Man vs Bear Debate: The Dumbest Feminist Argument Yet?
When it comes to identifiable differences in female vs male psychology as well as differences in brain biology, as a general rule and as most studies show women focus far more on feelings than men do. Specifically, women tend to be more sensitive to negative emotions and negative imagery. Obviously, men and women are not the same, never have been the same and never will be the same, and this includes how they process information and come to conclusions.
This is the reason why many of women's perceptions on life tend to bewilder men; most women operate from a place of emotion and assumption (which they call "intuition") and come to conclusions based on feelings rather than facts. Intuition can be a powerful tool for identifying threats before they occur, and when women get it right they might appear to be clairvoyant. However, when they get it wrong they get it really wrong and the result is foolishness and disaster.
How one feels is not necessarily what is true.
Enter feminism, a movement which claims to be fighting for women's "equality" but is actually fighting for women's privilege. Legal equality for the sexes was achieved long ago and one would think that feminism would have faded away with its mission accomplished. This has not been the case. Instead, feminists move the goalposts and the notion of equality has given way to desires for power. But unlike most political movements feminism does not chase power by applying direct force (in most cases). Rather, feminists chase power by magnifying and exaggerating their own weaknesses and victimhood.
In other words, they gain power by demanding reparations for perceived injustices. The more they feel oppressed or afraid or abused the more power society supposedly owes them. Feminism exploits the natural tendency of women to hyperfocus on negative emotions and promotes feelings over logic. If women feel like victims, that means they are victims.
This is where the "Man vs. Bear" narrative comes from. A bizarre thought experiment in which random women are asked if they were lost in the woods, would they rather run into a man or a bear? The question has created considerable controversy across social media, with a majority of women apparently choosing a bear over a man.
On the surface we can dismiss the thought experiment with the simple reality that women encounter men daily while most have never dealt with or seen a real bear in the wild in their entire lives. If they did run into a bear all of them would be screaming for help from the nearest man available to protect them.
It's perhaps the dumbest feminist mind-game so far in this respect. Life is not a Disney movie with friendly talking animals and there's a reason why men make up the vast majority of solo hunters - Female hunters don't want to go into the woods by themselves because they know predators like bears represent great potential injury or death.
To be fair, plenty of women have laughed off the question as ridiculous and pointed out the reality that with a man there's a good chance they will be helped out of the woods. With a bear there's no chance. But this hasn't stopped feminists from pretending as if the pro-bear response represents some kind of revelation about men and masculinity.
The issue has also revealed once again that math is the kryptonite of woke activists and critical thinking is their enemy.
Citing the predominance of men in crime stats, feminists argue that it's far more likely for a man to harm a woman than a bear to harm a woman. In fact, bear encounters are far more rare than encounters with men, and the percentage of men that commit violent crimes is tiny compared to the total male population in western countries.
By feminist logic, men are also actually safer with bears than with women. In 2021, 1,078 men were killed by women in the U.S. There have only been 180 fatal human/bear conflicts in North America since 1784. Again, this is about proximity.
In 2019, there were 283,467 violent crimes committed by men in the US, out of 161 million men. That's around 0.1% of the male population. The chances of a woman running into a violent man in the woods in this fantasy scenario is negligible. Feelings are being elevated over facts.
Most feminist narratives lean heavily on the fear dynamic. If women feel afraid of men then men and society must take them seriously and assuage those fears; the fears fabricated in women's minds are suddenly everyone's problem. In the past society used to laugh off female melodrama as an unfortunate bi-product of their nature; how can society fix a problem that doesn't exist in the tangible world? But as the male commentator in the first video argues, it doesn't matter if women are actually in danger from men, it only matters that they believe they are in danger.
But who created that fear in women? Was it men? Or, was it feminist propaganda? The numbers suggest feminism has rotted women's minds with fear.