The Man VS Bear Scenario
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 тра 2024
- The man vs bear scenario asks some thought provoking questions
This clip is from Talk Heathen, Episode 08.18 for May 05, 2024 with Sydney Davis Jr. Jr. and Christy Powell!
See the full episode: • Talk Heathen 08.18 wit...
Call the show on Sundays 1:00pm-2:00pm CDT: 1-512-991-9242
Don't like commercials? Become a patron & get ad-free episodes & more: / talkheathentome
► Find all of our links here: linktr.ee/atheistcommunityofa...
The podcast may be found at:
tiny.cc/podcastph
Talk Heathen merch can be found at: tiny.cc/merchaca
Note: We request pronouns as part of the call screening process on our shows, and we display the pronouns our callers provide. If you see a caller with no pronouns indicated, this is because they chose not to provide us with any, and we respect that decision.
-------
WHAT IS TALK HEATHEN?
Talk Heathen is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared toward long-form and on-going dialogue with theists & atheists about religion, theism, & secularism. Talk Heathen is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
Talk Heathen is filmed in front of a live studio audience every week at the Freethought Library of the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop & support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing & friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of government-religion separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists & to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
NOTES
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
/ talkheathen is the official channel of Talk Heathen. "Talk Heathen" is a trademark of the ACA.
Copyright © 2024 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
Im a gay man and I choose bear if you know what i mean.. ;)
😂
As a gay man I’m so tired of the women being idiotic about this lol
@@cajunking5987 I actually completely understand why women are choosing the bear..I'm on their side..I don't think it's idiotic. I'm sure if the man was gay they would choose the man instead.
@@cajunking5987 I personally would choose the man because a man would be easier to kill than a bear... but.. 🤗
@@PastellAntiiTheistt if you can side with the woman it just means you’re idiotic as well. It’s a fuckin bear. Don’t be stupid.
@@PastellAntiiTheistt as a gay man it’s pretty weird that your answer isn’t easily “I’d choose a man because I love men”
Or “I’d choose a man because it’s a FUCKING BEAR”
So you either don’t like men much or are dumb
I mean, as a man i wouldn’t want to be alone with a strange man in the woods either.
Well you’d be idiotic to choose a bear over it.
@@cajunking5987You're a moron if you'd choose any random man over a random bear. Every bear I've encountered has run away. Including a female with a pair of cubs.
Haha true...
as a man i would also prefer the bear,because the bear wont make fake alegations against me,id rather take my chances runing or figthing the bear
"Man vs Bear scenario"
Happily, I had never heard of it, and now Im sad that I have...
My first contact with the question as well.
And first thought: The trolls won. 😅
Hahahah true...
@@DrKlausTrophobiethe trolls in the woods 😳
I compare it to unarmed black people and cops.
They don't know which cops are likely to be racist with itchy trigger fingers.
The cops could say the same, now couldn't they? As a matter of fact, if you look at the statistics, cops technically have MORE basis for worry than black people. It doesn't FEEL good to say that, but it doesn't stop it from being factual.
That's the problem with answers to this question: factual reasoning goes out the window for far less sound but far more emotional reasoning.
I was thinking the same thing. Be leery of all cops, because it only takes one, and there are many stories.
@shelliecarlson7015 absolutely. It's often female cops who get wrapped up in the moment and shoot someone they shouldn't have, too, so REALLY be on the lookout for women in uniform. They'll shoot the shit out of you for looking at them wrong. Those women are dangerous.
@@patrickshepherd1341 Black people don't take an oath to protect and serve.
Police officers are supposed to be trained to deal with all kinds of situations.
There used to be a video of two similar situations. One in London and the other in Los Angeles.
In London, a black man was shouting and running around waving a machete. The police calmly got out their riot shields and corralled he man, without firing a shot.
In LA, a black man was standing there with a hunting knife.............
Think about the case if Kyle Rittenhouse.
What do you think would have happened if a black man walked by a police car, during a protest, carrying a military grade weapon?
At least two black men were choked to death in recent years.
A man is paralyzed now because a police officer shot him in front of his kids.
A black woman was killed by a police officer at a traffic stop.
At any rate, the comparison is valid.
Black people have to assume that every encounter with the police could be fatal.
I am a 68-year-old white woman. I never worry about the police, but I do worry about strange men.
@terryfall8915 that's all fine and good, but it doesn't make the statistics any different. Police go into situations all the time that turn deadly in an instant, even if it seemed like nothing was out of the ordinary at first. Yes they should be trained well, but at the end of the day they are gonna be the ones who are killed first off the encounter someone wanting to do harm. It's just an inevitability that sometimes violence will occur in hindsight that shouldn't have.
And no offense, but I can come up with some better examples of police misconduct than you did. I noticed you mentioned Jacob Blake. I also noticed how you phrased his incident, which tells me something about how you have gotten your opinions, and it also tells me you've spent very little time around actual law enforcement officers.
This is the exact thing I was pointing out: people using their hearts instead of their heads to think.
And for what it's worth, I've seen dozens of videos of black men walking past police with openly displayed assault rifles. They usually just end up in a conversation about guns with the cops and they all leave laughing as friends. What were you thinking would happen? The cops would tell the black guys to take a head start before the hunt begins? Then start firing off pot shots at them for fun? Get real. This isn't CNN land, this is the real world.
Cops have to expect that EVERY encounter with everyone, black or not, could turn fatal. So my comparison is technically more valid than yours, by your own standards.
In Australia they asked would you prefer to be stuck in a forest with a woman or a beer. They chose the beer.
Citation needed.
@@davidallen111 The me book of jokes. Not a very good book obviously.
@@davidallen111 He said "beer" not "Bear." Do you still need a citation?
@@terryfall8915 Yes. I do not believe that Australian men like beer more than the company of women.
Bear won't attack you unless it's hungry or is protecting his cubs
Well said.
This is the best and simplest explanation to the question that I’ve seen so far.
As a man who regularly spends multiple days deep in the Mtns backpacking solo often miles from any established trail and in areas that have high density of Mtn lions and black bears I routinely carry a firearm for emergency protection.
Interestingly whenever I consider Not carrying the extra weight and hassle of a pistol my thoughts don’t automatically go to “what if a bear..” or “what if a Mtn lion…”
Instead I’ve realized my thoughts go to “what if a crazy guy..” or “what if two crazy guys on meth..”
