Would you rather run into a bear or random man in the woods?

[MC74]

On the topic of accountability, the fact that this shit is allowed to slide for the sake of "boys being boys" is why hockey culture is fucked up the way it is.

Kinda off-topic here, but I wanted to get that one off my chest because even to this day, it's still a major issue within the sport.

 

[Quagmire]

It's an opportunity for men to realize (as you mentioned earlier from talking to your wife) that women worry (and tbh should worry) about a lot more than just being killed when bumping into a strange man.

Yep, when Im walking at night to my car, the worst thing I worry about is being robbed, women have to worry about so much more

There's far too many men out there who are treating this as an opportunity to try to tell women why they're wrong, when the vast majority of men don't have to worry about many of the things women do.

Yep and all it really does is cement women's fears as a lot of these men arent getting it and are being pushy just like some can be in the real world when trying to talk to them, buy them a drink, get their number, etc.. This is a hypothetical and what should be a ridiculous scenario, but some men are all up in arms about it, all it does is highlight that some men just dont get what women go through and can't put them selves in the woman's shoes.

 

[Mark]

I think this is a big part of what's driving the disconnect. You've had to fight men and it's worked out well enough for you so far. I've had to fight men too, and I was never able to prevent them from doing anything they wanted to me. My assumption is if I run into a man in the woods, that he will be able to do whatever he pleases to me, because I will physically be unable to stop him, and nobody else will be around to help.

It’s sad that you’ve found yourself in that situation enough times to use the word “men”, but ignoring the semantics… the “men” you’ve had to fight aren’t men at all. They’re boys trapped in the body of an adult that do not have any self-respect, let alone any respect for others, let alone respect to what they perceive to be an inferior woman.

So, I know it's hard, but imagine your choice is a bear or a man who can easily overpower you. You will not succeed in a fight with either. Pretend you're already injured or sick from drinking bad water or something. Which would you choose?

At this point, though, we’re essentially creating an unconquerable scenario. We’re stepping beyond the black and white discussion of “man vs. bear” and aligning several of the worst possible case variables you could ask for in a situation like that to produce the worst possible outcome. Naturally, I would lose in a scenario like that, as would anyone else cocky enough to think otherwise. That’s part of the point people debating this are making, and why it’s looked at as rage bait like @Smacktard said and @The Flame alluded to.

Well, I wouldn't say that. You're kind to say so though.

I’ve known a lot of naive and just plain stupid people who placed themselves in dangerous situations, and you certainly have a level of contemplation and perspective that could save your life. However, just like me, if someone really wanted you dead… they could find a way to make it happen.

Maybe. But there will always be people who enjoy hurting other people, and they only suppress it due to likely consequences. In the middle of the woods, it doesn't matter much what society thinks.

While this is 100% true and I won’t disagree with your point, it still begs the question of what that scenario would look like, say… a generation or two down the line of men being taught better or realizing that certain behavior is unacceptable. For example, if I’m not mistaken, it was India that I read something about years ago. They had a massive issue with sexual assaults, and then they clamped down on the perpetrators as they became known and convicted, and there has been a gradual reduction in sex crimes in the period of time that article covered. What it’s like now? I couldn’t tell you, I’ve never been there, but I’ve known a few Indian folks and the topic has come up, and apparently it was a much bigger problem there than it is here. My point is… they enacted a measure to attempt to put an end to it, they’re not at 0 by any means, but progress has been made. That’s all I’m suggesting… that as soon as we eliminate the Brock Turners and Bill Cosbys of this world, women will be in a safer place.

If that's the case, then I'll stick with the bear, thanks.

You still use a lighter even though fire can burn, right? You still use electricity even though it’ll only take less than one ampere to stop your heart, right? Risk assessment and risk mitigation never reach absolute zero. There will always be variables that create outliers.

Question though. Does your answer change if it's a mountain lion?

Or any animal for that matter. A few wolves? A hippo?

Absolutely, that’s still a part of assessing risks and mitigating them.

You said men are more dangerous to women than to other men. All I did was point out that more men are killed by men than women. I think the ratio is like 7:3.

