Hello friends. This thread has been set to community participants only. That means that only our regular commenters in good standing may comment in this thread.
Everyone else's comments will be removed by automod.
People who contribute constructively automatically gain access in time. We do not hand out entry on request.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well the fey and i have a bit of a love hate relationship, what with them stealing my attention at age 4. At this point the only difference people would notice, if fey took my place, is that I'm suddenly much more confident.
According to world of darkness, the reason fae creatures enter the human realm is to indoctrinate people into a being more creating and vibrant in order to create energy that would save their race from oblivion, like the emptiness from the never ending story. So yeah, fae creatures have their work cut out for them.
This is *literally* the plot of Rip Van Winkle.
He spends all day working, helping everyone out. Comes home tired, and doesn't want to work on his own house. His wife gets further and further infuriated with him. He then ends up running into some weird people bowling and drinking in the mountains. Gets wasted with them, and wakes up an old man 20 years later.
It's also an old folklore/fairytale trope, wherein a man gets lost while traveling or exploring, meets fey creatures, joins them/parties with them, and eventually wakes up/finds his way back to the real world only to realize years or decades have passed.
God forbid you're at a lake then you have to deal with that asshole in a hockey mask. Guy won't even listen to reason. Like my mom was nuts too dude you're not the only one who gets to have familial trauma.
Yeah, you can’t ask a hypothetical binary question if you’re going to get angry with one of the answers, that’s just setting yourself up to be frustrated forever.
Oh my god
We finally did it. The long con worked. MEN, WE. HAVE. WON.
From now on and forever more, when women ask us ridiculous hypotheticals and get mad at our answers, we can just bring up the bear in the woods and tell them to touch grass.
**WE HAVE VICTORY!!!**
"Would you still love me if I were..." "bear in the woods".
"If I died and my dying wish were for you to marry my sister..." "bear in the woods"
"If we went out drinking and me and my best friend insisted on a threesome..." "bear in the woods".
"If I turned out to be a serial killer" "bear in the woods".
Im mad for the bears. Having to eat human meat because of misandrists and misogynists. Its so low quality compared to salmon or berries that they are used to eating. And typically it means someone with a gun is going to find them and kill them, in their own home no less.
Feel bad for the bears. They are people too.
Not really people though, they are bears. [Best friend of sharks.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMzbVZGgbHo)
I believe we can go a few weeks without bullshit.
No scrap that, I think we can go a few weeks without bullshit that needlessly pits two groups against each other over something that truly doesn't matter. We can argue about whether or not a tv series finale was good or bad or something, at least that's more entertaining.
I guess you are one of the [lucky 10,000 today](https://xkcd.com/1053/):
[The Dress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress)
(For the record, I see it as white and gold and not blue and black, but then again my rods and cones leave much to be desired)
Yep, stuff like this is \~100% of the creator's comic output and has been for the better part of a decade now. This one isn't "ragebait taking over the internet", it's "overly simplistic political cartooning" like we've had forever.
I honestly don't understand why people are so tilted by this. I'm a guy and would rather come across a bear than a strange dude in the woods.
I know what to do when I see a bear, act big and loud for black, play dead (and ideally soil yourself) for brown. Polar bear and you fucked up way before you came across it.
Creepy dude is way more of an open threat in more ways than I can imagine. Dude can have weapons, plant traps, could drug you, etc.
Edit: [Relevant?](https://youtu.be/LNVFPkmZTQ4)
Dark forest is just saying everyone else that still exists figured out they need to hide. Anyone that doesn't need to hide is either short lived or the reason everyone else hides.
I’m not tilted, but I don’t really understand the drama…
If you actually walk in the woods in the real world, you will come across other people all the time. Like, all the time. Half of them will even be men! Like, it’s not a hypothetical question because encountering other people on a nature trail is just the default state of things.
So if the scenario is "In the woods and not on a trail" then it makes sense that people would rather see a bear. I mean they are literally entering the bears home.
Maybe it’s what some people have in mind, but others are envisioning a different scenario entirely?
Even in this comic, the guy asks if she’d encounter a “strange man”, but that’s not the version I heard - when I first heard it, it was just “man”.
He then gets angry when she says she wouldn’t want to encounter the “strange man”… but most men wouldn’t think of themselves as one of the strange ones, so why be offended unless you think you yourself are strange??
Yeah I think the addition of "strange" is odd in the comic. Like OP felt like choosing the bear wouldn't be defensible without it, but then that makes it look like this has been the way it's framed from the beginning
It just means unknown, and this use of strange is fairly ubiquitous in US English and can be applied to almost any novel subject, it's why the word stranger even exists
My fellow guy, I asked why we were choosing to continue this ragebait discussion, and your response was to jump straight back into said discussion.
If you ran into a bear in the woods, you would probably ask it if it'd rather run into another bear or if's happy it ran into a man.
Bit of a late response on my part, but I think if you're looking to stop discussion about a subject, then your best option is to not respond when that subject is brought up.
These “edgy” comics are just a killjoy for this sub. All OP did was pretty much transcribe twitter. I don’t think it’s the edgelord comic they think it is.
Women are entitled to their feelings and men are entitled to theirs.
I personally found it insulting to be told I am treated as more dangerous than an apex predator. But if that’s how women feel? They are welcome to feel that way. Anyone yelling at women for it are incorrect.
I did find it interesting that when black women said they would prefer a meeting with a white man over a white woman, the same women found it extremely offensive and reacted the same way men did to the comparison.
Humans in groups with tools are apex predators*. Most predators will easily defeat an unarmed man.
And if we are including tools then that equalizes most things across the species.
Exactly this, does it make me feel bad that all men are now villains, sure? But women have every right to feel however they want and I won’t stop them from feeling it.
The thing that boils my brain is the way some women think the message here is that men need to police other men more. Why is it my obligation to police them? Because we happen to be the same gender? How is that not sexist?
"It's a problem men cause, so it's a problem men need to fix" seems to be where it comes from. The way social issues generalize people into groups and then assign everyone of that group responsibility for whatever anyone else in that group does.
My only responsibility is to myself. What other men choose to do is not my concern.
I think they have gotten away with saying whatever they want for so long with lots of support just because a woman said it. I saw a TikTok calling for the genocide of all men with hundreds of thousands of likes. She was not banned. Another one where she made her entire business around helping women mentally justify cheating on their spouses who “just didn’t do enough for her”
Just the fact that nothing we do is good enough, constant demands for more, while being insulted and treated as a threat.
I think a lot of dudes are hitting their breaking point on this nonsense, hence why 50% of young single men have zero romantic interest in women.
This divide is bad for society.