While I originally told myself the protection was needed for wild animals what I’ve really come to realize is it’s protection from other men.
So yeah as a man who places himself in similar situations I completely understand why women would choose the bear.
❤
Men are much less likely to want to do her harm than a bear. Choosing the bear makes you a moron.
But these do not account for actual danger just perceived. Also it grossly overrepresents the "crazy guy" proportion of the Populus. You may be more likely to encounter a crazy person... but it is only because of the sheer amount of interactions you have with people every day. Not the actual danger on a 1 to 1 comparison.
@@ImAmirus thanks for your opinion but clearly you have no idea what you’re talking about
@@ImAmirus oh wow! You’ve seen videos!That’s amazing.
You should actually research a topic before making claims based on your own ignorance. This way it’ll help you avoid making an @ss of yourself. 👍
@@ImAmirus …says the person making claims of a topic they know nothing about AND making assumptions of a person they know nothing about 👍
Of you wanna be safe woman....come to Scandinavia 🇧🇻🇸🇪🇩🇰... the lands of the free....... greetings from Skandinavia Danmark 🇩🇰😊😊
Act better than a bear. Encourage your peers to act better than a bear.
The bar is low. Try not to fall beneath it.
You thought this was profound lmao.
Women despise men regardless of what men do, so there's no bar to fall behind.
something to note too about women's responses is that even when some of them mention the chance of the bear possibly killing them, they rather be killed by a bear as well because at least they know they'll just be killed and the bear wont do anything else to their bodies. there is definitely some things to think about when even in the face of death a woman rather be killed by a bear
Ehh, it’s still based on some odd assumptions though.
That man in the woods could be a “good Samaritan” who might save your life or at least provide guidance out of the woods. Likewise, he could be in need of YOUR help and you become the hero in that scenario. Instead the interviewed women seemed to jump to serial killer/grapist. But of course the vast majority of women are not murdered or graped by a vast majority of men anyway.
@@Byorin But there is something to be said when the worst-case scenario flashes in your mind first. It really shows how these real life horror stories of scumbags assaulting women can basically infect the minds of the majority of women, and a case of "better safe than sorry" threat analysis thinking, just assuming guilty before proven innocent becomes the default.
Also its not like a bear cant leave you krippled..
@@Nelsathis sure it can, but who cares? you missed the point
Men are far more likely to be the victim of men than women are.
This isnt a womans issue, they are just hijacking it. If they really cared about the victims of men's physical and sexual abuse, most of those victims are men.
Would you rather run into a random person in a rural neighborhood, or a bear in a rural neighborhood?
A bear....
@@PARebeccayet this encounter happens millions of times a day and the vast majority are not even noticed as anything. I am confident most women just walk past a guy, and would gtfo if they see a bear.
A person
I meet random people all day everyday
It’s a fucking bear
What color is my skin in this scenario?
I'd love to see this question asked anywhere other than America.
I'm starting to see what people are talking about when they refer to a 'post-truth society.'
Not American here... the domestic violence directed to women in my country is why I choose the bear.
Women are the same everywhere, they all treat men as "the other".
@@mizzzlicia1832 The bear will kill you. Do you still choose the bear? Are you that dumb?
@@mizzzlicia1832 I love that you can't even make this sound reasonable when you try. "domestic violence" as in 'not a stranger.' This is such a stupid position that it's depressing.
Her answer was precisely what I expected
The latest "MGTOW" incel rage bait meme.
There is a lot of crazy people out there.....in the woods 🤔🌲🪵
Yeah, I saw at least one video about it come up, but I brushed it off because I didn't know what context it was outside of "man VS bear".
Now I know, and agree.
Theres alot to unpack with this topic
depends on the time of year and how hungry the bear is.
Sometimes a bear is a euphemism for a really hairy gay guy...
If that would happen, leave that woman in the woods without the bear and the man, that woman must be very despicable to end up in that situation, if that were to happen.
The real question is, why are you out in the middle of nowhere in bear country? Why weren't you prepared for the possibility of meeting a hungry bear? What do you twisted your ankle and broke it, miles away from civilization? Who's gonna help you? You should have brought a friend along, and a weapon. At least a knife! Won't do much to the bear, but it'll be effective against humans.
It's ALSO that in SOO many (read most) "social situations" (party, club, bar, library, etc) there IS one.... Or there very well could be.... And girls are taught from an early age that this is true.....
This whole thing is BS. Obviously a strange man is "more dangerous" than an animal in some sense, but women only say "bear" because its a hypothetical and they are making a point. And men answering "woman" are just being cringe.
I'm only at 2:40 so not sure if the conversation goes there, but there's another subset of men that I run into who are hyper triggered by this conversation; men who view themselves as "real men" and other men as somehow "not real men." In other words, men who seem to think that the negative qualities this discussion, and others like it, are describing are somehow desirable/admirable and not problematic as fuck.
3:17 - The statistics on bear attacks aren't just "not that common" they're actually incredibly rare. I'd have to go look it up, but I believe the number of bear attacks that have resulted in physical injury as a result of the bear itself in the last 60 years are under 100. Bear attacks directly resulting in the death of a person are even rarer than that. I'll come back and edit this later with the correct numbers if I can remember to go find them.
9:08 - As a 6'1", 355 lb man, I'd rather encounter a bear than a random man in the woods. No question in my mind even as a man who the bigger potential threat is.
So, realistically, what do you think the proportion of men is who would go crazy on a stranger for basically no reason? Because if that random guy in the woods truly is random, then it's almost CERTAIN that he just wants to get out of the woods and would love some help from another person.
Look at it from the random man's perspective: you just got randomly dumped in the woods, are trying to just survive, and then all of a sudden a miracle. You see someone a short distance away and think that you've finally found some help because you're NOT one of the 1 in 100000 guys who would just randomly attack a stranger for existing, and instead are 1 of the 99999 out of 100000 who are perfectly normal and would actually go out of their way to protect another person, especially a woman.
But then that person starts screaming "oh my God! It's a MAN!!!" And they run away screaming like that. And then they get eaten by a bear lol.
I commented on another thread pointing out that this question perfectly highlights how humans are SHOCKINGLY bad at actual probabilistic evaluations. Your answer helps prove that nicely.
@@patrickshepherd1341 I think you're missing the point of the original question, and my silly comment.
