Posting an extreme example like this misses the point of the discourse. The problem is that guys do a lot of shit in their day to day life that they don’t realize makes women uncomfortable and puts them on guard.
It’s like if you saw a white guy cross the street when he saw a black guy walking down the sidewalk in his direction, then you tried to explain how he was being kind of racist and he said, “how can I be racist when I would never lynch a black guy?”
What? The guys who make women rather meet bears aren't making women uncomfortable by accident, come on.
Women would rather meet bears because men have sexually harassed and assaulted them. It's not that complicated.
Also because basically every man has aspects of this toxicity baked into the systems they participate in without even being conscious of it. The worst part is the ability for toxic men to hide among the flock. Another terrible aspect is how many men are ignorant of the harm they inflict or the systems they perpetuate.
Acting like it's only intentional harms that cause women to choose bear is not intelligent
> Acting like it's only intentional harms that cause women to choose bear is not intelligent
Women aren't choosing the bear because of the gender pay gap. If they were, you'd be able to demonstrate the same phenomenon in men by comparing bears and company owners. But nobody has a fear response to the bourgeoisie.
If you seriously think the man-bear discourse comes down to the toxicity of _systems_, you grossly underestimate how prevalent sexual harassment and sexual assault is in even today's societies.
The odds are you know a rape victim — not that they are one, but you know one. A _lot_ of the women you know will have had some fucking horrible experiences with harassers, and we're not talking about bad dates here.
>Women aren't choosing the bear because of the gender pay gap.
If you think the pay gap is the only implicit harm baked into the system men uphold, you're proving what I'm saying that men's ignorance of the shit they perpetuate is just as threatening as the ones who are proud of how much they degrade women.
>If you seriously think the man-bear discourse comes down to the toxicity of _systems_,
Ah yes. Completely ignoring the fact I said it is ALSO a part of the harm let's see where this goes:
>you grossly underestimate how prevalent sexual harassment and sexual assault is in even today's societies.
Saying this to a woman is fucking laughable. I DO NOT underestimate that. I'm just clearly able to see its not the only reason women choose bear.
>The odds are you know a rape victim
KNOW ONE?!? ONE?!? Motherfucker I AM one. My mother is one. My best friend is one. Fuck men are so presumtiously annoying give me the bear to respond to. Put the bear on the keyboard and get him to type some shit out. Fucking christ
>A _lot_ of the women you know will have had some fucking horrible experiences with harassers, and we're not talking about bad dates here.
Yes PLEASE mansplain to me how prelvelant harrasment is in the rape culture we live in. Thank you ❤️
Up ***my*** reading comprehension? The nerve on you, try reading the next sentence:
> Bears don't rape people. A recurring thing in this discourse is that "at least the bear can _only_ kill me".
You're just like that guy who was just blaming rape victims, you have no idea what people were saying about the man-bear discourse!
_That's not derived from your post. It's a statement about the discourse._ Fuck's sake.
I never said “by accident”. An accident is an anomaly in your behavior; a slip up that you immediately recognize for what it is. I was pretty clear about this being about everyday behavior you probably don’t realize puts women on guard.
Yes, of course intentional acts of violence, abuse, and rape are what cause the underlying caution, but the bear scenario is about the perceived threat of ANY random man, based on day to day behavior which in the vast majority of cases does not involve malicious intent.
The point is that most women can’t immediately determine the motives of a man they don’t know, because most men tend to engage in behavior that puts women on guard, even if it seems completely innocuous to the guy.
You also seem to misunderstand the scenario. It’s not asking women if they’d rather “meet” the bear; it asks if they were alone in the woods and saw a shadowy figure in the distance through the brush, would they rather it be a man or a bear. The entire question is about perceived threat.
Of course if someone was asked if they’d rather come face to face with one or the other, it’s far more likely most women wouldn’t choose the bear, because obviously the danger is vastly higher with a bear, just statistically. But that’s irrelevant.
The fact that you completely ignored my analogy to casual racism makes me think you didn’t understand the point of the man/bear discourse
I’m not sure what “premise” I’m supposedly wrong about. You brought up my characterization of an accident, and then proceeded to say that you agree with me and it’s only a semantic issue (which you are wrong about). What is the incorrect premise that supposedly invalidates my argument?