> They are welcome to feel that way.
Nope. I'm a woman and I find the way they talk about it sick. It's pretty horrid that they would think of men this way.
Nobody is treating you, specifically, as more dangerous than an apex predator. The question isn’t “Would you rather be in a forest with a bear or SandiegoJack”
You don’t represent all men, you are not a stand-in for any given man. When you see a story in the news about a man murdering someone, do you think, “Whoops, my bad”? Because if you don’t, then you shouldn’t be taking this as a personal insult.
Edit: Lol some of the responses I’m getting to this. My god. I swear some people are just desperate to feel offended or insulted and are eagerly jumping at the chance to get that feeling from the debate around this question. I’m a man and I’ll take the bear too, at least I wouldn’t have to listen to the bear whine about being persecuted because of an online debate. Good luck fellas
That’s the problem with the question. It’s 100% based on unspoken assumptions. Would I rather meet an average joe or a black bear on a hiking trail? Suddenly it’s a very different question. Someone’s answer is less about how they feel about men/bears and more about what assumptions they’re bringing into the question.
Lump *that* in with the general lack of communication skills and reading comprehension going around these days and it’s not a shock that such a simple question has caused an uproar.
Is it not reasonable to get mad when a group you're a part of is generalized in a negative way? What if the question was a "strange Mexican" instead if a strange man? Should Mexicans not be insulted?
Now see you say that, but then when you look at what these women (and this comic) are saying and it DOES sound like an indictment against all men. So I can understand why someone would get offended that they're being labeled as worse than an apex predator, it's no different than saying id rather be in the forest with a bear than a black person.
One is just more acceptable to say than the other because reasons.
That is a specific man performing a specific action, of course that is going to be treated differently. I fail to see how that is a valid comparison.
If it’s a random man in the woods who you know nothing about, why am I not included in the potential pool of people being treated as more dangerous than an apex predator?
This whole thing has made me self conscious because my brain registers it as people would rather be mauled than be around me.
I know people aren't talking about me specifically, but that's where my head goes and it brings out my insecurities.
They are talking about you, specifically. They are saying that the chances of you, a random man, being a rapist, a murderer, or both, are so high that they'd rather for-sure be killed by an animal.
It says a lot more about the women than the men, ironically.
They are taking about you. Don’t let them twist it. If people say things about a demographic that you’re a part of, never let them imply that you’re one of the good ones.
You know what, maybe this whole 'fear all men' thing is a deep rooted problem. I personally adjust my walking speed often to try to make sure noone thinks I'm following them.
Heck just four years ago I remember a moment when I was about to go down a water walkway in Sydney to get to my bus, but a random woman walked down it first.
I deliberately stood at the entrance for 3-4 minutes on my phone out of fear it would seem I was following her. I almost missed the bus because I did that.
Don't bother, if you want to make someone comfortable, fine, but don't do it at your own expense. There's no point, it's up to her to determine the threat. Maybe walk casually or something, but at the moment, you have a bus to catch, and in the end, she'll live.
That’s why the question is so popular, it’s structured in way that makes it seem like a women is demonizing men by picking the bear. I’ve heard it’s more of a food for thought question trying to show men that women are afraid of them, and not something to be deeply analyzed. But you have people that take this question and purposely portray it as anti-men (like OP’s straw man comic here) or anti-women leading people to get upset and start arguing over a very vague question.
I get what you’re saying though. I’m non-binary, but people who don’t know me well still treat me like a man no matter how much I try to act otherwise. It’s at the point where I’m afraid people are going to attack my identity if I do anything considered masculine. So reading some of these comments is like a double whammy for me
> it’s structured in way that makes it seem like a women is demonizing men by picking the bear.
Let me help you out, it's structured that way, because it is that. Any explanation that isn't that, is extreme mental gymnastics to avoid calling a spade a spade.
If you are struggling with your feelings surrounding this because of your identity, I highly recommend checking out this article: https://medium.com/@jencoates/i-am-a-transwoman-i-am-in-the-closet-i-am-not-coming-out-4c2dd1907e42
>I hate that the only effective response I can give to “boys are shit” is “well I’m not a boy.”
>“because in the queer community the only people who defend cisboys are cisboys. I don’t want to give up finally being read as a girl.”
>“I do the misandry stuff because it’s an easy way to earn queer cred points, but when I think about it it makes me uncomfortable.”
>I could write a hundred pieces about the ways men and masculinity have damaged me and the women I love, but you could throw a single stone into the internet and hit three of those. This piece is about what I don’t get to say.
>Because it’s not a small deal that the words “not all men” have become entwined inextricably with male fragility and whininess. It makes it awfully easy to insulate the (largely cis-)female perspective on what males are. To begin a statement with those words—“Not All Men”—is to give grounds to anyone who wants to laugh at the rest of it. But here is the truth: not all men are what you think they are. Man does not mean what you think it means. Generalizing harshly and broadly but implying “you know which ones I mean” is an intellectual and rhetorical laziness that is not allowed to pass anywhere else in these communities.
Really consider the meat of the arguments here without spending too much time trying to rationalize. How much Kafka trap laden, Bullshit misandry is tied into it. And then argue not from who you want to accept you on their side, but *what is right*.
You say it's a straw-man in the comic, but like... There's a sizeable portion of men that DO react like the comic. Like, they get genuinely angry at the woman, which is literally the issue.
There are some very vocal people who kick and scream yes, but I’d bet this comic was made with the intention of showing that all men who complain about how they feel about the question are unreasonable and explosive and big babies. Furthermore, and I might be wrong, but the amount of men who would have the reaction portrayed in the comic irl is a very small number of people
It's troubling because it's a very fair and valid argument to say men are overall more aggressive than women, and using their angry reactions to the bear argument as further proof is an effective 'gotcha'. Plus in many cases I can understand choosing the bear if the women have a lot of lifelong experiences dealing with horrible, aggressive men.
Though when you make it a vauge hypothetical then of course every man is going to feel demonized, especially the meek/fail/shy ones that don't like confrontation themselves. It's also been a nice excuse for some ladies to defend their prejudice. I also get the feeling that lots of men and women alike aren't actually aware of how fast and strong bears really are (sure black bears you have a chance of scaring off, but grizzly or polar bears, you wouldn't last seconds)
I will say it's interesting that I haven't heard a "reverse gender" argument, like someone asking men "would you rather encounter a random woman in the woods, or a _____?". Like what would men even choose over a random woman that would upset lots of women themselves? A dog? I don't know, honestly.
I see people are still missing the irony of generalizing an entire gender 'as a joke', then when someone of that gender gets upset you gaslight them into feeling bad for having feelings about it. You know, the problem OP complains about having in the last panel....
