@heinshaaine8153 Both of them sound like torture to me. The main difference is that with a bear it is not based on malice. The bear's knowledge is not based on calculated mental thought. Human beings on the other hand mentally calculate what they do, so much of what a human does is an act of both will and knowledge. This makes being attacked by a human that much more savage. This is also what makes violent crime in general evil. I say this as someone who is deeply influenced by the teachings of Locke. Whenever a human does something, they are acting upon the knowledge in their mind to do that thing. That knowledge is not innate, they learned that through will and effort - something Foucault (another philosopher I read) calls the will to knowledge every now and then. Animals don't think in language, they act on a different paradigm of knowledge, which also has to be learned, but in different ways which we don't fully understand in my opinion.
Animals most likely act on feeling. If a bear feels that you are a threat, they will attack or flee (fight/flight psychological mechanism, which we humans share with animals). Human beings go one step further than fight/flight psychological mechanics. The bear isn't going to think to himself, oh look, here is someone I can attack today. Human beings on the other hand DO think this way. This is what makes violent crime in general evil. The violence is not based upon the fight/flight mechanism. In legal terms I believe this is called malice aforethought. I'm reaching here a bit, but I'd be willing to bet that many animals generally don't engage in malice aforethought. Human beings definitely are quite adept at malice aforethought. I believe that there is something about our capacity for language that I believe allows us and enables a greater ability for malice aforethought to a much greater degree than animals who don't use language. I'm not saying that all animals are incapable of malice aforethought - but what I am saying is that human beings are definitely adept at it. The fact that human beings are born as blank slates of zero understanding, that is we don't have an understanding of the world at birth, essentially means that our actions are based upon our understanding of the world rather than fight/flight psychological mechanics like the animals.
I generally don't align with Steven Pinker's world view on the blank slate. I think there is something starkly different about the human condition than the animals and that humans are largely born with zero understanding of the world at birth as per Locke. Animals mostly seem to figure out how to move about in the world at a faster rate than humans, although this varies from animal to animal.
Anyways, just my two cents on the issue.
@@ninjacats1647I'm sure someone having their insides torn out by a bear can rest easy knowing it's not out of malice (much worse).
“The worst thing a bear can do is kill you” bro have you seen the video of the bear just holding a deer down and eating it asshole first while it’s alive and wailing? Brutal
Or listened to the phone called of a 19 yo Russian girl calling her mom while being eaten a live by a bear and 2 cubs
@@tardigrade8019or Timothy Treadwell who thought bears are better than humans and yet, he got himself eaten.
All of you folks are much too logical. Of course these things haven't been considered 😂😂.
Now think about the worst thing a man could do to a woman
@@tardigrade8019 I actually don’t think it’s possible to listen to that phone call anywhere.
Would his opinion change if it was a poler bear or a black man?
Of course!
Stop it 😆
@@BagelBoy97😂
A bipolar bear?
Polar bear is white so it's half way to evil
This line of argument is the same one that raicist use for their beliefs but youd never seen a feminists admit to it "your more like to be ataccked by a man then bear" "erm 13/50 thats why we need a ethno state"
Yup
“It’s not my fault I cross the street to avoid black people, black people need to change their behaviour”
fr a racist could make this same argument citing crime stats. Comparing any group of people to animals has always been super offensive, but they act like straight white men should just take it.
Funny seeing Vaush argue in favor of bear like he isn’t also someone women would be afraid of
Not just women. Horses as well.
You suppose that Vaush doesn't realize that he's a man?
Let's all be honest, he probably wanna fuck the bear...
@@yourarchnemesis8453And children he claims are "short stacked goblins"
Vowsh? Hide the horses!
Fellas, what do you think is more dangerous if you are attacked by either of these weapons? A gun, or a nuke?
Answer: gun, because about 43,000 people in the USA have died from gun violence.
Meanwhile, how many people have been killed by a nuke this year?
😂
Whats more dangerous, a supermassive black hole or a spoon?