Sure if you over analyze and try to strictly identify ever variable at play that could lead to this hypothetical situation you can definitely come up with your wacky version. That's not helpful, and completely attempts to invalidate the point that women are driving at which was perfectly highlighted in this video; generally speaking men are a much greater threat to women than a bear is, and a bear is much more understandable/predictable than any random man.
To my point, even as a man, another man is also going to be more likely to attack me than a bear. In day to day life, other men are a greater potential threat than a bear, and have a higher overall likelihood of causing me injury. This is the whole point. Nobody is trying to say "what if you were literally dropped into the woods for some random reason, and encountered another random person nowhere near civilization who also seemed to be completely lost or captive in this hypothetical." That's asinine.
Also, we have more accurate, real world examples of these situations we can look at for parallels. Women go on hikes/runs through wooded areas all the time. Women have absolutely been attacked by men in those situations. If you want to try and over analyze the potential scenario where a woman might encounter a random man, then just visualize it that way. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here, but it really sounds like you're trying to dismiss the overall point of the man vs bear question, and that's coming off as pretty gross.
@coleford4258 I am dismissing it, and your explanation is a perfect example of why. The problem is that I'M not assuming stuff into the question, you (and women) are. The question basically says "pick one: stuck with bear or stuck with man." There is ZERO indication there that the man is anything other than just some random normal dude, and NOT one of the small percentage of men who get unnecessarily violent. And the percentage of THOSE men who get violent for absolutely no reason is vanishingly small. So right off the bat, the question gives no indication that this is anything other than just a normal person. That's thing 1.
Thing 2. Yes women have gotten randomly attacked in the woods by men. And the percentage of women's outings to the woods or encounters with men in the woods that result in that is vanishingly small. For every woman that gets attacked in the woods by a man, there are 100000 who don't. So probabilistically it STILL makes no sense.
In order to make the common women's argument for this question, you have to assume a million and one things about the man (ALL of them as bad as humanly possible) and you have to simultaneously make a bunch of best case scenario assumptions about the bear.
Let's test your logic and, instead of women being afraid of bears for all the reasons you suggested, let's make it whites being afraid of blacks. I'll bet you $1000 right now that, if I copy and paste your argument word for word, then swap out "women" for "whites" and "men" for "blacks", you wouldn't think your argument sounds very good anymore. In fact you'd probably think it's terribly racist. Which it would be. But at least it would be more statistically correct.
The fact that you're defending this tripe is what's disgusting, not my dismissal of utter panicky unthinking bullshit.
You’d choose a bear? Congrats you’re an idiot lol
@@patrickshepherd1341 you are assuming stuff into the question. You're taking it 100% literally and trying to define the parameters of exactly how a woman ends up in the woods, how the random man got there, and what characteristics we can attribute to the man. Let me make this clear. THAT'S NOT THE FUCKING POINT.
"There is ZERO indication there that the man is anything other than just some random normal dude." Right. So if you aren't the type of man that women should be worried about, then the whole question has nothing to do with you. That's the whole point that Sydney was making in the video that you apparently didn't watch before commenting your completely uninteresting sophistry at me.
You also keep trying to insert qualifiers like "vanishingly small" or "small percentage". Since 1998 over 17 million women have been raped. If you want to average that per year as though it's linear that's about 680.7 thousand women per year. And that's "successful" rapes, not just violent assault. In the entirety of North America, since 1784 there have been 180 fatal encounters which include encounters in captivity. There are approximately 30 recorded bear encounters (black and brown) in North America per year (2000 - 2017) that are considered "conflicts", and the majority of those resulted in no serious injury. What you seem to be ignoring is the basic fact that a woman is more likely to have a dangerous encounter with a man than with a bear. That's it. We're not philosophizing about the probability that an individual man is dangerous and the possible parameters that would accompany meeting a random man in the woods vs encountering a bear. That's not the point of the question and the implied analogy, but you seem determined to ignore that in favor of grandstanding over how men are somehow being negatively portrayed by the question. Gross.
"Let's test your logic and, instead of women being afraid of bears for all the reasons you suggested, let's make it whites being afraid of blacks." How about we not try including racist dog whistling at all you (UA-cam made me redact my insult). How about we quit trying to undermine the real fears of women, and how about you quit being so overly butthurt because you identify with the men the man vs bear question is about. Sorry you're so vehemently triggered by women expressing just how badly men have mistreated them to the point of being less afraid of bears, but your rejection of this point is simply you identifying with the men that women are actually scared of.
But just to put a pin in this racist garbage you're promoting, according to the FBI database on homicide stats, the vastly overwhelming number of white victims were killed by white perps. So I guess you're right, if you randomly change the subjects of the question to include completely irrelevant racist dog whistling then it absolutely doesn't make sense. Good job you gigantic big brain you.
If i were to choose between a woman and a dog, I'd choose the dog, this is kinda like the bear vs man argument but men will definitely choose the dog
You can trust a dog.
what if it's a man wearing a bear costume?
Damn it who told you
Im just now getting up
It's because men tend to be more brazen and physically stronger than women, which could be seen as a negative thing in some cases. There are more male soldiers, firefighters and blue collar workers than female ones, but there are also more male serial killers, rapists and dictators. This is just a dark twist on the "men always think about the roman empire" thing
You think women are picking bear because they think men are stronger than women? If that were the case they wouldn't be picking bear
I've thought that exact thing about the Roman empire. They're like a matching set of questions lol. Unfortunately, the men's question showed off historical thinking, while the women's highlights people's lack of actual probabilistic reasoning. Which, for good measure, is not a woman specific problem - most humans are REALLY bad at actual probabilistic evaluations. Some of their justifications are alarming though...
Could you explain what you mean with the roman empire thing? I dont think i have encountered that yet.
@Nelsathis a few months ago there was this question going around, "how often do you think about the Roman empire". Women's answer was generally almost never. Men's answer was generally at least a few times a week, and this blew women's minds.