I get where you’re coming from with that, but I disagree on the principle that the numbers on the male side include combatants, criminal activity, and occupational hazards that generally favor males.

That's a fair point. If a woman was alone in the woods and saw both a bear and a man, I don't think she would run to the bear for help, though.

Precisely.

I'm inclined to agree with The Flame that this is just another one of these dumb online ragebait things meant to pit women and men against each other. Yes, many men are complete shit, and men are more dangerous than women, but generalizations like this help no one.

Exactly. All it does is leave decent men and already petrified women tossing scenarios back and forth where they continually escalate to the point of being totally one-sided against men while the real threats are off in the woods looking for their next victim paying ZERO attention to this debate, because they are already doing what they want. Until… someone stops them.

Fellas.

What was the very first sentence I said when I chimed in?

Listen to the women in your life and come on back. You'll have a different perspective. I promise.

To add to this, the women I’ve had read this all see your points, but they’ve all been grounded in life here in America long enough to know that I’m also right about doing something about those men. Just like any other form of crime, my solution isn’t an overnight one. I could be elected emperor of the world right after I post this, enact a law killing all sex offenders, and we’d still have outliers filter through the cracks. That’s unfortunately a very real part about human nature… all it takes is one sexual deviant to take the innocence of a child, or one individual who was sexually assaulted themselves to the point where it became normalized to them. There will always be bad people… what good people choose to do about them ultimately plays a role in how long they carry it on. To use a buzzword… this kind of behavior was normalized. How do you make it to where it’s no longer normalized? The same way you do with anything else. Incrementally.

FWIW I think this fella did that:

…and I’ve continued to through this morning.

Also FWIW my wife chose bear. We disagreed, it's fine. I said statistically I don't think it makes sense to choose a bear. She said at least the element of uncertainty is removed with the bear -- either it kills you or it doesn't. Men can kidnap, torture, rape, etc over long periods of time. I get where she's coming from, I just don't think that's a realistic occurrence for like 99.9999% of men.

That’s the same logic mine applied, but after reading my responses here and asking for elaboration on certain elements, she didn’t take long to see my perspective on it since hers is already pretty clear to me. She respects the amount of danger I’ve been in over the course of my life, and completely understands the rationale behind where I’m coming from… but, she also knows me well enough personally to know where my heart is on the matter.

This is just general advice for men based on what I'm seeing. It becomes a very slippery slope very fast, I've had to see it happen all too often in my previous line of work.

Yup, and in my previous line of work is where I’ve had to protect women from these kind of scenarios. Ain’t nothing like driving through a dark parking lot in the middle of the night looking for a car, hearing the most blood-curdling scream you could imagine, following the source of the sound, and finding a man trying to pin a woman down in between two cars. There also isn’t anything like the sense of gratitude you feel from someone for being at the right place at the right time and having the wherewithal to handle it, and the confusion you feel internally because you didn’t do anything special… you just stopped something bad from happening to someone. Trust and believe, I know where you’re coming from, there are some sick fucks out there.

Yeah that's true, I just heard people say that men wouldn't understand because men harm women more than men harm men, and I don't necessarily think that's true.

Which brings me back to my point about occupational hazards… how many women officers are there compared to men? How many soldiers? Truck drivers? Repo men? I’ve been in far more dangerous situations than most women I know, including those that survived assaults, and any woman I’ve taken out on the road with me over the years to see what the job was like walked away from the experience with a new appreciation for what their man did to put food on the table. Now, there’s a clear distinction between my willful act of going to work and a woman walking through the woods met by a predator, but that isn’t the point here. The point is, overall, the presence and handling of a dangerous situation.

What is true though is that women put up with a lot more shit from men than men do. I can see why women would feel MORE threatened than men in a situation like that, but it's all such a vague question that everyone will interpret it differently.

Exactly. You’re only gonna pop off at a dude so many times before you get met with a “you know what, motherfucker?”, and women don’t get that luxury.

I encounter solo women when hiking all the time. In this case, she's alone in the forest with a stranger. When I picture being alone in the forest with a man, I think of like a hiking trail. I'm not picturing a man leering at me from behind some trees in a forest. If that's the scenario, give me the fuckin bear because that's creepy as shit.