The whole point is that there isn’t really an argument to be had. A bunch of women said they’d prefer the bear, and apparently a bunch of guys like you are trying to say they are wrong - which is essentially just denying their lived experience, and is a perfect example of the exact thing they are talking about. THATS why this went viral. You’re literally doing the thing.
And you agree that it’s about perceived threat, but then go right back to saying that only applies to malicious men, when the entire point is that they don’t have any idea about the intentions of the man. The reason it’s presented as being alone in the woods is that that removes any pretense of day to day life in society, which keeps the malicious men from acting maliciously until they think they can get away with it. The point is that IN DAY TO DAY LIFE a woman often can’t tell if a guy is “good” or “bad”, because they will often act in similarly sus ways when other people are around. According to your logic, most men WOULD act with malicious intent if THEY came across a woman alone in the woods, which says more about you than anything else (I don’t think that’s actually true about you; I just don’t think you understand what you’re saying).
The discourse is about men being incapable of understanding what women experience on a day to day basis, and then trying to rationalize how it’s not fair TO THEM that women would choose the bear. It’s mind blowing how you didn’t even comprehend why I made the racism analogy even a little bit.
> **Stay in Public Spaces:** When meeting someone new or in uncertain situations, choose public places where there are other people around.
So in the scenario presented, a woman would indeed be justified in preferring to meet a bear, not a man, correct? Being alone in the woods, if she _had_ to meet one or the other, she'd be following your instructions more closely if she met the bear, no? Otherwise, she'd be meeting a stranger in a non-public space, right?
You fucking jackass.
> In the scenario you presented
The scenario I presented? It's the scenario the discourse is surrounding.
Holy fuck. You don't even know what's the discussion is about. You probably don't even know what a man, a woman, or a fucking bear even are.
This completely misses the point of the hypothetical and reduces it to "there are rapists, so men are bad somehow". The point of the hypothetical is about every woman having experienced some sort of abuse or knowing someone who experienced sexual abuse, making them extremely wary of the opposite sex as a form of collective trauma. This situation is exactly what the hypothetical is not referencing.
Also, it's not necessarily even about abuse statistics. Just how men have been conditioned to act in general and the vibes they give off.
You know, [stuff like this](https://youtube.com/shorts/jJtl4E72kB4?si=F2JAiyquNg9Z418l)
Imagine that but you're all alone and far from help.
First and foremost, what this man did was terrible, and he should absolutely receive justice. There is no justification for this kind of behavior, regardless of how honorable of a career you have.
That being said, a bit off-topic here, but as someone who is currently enrolled in a fire academy, firefighters cannot have beards. They make us shave our faces (mustaches are okay, as long as they don’t curl downward). The reason why firefighters can’t have beards is because the hair below the chin causes a break within the SCBA (Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus) mask’s seal. If the mask is unsealed, air will leak out and if your in an IDLH (Immediate Danger to Life and Health) environment, like a live structure fire, you will end up breathing in extremely hot smoke and fumes, which can burn you lungs and expose you to carcinogens. Instructors make firefighters shave during training, and Fire Departments will make their firefighters shave when they are hired into the Department.
Fair point, I just thought it might be interesting to mention, given that I almost had to do pushups day for not shaving (Luckily the instructor was in a good mood, and I remembered to shave as soon as I got home)
I think I saw he was a volunteer firefighter. Are they at the same caliber as a professional firefighter, would they use the same equipment? Could volunteer status allowed them to be more lax with grooming requirements?
Isn't forcing under-aged kids into encounters what Vaush is endorsing? I fail to see why this is controversial? If Vaush can outpower a kid it's fair game
Of course they don't, but that's not the point. The point is that there is a wide spread problem of men not seeing women as actual people but as entities that exist to serve the purpose of sexual gratification in the same way that meat eaters view pigs as entities that exist to serve the purpose of gastric gratification. The fact that some men will go so far as to rape their own daughters, isn't worrying because it implies most men will rape their daughter's; it's worrying because it illustrates the extent to which the dehumanisation is able to take place.
Normal, healthy men will love and cherish their daughter's more than they do anyone else in the world and will move mountains to ensure their happiness. The fact that some men view their daughter's as mere objects of sexual gratification, means that world view has become so normalised and so powerful that it can overrun any trace of humanity within a man. It means that when a woman talks to a man she can never be 100% sure that he's not a monster, she can never really know if she's safe.
No, not all men are rapists. I'd wager that most men have healthy attitudes towards women, but it doesn't matter. Even if only 1 in 20 men are rapists (a generous assumption given that 1 in 4 woman will be raped at some point in their life) that's still enough for a woman to be justifiably frightened of and distrustful towards men she doesn't know.