I'm like the other commenter; I see these almost as a matching set of questions. But that's probably mostly just because there was a woman question and a man question in quick succession. To be fair, the questions are too dissimilar to be considered a real pair. But men really gravitated to the Roman empire question, and women to this one, so it seems kinda fair still
I appreciate Sydney's point. But being from Arkansas as well the bears from Arkansas are undersized black bears. Like smaller than your average man from what seen. At least the ones I've seen people bag. What people are more so laugh at when we think of bear we think of a grizzly bear. And when you put the scenario like she does, a scary guy or a bear yeah I'll pick the bear because one is dangerous and is supposed to be there and one is scary because its not supposed be there. I do understand the distrust of other humans. But when you put that way the scenario serves no purpose besides prove when are not good at hypotheticals and don't as philosophical about dumb shit as men(friendly jab at both parties). I think it just proves your point because frankly if I get it its an unpredictable threat but only 1% of population is allegedly a criminal. (If believe you the popular old adage) so i think its fine to be aware and and untrusting of other people. I think it tars too many people of the same brush. Because I've heard the crime stats line but people only start viewing in with nuance when you break it down by race/ethnicity. So you get into a weird place when you do that. And quite frankly looking at myself as a 6'3 230lb athletic build bald guy i could see how I'd intimidate someone and i see it happen a lot. I can't say I blame people.
Silliness.
When she says that “this isn’t about you” to those guys who say it’s not all men, I have to disagree. It might not be mainly about them (the main issue being those men who are an actual threat), but they are a secondary concern. They are a big part of why we often can’t address these issues. They want to take over and say why they aren’t the problem, meanwhile the problem continues. They are the enablers.
If a man feels it necessary to claim he's not the problem, then he probably is. I think she explained that during the call.
A lot of men who really aren't part of the problem, don't stand up to the men who are.
Can we start by making it an actual argument? It started as an assertion at best, and a serious straw man at worst. Nobody said anything about themselves and there is no point in starting that reasoning. Take any single male person you dont know. Is it still offensive? I say it is. Very much so.
@@terryfall8915 but she also said the question isn’t directed at those guys who don’t do direct harm, but also denounce the question. I’m saying they are also the problem.
Men are far more likely to be the victim of men than women are.
This isnt a womans issue, they are just hijacking it. If they really cared about the victims of men's physical and sexual abuse, most of those victims are men.
Same I’d rather be in the woods stuck with a bear than a strange man/woman for the same reason. Bear is way more predictable.
The nuance? I think you mean excusing sexism like if it’s valid mindset to have the question started simply average man in the woods or average bear already you start with comparing men to bears literally dehumanizing and the when men started calling it out they switch the question to rape or eaten alive which is more of a reasonable in a way
Most men will not violently attack you but the average bear definitely would but this is honestly such an issue with the side is pro gay good pro women’s choice awesome but then you make excuses for y it’s ok to be sexist to men and telling us we’re no better than the average bear how insulting and for some reason it blows your minds we r offended btw I have been treated by a random women I never met before like if I was a bad guy to do something and she wouldn’t let me talk to my ex who abused me in her exact words your a man so your probably gonna hurt us that’s literally sexist
I'm a man, and my immediate answer was bear.
I always thought the question was a veiled way of asking "would you rather risk death or grape?"
'uhhhh....that's a no--brainer: death *BY* grape. (Passenger 57... "You'll have to kill me first." "No, not first... *DURING")*
What they’re really asking is, “Do you think your risk of being harmed is higher in scenario A or B?”
@@Leith_Crowther I guess it depends on how hungry the bear is!
@@paulthompson9668- Also depends on the species and the individual bear's personality. I'm a man, and I'd probably choose a black bear over a stranger who's a man. Like the hosts discussed, the bear would probably be more predictable. If I were a woman, I'd definitely choose the black bear.
@@loki2240 That just seems like it comes from a deep-seated place of hate towards men. These interviews with women weren't done in a place where they would have knowledge of the differences between different kinds of bears and what the best survival tactics are depending on the type of bear and its behavior. So these women are basically saying they'd rather risk death than rape. Any attempt to say otherwise is disingenuous.
(Now, maybe you know the differences between a black bear and a grizzly bear, and how to act in front of each and how to modify your behavior depending on theirs, such as whether they look hungry, they're protecting their children, they're asserting dominance, they're mating, etc. But the women being interviewed are not.)
This is silly.
as a man i would also prefer the bear,because the bear wont make fake alegations against me,id rather take my chances runing or figthing the bear
If you want men to be less scary, you need to promote Progressivism. Progressive men work to understand their instinctual drives and how to direct them in a way that does not threaten women. Science rules.
I do not care about appearing “less scary” to women I don’t know, and it’s silly to worry about it anyway because you could do everything right and they could still be scared. A lot of people are scared, depressed, anxious or whatever despite what we do or don’t do. We could just focus on not committing crimes and get on with our lives.
@@Byorin The more Progressive men there are, the less crime there is in a society. The less crime there is, the less people are scared, depressed, anxious or whatever. Science rules.
@@davidallen111 I think youre cherry picking that data, which of course two can play at that game.
Go ask Saudi Arabia or Japan if their society values men being traditional or progressive and how that factors into their crime rates.
@@Byorin Saudi Arabia is very conservative, so much so that many crimes against women are not even illegal there. Some crimes against women are even required by law. Japan is very progressive and has a low crime rate. What is your point?
@@davidallen111 No, Japan values high tech, but that doesn’t mean they support progressive ideology. I was just there. They’re quite conservative. Their crime rate is extremely low as well. Saudi Arabia is similar in some ways and different in others, while being not big on the whole progressiveness thing.
The point is that you can be conservative and have a very low crime rate, which you implied was not the case. There is a lot more nuance than you were allowing.
It seems people have forgotten what a hypothetical question is. It's to elicit an opinion or a belief on a topic. We aren't arguing about statistics and facts.
Sydney literally said statistics here and there. Your side needs to form a coherent position.
@@namethis658 while I won't deny statistics were brought up, they said multiple times it's not what the conversation was about.
Your side needs to stop quote mining and talking things out of context.
@@drg8687 Statistics is brought up because its addressing if perceived danger is representative of actual danger. You have every right to perceive anything however you wish... If you want to leave the question at that ok... I am more concerned weather it adheres to the reality. If your perceived fear is based off of bad data then you have a belief that does not conform to reality. I find this amazing that on an atheist show where people call in all the time about "well I feel it to be true" is the best they have, that when the same logic is applied to this scenario it suddenly does not matter.
@@tcunero So, what are you trying to stay? The fear that a large majority of woman have about the potential for experiencing violence from an unknown male is as irrational as a belief in god?
Is violence against woman as make believe to you as god? Assume I have never looked at the statistics. What are they going to say?
Who commits more violence against the opposite sex?
Who commits more sexual violence?
Who is physically stronger?
What is the most likely cause of death for a pregnant woman?
None of those "statistics" are helping your argument.