Which is why the context of this conversation has caused so many issues… it’s just not realistic to imagine some predator lying in wait for your evening hike, and if it is… then you need a different hiking spot because that one has clearly been compromised and doesn’t receive any attention from park rangers or whoever would be in charge of ensuring the safety to the visitors.

Now… if we’re just talking about wandering through the unnamed woods on public ground, it begs the question… what are you even doing in the woods to begin with to where this is a scenario that’s a possibility? Why would ANYONE, male or female, place themselves in such a position without weighing the pros and cons of it? I’m not saying that if you’re lost in the woods, go get raped and have fun, but… what the hell was going on in this theoretical woman’s mind where she thought it was okay to wander off into the wilderness? I don’t need to ask that question of the predator, I already know the answer. However, if the person knows there are predators in the woods, or knows of the potential for them to exist, why the hell are they playing with fire? We don’t need people doing stupid shit because they’re naive enough to think they’re safer with a wild animal than a human. We also don’t need people being naive enough to not suspect the potential for danger as well. No, I’m by no means blaming a victim, but… it’s common knowledge that people present themselves as potential victims unknowingly. You’re not gonna walk down the street with a brand new iPhone in your hand if you’ve seen news stories about people running up, knocking the holder out, and taking the phone, are you? Absolutely not. You’re going to make sure you keep your device in your pocket, stay aware of your surroundings, and have a plan of action in case anything goes sideways. The same should be applied across the board… I see a lot of people with, for lack of a better way of putting it, absolutely shitty survival skills and even worse situational awareness. Male and female.

 

[Quagmire]

Which is why the context of this conversation has caused so many issues… it’s just not realistic to imagine some predator lying in wait for your evening hike, and if it is… then you need a different hiking spot because that one has clearly been compromised and doesn’t receive any attention from park rangers or whoever would be in charge of ensuring the safety to the visitors.

This is a hypothetical situation, should we phrase it would you rather be at a bar with a bear or a man and no one else? The point is women dont know what they're getting with a man, but you know what a bear is.

And sometimes there are killers who meet their victims hiking in national parks.

There is an entire podcast on it https://parkpredators.com/

 

[Quagmire]

I'm inclined to agree with The Flame that this is just another one of these dumb online ragebait things meant to pit women and men against each other. Yes, many men are complete shit, and men are more dangerous than women, but generalizations like this help no one.

I dont think it was originally meant to be rage bait, but some men fell hard for it as rage bait and well, raged about it. If men werent getting all up in arms about it, it would probably help with the 'not all men"

Back to what I said earlier, this is a fictional hypothetical situation and there are still men who can't take no for an answer here. They have to question a woman's decision and try to convince the woman they are wrong

 

[Mark]

This is a hypothetical situation, should we phrase it would you rather be at a bar with a bear or a man and no one else? The point is women dont know what they're getting with a man, but you know what a bear is.

And sometimes there are killers who meet their victims hiking in national parks.

There is an entire podcast on it https://parkpredators.com/

I’m well aware of the point that’s attempted to be made without sinking time into a podcast theorizing hypotheticals. My statements are rooted in the facts of the things I’ve seen and experienced in life, and as someone who has survived many situations that could have killed me, I have a pretty good bearing on what it’s like to be in danger. Enough so that it was my responsibility to ensure the physical safety of dozens of repo agents, male and female, because I’m that capable of assessing risks and mitigating dangerous situations.

I dont think it was originally meant to be rage bait, but some men fell hard for it as rage bait and well, raged about it. If men werent getting all up in arms about it, it would probably help with the 'not all men"

Back to what I said earlier, this is a fictional hypothetical situation and there are still men who can't take no for an answer here. They have to question a woman's decision and try to convince the woman they are wrong

No, it’s thought of as rage bait because it’s rooted in the same kind of irrational thinking that posed the question several months ago that if so and so was a worm, would they still be loved. People that regularly experience danger, and not hypothetically, tend to have a different outlook towards dangerous scenarios. It’s a very analytical process, there’s more time spend observing than theorizing.