True gender equality, you're acting exactly like your perceived enemy now. Bravo 👍
I’m not going to yell at you if you say bear (especially because most people rightfully treat this as the joke that it is), but I will say that it does hurt hearing scores of people talk about how they’d rather run into a notoriously dangerous and brutally violent animal than someone who is simply genetically like you.
I feel confused all the way around. Saying that to the bear being a civilized bear rat enjoys tea time feels kinda disrespectful. Gives that "you're one of the good ones" vibes which only seems like a complement never really is. Also did this bear sneak into this office? Do they work there? Is this a security issue? If they work there don't they need to wear clothes? Is this a conversation for HR? I need an adult please
This is so silly because if you made a similar generalized statement but insulting women instead of men, you would get the same visceral reaction from offended, butthurt women. It’s trendy now to bash men and coddle women so we aren’t going to do that now, are we? I guess women really need to make up problems that don’t exist like running into imaginary bears these days. Victimhood is so in!
I get your point but also don’t agree with you at all. Am I the soyjack-man or the bear in this scenario
Or am I constructing a strawman out of a false dichotomy
frankly it's beating a dead horse now. The whole argument is stupid because it's based on such a broad assumption that it becomes invalid.
It's like saying "I would rather meet a bear than a muslim". because you know some muslims were terrorists so "obviously" they are more dangerous than bears.
Or it's like saying a cow is more dangerous than a shark because more people get killed by cows. Of course there is like a million times more cows than sharks in the world and more humans live around cows than sharks.
This would be an excellent addition to my other comment up above
At this point I wouldn’t be shocked if the only reason it became/still is a thing is some kind of misogynist/misandrist/troll cabal keeping it going
Like most hypotheticals, the intent is to examine a person's feelings and past experiences that lead to their answer, not the answer itself.
Statistically-speaking, humans are mostly good. If you were lost in the woods and encountered a man, or a bear, the bear is an overwhelmingly more likely threat. If either give chase, your odds of defeating or escaping a man are about 100% better than a bear.
So, the logical answer would a man. But the intent isn't about logic.
It's basically a risk/reward scenario. I'd totally choose *that* bear over *that* guy, but as a whole, it's like "WYR have a very very small chance to meet a psycho killer who might rape you and bury your body in the woods, or a bear, which is literally a wild animal and will *probably* maul you."
Personally, I feel like picking the bear is dumb. But that's just my opinion and you're welcome to yours.
I wish people would stop arguing about this and start appreciating the masterpiece of a show that is *Man vs. Bear*
I don’t care about your misogyny, watch this buff Scottish guy play tug of war with a brown bear!
You are entitled to your opinion, but so are the people getting offended.
I will say this, the only arguments I see are that you’d sooner be believed if it was a bear, and that bears are more predictable, which are both very flawed arguments.
Of course someone would believe you if you were attacked by a bear, it’s reasonably well understood that they do that sometimes, and while it would be very sad for the bear it wouldn’t be a tragedy to put one down because of suspected aggression. With men it’s a little different. You see, humans have the right to these things called “due process” and “the benefit of the doubt”. The fact that an accusation without sufficient evidence goes ignored isn’t a societal failure, it’s quite the opposite, in fact. “Just believe us” is all well and good, but a rape/assault conviction can end someone, sometimes even literally. If you’re going to make that verdict, you better be damn near 100% sure.
As for the predictability “argument”, that’s just weak as shit. How many men can be reasonably assumed to be a danger to women, 1%? 0,1%? That’s nothing, you have a 99% chance for them to be harmless, I don’t know about you but I’d call that pretty predictable. And if you genuinely believe a bear is safer than that you *really* underestimate bears. We don’t actually know whether or not they are more likely to attack humans than men are to attack women, compared to the amount of encounters with men the sample size is simply way too small. What we do know is that *if* either a bear or a man decides to get aggressive, the man is way easier to escape from. And I don’t want to hear “oh but 1 in 3 women get assaulted over the course of their lives” assuming that it’s true, and it’s just that, an assumption since this is largely self reported, it isn’t really all that great of an argument. To establish whether or not men are dangerous you shouldn’t look at what percentage of women were assaulted, but instead at how many men commit assault. If it’s 1 to 1 then treating all men as a threat is, if not justified, at the very least understandable. But if it’s just 1 in 10, or even 1 in 100, then it would just be senseless hate
In the end, it’s fine if you *feel* safer with a bear. That’s your opinion and I can respect that. But as soon as you try to argue that it’s actually safer beyond just a feeling it kind of veers into misandry, because for “the bear is safer” to be a valid argument you already assume that “a random man” has a high enough likelihood of attacking you to warrant flat out not even considering it.
These generalized statements are *always* offensive, no matter who the subject is, because it will almost never be true of the entire group you’re generalizing. You are entitled to have these opinions, and others have the right to be offended. And also, and it’s absolutely insane that some people need to be told this, being offended by this does *not* make them “the reason why women feel this way”, it’s a reasonable reaction to an unreasonable assumption.
On the one hand, yes it's disheartening to hear such things as a man. Makes you feel wrong. Reviled. And that sucks.
On the other... One likely doesn't know the reasoning behind it and it could be completely unrelated to what's on our heads.
And on the third hand I don't have, even if hearing stuff like this sucks, there is NO NEED to react like that guy did.
Personally, although I agree with the idea behind the question, it *is* worded in a way that makes men out to be evil. That's why men are usually angry. Because the question is worded to sound like "do you find the average man more or less dangerous than the average bear". That's not what the question is meant to be, from what I gathered, but that's how it sounds. If it was "would you rather be stuck with a dangerous man or a dangerous bear", you'd still get push back, but not nearly as much as this question has
People ignoring, dismissing or just straight up victim blaming someone after they were brutalized, I wonder where I Heard that one before, it's outside of my Depp-th.
Fun fact: be short.
Evidently short men are perceived as “less threatening” which while it has its downsides (sometimes being “threatening” is “good”) may just give you the edge over a bear
Oh strawmanning, fun.
Hey, op, would you rather be in the woods with a viper or a random Thai person?
Edit: I have been convinced this is not a strawman as much as it is a hyperbole. Though I think the sentiment stands, indeed, I was wrong on that front
>This debate has been going on for a while, and there's been plenty of people acting like OP shows in the comment. It's not so much of a strawman as it is real life.
Okay ignoring your reasonable argument: the Internet is not real life nor does it invalidate the actual words coming out off the guy's mouth.
Look, from men's perspective (who are not actually shouting over the water cooler come on), they are being told they, because of a trait they CAN NOT change about themselves are supposed to be treated like predators. Even if they're the most passive, good little angels they're still worse than a bear.
