Italian writer against women choosing the bear: hating men has become fashionable

[Estro Felino]

I wouldn't want to meet her in the woods.
However, I wouldn't make her deeds writ
large, applying them to all women.

What I mean is that murders have a motive.
Murderers don't kill random people.
Whether they are men or women.

Sexualizing murders is what feminism does.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I mean is that murders have a motive.
Murderers don't kill random people.
Whether they are men or women.

Sexualizing murders is what feminism does.

That seems an overly broad generalization.

 

[Viker]

I have a silly question: WTF is so great about Brad Pitt?

Motorcycles?

 

[Viker]

What I mean is that murders have a motive.
Murderers don't kill random people.
Whether they are men or women.

Sexualizing murders is what feminism does.

Huh?

 

[crossfire]

Statistically a random man can be dangerous, but not as dangerous as a random bear.
Many says: it depends on the man, but not "it depends on the kind of bear".
Last year a man was mauled to death in the Alps. By a normal European bear. A female with her cubs.
Imagine what a Grizzly bear in Alaska would do.

A dangerous man can hit on you, but hitting on someone is not the same as mauling them to death.

I can promise you that I have listened to a woman answering: "I'd rather be mauled to death by a bear than meeting a man all alone in the wood".

It's not due to misandry. It is due to the fact that a woman would be believed if she said was attacked by a bear, but would be disbelieved if she said she was attacked by a man.

 

[Stevicus]

It's not due to misandry. It is due to the fact that a woman would be believed if she said was attacked by a bear, but would be disbelieved if she said she was attacked by a man.

That's because a man is considered innocent until proven guilty. A bear is not. A bear deemed a threat to humans would probably be executed without trial (even if it didn't kill anyone).

 

[lewisnotmiller]

We find men are all different, so this new ideology that tends to portray all men as potential rapists...is really laughable.

That's not a new ideology. Certain philosophies of feminism were espousing this when I was at Uni (early to mid nineties)

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not due to misandry. It is due to the fact that a woman would be believed if she said was attacked by a bear, but would be disbelieved if she said she was attacked by a man.

That seems to be a mindset of total victimhood.
Imagining the worst....& believing it to be universally true.
It's very unhealthy.

 

[crossfire]

That seems to be a mindset of total victimhood.
Imagining the worst....& believing it to be universally true.
It's very unhealthy.

Remember #metoo, and the huge backlash against it?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

You should read the article, really.

I did. I felt it missed the point of the question entirely. I will explain below.

Statistically, the percentage of men who would attack a woman in the wood is very, very low.

Is it? What about outside the woods? How many women are attacked in the woods and never report it or are unable to report it?

And by the way...being hit on by a man is not the same as being mauled by a wild bear.

The question isn't just about being hit on and this where I think the article misses the point. A lot of females are traumatized by violent male behavior. Not as many are traumatized by violent bear behavior. Meeting a bear in the woods would be terrifying regardless, but the likelihood of being attacked by the bear is fairly low.

This isn't a matter of hating men, but a matter of male violence being a problem people seem very willing to ignore.

That said, harassment by males is also a problem. Some people may enjoy being catcalled or harrassed, but for those that don't enjoy it it is emotionally traumatizing, especially while alone in the woods where the possibility of being assaulted is higher than in public.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Never in the history of mankind has a bear stopped attacking simply because a woman said STOP!

Being forceful and talking is a way of scaring a bear off. So that statement isn't entirely accurate.

"Slowly wave your arms above your head and tell the bear to back off."

Staying Safe Around Bears - Bears (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

Men have been known to stop when the woman tells him to.

And known not to stop.

You've gotta be a special kinda stupid to choose a bear that has never been known to stop, over a man who has been known to stop when told to do so.

See above.

 

[Revoltingest]

Remember #metoo, and the huge backlash against it?

Yes.
Why?

 

[Revoltingest]

Being forceful and talking is a way of scaring a bear off. So that statement isn't entirely accurate.

"Slowly wave your arms above your head and tell the bear to back off."

Staying Safe Around Bears - Bears (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

And known not to stop.



See above.

A bear has been known to not attack.
A man has been known to attack.
Both statements are true.
This means men are more dangerous than bears?

 

[crossfire]

Yes.
Why?

Remember the offshoot #Believewomen?

 

[Revoltingest]

Remember the offshoot #Believewomen?

Is there an end to this series of
questions resulting in a claim?

 

[crossfire]

A bear has been known to not attack.
A man has been known to attack.
Both statements are true.
This means men are more dangerous than bears?

Dealing with an attack from a man afterward is a lot more complicated than dealing with an attack from a bear afterward.

 

[crossfire]

Is there an end to this series of
questions resulting in a claim?

If you don't remember it, then the claim that women make of not being believed does hold some validity, no?

 

[Revoltingest]

Dealing with an attack from a man afterward is a lot more complicated than dealing with an attack from a bear afterward.

How is that known?

 

[Revoltingest]

If you don't remember it, then the claim that women make of not being believed does hold some validity, no?

"Hold some validity" could mean it happens
often or seldom. It's really making no claim at
all....except perhaps to suggest women normally
aren't, but without actually claiming it.
What fraction of the time are women not
believed when a man attacked them?

 

[crossfire]

How is that known?

See post #106. You have the courts (and all the stress that comes with it) to deal with when you are attacked by a man. You don't have that when attacked by a bear.