Well no where in the post does it specify that being attacked by a bear is worse than by a human? I am more afraid of being attacked by someone with a gun than being nuked. But I guess you are afraid that people run around with nukes and robs people.
Can it be so impossible that the man in the woods is just camping? WTF is this hypothetical?
Better a forest ranger lol.
It is possible, but it could also be a man burying a dead body. Bears don’t attack humans unless you startle them, that’s why most bear encounters are barely lethal.
@@dianax6680 by that logic there is no notable percentage of male encounters that are lethal. less than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction.
How many times does a woman walk by or "encounter" (come within 30 ft of) a man with literally nothing happening? millions of times a week? Your mailman? a cable repair guy? a guy who is looking at his phone on his lunch break? EVERY man in an office minding their own business? the people driving in their cars past you every day?
So that means that women choosing the bear are somehow even more retarded.
If you think bear encounter is not lethal, then walk up to and TOUCH a bear in the wild. I goddamn guarantee you if you take the amount of people who touch bears in the wild and get attacked, the percentage is higher than men who are touched by women.
@@REDDAWNproject You don't even need to touch it to be attacked, if it is hungry or uncomfortable with your presence it will attack you, it may not be "lethal" but the chances of it dismembering you are high. Most non-lethal attacks leave people maimed and dismembered.
bears don't hunt humans
Everyone's just assuming the bears are violent because they come from broken, single-parent households.
*single-bearent
they are very cute, beautiful eyes, polite they might ask for some snacks but Ive never experienced any ask of violence. look up the numbers it rarely happens. the woods are awesome.
@@elise9537 dont need to tell ME twice. Vaush told me he stuck his meat inside of one; it didn't attack him! they truly are polite and cute!
People forget bears eat you alive.
Yeah I would rather get shot then get eaten alive.
Some people rather that than being harassed.
@@snakeEyedPirate And those people are insane.
I saw someone say cat-calling is actual SA.
Y’all don’t seem to understand that most bear encounters are NOT lethal. I’ve seen bears when scouting, they’re actually pretty cute. But most encounters with a man in the forest in the middle of the night are lethal, and worse.
I live in Texas. Black bears are soy and tend to run. Now, deer is a different story. Stand in doe urine during mating season that buck is going to gore you.
guys I totally agree with this, can we do this innocent hypothetical with black people now?
Only if you include a black bear in your hypothetical.
True. This can even work with an unsupervised minor alone in the woods vs the group with the highest conviction rates per capita for Child abuse material.
Are you suggesting there is a difference between black men and white men in terms of predation towards women?
@@maryanchabursky9148 yes
@@luluna5228 prove it
Destiny is the only leftist (or center leftist) with a sane take on this matter without devolving into right-wing and reactionary lunacy either.
YMS had pretty much the same take; but a bunch of people in his comments section are "disappointed" with him.
Vaush is so morally bankrupt: “Prejudice is only bad when it's harmful.”
No, prejudice is always wrong and you shouldn't prop up Prejudice A because it is less harmful than Prejudice B.
Prejudice is harmful, by definition. You're negatively judging an individual for things they didn't do.
Retarded opinion, almost any oppressed group is going to harbor prejudice against the group of people who enable their oppression at large even if literally every single member of that group isn’t an oppressor, it’s a defense mechanism. Obviously not every white person in 1800s America owned slaves or hated black people but that doesn’t mean black people were in the wrong for being prejudiced against them. You could also say this about the vast majority of anti-colonialist resistance movements throughout the last 200 years, many movements were centered around painting a group of people (usually white people) largely as oppressors and enemies, that doesn’t make them racist or wrong.
Not to mention that Vaush used to say the exact opposite in regards to men and white people: both that bigotry against them is harmful even if it's less harmful than bigotry against women or black people, and that even it's less harmful that still doesn't mean the harm it causes is acceptable
This wasn’t his point
@@nikibronson133It’s the same “Racism is prejudice plus power” bullshit argument the far-left always makes.