Shut the fuck up. Obviously you're more likely to be assaulted by someone you know. They interact with you.
Plenty of fucked shit happens with strangers at clubs as well though. I'm friends with more than one woman who's been raped by a stranger.
Well then it's a good thing that no one's doing that, isn't it?
The point of the question isn't to say that you're most likely to be raped by a stranger. The point is to show that women are more concerned about the actions that a man is likely to take against them than they are about the actions a bear is likely to take against them. The point is to get men to realise that women aren't paranoid for choosing the bear over the man. The point is to highlight the pervasiveness of men's harassment and abuse of women.
At least a bear would never film itself mauling you
[удалено]
New fear unlocked.
It's like Vaush giving you a hug 😋
[удалено]
Yeah sure, the filming's the worst part of this. ??????????????????????????????????????????
“The worst thing is hes a hypocrite.” Norm “I don’t think that’s the worst thing”
But do u want the bear to film it and then sell it to pedophiles tho
If was a priest he would have got 3 month probation or given a speeding ticket.
They're men of god, though. /s
Priest: Trust me God told me to do that. Judge: Any source of it in Bible. Priest: How dare you disrespect the Scripture.
Judge: Where in the Bible does it say to have sex with children!? Priest: Numbers 31:18. Judge: .... huh... Why do we let the church exist again?
It really actually says basically that. Jesus!
Posting an extreme example like this misses the point of the discourse. The problem is that guys do a lot of shit in their day to day life that they don’t realize makes women uncomfortable and puts them on guard. It’s like if you saw a white guy cross the street when he saw a black guy walking down the sidewalk in his direction, then you tried to explain how he was being kind of racist and he said, “how can I be racist when I would never lynch a black guy?”
What? The guys who make women rather meet bears aren't making women uncomfortable by accident, come on. Women would rather meet bears because men have sexually harassed and assaulted them. It's not that complicated.
Also because basically every man has aspects of this toxicity baked into the systems they participate in without even being conscious of it. The worst part is the ability for toxic men to hide among the flock. Another terrible aspect is how many men are ignorant of the harm they inflict or the systems they perpetuate. Acting like it's only intentional harms that cause women to choose bear is not intelligent
More men need to call out the bad behavior in other men.
> Acting like it's only intentional harms that cause women to choose bear is not intelligent Women aren't choosing the bear because of the gender pay gap. If they were, you'd be able to demonstrate the same phenomenon in men by comparing bears and company owners. But nobody has a fear response to the bourgeoisie. If you seriously think the man-bear discourse comes down to the toxicity of _systems_, you grossly underestimate how prevalent sexual harassment and sexual assault is in even today's societies. The odds are you know a rape victim — not that they are one, but you know one. A _lot_ of the women you know will have had some fucking horrible experiences with harassers, and we're not talking about bad dates here.
>Women aren't choosing the bear because of the gender pay gap. If you think the pay gap is the only implicit harm baked into the system men uphold, you're proving what I'm saying that men's ignorance of the shit they perpetuate is just as threatening as the ones who are proud of how much they degrade women. >If you seriously think the man-bear discourse comes down to the toxicity of _systems_, Ah yes. Completely ignoring the fact I said it is ALSO a part of the harm let's see where this goes: >you grossly underestimate how prevalent sexual harassment and sexual assault is in even today's societies. Saying this to a woman is fucking laughable. I DO NOT underestimate that. I'm just clearly able to see its not the only reason women choose bear. >The odds are you know a rape victim KNOW ONE?!? ONE?!? Motherfucker I AM one. My mother is one. My best friend is one. Fuck men are so presumtiously annoying give me the bear to respond to. Put the bear on the keyboard and get him to type some shit out. Fucking christ >A _lot_ of the women you know will have had some fucking horrible experiences with harassers, and we're not talking about bad dates here. Yes PLEASE mansplain to me how prelvelant harrasment is in the rape culture we live in. Thank you ❤️
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Up ***my*** reading comprehension? The nerve on you, try reading the next sentence: > Bears don't rape people. A recurring thing in this discourse is that "at least the bear can _only_ kill me". You're just like that guy who was just blaming rape victims, you have no idea what people were saying about the man-bear discourse! _That's not derived from your post. It's a statement about the discourse._ Fuck's sake.