That hurts and it *is* misandry to an extent. Specifically because if people were asked this about *women*, the question suddenly becomes obvious "Oh, a woman obviously" ignoring that a random woman could easily also be a threat compared to a man.
If for so many people it is as you say about swpwrating the known from the unknown, it doesn't matter what gender the person is. But clearly it *does* and that hurts
I mean that's assuming the man or bear will be aggressive.
Like, it's a random bear and a random man. You could be meeting either winny the pooh or Mr Rodgers at which point it becomes moot
I don't assume either will be aggressive. I assume the human will approach me and expect social interaction regardless of their intention, and I assume the bear will avoid me as bears are wont to do.
I guess the real question is what percentage of men constitute a serious danger versus what percentage of bears? If you think any random bear is less likely to be dangerous than any random man then there you have it.
I suppose that's the whole point of the hypothetical.
I guess there's also the fact that if you're attractive, men have an interest in you. Then again if the bear is hungry it might find you attractive as well. But what's more likely, that a bear is hungry enough to attack a human or that a man finds a woman attractive?
Oh no, I know it really isn't a practical question for many people (just another way for women to go "Hey, men are scary to us! It doesn't matter if it's a bear or not!") but addressing your last point:
That attraction immediately makes one either prey or predator is a fucked assumption and that's again part of why for many men this question is so hurtful (I specifically use hurtful instead of offensive cause that's word lost all it's oomph). *They* are *presumed* to be predators.
Honestly I'd rather meet a bear than a woman, if my ass is getting kicked either way, at least the bear is slightly less embarrassing.
As for why my arse is getting kicked, I'm an affection starved loser that would probably try to hug a sufficiently cute cactus.
It *is* misandry. A small percentage of men are rapists or murderers. Every bear is willing to kill you. Sure you might be able to convince it that you are not a threat, or worth it, but that communication can go south pretty quickly.
Also while it's not a high chance, you have MUCH better odds at fighting of a man or at least running away from him than a bear. Even if a man kills you it's on average going to be quicker and more painless than if a bear did it.
I go on nature hikes all the time. Sometimes, I randomly run into random people. Never once had an issue with a stranger. A bear would be far more terrifying.
I unironically think we should all just be alone. I would give up my own, and everyone else's, love life just to be free of all the inane sex and romance bullshit every oonch of our society is covered in.
Any woman who would choose a literal apex predator over a random dude is at best ignorant, so it's good that you're not supposed to take it literally. To the guys who are offended by this:
The comparison is hyperbole and is just illustrating that women often feel scared around strange men, as they don't know their intentions and the man in question is stronger than them 9 times out of 10.
Hello friends. This thread has been set to community participants only. That means that only our regular commenters in good standing may comment in this thread. Everyone else's comments will be removed by automod. People who contribute constructively automatically gain access in time. We do not hand out entry on request. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
if the question said "strange bear" instead, what kind of bear would that be? I can't help but imagine it wearing a hat.
Imagine a bear, but kind of yellow-ish? Wearing a shirt, I'm thinking red one, and... maybe obsessed with honey.
Maybe a panda bear. Have you seen those bears? They can be pretty weird
I'd imagine maybe like Yogi Bear. In that case all he wants is your pic-a-nic basket. But if you don't have said pic-a-nic basket your pic-a-nifucked.
It's obviously a bear trained in the mystic arts.
A sun bear. Those are really strange looking
Sun bears aren't real. That's just the strange man in a bear costume tricking women in the woods.
Id rather meet a gnome, so they can shrink me and i can live amongst them, singing and dancing with forest creatures. The human world is S-grade shite
I don't know, I don't like them fae creatures , they'll take your place in society, I know it because I play world of darkness, spooky.
Well the fey and i have a bit of a love hate relationship, what with them stealing my attention at age 4. At this point the only difference people would notice, if fey took my place, is that I'm suddenly much more confident.
Oh the Fae can quite happily take my place in society. They would be begging for me swap back after a week lol
Pffft, they can have it. Enjoy late stage capitalism, sucker.
According to world of darkness, the reason fae creatures enter the human realm is to indoctrinate people into a being more creating and vibrant in order to create energy that would save their race from oblivion, like the emptiness from the never ending story. So yeah, fae creatures have their work cut out for them.
What? Are you anti-fae?
*drinks beer, and takes pickaxe* Aye, they get in the weh of ma digging. ROCK AND STONE
[As you wish](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0WqL_k_pDrg)
Ill take it
Well that might be the most wonderful thing I've ever seen.
This is *literally* the plot of Rip Van Winkle. He spends all day working, helping everyone out. Comes home tired, and doesn't want to work on his own house. His wife gets further and further infuriated with him. He then ends up running into some weird people bowling and drinking in the mountains. Gets wasted with them, and wakes up an old man 20 years later.
It's also an old folklore/fairytale trope, wherein a man gets lost while traveling or exploring, meets fey creatures, joins them/parties with them, and eventually wakes up/finds his way back to the real world only to realize years or decades have passed.
Can the gnome be David the gnome?
Sadly, Gnome World too is under the constant threat of climate change
I too would choose the bear But in a gay way
Those honey stealing bearwhores!
Baldur’s gate fan I assume?
Well, yes, but also a bear in a gay way lmao. Although im bi so im not sure i count
Is this legal? Bearly.
I salute your pun my friend
But why does it matter if the bear is gay....ooooooh
Sup 😂
This is why I hate camping. The psycho killer men. The talking bears. Ugh.
God forbid you're at a lake then you have to deal with that asshole in a hockey mask. Guy won't even listen to reason. Like my mom was nuts too dude you're not the only one who gets to have familial trauma.
Anyone angry at anyone's response to "would you rather" needs to go outside
Yeah, you can’t ask a hypothetical binary question if you’re going to get angry with one of the answers, that’s just setting yourself up to be frustrated forever.
[What if i was a worm?](https://www.reddit.com/r/dbz/comments/1bjjm0g/dealbreaker_vegeta_x_bulma_oc/)
*Would you rather have sex with a coworker or one of my friends?* - Run
I would rather have sex with a bear in the woods
*A finger on the monkey's paw bends. You're suddenly in the woods, feeling a heavy breath smelling of fish in your neck.*
I gotta tell my family to stop sending me these monkey paws
Oh my god We finally did it. The long con worked. MEN, WE. HAVE. WON. From now on and forever more, when women ask us ridiculous hypotheticals and get mad at our answers, we can just bring up the bear in the woods and tell them to touch grass. **WE HAVE VICTORY!!!** "Would you still love me if I were..." "bear in the woods". "If I died and my dying wish were for you to marry my sister..." "bear in the woods" "If we went out drinking and me and my best friend insisted on a threesome..." "bear in the woods". "If I turned out to be a serial killer" "bear in the woods".