Only prejudice by whites - which is their entire existence mind you (whiteness is racism;) - is harmful?
Why? Well no one else in society has power to cause harm with their racism because they are just powerless victims of whiteness.
It’s bullshit. It’s ill-liberal and it should be rejected. Discrimination is always wrong.
"would you rather be in the woods with a man or bear?"
"A bear. Men are scary"
"What about a transman or bear"
"A transman"
"So, are you saying transmen aren't real men?"
*starts to short circuit due to cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy*
Have this conversation actually happened?
But isn't the answer very easy? Transmen are still men, but they have been socialised as women. Do you believe men have raping and murder in their nature? Or is it because we raise them in a specific way that, when other shit goes wrong, makes them into murderers and rapists? I believe the latter. That's why some of them rape and murder. And transmen, even if they are still men, they have been socialised in a completely different way.
Damn, you sure showed that fictional person my guy. lmao
Instead of realizing what has caused women to say bear, men are poking fun. There is your answer as to why women say bear.
@@fionagoode327Yea being indifferent towards other gender feelings is not gonna solve problems. Oh waitttt.... 😮
Weirdest thing to me, even their answer...
" worst thing a bear can do is kill me. "
Is reflective of a strange mindset. It is effectively damage control.
Even if we grant their position, one of these is a much harder opponent than the other. You're assuming a position of loss.
This question reads to me, " Who would you rather fight, a random man or a random bear? "
Randon man? My odds of victory are highest with a man. Like what?
I'm picking the easiest fight, not based on which can cause the least psychological damage.
Bears can maul people but not kill them
"but... but... my feelings..."
If you lose a fight with a man you'll get knocked out.
If you lose a fight with a bear you'll have your face ripped off.
@@randomhuman2595what
Where in the og post does it specify that the person in question is attacking the bear?
I'll commend online Feminists for one thing. They do rage bait way better then redpillers somehow lmfao
No, it's not rage bait, it's their genuine opinion. They're just stupid.
@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 The first few women to say it had to have been rage bait trolling. The question seems purely crafted not to spark intellectual discussion, but to make ppl triggered. At least that's the way I see it.
@@54amzaK No, dude. Talk to them. They genuinely believe their answer. The reality is that they wouldn't pick the bear if they were ever in that scenario, but they absolutely believe they would, and are vilifying men based on that, even when we all know, they'd pick the man.
@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 What we're saying can both be true
@@54amzaK Yeah, that's true. I think the ones that popularised it weren't doing it for the lols but I suppose it's not really an important difference to argue over. True.
Wouldn't a bear literally eat you alive? A man may not even be hostile or may just be a hunter, a park ranger, fellow camper, or on something on that line. Am I missing anything out of this?
literally the best a bear can do is not kill you
The number of reported fatal bear attacks per year in the US is in the single digits with an average of 1, and worldwide it's double digits.
Unless the bear is provoked first, is extremely hungry, or you get too close to its cuba, chances are it will ignore you or just remain wary of your presence.
cubs*
@@Soren59 1. you act like those one of those 3 things happening is rare (provoked, hungry, too close to cubs etc) when you just need ONE of them to be true at the time.
2. the question is basically saying "you randomly come in close contact with a bear or man" at that range 1. you are already provoking it 2. if they have cubs with them they will ALREADY assume that you being close to the cubs is you being in danger.
Of course if you start adding uncharitable factors into the hypothethical it might change somethings. but the hypothethical is that you are ALONE in the woods walking and randomly a bear appears in front of you, like within 15 feet.
no one sane in that example is going to say the bear because "well if I dont provoke it" like bro you are ALREADY provoking it by being that close to it in its environment.
@@Soren59This is a silly thing to say because if humans encountered bears at the same rate women encounter men the number of humans killed by bears would be way higher. this is just a goofy use of statistics, it's like saying that you would prefer to run into a person you don't know in the woods rather than a person you are familiar with because you are statistically more likely to be murdered by a person that you already know.