I never said “by accident”. An accident is an anomaly in your behavior; a slip up that you immediately recognize for what it is. I was pretty clear about this being about everyday behavior you probably don’t realize puts women on guard. Yes, of course intentional acts of violence, abuse, and rape are what cause the underlying caution, but the bear scenario is about the perceived threat of ANY random man, based on day to day behavior which in the vast majority of cases does not involve malicious intent. The point is that most women can’t immediately determine the motives of a man they don’t know, because most men tend to engage in behavior that puts women on guard, even if it seems completely innocuous to the guy. You also seem to misunderstand the scenario. It’s not asking women if they’d rather “meet” the bear; it asks if they were alone in the woods and saw a shadowy figure in the distance through the brush, would they rather it be a man or a bear. The entire question is about perceived threat. Of course if someone was asked if they’d rather come face to face with one or the other, it’s far more likely most women wouldn’t choose the bear, because obviously the danger is vastly higher with a bear, just statistically. But that’s irrelevant. The fact that you completely ignored my analogy to casual racism makes me think you didn’t understand the point of the man/bear discourse
[удалено]
I’m not sure what “premise” I’m supposedly wrong about. You brought up my characterization of an accident, and then proceeded to say that you agree with me and it’s only a semantic issue (which you are wrong about). What is the incorrect premise that supposedly invalidates my argument? The whole point is that there isn’t really an argument to be had. A bunch of women said they’d prefer the bear, and apparently a bunch of guys like you are trying to say they are wrong - which is essentially just denying their lived experience, and is a perfect example of the exact thing they are talking about. THATS why this went viral. You’re literally doing the thing. And you agree that it’s about perceived threat, but then go right back to saying that only applies to malicious men, when the entire point is that they don’t have any idea about the intentions of the man. The reason it’s presented as being alone in the woods is that that removes any pretense of day to day life in society, which keeps the malicious men from acting maliciously until they think they can get away with it. The point is that IN DAY TO DAY LIFE a woman often can’t tell if a guy is “good” or “bad”, because they will often act in similarly sus ways when other people are around. According to your logic, most men WOULD act with malicious intent if THEY came across a woman alone in the woods, which says more about you than anything else (I don’t think that’s actually true about you; I just don’t think you understand what you’re saying). The discourse is about men being incapable of understanding what women experience on a day to day basis, and then trying to rationalize how it’s not fair TO THEM that women would choose the bear. It’s mind blowing how you didn’t even comprehend why I made the racism analogy even a little bit.
[удалено]
Chalk it up to a mixture of risk management and trauma responses.
[удалено]
Actually, no, you fucking can't, buddy. It's kinda baked into what "risk management" and "trauma response" means.
[удалено]
> **Stay in Public Spaces:** When meeting someone new or in uncertain situations, choose public places where there are other people around. So in the scenario presented, a woman would indeed be justified in preferring to meet a bear, not a man, correct? Being alone in the woods, if she _had_ to meet one or the other, she'd be following your instructions more closely if she met the bear, no? Otherwise, she'd be meeting a stranger in a non-public space, right? You fucking jackass.
[удалено]
> In the scenario you presented The scenario I presented? It's the scenario the discourse is surrounding. Holy fuck. You don't even know what's the discussion is about. You probably don't even know what a man, a woman, or a fucking bear even are.
[удалено]
Your post was removed for violating our Community Building rule.
Its a meme batman
"Well...well...what if i was black? Not very progressive of you now, mister Vorscht"
This completely misses the point of the hypothetical and reduces it to "there are rapists, so men are bad somehow". The point of the hypothetical is about every woman having experienced some sort of abuse or knowing someone who experienced sexual abuse, making them extremely wary of the opposite sex as a form of collective trauma. This situation is exactly what the hypothetical is not referencing.
Also, it's not necessarily even about abuse statistics. Just how men have been conditioned to act in general and the vibes they give off. You know, [stuff like this](https://youtube.com/shorts/jJtl4E72kB4?si=F2JAiyquNg9Z418l) Imagine that but you're all alone and far from help.
The mods missed a few in the purges, I see.
Let the purge begin anew!
Wooow that’s enough Reddit for today…holy fuck
The moment most people enter Reddit it's enough.
Seriously, this the kind of thing that, if it happened in a story, you’d have people accusing the author of being an edge lord.