We have to take our shoes off at the airport because ONE guy tried to do something ONE time. If you are wrong 99 out of 100 times about a situation, no consequences, but that 1 time you don't play it safe it's over. That's called playing it safe.
I don't think we are going to see a large increase in women running towards bears because of this.
@@tcunero So, what are you trying to stay? The fear that a large majority of women have about the potential for experiencing violence from an unknown male is as irrational as a belief in a god?
I find it amazing, that on an atheist show, where people call in all the time saying "well I feel it to be true" is the best they have, that when the same logic is applied to this scenario it suddenly does not seem to matter what the actual reality of the situation is. You have every right to perceive anything however you wish... If you want to leave the question at that ok... I am more concerned weather it adheres to the reality. If your perceived fear is based off of bad data or a misconception about something, then you have a belief that does not conform to reality in the same way religious callers do the same.
No kidding. Atheists are a pretty strongly maligned group in the US, and I'd just love to hear their "reputation" based lectures pointed at that group. I expect this kind of thinking from the callers, but both hosts engaging in the same non-point is pretty absurd. Looks like Talk Heathen's quality is dropping with its view count, which I don't say happily because I used to like this show and I want better for it.
You're a man, aren't you?
@@exceptionallyaverage3075why should it matter what gender this person is?
I glad I was the only one to notice this giant glaring hypocritical inconsistentcy.
@gregsanich5183 Ae you a man, too? Are you also offended a woman would rather be stuck in the woods with a bear than a strange man?
This whole trend is so cringe
It's a hypothetical that lacks so much nuance and detail that it is essentially unanswerable in a simple way. You basically have to write a small essay. Bear attacks aren't that common because most people are smart enough to stay away from bears.
( There's also a law in most states that have bears, especially grizzlies that forces you to carry a deadly weapon when going out into the woods. A big one too. )
The original meme has an entire list of why women would rather encounter a bear than a strange man.
If the bear attacks her, people will believe her.
If the bear attacks her, no one will ask her what she was wearing that brought on the attack.
If the bear attacks her, no one will ask her if she was flirting with the bear.
I can't remember the entire list, but these are a good example.
@@terryfall8915this would make so much more sense if the question were "who would you rather be attacked by". That would make so much more sense. And i dunno the original, but here it isnt.
I learned about this Man vs Bear thing late.
Wow, I never heard of this scenario before, and I can say right away I'd prefer to meet two bears rather than one human male even if he's under 18y.o. Too much of negative experience, sorry guys.
I must admit, I've never heard of this debate before, but my first thought, as a hypothetical, was "why the bear? the man could be communicated with, have some survival tricks and help get you back to civilization." I didn't realize that the perception was in that route...
Edit: ok, nvm, I thought I heard it as "if you were stuck in the wilderness with a bear or a man, which would it be?", not "if you came across a man or a bear in the wilderness, which would it be?" Totally different hypotheticals. My bad...
I think you interpretation could be justified as well. One issue with this hypothetical is everyone interprets the scenario different and that leads to wildly different context. It makes it hard to pin anything specific down, and leads to the question saying more about the individuals mindset then anything based in a specific reality
This is literally one of the dumbest trends I've ever seen
100%. The question really is "do you hate men" and the libs answer "yes" and pretend that its common sense.
We're talking about a wild and very active animal that weighs hundreds to maybe a thousand pounds more then you, it's almost always hungry lol. also in the wild you never know when you're going to get an opportunity for calories so when they see it they take it especially since they hibernate and need extra calories in their body for the winter.
I made a vid about this.
Let’s change the question. Would you rather be alone in the woods with a:
Bear
Man
Women
Depends on who's asked.
As a bear i would prefer another bear. Because humans are f*ing dangerous!
@@DrKlausTrophobie As a bear you can better avoid the human. A bear you will pretty much have to fight, cause its either their, or your territory.
@@Nelsathis You are arguing on the assumption of limited space. Well, with another bear the fight for territory is fair. Humans on the other hand have spears, bows, traps and guns...
i think the man v bear is more about the potential physical harm and predictability/expectation
the woman v bear is not just the physical (women can grape/kill men too and be just as bad as the bad men) but also the emotional (losing family/friends, losing assets/money, being labeled as a grapist/abuser/creep when purely innocent .... )
Men are far more likely to be the victim of men than women are.
This isnt a womans issue, they are just hijacking it. If they really cared about the victims of men's physical and sexual abuse, most of those victims are men.
I heard a good one. If I was treading water in the middle of the ocean, would I rather be with a shark or a woman. The answer was, “ The shark because it won’t drown me slowly. “
See guys, if you get offended by this question it’s your fault. She can tell everything about you, as a person, just based on this one response. So. Let’s try to turn this around o.k. guys would you rather be stuck in a desert wasteland for 60 days with a woman or a dog? How many women would say this question is misogynistic? As far as the claim that we, as men, aren’t doing enough to address *ape, prey tell what more should we be doing? What matrix are you using to come to that conclusion, in what areas and what policies, protocols and procedures are we lacking? Could we improve sure I guess but since I haven’t studied the problem, I can’t speak intelligently so I’ll keep my mouth shut. I submit to you that during the entire process from investigation, to arrest, to prosecution to confinement men are involved in every step. Is it an expectation gap, when someone expects the entire world to be as safe as their living room? So, to recap 1) we have every right to get offended and you have no right to shame us for our response 2) if you can’t demonstrate what we should be doing to address this crime you can’t say we aren’t doing enough. I watch your channel for rational arguments, you need to do better.
Men are far more likely to be the victim of men than women are.
This isnt a womans issue, they are just hijacking it. If they really cared about the victims of men's physical and sexual abuse, most of those victims are men.
Has anyone asked the female bear this question?
2 Kings 2:23-25
Ok this one has me confused... they are really saying a random man has a higher chance of being a threat then a bear??? What statistics are they referring to? There seems to be so much baggage with this question.... so if your lost in the woods and on the fork in the path ahead you see a bear or a man and you choose the bear? For real? Is this just a form of sexism towards men, by applying the actions of some to the whole group. Other "isms" follow the same pattern ie: all blacks are criminals or other harmful steriotypes. What about the overwhelming majority of men that you run into EVERY day that do nothing or act respectful. Heck all the videos i saw of this was a "random guy" interviewer they all felt comfortable enough to stop and talk to. Does the location matter (instead of forest a town). Would love to know what data they mention.