_"People get really defensive when I portray them as savage brutes who can't be reasoned with."_
Ya don't say...
women: I choose the bear
also women: has always only ever chosen the man in every circumstance of their life and will continue to do so forever
Women: saying one thing and doing another since Forever
Literally wrong because I actively choose to go in Alaskan woods where bears will be but avoid going at night because I think creeps will be there.
@@Aminangela but that's not a choice between bears and men because both would be possible to encounter in either situation. You're choosing between *bears and men during the day* and *bears and men at night*
What you've done here is started with a conclusion and tried to work your way there.
@@Aminangela
"I actively choose to go in Alaskan woods where bears will be" As if you are going into the woods to see bears and not for any other reason.
"but avoid going at night because I think creeps will be there." As if you wouldn't encounter creeps during the day.
@@AydenMartinez-iv3jt I mean I'm telling u my decision making process. Ive even gone when there are bear sightings because I know how bears behave and can prevent a confrontation. And the reason there are more creeps at night is bc there are less people in general so it's incredibly risky to try attacking in daylight. Kinda common sense imo.
I think they would only say “the black man” if you don’t ask the original version of the question first.
I actually tried this, and you're exactly right. I think it's because the fear of looking racist trumped the fear of men in general lol
@@AIATCG yea, it’s all comparative and people looking out for their own image. I say it ‘cause I’m a large black man who’s relatively mild mannered and I see what women say vs how they actually behave around me. It never quite matches lol
@jcnot9712 it's funny you say that because I'm half black but I'm really light skinned, and I've noticed women will immediately change their tone and a lot of their behavior when they find out,ESPECIALLY if we are in a group setting.
@@AIATCG yea, group setting makes all the difference specially since a lot of the prejudice is either fear-based or masked as such. When there’s no one around, the fear is you’ll “hurt” them, as irrational as that may be to think. When you’re in a group, the fear is they’ll get ostracized for saying wrong thing. I live in one of the most “liberal” cities in the country (NYC) and I experience it all the time lol
Yea idk why so many terminally online people have been defending this restarted hypothetical
Ah so it's like "if I was a worm, would you still love me?" but instead its positioned at all men and asking "alone in the woods, we pick the bear over the man. Do you support that decision?" and so if you pick the wrong option in both, you're a terrible person and that's supposed to say a lot about you.
As a bear, I sad🐻
You cant say an emoji, you must perform it
I’m sorry Mr Bear that you have to deal with all these people
You'll just have to grin and bear it
Ask them: "Palestinian man or the Bear?"
The problem with the man/bear thing is, women are just yapping. When they say, “you should ask yourselves what it really says about misogyny for us to pick a bear over the man”, they are yapping, because they think they know what experiencing the bear would be like. But they don’t. Every woman who picked the bear, yapping about how it makes some societal point, would poo their pants and beg to change their minds the second they actually saw a bear irl, instead of meeting the bear and dying nobly like they imagine. Which renders their yapping totally vacuous and insincere.
Men won't stop yapping long enough to realize why someone would say bear. We'd rather be eaten alive than tortured and raped for days, months, or years. With every dip shit answer you guys give it only proves our point even more.
ur proving the point
@@snowrubu Exactly. They don't get the bear answer anymore than they get why we are choosing cats over them. They just keep defensively yapping.
@@fionagoode327 feel free to explain your point if you think I’ve “misunderstood”. My wife was laughing at y’all too lol
@@snowrubu “you saying my answer is dumb is making me want to get eaten by a bear even harder” lmfao
I think womens choice in this debate has been very much influenced by the fiction that they read.
Is Vaush still a thing after, you know, that whole incident? Do people still listen to him and take him seriously?
His community is filled with like minded individuals. And he's easy farm content
Crazy to think being outed as a complete sexual degenerate and possible pdfile didn’t do anything to change the minds of his tankie audience lol
No, he's stuck and is with no growth.
What was the incident again?