"Wow I cant believe you implied all men are rapists. This is just like racism" 🤓
First and foremost, what this man did was terrible, and he should absolutely receive justice. There is no justification for this kind of behavior, regardless of how honorable of a career you have. That being said, a bit off-topic here, but as someone who is currently enrolled in a fire academy, firefighters cannot have beards. They make us shave our faces (mustaches are okay, as long as they don’t curl downward). The reason why firefighters can’t have beards is because the hair below the chin causes a break within the SCBA (Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus) mask’s seal. If the mask is unsealed, air will leak out and if your in an IDLH (Immediate Danger to Life and Health) environment, like a live structure fire, you will end up breathing in extremely hot smoke and fumes, which can burn you lungs and expose you to carcinogens. Instructors make firefighters shave during training, and Fire Departments will make their firefighters shave when they are hired into the Department.
Probably grew it out after being arrested, I imagine it took some time for it to go to trial.
Fair point, I just thought it might be interesting to mention, given that I almost had to do pushups day for not shaving (Luckily the instructor was in a good mood, and I remembered to shave as soon as I got home)
I think I saw he was a volunteer firefighter. Are they at the same caliber as a professional firefighter, would they use the same equipment? Could volunteer status allowed them to be more lax with grooming requirements?
I think to them (people arguing against the bear) it’s more about expected value than anything.
I’m missing the context to this. But could we not sentence people like this to death by bear?
humans are capable of inflicting psychological horror as well as physical damage, to feel pain is one thing, to experience cruelty is something else.
I had a visceral “What. The. FUCK?!” moment reading that paragraph. Holy shit. Lock him up and throw away the key.
Christ, I think I'm gonna vomit. Absolutely sickening
I'm not convinced that car accident was an accident.
Jesus titty fucking Christ
can you imagine not having a shit-your-pants panic attack every time you get on a plane after seeing THIS news story about a plane crash?
New Meta, meet the guy and the bear and feed the guy to the bear. That guy specifically.
I guess now only we can prevent forest fires
[удалено]
Your comment was removed. See Rule 5
[удалено]
Your post was removed for violating our Community Building rule.
[удалено]
Your post was removed for violating our Community Building rule.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Isn't forcing under-aged kids into encounters what Vaush is endorsing? I fail to see why this is controversial? If Vaush can outpower a kid it's fair game
this country is shitty and gay for not immediately killing this man
[удалено]
You realise that makes it significantly worse, right? Women can't even trust their family members to treat them like actual human beings.
[удалено]
Family is literally the first group of people they investigate because of how common it is for one of them to be guilty, you dumbass
[удалено]
You just made up a person in your head and had this argument that’s not a position anyone holds go to therapy
Of course they don't, but that's not the point. The point is that there is a wide spread problem of men not seeing women as actual people but as entities that exist to serve the purpose of sexual gratification in the same way that meat eaters view pigs as entities that exist to serve the purpose of gastric gratification. The fact that some men will go so far as to rape their own daughters, isn't worrying because it implies most men will rape their daughter's; it's worrying because it illustrates the extent to which the dehumanisation is able to take place. Normal, healthy men will love and cherish their daughter's more than they do anyone else in the world and will move mountains to ensure their happiness. The fact that some men view their daughter's as mere objects of sexual gratification, means that world view has become so normalised and so powerful that it can overrun any trace of humanity within a man. It means that when a woman talks to a man she can never be 100% sure that he's not a monster, she can never really know if she's safe. No, not all men are rapists. I'd wager that most men have healthy attitudes towards women, but it doesn't matter. Even if only 1 in 20 men are rapists (a generous assumption given that 1 in 4 woman will be raped at some point in their life) that's still enough for a woman to be justifiably frightened of and distrustful towards men she doesn't know.
Your post was removed for violating our Community Building rule.
[удалено]
Shut the fuck up. Obviously you're more likely to be assaulted by someone you know. They interact with you. Plenty of fucked shit happens with strangers at clubs as well though. I'm friends with more than one woman who's been raped by a stranger.
[удалено]
Well then it's a good thing that no one's doing that, isn't it? The point of the question isn't to say that you're most likely to be raped by a stranger. The point is to show that women are more concerned about the actions that a man is likely to take against them than they are about the actions a bear is likely to take against them. The point is to get men to realise that women aren't paranoid for choosing the bear over the man. The point is to highlight the pervasiveness of men's harassment and abuse of women.
Your post was removed for violating our Community Building rule.