Pretty sure the statistics of bear attacks vs SA are the supporting info. Don't you think it's a bigger problem that most women feel safer running into a bear they've never met in the woods alone than a man they've never met? How is you saying, "nuh uh" addressing that?
@@isaacmachado1238 Most women run into several men per day. They do not run into several bears. It's a nonsense comparison.
@@GuitarGuy057 what are you talking about? You compare bear encounters to bear attacks and get a stat. So we can see how likely a bear is to do harm and why they might do so. Then we compare that to how likely a man is to do harm to a woman and why they might do so. Bing bang boom, they are being compared.
@@isaacmachado1238
Go find definitive stats about how many times a day people encounter bears and men then.
I'll wait.
@@isaacmachado1238 Well first I am questioning it not dismissing it. Second you can't compare statistics like that for a multitude of reasons. One potential interaction happens billions of times a day and the other is extremely less frequent. Its like saying jumping out of a plane with no parachute is safer then falling down the stairs because more people die from falling down the stairs every year. Also it is concerning that people think this, thats why I'm discussing it. Like she said though, doesn't that say more about the people thinking that then not?
Im trans, and I also choose the freaking bear instead of any woman, in fact, I would offer psychological aid to any bear that has been unfortunate to be with a woman
That sounds very plausible.
@@floraposteschild4184Heh, absolutely.
4:37 - 5:02
AWESOME!
Now let's talk about n-_-_-_.
Whoa
@@ButterHeroBread He's saying that the exact same line of reasoning has and is being used to put down black people collectively. That's part of why this line of argument is so stupid, embarrassing, and harmful. It's a good point. If there are bad male actors and we are collectively responsible for addressing them and need to account for them personally, that surely black people need to do the same for the multiple stereotypes that they face, and their """"reputation"""". They shouldn't have to, and that's the point.
Some black bears can be scared away. Playing dead usually works with a brown bear. Start to pray to whatever god you believe in to make it quick when you encounter a polar bear. I'd still pick an encounter with a man in the woods.
You have never met a sloth bear I assume.
@@gamingdragon1356 Yes, and I'm lucky to never have encountered a bear in the wild.
The edition of the St. John's Outdoor Survival guide that I read as a teenager summarized defensive bear strategies thus:
Black bear: fight back. They're most likely to attack to due hunger...they have to be desperate to consider a human a food source; you just need to convince it you're not an easy meal
Grizzly: Play dead. They're most likely to attack because you spooked them and there may be cubs nearby. *If you're lucky the bear will chew on your scalp a few times, decide you're no threat, and leave you alone."* (oh yeah, it said that)
Polar bears: Don't get involved with polar bears. Everything in their territory that moves is food. They have no natural predators, nothing to fear and spend 6 months of the year on the brink of starvation. *DON'T GET INVOLVED WITH POLAR BEARS*
Also, the color of the bear doesn’t necessarily denote its species. Know which bears are in your area!
@@Leith_Crowther I hate to break it to you but, where I'm from, the black bears are...."black bears" ....the white bears are "polar bears" and the brown ones are called "grizzly's" .
So, actually....the colour of the bear does denote it's species, IN MY AREA (no polar bears here, but in the province where I was born).
Also, I think if someone followed your advice (knowing which bears are in their area) than I'm pretty sure it would be the case that colour is the first distinguishing characteristic. I'm not saying I can tell a grizzly from a kodiak, but....from wikipedia: The grizzly bear, also known as the North American brown bear or simply grizzly, is a population or subspecies of the brown bear inhabiting North America." Note the recurring colour mention. Unless your suggesting that by white bear, I might be mistaken ...
Used to come here for the rational discussions about religion. Since when did Talk Heathen turn into a toxic mysandry channel?
Sounds like you have some confessions to make.
did you watch the video? they very clearly explained that its because of the fact people (specifically men) are very unpredictable compared to a bear, or at the least thats what people believe.
The statistics of whether or not there will be violence in the woods with a man compared to a bear is such an incredibly stupid statement. That means you would have had to do a survey on whether or not being in the woods with a man was more dangerous than being in the woods with a bear. It's a hypothetical. There are no statistics in regards to a hypothetical because it hasn't actually ever happened. That's why it's a hypothetical. It also doesn't tell you how far away from civilization you actually are, which is another important factor and nuance that is just completely left out of the question. I know you really want to tell me they're worse than a violent predator who will maul and eat you alive but percentages don't lie. The vast majority of men percentage wise, even if they are misogynistic douchebags would probably still just walk out of the woods with you because I guarantee you, they would be much more concerned about their own safety ( you know because most people would be reasonably worried about freezing to death ) rather than exerting all their energy and wasting any time they have to save themselves doing something to you. Where as the vast majority of bears? They will maul and eat you without a second thought. Like I get why people think about the question but my goodness your reasoning was the worst I've ever heard from anybody so far. There are more comments I left here for other aspects of my opinion, but also in my opinion y'alls opinion on this subject is extremely silly. I'm sure there's many things you're right about, but this is not one of them. 😂
In this comment section: men that still don't get it.
I get that this is pure misandry. Every excuse they come up with is actually a gaslighting tactic.
We're supposed to agree that men are more dangerous than bears? It is insulting and stupid. The point is to just hate men, we get that. Don't get mad when people think its stupid.
@markevans8206 yeah because women are innocent in all that right? It's not like culture has changed to the point that those people like Tate get rewarded whereas nice guys are typically overlooked or taken advantage of and getting cleaned out in divorce court or anything...
@markevans8206it’s weird that you mentioned Andrew Tate when he’s said that men should protect women. Of course it’s old fashioned and I suppose sexist to still promote that view.
@markevans8206 you're not offended, while you SHOULD be.
It's a cross burning on your lawn, it's misandry in its purest. And yes, it includes ALL men. There was no nuance in the original question.
I actually really don't like the first answer given to this. You mentioned that if a guy gets upset over the question then they need to reflect what that says about them, but that take necessarily assumes that the argument is ONLY about bad men. But the question never said anything about that. Just a man. Any man. Including the astronomical number/percentage of men who would never do anything.
I'm actually kind of shocked by how bad these takes were. At the end of the day, an IMPOSSIBLY higher percentage of bear encounters turn violent than the percentage of interactions with men that do the same. You can't just say that you have to respect statistics and then talk about things like reputations. I think this is a very biased take, personally.
guys don't get upset over the answer. Guys think the people answering "bear" live in a hate filled universe and they are also pretty stupid. It isn't a serious question if there was actually a choice 100% of women would choose the man. They just want to push some hate under the guise of a "hypothetical" situation.