@@pawnhearts8785 Horses
"A man could do way worse than the bear."
"So you fear that a man will literally eat you alive?"
No joke I posted a comment on a similar video about “maybe women should think about how awful being eaten alive is before they say the worst a man could do is definitively worse”
You know the response I got back “I’m sure Jeffrey Dahmers victims would’ve chosen bear”
The people blindly arguing for bears are just using the greatest extreme they can to justify the rule. Insane
@@hdl3044 If woman really thought this, they’d be dumb not to be pro gun. If men are truly more dangerous than a bear and you encounter them everyday, you’re single digit IQ to not want to have a gun to protect yourself. But I don’t think woman are that dumb so this is just obvious rage bait that does nothing but divide ppl and create unnecessary attention in the name of clout
@@hdl3044 I'll take my chances with Dahmer over the bear. Also they act like 1/3 men are complete psychopaths with no regard for anything.
@@hdl3044
can't bears do that "thing" to women to?
So being eaten alive is worse than being rape tortured from birth to death? I rather be eaten alive.
People are missing a more fundamental part of the question… exactly what kind of bear are we talking here? A grizzly bear is far more dangerous than a black bear.
Panda bear
You’d have to ask what kind of man to make it equal.
Polar is obvoiusly gg for amyone who meets it
Random man random bear
Least autistic response.
“Would you rather run into Vaush or EDP445?”
Vaush because he only like kids and horses
It becomes dangerous when it is a child
"Run into" ok but edp can't even run just run away lol
Both, I am confident I could take them 2 vs 1.
Depends on weather I'm a child or a horse
Oh wait, Vaush loves both💀
lots of women really pretending to be bear whisperers to justify their regarded choices
lots of guys pretend to be protected when in reality they are just predatorial abusers.
@@elise9537 I'm sorry that your father left.
@@KrzysztofMarchański and I am not sorry you signal yourself as a pitifuk human each time you speak. Nobody like you for you, its not some conspiration.
anyone who said bear has never been hiking in their life
also changing it to a bear vs black man is really funny 😂
If it was black man vs man
They would choose the black man to not look racist.
While the sane people would choose the man in general knowing statistics and the crimes in Africa.
I have met a bear hiking. It ran away because we were loud and waved our hands. Try that against an armed robber.
I think it depends. When you say "alone in the woods" im thinking like deep in the woods i fucked up got lost type. So the guy im imagining i run into is the lock you in the basement kinda guy lol I think we watch too much horror.
"Few have stories of bears trying to kill you..." Actually, many do...many people who are outdoorsy, bear stories are inescapable...my own mother had her experiences.
I don't believe half of those stories. You'd think these people are living in an episode of Winnie the Pooh.
Men are more _potentially_ dangerous than bears, bears are more dangerous _on average_ than men, the best lesson is that both sides don't understand a) risk and probabilities and b) that the other side might have different priorities
its not a question about statistics / probability. its not even supposed to be a question answered rationally. bc obviously bears are more dangerous than men on average.
@@snowrubu would you rather meet a woman or a bear in the woods?
@@HarrDarr id rather meet your mum in the woods
@HarrDarr bear. Worst the bear can do is eat me alive, women actually are deadly.
@@PMCFrontLines so it's not actually about meeting a man or a bear, it's about meeting a human or a bear?
Don't forget the real tragedy of this hypothetical: Someone, either man or bear, will encounter a woman.
Lol incel.
Vaush has been stuck on 450k subs for 3 months
And you're one of them sad 😂
He's obviously in denial over a certain vtuber's breedability.
I guess it's his way to back pedal on the weird stuff they happened recently. He is trying to maintain an image
@@spsawyer22 Was there an event that led to this? Not aware of and curious cause I hate this guy
@@thespileys2301 vaush or the turtle
An interesting deviation on the question: a woman is in the woods, say a vast national park, and she is totally lost and the sun is going down. Bear of man?
I know being a damsel in distress is not vogue at the moment but I seriously question a woman in good faith saying she would rather see a bear opposed to her literal only ticket out of there.