As far as not taking no for an answer… I haven’t seen that once. I have, however, seen people trying to offer perspectives. No one is debating whether or not women have a right to be in fear of certain men. The only thing that’s being debated is whether or not it’s effective to generalize all men. If we were having this conversation about women instead of men, women would be just as up in arms if they were generalized like that… which is something that I’ve made sure not to do, because as a generalized man, I know how it feels. Not once have I diminished or disputed the trauma victims endure. Not once have I said a woman is wrong for being scared of a random dude in the woods.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Smacktard]

And sometimes there are killers who meet their victims hiking in national parks.

There is an entire podcast on it https://parkpredators.com/

And people get crushed to death by vending machines every year. That doesn't mean that I'm going to stop using vending machines.

When you look at the stats, an encounter with a man is less dangerous than an encounter with a bear. The sheer number of times that women are alone with men over the course of their lives leads to cases where they are abused. Not just the sheer number, of course, but also shitty men being shitty, which IS a reality then men have to -- and mostly do -- accept. But I still think it's misandrist to paint all men is dangerous because SOME men are bad men.

If men werent getting all up in arms about it, it would probably help with the 'not all men"

Women don't like negative stereotypes about themselves, either. This is not a uniquely male phenomenon. I think it's a generally accepted truth that men are more predatory and dangerous than women, yes, but likening this guy...

...to an apex predator is a bit disingenuous.

 

[Mark]

…but being the one that's in the situation doing the screaming has to be worse. Much worse.

No shit, dude. That’s not what I’m saying at all. The fact that that was your takeaway tells me that you’re seeing me as no different than some incel neckbeard that’ll never touch a woman yet knows all about them, and knows all about violence yet has never thrown a punch. I’m not one of those dipshits you need to argue this point with, I’m unfortunately very aware of reality, which is where my position on this comes from. Not this weeks buzzworthy article. Not this months podcast. Shit I’ve seen with my own eyes, conversations I’ve had, situations I’ve intervened in. This might be the hot topic for some now, but for the rest of us out there living in the real world? This is nothing new. There are already men out there actively doing what they can to protect women and children. There just aren’t enough of them, and there aren’t heavy enough consequences for those that prey on others. Until both of those things change… no amount of theoretical logic is gonna matter.

And yes, I've intervened on more than one sexual assault.

Good on you, that’s what anybody should do. Hold those pieces of shit accountable.

 

[TD]

.

 

[VashTheStampede]

What if the man is a bear?

 

[VashTheStampede]

Some of y'all are really overestimating the dangers of bears.

Black bears, the likely most common bear you'd come across in America, are actually pretty fucking chill. And even if you do end up in a violent situation with a black bear, the odds of you being killed or even seriously injured are pretty low.

It's pretty fucked up to widely paint all bears as being dangerous, based on the actions of a violent minority.

#NotAllBears

 

[Mark]

That's not how I'm looking at you, Mark - but this goes well beyond individual belief and perspective.

How do you think these kind of things change, though? If someone reads my words, and then next week they see a guy behaving like a creep and speak up because they now think it’s the right thing to do, what does that accomplish? It takes one individual to rape a women to ruin the image of all men. Why can’t it take one man to be a catalyst that makes another man step up to protect a woman? Perpetuate that enough times, the same way the negative has been perpetuated, and what do you think could be accomplished?

People who keep fixating on the literal bear in this example are missing the big picture. Women are afraid of men and instead of listening to why they are - so many people are trying to be like, well the bear is more dangerous because of xyz. You got men being offended for being grouped with those assholes. You got the alleged alpha males who already think they have a right to control their body, now telling them how to feel.

Yeah, dude, I see where this is going and I’m not seeing an Andrew Tate here, I’m seeing two men that love the women in their lives and have two different but connected ways to deal with the issue.

The people who are so scared of getting killed by a bear while in the woods are probably the same type who will gladly shoot to kill a home invader. You're in the woods? You're in a bear's habitat, not your own, you're invading their home. They aren't the apex predator, humans, and more often than not - men are. Women would still rather take the bear in the woods than their chances with a man.