Imagine using that point of view with racial minorities and saying that they shouldn't be offended unless they are whatever stereotype the host is spouting off that day. It's depressing how many people can't think for a few seconds and come to a fair opinion, especially the hosts. I'm genuinely super disappointed and hope they don't persist.
@seannelson3613 exactly! Even if you just turn it around and say something like: I'd rather be caught with a bear than a woman because the woman might very well escape the forest and say I assaulted her and get me put in prison for decades, all because I didn't pay her enough attention. Or she might attack ME and then have ME arrested for assault. And if you don't like that take, then maybe you're a woman who would do such a thing. You know, the fact that this is even a question should really make women reconsider their reputation in society and how they need to look in the mirror to make a change. And even if you wouldn't do that yourself, if you're not actively calling out other women who do then you're part of the problem yadda yadda yadda.
I keep tuning in to this channel because I've heard so many great discussions, but I feel like in general they really let their standards of rigor go by the wayside when it comes to contemporary social issues. It's disappointing.
Heard this manbearthing the first time here, and my thoughts exactly. Seems to be more telling about the social framing than anything else. Wasnt there also a statistic where Americans have been asked what animals they could beat up bare Handed, and like 40% were confident about grizzly? Puts this into perspective similarly about what people seem to think bears are.. my german side was to think its about beers, cause then i can finally understand
@Nelsathis lol I don't know the exact statistic, but I think that's probably about right 😆. I bet a lot of them would try, too, lol!
But seriously, all this equivocation is a joke. I've heard people talk about how a bear will only attack you in such and such circumstances, like if they're hungry. But YOU JUST NEVER KNOW with a man. It's so ridiculous. Like, what are the odds that if you come across a bear, it's hungry? Well, it has to eat a few times a day, so probably something like 25%? Maybe 15 or 20? And if you come across literally some random man in the woods, what are the odds he's going to attack you? Any woman who hikes runs into random men in the forest all the time, and those encounters end in assaults nearly 0% of the time. For them to say you have to respect statistics and science, and then ramble on the way they did, is laughable.
Anyone who would pick the bear isn't sane. I know they just want to push some misandry and hate but it doesn't make you look smart.
Why am I insane for picking the situation that I know about? I know how to handle a black bear. I have come across a black bear in the forest and I have not had a problem
I go camping all the time and it's often in bear country. I am not at all concerned about bears in Bear country but I am absolutely concerned about the random dude walking around in my campsite. Bear walking around in my campsite not a problem, man walking around in my campsite yeah I'm concerned
Don’t you encounter random men all the time?
@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite you know how to handle an encounter with a black bear, but not how to handle an encounter with a man?
The fact that you're so afraid of men says a lot about you, and none of it is positive.
@@cajunking5987 No man this basement dweller thinks that they could take a bear because men are soooo mean to them. Crazy. Libs are literally insane.
You obviously don't know a whole lot about bears. Bears don't assault women, for one thing. Men do. Not only strangers, but men the women know, and are sometimes related to.
That's the thing: the guys getting offended over a bear being picked over them ARE the predatory types. They thrive on people NOT trusting their gut and discomfort because they WANT to be seen as "innocent" and "harmless". People saying they'd rather tussle with a 400 lb furry bag of muscle and claws over them is firmly putting these guys in the "danger" category and they can't take that people are seeing them for what they actually are.
So, absolutely look out for the guys who get offended by the bear vs. man debate, because those dudes need to have their hard drives scoured by the FBI.
Is the man/bear trying to kill me?
Because if I have to play "predator" with a man or a bear, then I think I can outsmart a killer man, but I can't outsmart how fast a killer bear can outrun and outmurder me.
If it's just a normal guy and a normal bear, it's a man I'll pick. A normal bear in the wild is more dangerous than a normal man in the wild.
I don't think the statistics argument maybe isn't a good one, here, because we don't have so many people just out in the woods where there are bears all the time.
If we had more servings of "individual people out in the woods with bears," we'd see more people killed by bears.
In the society we have, there are millions of more human men than bears. So the odds of there being a bear attack is basically nothing compared to getting attacked by any random human at all.
The key take away for me was:
"Would I rather engage a man outside of his natural habitat(in the woods) or would I rather engage a bear inside its natural habitat?"
I wouldn't want to encounter any human randomly out in the woods. They're probably in the woods for a reason.
Here's what you responded to, before I finished it
@@Robeebert you're the 9% of American men who think they can beat a lion in a fist fight huh
...or...they aren't fans of discrimination and stereotyping. Making some STRONG assumptions, there. Perhaps reflect on why and then you might learn why men would be annoyed about this conversation.
Here’s the thing; you’re making a BS assertion. Do you have a way of reading other people’s mind? If you make a statement about all men (which was the hypothetical scenario), some men will get offended…because it’s a crass and dumb generalization. Anyone can do that. Example: “people that post things like you just have are stupid and should have their hard drives sourced by the FBI.” See how easy that was? 🤦🏻♂️
It seems a little disingenuous to say men who don't like that are all just hidden predators doesn't it?
No the Bear's not going to follow you home. It's just going to follow you until it gets hungry. The fact that people are willing to be in the woods in close proximity to a carnivorous predator that is known to eat people rather than a random person. Is insane to me. Like yeah, there's a percentage chance that the random man could be a weirdo, but there's a 100% chance that a grizzly or polar bear will maul and eat you. This is why I said it depends what kind of bear.
( I live next to a wildlife park that has a bunch of bears and I know several people that work there. ) Black bear would be doable because those guys are mostly scaredy cats. Brown bears yeah nah I'm good. They'll crush my head like a watermelon against the dirt then lick up what drips out.
No. There is little chance that the bear will bother you. Even so, no one is going to ask a woman if she was leading the bear on by flirting with it.
The man vs bear is pure misandry.
And "if you think it's about you it's a red flag" is typical gaslighting. Stop inventing "nuances", there were no nuances in the original question.
Yeah what I'm learning from this is that if I am in a survival situation with a liberal woman I will just leave her to die.
If the hosts can't even be honest, what's the point of tuning in anymore? Aren't they just harming atheism at that point?