(What caliber of men do you find in the woods? Mostly hunters. If in a national park: park rangers. Men who camp/hike. And of course hobos.)
I totally get how a sizable chunk of men would see this as an opportunity to abuse their physical strength, no witnesses and all, but how can you expect men in general to not be aghast and frankly saddened that a woman thinks 50% or above of men would be predators if given the situation.
"THERE IS WORSE THINGS THAN DYING, A BEAR CAN ONLY KILL YOU." So the idea immediately goes to becoming a basement slave to some rural hick'
Even if people think that the man is a threat, you have a better shot of surviving a man than a bear
The point isn’t surviving, the point is that the worst a bear can do is kill you, another person could do anything to you. Like it’s not about what realistically is worse, it’s about what feels worse and the potential for harm (aside from death)
Man you get out of here with your logic and nuance. /s
@@Arc77crA a bear can rape you.
A bear can eat you.
A human can do terrible things, but a bear can do 3/4 of those things while weighing 1000 pounds. Also, you can't outrun a bear. you can't fight a bear. all you can do is pray to your god that the bear is scared of you. which, good thing, they generally are. But you don't know if they have a baby nearby, or they haven't eaten in weeks, or you smell just right. And even if they don't, if a bear just swats at you, you are losing limbs.
A human can treat you as an equal. A human can reasoned, bartered or talked to. a human can ignore you or be scared of you. a human can help you.
you do not understand how fucking scary bears are.
this whole discussion is because women have spent the last 15 years exclusively jacking off on true crime documentaries
@@Arc77crA death will feel worse.
@@C3Rl3 that’s not the point
Depends on the type of bear. Some bears are only 13% percent of the bear population, but commit half the maulings.
Those are the bears from inglewood
It's all about stereotyping men and it's the most acceptable stereotype in this society. You can talk misandry about men and be okay with it.
Reverse the question and ask them,
"Would you rather feel safer encoutering a grizzly bear/polar bear or a BLACK man?"
And see their cognitive dissonance work.
Bear since a black man is still a man.
I finally, for once, heard some shit Destiny had said that I actually agree with
The correct answer to this is: Id rather see a blackbear than a man, but id rather see a man than a brownbear.
I would love to see a reality show where women who picked the bear are taken to the woods left alone, and given a choice of two clearly marked paths: one says bear and the other says man and watch where they actually go. Also, quit picking up men on tinder and going to their homes the first night for sex. That behavior proves you aren’t afraid of men.
To Vaush these types of hypotheticals are pretty realisitic, cause he imagines himself being a horse and stalking women through the woods, every damn day.
I’d rather not mean anyone in the woods. I just want to go fishing 😂.
I really don't understand why are so many men are offended by women choosing the bear, please just let them choose whoever they want what's so offending about that ?
add to that i saw the video where women were asked most of them were answering and laughing it pretty clear they weren't serious !
Now would Vaush pick a horse or shortstack goblin?
You get it Destiny!!!! Another women's virtue. And yes that's why the red pill exist.... An answer to this harm.
So a clown fighting with an clown?
Where are these peoples' fathers.
Would you rather see slenderman in the woods or a man
Basically the same thing. Pretty obvious the answer
I’ve talked to a few women about this and I think the real driving factor in this a lot of people don’t realize that it’s very dangerous to run into a bear in the woods.
Also, I guess they've never been on a trail. You encounter so many strangers hiking and sometimes they wave at you and that's it.
It’s actually not lol. They don’t attack people unless you provoke them.
@@dianax6680 how does one provoke a bear
It's a bluff dude. The vast majority of them would choose a man over a bear.
@@dianax6680and you know how bears can be provoked? By you just existing near them, being too close to them, their cubs, their den, etc. if they’re hungry too that can provoke them.
Progressive brain rot is funny
A bear would also eat you while you're still alive. You wouldn't necessarily just get killed, you'd likely be eaten first.