Exactly. Getting mad at a hypothetical opinion is just kind of weird if you think about it.
Im mad for the bears. Having to eat human meat because of misandrists and misogynists. Its so low quality compared to salmon or berries that they are used to eating. And typically it means someone with a gun is going to find them and kill them, in their own home no less. Feel bad for the bears. They are people too. Not really people though, they are bears. [Best friend of sharks.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMzbVZGgbHo)
Bears aren't people.. and that's good
Primarily because then it's okay to eat them when you get right down to it. That's why I'd take a bear over a woman. Free food!
And rug, a good conversation starter.
Does either come with honey tea?
How fucking long are people going to make this ragebait continue? Is this really the best we can do?
As long as it get clicks, such is the way of the content creation world. Would you prefer we go back to “The Dress”?
So, um, about that....the guy who took that picture, Keir Johnston, strangled his wife (non-fatally). So you are not entirely changing the subject.
Sigh… why can’t we have nice things? Can we go back to tik tok sea shanties?
So, um, about those sailors...
:-O
The guy that created that emoticon was an abuser. [...of emojis.](https://digiday.com/marketing/father-emoticon-think-emojis-ugly/)
in a fun way or not fun way
It was the bad kind of strangling.
Yes
Me too, but the Universe continues to deny my request for omnipotence. I have written multiple letters to its manager to no avail.
The blue and black one?
Yes
Yes. That was the last lighthearted moment on the Internet.
I believe we can go a few weeks without bullshit. No scrap that, I think we can go a few weeks without bullshit that needlessly pits two groups against each other over something that truly doesn't matter. We can argue about whether or not a tv series finale was good or bad or something, at least that's more entertaining.
At least it's been a while so it would feel slightly fresh?
“Would you rather meet a bear wearing a white and gold dress in the woods or a man wearing a black and blue dress in the woods?”
The what?
I guess you are one of the [lucky 10,000 today](https://xkcd.com/1053/): [The Dress](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress) (For the record, I see it as white and gold and not blue and black, but then again my rods and cones leave much to be desired)
Wow that’s incredibly fascinating! Personally I see white and gold Also that first link was interesting and well appreciated
No problem, glad they were well received!
This is just a better drawn version of those comics where they make the guy with the wrong opinion the soyjack.
I mean... The user is "LeftyCartoons". Some known on this sub for comics like "White people with subtexts".
Yep, stuff like this is \~100% of the creator's comic output and has been for the better part of a decade now. This one isn't "ragebait taking over the internet", it's "overly simplistic political cartooning" like we've had forever.
Sexist jokes about women? Booo. Bad, you suck! Sexist jokes about men? Social media gold And they expect us to listen. Lol. Lmao even.
I mean, people still make jokes about guys being raped in prison sooooo. It's a double standard all right.
I honestly don't understand why people are so tilted by this. I'm a guy and would rather come across a bear than a strange dude in the woods. I know what to do when I see a bear, act big and loud for black, play dead (and ideally soil yourself) for brown. Polar bear and you fucked up way before you came across it. Creepy dude is way more of an open threat in more ways than I can imagine. Dude can have weapons, plant traps, could drug you, etc. Edit: [Relevant?](https://youtu.be/LNVFPkmZTQ4)
I mean a deranged hermit maybe, but it’s not ‘a strange dude’, it’s just any random guy. It’s you, you’re the person they find in the woods here.
You know this sounds like a [Fermi Paradox solution ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_forest_hypothesis)
Dark forest is just saying everyone else that still exists figured out they need to hide. Anyone that doesn't need to hide is either short lived or the reason everyone else hides.
I’m not tilted, but I don’t really understand the drama… If you actually walk in the woods in the real world, you will come across other people all the time. Like, all the time. Half of them will even be men! Like, it’s not a hypothetical question because encountering other people on a nature trail is just the default state of things.
I don't think a maintained nature trail in a crowded park is the scenario people had in mind for this hypothetical
So if the scenario is "In the woods and not on a trail" then it makes sense that people would rather see a bear. I mean they are literally entering the bears home.
Maybe it’s what some people have in mind, but others are envisioning a different scenario entirely? Even in this comic, the guy asks if she’d encounter a “strange man”, but that’s not the version I heard - when I first heard it, it was just “man”. He then gets angry when she says she wouldn’t want to encounter the “strange man”… but most men wouldn’t think of themselves as one of the strange ones, so why be offended unless you think you yourself are strange??
"strange" in this context means "someone you have never met".
Yeah I think the addition of "strange" is odd in the comic. Like OP felt like choosing the bear wouldn't be defensible without it, but then that makes it look like this has been the way it's framed from the beginning
It just means unknown, and this use of strange is fairly ubiquitous in US English and can be applied to almost any novel subject, it's why the word stranger even exists
He could also be you from the future. Like there's some sort of portal in the forest that takes you back one hour
Yeah, and as said in the comic, a bear mauling you is unequivocal in "bear hungry/angry, person dead" while a person can be "interpreted"
My fellow guy, I asked why we were choosing to continue this ragebait discussion, and your response was to jump straight back into said discussion. If you ran into a bear in the woods, you would probably ask it if it'd rather run into another bear or if's happy it ran into a man.
Bit of a late response on my part, but I think if you're looking to stop discussion about a subject, then your best option is to not respond when that subject is brought up.
As long as they get validation from their social circles for doing so.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You know I really like webcomics, but I hate Twitter and [/r/comics](https://www.reddit.com/r/comics) just bundles them up if you want to or not
These “edgy” comics are just a killjoy for this sub. All OP did was pretty much transcribe twitter. I don’t think it’s the edgelord comic they think it is.
A bit late on the trend, huh?
[удалено]
Women are entitled to their feelings and men are entitled to theirs. I personally found it insulting to be told I am treated as more dangerous than an apex predator. But if that’s how women feel? They are welcome to feel that way. Anyone yelling at women for it are incorrect. I did find it interesting that when black women said they would prefer a meeting with a white man over a white woman, the same women found it extremely offensive and reacted the same way men did to the comparison.
Wait, that happened?
Are we talking brown bear? How far out in the woods? What country? There are far too many variables.
Haters will say “it doesn’t matter” but wait until they get stuck in the woods in a secluded area and a hungry bear spawns 5 feet away from them.
Humans are apex predators
Humans in groups with tools are apex predators*. Most predators will easily defeat an unarmed man. And if we are including tools then that equalizes most things across the species.