I started growing out of these shows when they started calling people "womb person" and such. ( i dont know which ones tho ), not realizing how objectifying this can be. Now i get this recommended to me and hear this for the first time. So Yeah, definitely didnt get better
@@seannelson3613 They try to link far left activism with atheism and it always backfires
Like all women are great folk to. Grt off your high horse
It’s OK for Sidney to make general statements about all men but turn around and blame men for feeling offended. How do you even ascertain who’s a scary man? Their appearance? VERY poorly argued.
It's just man-hatred, which is poorly masked. And they hate ALL men.
For anyone who's still picking the bear, watch the revenant. You will no longer want to pick the bear.
That or you can look up this horrifying real life example of a man who was a bear lover who had been close to wild bears his entire adult life. This guy then went to go observe them in the wild with his girlfriend set up camp and then because they had brought no weapons, their camp was invaded by a grizzly who mauled and ate them both alive. Don't f with bears. Respect them from a distance.
You're missing the point.
All bears are predators, not all men are predators. Period.
Some men are sexual predators, no bears are sexual predators. Period
Some men are psycho killers, and psycho killers have a strong bias for being male perpetrators with female victims. No (non-polar) bears are psycho killers; they only want you to fuck off or to join them for dinner.
@@isaacmachado1238Some women are sexual predators, no bears are sexual predators. Period.
Love the mirroring, huh?
@@namethis658 I mean, you just made a factual statement, though I'm not sure to what end. So we all agree this was a silly point for OP to try and make at all.
@@isaacmachado1238 BUT ALL BEARS ARE PREDATORS. It doesn't matter if no bear is going to sexually assault you when most bears you encounter have a decent chance at mauling you to death.
Bears will eat you alive, and people say women don’t have common sense. 😂
Bears, the vast majority of the time, eat vegetation, insects, carrion, garbage, and fish in season. They don't roam the woods, hungering for fresh meat, let alone human meat.
And people say men don't do research before offering, especially to women, their opinions.
@@floraposteschild4184maybe but Timothy Treadwell screams make me think you’re wrong. 😂
@@floraposteschild4184 and men, the vast vast majority of the time, don't rape, stalk or kill women. Men are more violent but most of that is against other men. They also don't typically roam the woods looking for women to rape, stalk or kill. So what's your point? That women really aren't good at logic?
This is a straw man argument based in fallacious reasoning.
1) You don't get to tell me I have to look inward and do some reflecting like you know my mind better than I do if I put myself in the shoes of "the man" in the hypothetical. You had to rephrase the question to get that to work. The question wasn't "bear or scary man" it is "bear" or "man".
As a pretty competent survivalist, I did not picture myself as a "scary man in the woods" I pictured myself. A man who is a competent outdoor survivalist.
Most men are gonna hear "man" and go "I'm one of those." and now they are associating it with themselves as "man" in the hypothetical.
This makes the hypothetical about the average man, and the woman's general feelings towards the average man in general, which we've established men are putting themselves in the shoes of, which is why it gets taken personally.
It then goes into the statistics about SA and bear attacks for some reason, even though it's practically a non-sequiter.
The average woman runs into several men per day. This increases the likelihood of running into a shitty one.
The average person does not run into several bears per day. Or even one per year. This decreases the risk of running into a very hungry or territorial one. Substantially.
Comparing the statistics is therefore absurd to do with any real meaning.
A much better hill to die on would be the fact that SA stats are so abhorrently high in general. And at least on that hill, there aren't any APEX PREDATORS of the woods waiting for you.
Either way, be it strange men or strange bears, that's why I like to carry a gun.
And I'll be damned, I haven't had to use it on either. Fancy that.
Of course it's a strawman argument, we're dealing with man-haters here
I honestly think that might have been it for Talk Heathen for me. I've heard bad takes before, but that was willful ignorance and BOTH hosts. I can't think of a reason to cut them any slack for that, and I don't need to spend time listening to backward commentary instead of well-reasoned arguments. How is this elevating atheism?
@@seannelson3613 that's what you get when the show gets infested with feminists. Feminism is man-hate, that they try to mask, but situations like this make the mask fall off.
And it's not just feminist women, it's all women.
Women generally don't like men, so it's a good wake-up call to see how women generally treat men.
One of the worst responses I've ever seen one of these shows. 1. The scenario is about a man in general (not scary men, that was a lie), so saying that it isn't about the individual is absurd. If you're making a wide statement about a group and I am a member of that group, I'm involved. 2. Tiktok is a pox on society with children making stupid and inaccurate observations about anything at all. That isn't meaningful or important, and it's embarrassing for the hosts to pretend that it is. 3. You don't have statistics on approaching unknown men in the woods vs. Approaching a bear. 4. You implied that the statistics show that a bear is safer (they don't), and then suggested that we should ask questions about someone's point of view before being annoyed or offended. 5. Bears injure and kill for a lot of reasons, including being territorial. People approach men in lots of settings, the smart ones don't approach bears. Additionally, I don't think that the different reasons are going to be helpful mid-mauling. 6. Saying that it is my responsibility to account for all poorly acting men is absurd and you would never say that about any other group. 7. Reputation is not an argument. That doesn't need any further explanation. In closing, I simply do not believe that most women would actually choose this in a real life situation, those that would should probably get some help, and children veying for attention on tiktok isn't 'where we are as a society.' This show is what needs to change.
I love it when women say 'no you just don't understand!' when we do, we absolutely do, it's just a dumb question. That bear has a chance of seeing you as a threat and killing you. It will either leave you alone or kill you, that's your options. When it then leaves you alone you are alone, how good is your survival skills? Cause you're now stuck in a forest not knowing where you are (going by the premise of the argument)
Now to being stuck with a man. What is the chance he will kill you? Odds are extremely low, so few people are actually murderers so we can probably rule that out. What is the chance he will 'take advantage' I say it like that as it can lead to a few options. Again this is low, most men are not abusers even given free reign will not hurt someone else, we are protectors at heart (which is why women are attracted to the bad boy, they are usually strong and confident) Yes there is a chance bad stuff will happen, of course there is but the odds are again in your favour that this man will not hurt you.
So lets look at your situation. You get dropped in a forest with a bear. The bear either kills you or leaves you're now stuck in the woods on your own. You get dropped in the forest with a man, he's likely to be confused as hell about the situation and says 'lets get to safety' you both work together to get back to civilisation.
But here we are, women are picking the bear. Critical thinking left the chat.
Women !! 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️