According to science, logical and rational thinking, meeting a random man in the Woods is much better option than meeting a random bear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aOOuMQkIzU
The thing these arguments never take into account is a fate worse than death.
That's the point you're missing.
Think about why someone would prefer the much more likely bear mauling to the much less likely worst case scenario with a man. If you can wrap your head around that, then consider why these women had that answer ready to go with very little thought. Considerations of a fate worse than death is something that women live with from the age where they first notice grown men noticing them. That averages 11 or 12 years old by the way. Maybe younger if their parents were a little more candid with them than the generic "stranger danger."
I knew I had to have the talk about men when my girls turned nine. They were playing basketball and one of the dads made a comment about a girl and said “she is going to grow up and look like Mia Kalif (I don’t know how to spell her name, the porn star) and be a hot piece of ass.”
Oh, yeah…you mean that nine year old? The fuck is wrong with you.
Think about why someone would prefer the much more likely bear mauling to the much less likely worst case scenario with a man.
the only reason i can think why someone would take that decision, is that they have no apriori knowledge of the situation, and simply assume something they have no knowledge about is going to be easier than that that they do have knowledge about. (which is often naive)
Or, and this is my theory, this is actually one big metaphor about the problems modern society faces, and it's not actually based on rational thought or decision making, and it's supposed to be, because the point is to point out the problem as i already stated. The question that leaves is why nobody seems to be talking about the fundamental underlying problem, and instead seems to be talking about bears.
I get it, there's a problem with this shit in society, why aren't we talking about it? Like if you want to make change happen, to improve society, we need to sit down and have a two sided discussion, instead of saying that you would prefer to be eaten by a bear, than be around a man "because a thing could potentially happen" this accomplishes almost nothing unfortunately.
Anyway, that's my current theory, maybe i'm wrong as fuck, idk, i'm welcome to any ideas, i don't understand why people keep talking about this the way that they are so i could use some background info (and don't tell me that it's because men sometimes rape women, and women don't like being around men as a result, i understand what the thought experiment is for, you don't need to explain that part to me, unless i'm wrong about it and misunderstand it lol.)
According to science, logical and rational thinking, meeting a random man in the Woods is much better option than meeting a random bear. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aOOuMQkIzU
The thing these arguments never take into account is a fate worse than death.
That's the point you're missing.
Think about why someone would prefer the much more likely bear mauling to the much less likely worst case scenario with a man. If you can wrap your head around that, then consider why these women had that answer ready to go with very little thought. Considerations of a fate worse than death is something that women live with from the age where they first notice grown men noticing them. That averages 11 or 12 years old by the way. Maybe younger if their parents were a little more candid with them than the generic "stranger danger."
I knew I had to have the talk about men when my girls turned nine. They were playing basketball and one of the dads made a comment about a girl and said “she is going to grow up and look like Mia Kalif (I don’t know how to spell her name, the porn star) and be a hot piece of ass.”
Oh, yeah…you mean that nine year old? The fuck is wrong with you.
the only reason i can think why someone would take that decision, is that they have no apriori knowledge of the situation, and simply assume something they have no knowledge about is going to be easier than that that they do have knowledge about. (which is often naive)
Or, and this is my theory, this is actually one big metaphor about the problems modern society faces, and it's not actually based on rational thought or decision making, and it's supposed to be, because the point is to point out the problem as i already stated. The question that leaves is why nobody seems to be talking about the fundamental underlying problem, and instead seems to be talking about bears.
I get it, there's a problem with this shit in society, why aren't we talking about it? Like if you want to make change happen, to improve society, we need to sit down and have a two sided discussion, instead of saying that you would prefer to be eaten by a bear, than be around a man "because a thing could potentially happen" this accomplishes almost nothing unfortunately.
Anyway, that's my current theory, maybe i'm wrong as fuck, idk, i'm welcome to any ideas, i don't understand why people keep talking about this the way that they are so i could use some background info (and don't tell me that it's because men sometimes rape women, and women don't like being around men as a result, i understand what the thought experiment is for, you don't need to explain that part to me, unless i'm wrong about it and misunderstand it lol.)
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=-aOOuMQkIzU
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.