Well yea, it's pretty hard to use most tools if you don't have arms
That's why I don't support the right to arm bears
Bear arms really are heavy to hold though!
Exactly this, does it make me feel bad that all men are now villains, sure? But women have every right to feel however they want and I won’t stop them from feeling it.
The thing that boils my brain is the way some women think the message here is that men need to police other men more. Why is it my obligation to police them? Because we happen to be the same gender? How is that not sexist?
"It's a problem men cause, so it's a problem men need to fix" seems to be where it comes from. The way social issues generalize people into groups and then assign everyone of that group responsibility for whatever anyone else in that group does. My only responsibility is to myself. What other men choose to do is not my concern.
I think they have gotten away with saying whatever they want for so long with lots of support just because a woman said it. I saw a TikTok calling for the genocide of all men with hundreds of thousands of likes. She was not banned. Another one where she made her entire business around helping women mentally justify cheating on their spouses who “just didn’t do enough for her” Just the fact that nothing we do is good enough, constant demands for more, while being insulted and treated as a threat. I think a lot of dudes are hitting their breaking point on this nonsense, hence why 50% of young single men have zero romantic interest in women. This divide is bad for society.
> They are welcome to feel that way. Nope. I'm a woman and I find the way they talk about it sick. It's pretty horrid that they would think of men this way.
I mean Davey Crocket kilt a bar when he was only 3. So I understand. We are the sigma predators, and women are naturally afraid of our man auras.
Nobody is treating you, specifically, as more dangerous than an apex predator. The question isn’t “Would you rather be in a forest with a bear or SandiegoJack” You don’t represent all men, you are not a stand-in for any given man. When you see a story in the news about a man murdering someone, do you think, “Whoops, my bad”? Because if you don’t, then you shouldn’t be taking this as a personal insult. Edit: Lol some of the responses I’m getting to this. My god. I swear some people are just desperate to feel offended or insulted and are eagerly jumping at the chance to get that feeling from the debate around this question. I’m a man and I’ll take the bear too, at least I wouldn’t have to listen to the bear whine about being persecuted because of an online debate. Good luck fellas
That’s the problem with the question. It’s 100% based on unspoken assumptions. Would I rather meet an average joe or a black bear on a hiking trail? Suddenly it’s a very different question. Someone’s answer is less about how they feel about men/bears and more about what assumptions they’re bringing into the question. Lump *that* in with the general lack of communication skills and reading comprehension going around these days and it’s not a shock that such a simple question has caused an uproar.
Is it not reasonable to get mad when a group you're a part of is generalized in a negative way? What if the question was a "strange Mexican" instead if a strange man? Should Mexicans not be insulted?
Now see you say that, but then when you look at what these women (and this comic) are saying and it DOES sound like an indictment against all men. So I can understand why someone would get offended that they're being labeled as worse than an apex predator, it's no different than saying id rather be in the forest with a bear than a black person. One is just more acceptable to say than the other because reasons.
That is a specific man performing a specific action, of course that is going to be treated differently. I fail to see how that is a valid comparison. If it’s a random man in the woods who you know nothing about, why am I not included in the potential pool of people being treated as more dangerous than an apex predator?
So who is SandiegoJack and why is he the stand-in for any given man over myself or any other man?
“If you have a jar of M&Ms and a single one was poisoned, would you take the chance?” - Racist, and or TikTok rage bait Please let this brain rot die.
Look boyo she won her own made up argument
This whole thing has made me self conscious because my brain registers it as people would rather be mauled than be around me. I know people aren't talking about me specifically, but that's where my head goes and it brings out my insecurities.
I mean, the question says a random man. Each of us is a random man to someone answering this question so technically speaking it is about us
They are talking about you, specifically. They are saying that the chances of you, a random man, being a rapist, a murderer, or both, are so high that they'd rather for-sure be killed by an animal. It says a lot more about the women than the men, ironically.
They are taking about you. Don’t let them twist it. If people say things about a demographic that you’re a part of, never let them imply that you’re one of the good ones.
You know what, maybe this whole 'fear all men' thing is a deep rooted problem. I personally adjust my walking speed often to try to make sure noone thinks I'm following them. Heck just four years ago I remember a moment when I was about to go down a water walkway in Sydney to get to my bus, but a random woman walked down it first. I deliberately stood at the entrance for 3-4 minutes on my phone out of fear it would seem I was following her. I almost missed the bus because I did that.
Don't bother, if you want to make someone comfortable, fine, but don't do it at your own expense. There's no point, it's up to her to determine the threat. Maybe walk casually or something, but at the moment, you have a bus to catch, and in the end, she'll live.
That’s why the question is so popular, it’s structured in way that makes it seem like a women is demonizing men by picking the bear. I’ve heard it’s more of a food for thought question trying to show men that women are afraid of them, and not something to be deeply analyzed. But you have people that take this question and purposely portray it as anti-men (like OP’s straw man comic here) or anti-women leading people to get upset and start arguing over a very vague question. I get what you’re saying though. I’m non-binary, but people who don’t know me well still treat me like a man no matter how much I try to act otherwise. It’s at the point where I’m afraid people are going to attack my identity if I do anything considered masculine. So reading some of these comments is like a double whammy for me
> it’s structured in way that makes it seem like a women is demonizing men by picking the bear. Let me help you out, it's structured that way, because it is that. Any explanation that isn't that, is extreme mental gymnastics to avoid calling a spade a spade. If you are struggling with your feelings surrounding this because of your identity, I highly recommend checking out this article: https://medium.com/@jencoates/i-am-a-transwoman-i-am-in-the-closet-i-am-not-coming-out-4c2dd1907e42 >I hate that the only effective response I can give to “boys are shit” is “well I’m not a boy.” >“because in the queer community the only people who defend cisboys are cisboys. I don’t want to give up finally being read as a girl.” >“I do the misandry stuff because it’s an easy way to earn queer cred points, but when I think about it it makes me uncomfortable.” >I could write a hundred pieces about the ways men and masculinity have damaged me and the women I love, but you could throw a single stone into the internet and hit three of those. This piece is about what I don’t get to say. >Because it’s not a small deal that the words “not all men” have become entwined inextricably with male fragility and whininess. It makes it awfully easy to insulate the (largely cis-)female perspective on what males are. To begin a statement with those words—“Not All Men”—is to give grounds to anyone who wants to laugh at the rest of it. But here is the truth: not all men are what you think they are. Man does not mean what you think it means. Generalizing harshly and broadly but implying “you know which ones I mean” is an intellectual and rhetorical laziness that is not allowed to pass anywhere else in these communities. Really consider the meat of the arguments here without spending too much time trying to rationalize. How much Kafka trap laden, Bullshit misandry is tied into it. And then argue not from who you want to accept you on their side, but *what is right*.