I’ve stated multiple times my thoughts on home defense, I would most certainly shoot to kill. I’m not waiting to find out if he wants my PlayStation or the life of my family, and I’m not ashamed to admit that I’d do what I have to do to protect my own in a do or potentially die scenario. However, I also agree with the sentiment that I’d be trespassing on a bear’s territory if I were in the woods, and because of that, and being aware of the risks of invading on something else’s territory, I would err on the side of caution to begin with… which is where I posed the question theorizing motive for the random woman in the woods. Does she know there are bears there? Yes. Does she have means of self-defense, like bear spray, like you’ve admitted to possessing on your hikes? If not, her ignorance or naïveté has walked her unprepared into a life or death situation. If so, then she is astutely aware of the risks and has prepared for them. I don’t see the sexist connotations behind that very clear thought process, because I’m applying the same logic you yourself have admitted to employing as a man in preparation for your hikes.

This isn't some hot topic, this is a long unaddressed topic that continues to go unaddressed and it doesn't help when so much of your country is in love with a piece of shit who preaches to grab em by the pussy.

Unaddressed by whom? The first time I kicked the shit out of a dude for taking advantage of a drunk chick was over 20 years ago. I address it every time the opportunity presents itself, I don’t sit around and talk about it.

Something not being new is not an excuse. Racism, hate, phobics, all this shit. None of it is new. But it still needs to be talked about but as always, it gets glanced over and buried by so-called alpha males.

No, it gets glanced over because of that stupid ass “boys will be boys” mantra, money, power, etc. If we stop allowing the behavior, regardless of those factors, it will eventually change. Making excusing and distributing the blame where it shouldn’t go doesn’t address the root cause of the issue, as I’ve already said countless times in this conversation. You can go ahead and generalize men and dance around the subject all you want, but I’m gonna continue to single out each and every individual that commits those kind of acts and hold them accountable on their own. The way I see it, you and I aren’t there when a rapist is taking his pants off helping him with his belt buckle, and you and I won’t be there to share the blame for what he does after the fact.

One of the first things you said was criticizing women for feeling this way:



This is an asshole thing to say and complete invalidates the perspective of women.

Your point? I’d say the same thing if you were walking into the woods without preparing for the dangers you’d face. You said it yourself… bear preparedness is an easy concept, you follow some simple rules, you lessen your chances to get hurt. Why would someone not follow similar guidelines when heading out downtown for the night? Have a plan. Have people know where you’re at, what route you’re taking, what ride share service you’re using, who you’re with, etc. I’m a grown ass man, and when I leave, people know where I’m going and would know what route I’d take just in case, because you never know what could happen… an airplane door could fall out of the sky and land on the vehicle I’m in. It’s called taking personal responsibility for your safety and not just blindly wandering off into the woods.

All of this still doesn’t bring a woman’s chance of unexpected harm to come her way to zero. That’s where my battle cry for more accountability comes into play, because that’s how you start reshaping society to not behave that way to begin with. It’s a form of psychological conditioning, no different than what conditioned some men to believe they have the right to treat women any way they please.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

This is going in circles and you keep making it about your white american male privileged perspective with an inability to realize that maybe, just maybe, the desired effect isn't for a man to come in and save the day - but to increase awareness of how much of a problem sexual assault is for women. Then instead of acknowledging that, they get met with shit like this.

Two things I want you to reflect on:

a) This question was directed at women specifically. You could argue that this was a social experiment to see what men would do and quite frankly - many of them have failed spectacularly. A question directed at women that men want to jump in and solve, yet not actually listen to what the women, who were asked this question, are saying.

b) Do you think the solution is that men need to save women from this? Women should not have to rely on a man showing up at just the right time to feel safe. For every one you are able to help, many, many others, are unhelped. Women need to feel safe around men, they don't need the man to come in and save the day like they're some Disney movie princess.

Do you think I felt good about needing to intervene? On the level that I did intervene, yeah. Maybe. But the reality is that it makes me sick to my stomach every time. To come across a woman who can't stop shaking and/or crying and might be permanently damaged as a result? That shit is heartbreaking - and even if you intervene, the trauma can definitely still be there.

It doesn't matter that every man isn't like that when it comes to how safe a woman feels. All that matters is it could be THAT man.