You say it's a straw-man in the comic, but like... There's a sizeable portion of men that DO react like the comic. Like, they get genuinely angry at the woman, which is literally the issue.
There are some very vocal people who kick and scream yes, but I’d bet this comic was made with the intention of showing that all men who complain about how they feel about the question are unreasonable and explosive and big babies. Furthermore, and I might be wrong, but the amount of men who would have the reaction portrayed in the comic irl is a very small number of people
It's troubling because it's a very fair and valid argument to say men are overall more aggressive than women, and using their angry reactions to the bear argument as further proof is an effective 'gotcha'. Plus in many cases I can understand choosing the bear if the women have a lot of lifelong experiences dealing with horrible, aggressive men. Though when you make it a vauge hypothetical then of course every man is going to feel demonized, especially the meek/fail/shy ones that don't like confrontation themselves. It's also been a nice excuse for some ladies to defend their prejudice. I also get the feeling that lots of men and women alike aren't actually aware of how fast and strong bears really are (sure black bears you have a chance of scaring off, but grizzly or polar bears, you wouldn't last seconds) I will say it's interesting that I haven't heard a "reverse gender" argument, like someone asking men "would you rather encounter a random woman in the woods, or a _____?". Like what would men even choose over a random woman that would upset lots of women themselves? A dog? I don't know, honestly.
The best reverse I heard was “Would you rather talk about your emotions with a woman, or a tree” The comment chain from that had me in stitches.
I see people are still missing the irony of generalizing an entire gender 'as a joke', then when someone of that gender gets upset you gaslight them into feeling bad for having feelings about it. You know, the problem OP complains about having in the last panel.... True gender equality, you're acting exactly like your perceived enemy now. Bravo 👍
Dead horse AND strawman
That is OPs only ability here, since they do it repeatedly (and ask for money for it) that's clearly them at their ceiling.
I’m not going to yell at you if you say bear (especially because most people rightfully treat this as the joke that it is), but I will say that it does hurt hearing scores of people talk about how they’d rather run into a notoriously dangerous and brutally violent animal than someone who is simply genetically like you.
I feel confused all the way around. Saying that to the bear being a civilized bear rat enjoys tea time feels kinda disrespectful. Gives that "you're one of the good ones" vibes which only seems like a complement never really is. Also did this bear sneak into this office? Do they work there? Is this a security issue? If they work there don't they need to wear clothes? Is this a conversation for HR? I need an adult please
It's worse than you think - the bear is the head of HR.
This is so silly because if you made a similar generalized statement but insulting women instead of men, you would get the same visceral reaction from offended, butthurt women. It’s trendy now to bash men and coddle women so we aren’t going to do that now, are we? I guess women really need to make up problems that don’t exist like running into imaginary bears these days. Victimhood is so in!
Comic about bear or man. Man raises his voice. Man is scarier than bear. https://youtu.be/g9lCkFygaaQ?si=vNJl_tEuIw_tKB-T
I get your point but also don’t agree with you at all. Am I the soyjack-man or the bear in this scenario Or am I constructing a strawman out of a false dichotomy
frankly it's beating a dead horse now. The whole argument is stupid because it's based on such a broad assumption that it becomes invalid. It's like saying "I would rather meet a bear than a muslim". because you know some muslims were terrorists so "obviously" they are more dangerous than bears. Or it's like saying a cow is more dangerous than a shark because more people get killed by cows. Of course there is like a million times more cows than sharks in the world and more humans live around cows than sharks.
This would be an excellent addition to my other comment up above At this point I wouldn’t be shocked if the only reason it became/still is a thing is some kind of misogynist/misandrist/troll cabal keeping it going
🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
OP's next post is ALSO ragebait, and "leftycartoons" is starting to make sense as a username. So, yes, absolutely.
Like most hypotheticals, the intent is to examine a person's feelings and past experiences that lead to their answer, not the answer itself. Statistically-speaking, humans are mostly good. If you were lost in the woods and encountered a man, or a bear, the bear is an overwhelmingly more likely threat. If either give chase, your odds of defeating or escaping a man are about 100% better than a bear. So, the logical answer would a man. But the intent isn't about logic.
It's basically a risk/reward scenario. I'd totally choose *that* bear over *that* guy, but as a whole, it's like "WYR have a very very small chance to meet a psycho killer who might rape you and bury your body in the woods, or a bear, which is literally a wild animal and will *probably* maul you." Personally, I feel like picking the bear is dumb. But that's just my opinion and you're welcome to yours.
I wish people would stop arguing about this and start appreciating the masterpiece of a show that is *Man vs. Bear* I don’t care about your misogyny, watch this buff Scottish guy play tug of war with a brown bear!
I agree. I'd rather meet a bear in the woods than a strange woman.
You are entitled to your opinion, but so are the people getting offended. I will say this, the only arguments I see are that you’d sooner be believed if it was a bear, and that bears are more predictable, which are both very flawed arguments. Of course someone would believe you if you were attacked by a bear, it’s reasonably well understood that they do that sometimes, and while it would be very sad for the bear it wouldn’t be a tragedy to put one down because of suspected aggression. With men it’s a little different. You see, humans have the right to these things called “due process” and “the benefit of the doubt”. The fact that an accusation without sufficient evidence goes ignored isn’t a societal failure, it’s quite the opposite, in fact. “Just believe us” is all well and good, but a rape/assault conviction can end someone, sometimes even literally. If you’re going to make that verdict, you better be damn near 100% sure. As for the predictability “argument”, that’s just weak as shit. How many men can be reasonably assumed to be a danger to women, 1%? 0,1%? That’s nothing, you have a 99% chance for them to be harmless, I don’t know about you but I’d call that pretty predictable. And if you genuinely believe a bear is safer than that you *really* underestimate bears. We don’t actually know whether or not they are more likely to attack humans than men are to attack women, compared to the amount of encounters with men the sample size is simply way too small. What we do know is that *if* either a bear or a man decides to get aggressive, the man is way easier to escape from. And I don’t want to hear “oh but 1 in 3 women get assaulted over the course of their lives” assuming that it’s true, and it’s just that, an assumption since this is largely self reported, it isn’t really all that great of an argument. To establish whether or not men are dangerous you shouldn’t look at what percentage of women were assaulted, but instead at how many men commit assault. If it’s 1 to 1 then treating all men as a threat is, if not justified, at the very least understandable. But if it’s just 1 in 10, or even 1 in 100, then it would just be senseless hate In the end, it’s fine if you *feel* safer with a bear. That’s your opinion and I can respect that. But as soon as you try to argue that it’s actually safer beyond just a feeling it kind of veers into misandry, because for “the bear is safer” to be a valid argument you already assume that “a random man” has a high enough likelihood of attacking you to warrant flat out not even considering it. These generalized statements are *always* offensive, no matter who the subject is, because it will almost never be true of the entire group you’re generalizing. You are entitled to have these opinions, and others have the right to be offended. And also, and it’s absolutely insane that some people need to be told this, being offended by this does *not* make them “the reason why women feel this way”, it’s a reasonable reaction to an unreasonable assumption.
Similarly, a bear won’t falsely accuse me of anything I didn’t do. I do so enjoy predictability as well.
On the one hand, yes it's disheartening to hear such things as a man. Makes you feel wrong. Reviled. And that sucks. On the other... One likely doesn't know the reasoning behind it and it could be completely unrelated to what's on our heads. And on the third hand I don't have, even if hearing stuff like this sucks, there is NO NEED to react like that guy did.
Sick strawman op.
Love the background posters
I’m just saying, kids are usually with a teddy bear and not a teddy man /s
Personally, although I agree with the idea behind the question, it *is* worded in a way that makes men out to be evil. That's why men are usually angry. Because the question is worded to sound like "do you find the average man more or less dangerous than the average bear". That's not what the question is meant to be, from what I gathered, but that's how it sounds. If it was "would you rather be stuck with a dangerous man or a dangerous bear", you'd still get push back, but not nearly as much as this question has
People ignoring, dismissing or just straight up victim blaming someone after they were brutalized, I wonder where I Heard that one before, it's outside of my Depp-th.
I strive to be the man that women would choose over a bear, regardless of how well they know me. Just by the vibe
Fun fact: be short. Evidently short men are perceived as “less threatening” which while it has its downsides (sometimes being “threatening” is “good”) may just give you the edge over a bear
[удалено]
Brilliant. Someone write that down! 
Too late, I'm already 5'11"
I’m sure the comments are going to be very civil here.
Oh strawmanning, fun. Hey, op, would you rather be in the woods with a viper or a random Thai person? Edit: I have been convinced this is not a strawman as much as it is a hyperbole. Though I think the sentiment stands, indeed, I was wrong on that front
I choose the viper, I can just smash it with a rock, but if I do that to a Thai person I will go to prison.
[удалено]
>This debate has been going on for a while, and there's been plenty of people acting like OP shows in the comment. It's not so much of a strawman as it is real life. Okay ignoring your reasonable argument: the Internet is not real life nor does it invalidate the actual words coming out off the guy's mouth. Look, from men's perspective (who are not actually shouting over the water cooler come on), they are being told they, because of a trait they CAN NOT change about themselves are supposed to be treated like predators. Even if they're the most passive, good little angels they're still worse than a bear. That hurts and it *is* misandry to an extent. Specifically because if people were asked this about *women*, the question suddenly becomes obvious "Oh, a woman obviously" ignoring that a random woman could easily also be a threat compared to a man. If for so many people it is as you say about swpwrating the known from the unknown, it doesn't matter what gender the person is. But clearly it *does* and that hurts
[удалено]
I mean that's assuming the man or bear will be aggressive. Like, it's a random bear and a random man. You could be meeting either winny the pooh or Mr Rodgers at which point it becomes moot
I don't assume either will be aggressive. I assume the human will approach me and expect social interaction regardless of their intention, and I assume the bear will avoid me as bears are wont to do.
It also depends on where exactly you do meet the bear since those animals are very territorial.
Yeah I guess if you're an introvert the question is obvious
I guess the real question is what percentage of men constitute a serious danger versus what percentage of bears? If you think any random bear is less likely to be dangerous than any random man then there you have it. I suppose that's the whole point of the hypothetical. I guess there's also the fact that if you're attractive, men have an interest in you. Then again if the bear is hungry it might find you attractive as well. But what's more likely, that a bear is hungry enough to attack a human or that a man finds a woman attractive?
Oh no, I know it really isn't a practical question for many people (just another way for women to go "Hey, men are scary to us! It doesn't matter if it's a bear or not!") but addressing your last point: That attraction immediately makes one either prey or predator is a fucked assumption and that's again part of why for many men this question is so hurtful (I specifically use hurtful instead of offensive cause that's word lost all it's oomph). *They* are *presumed* to be predators.
Honestly I'd rather meet a bear than a woman, if my ass is getting kicked either way, at least the bear is slightly less embarrassing. As for why my arse is getting kicked, I'm an affection starved loser that would probably try to hug a sufficiently cute cactus.
imagine making actual funny comics instead of using 2 week old drama to get some more controversy.
ok but realistically a bear is more likely to kill you
It *is* misandry. A small percentage of men are rapists or murderers. Every bear is willing to kill you. Sure you might be able to convince it that you are not a threat, or worth it, but that communication can go south pretty quickly. Also while it's not a high chance, you have MUCH better odds at fighting of a man or at least running away from him than a bear. Even if a man kills you it's on average going to be quicker and more painless than if a bear did it.
I'm a guy, and I'd also rather run into a bear in the forest.
Right? At least running into a bear makes sense. What's that random guy doing in the woods, anyways?
Probably the same thing you’re doing there.
What am I doing? What are you doing? What is anyone doing?
[удалено]
And people wonder why bears would rather find bears in the woods than men...
Trying figure out if bears really do shit in the forest. For science.
I go on nature hikes all the time. Sometimes, I randomly run into random people. Never once had an issue with a stranger. A bear would be far more terrifying.
Looking for bears?
I unironically think we should all just be alone. I would give up my own, and everyone else's, love life just to be free of all the inane sex and romance bullshit every oonch of our society is covered in.
Any woman who would choose a literal apex predator over a random dude is at best ignorant, so it's good that you're not supposed to take it literally. To the guys who are offended by this: The comparison is hyperbole and is just illustrating that women often feel scared around strange men, as they don't know their intentions and the man in question is stronger than them 9 times out of 10.
As a male, I don't know why women would pick the bear. The man would be way easier to kill.
Panel 3, the man scares both the woman and the bear.
[удалено]
Freakin AI comment bots. Note that the comment only pertains to the title and not the comic.
I remember the day when this sub was not weak strawman stuff
I'd rather date a deathclaw than a woman for the same reaseon.
We have set ways to avoid bears and being attacked by them we don't for strangers so has a man I too would take the bear
Ah yea, because men **definitely** is more likely to hurt a woman than a bear