To try to imply that they shouldn't feel like that because of your own privelege? C'mon man.

If you think I’m suggesting that men come in and save the day, you’re still mistaken. You or I should have never been in the position to intervene, because those women should have never been in that position needing to be saved. The men that perpetrate these acts shouldn’t have committed to them to begin with. Period. The other men should do their part to make sure women don’t have to feel that way. It’s a lot simpler than you’re making it, it just requires some actual effort and the lack of giving a fuck about calling out individuals instead of generalizing.

Making this about my position in American society is dancing around the issue. Still. The fact that I’m a straight white American male has absolutely nothing to do with what John Doe decides to do to Jane Doe. Criminals do what criminals do and predators do what predators do regardless of their place in society, because it has been evident that men all the way at the bottom of the totem pole and men all the way at the top of it have all been found guilty in the past. Removing them from society is the only solution, because you’re right, a woman shouldn’t have to be in fear of being sexually assaulted.

Notice, I didn’t ask you if you felt good about intervening. I know that answer. It doesn’t need to be asked. Notice, I didn’t act like a Disney hero in telling my story, because I’m not one. I said we were in the right place at the right time to spare someone something traumatic.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

If it was so simple it wouldn't be an every day problem, dude.

It again. May seem simple - from your perspective.

And it wouldn’t be an every day problem if people started doing something about it, which is the point I’ve been drilling this whole time. So, yes, from my perspective, there is a problem that requires a solution, and I’d like tho think that I laid out a pretty good start for how to solve the problem.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

Look at that. Mark solved world peace.

Lemme know what that sarcasm solves. I thought this was a serious matter to you? My response was as serious as it gets, I don’t tread this issue lightly, and I’d appreciate it if you didn’t act like I do. I apologize if my “I agree, this is a problem, let’s do something about this” approach is too much for you, but, that’s what I’m willing to do to put a stop to this. You can passively do something about it by criticizing all men, generalizing, and dancing around the issues. Or, you could actively do something about it and demand that we raise our sons better, do better ourselves, and penalize those who don’t in the harshest way possible. I only see one of those ways making it a safer world for our daughters.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

I just don't think you realize how obnoxiously arrogant you sound.

But sure - go tell women that the solution to them fearing sexual assault by men is simple and tell me how that works out for you.

Yes, I will gladly tell women that the solution to sexual assault is to raise our boys better, do better to become better men, and penalize those that don’t.

It’s still better than telling them “don’t worry, I made sure I told all men to be ashamed of themselves because of the actions of some online, we’ll shame those criminals into compliance in no time, because you know they’re paying very close attention to that matter and totally not waiting for their next victim”…

But, I’m arrogant? Right. I’m sitting here saying throw those fuckers in jail, string them up, etc. You’re over here talking about all men, white men, and everything else BUT sexual predators explicitly. Yet, I’m the one not posing a real solution to this? I’m the one being arrogant? I’m the one talking about privilege?

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

This is honestly so typical of that American Alpha Male mindset that I can't help but shake my head and let out a disappointed chuckle.

That’s fine, I’ll wear that badge with honor if it means I protect the ones I love and innocent people when presented with the opportunity. I’ll never forget the gratitude I experienced those times I was at the right place at the right time, regardless of whether or not I get you or anyone else’s seal of approval for the methods I employ or the beliefs I have regarding how to deal with it.

I’d rather you judge me for being too harsh or having what you perceive to be an unrealistic approach to solving the issue than to have you judge me for not doing anything at all. At least we’re both in agreement that something must be done to stop it, the “what” is the problem we disagree on.

 

[TD]

.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Quagmire]

Forget it @TD, it's Chinatown

 

[Mark]

ofAnd therein lies the problem. It's not about the gratitude or validation that you get for doing what is right. It's about trying to understand how women feel around men that could very easily sexually assault them at a moment's notice - it's about trying to place yourself in the shoes of the woman. Yes, she's grateful in that moment. But now she knows forever that it might happen to her again, that even though you were there, while there are some good men - there's many, many, terrible men out there.

We wonder why women have so many trust issues with men, and you're concerned with how grateful she was?

No, I’m saying that the gratitude those women expressed to me means more to me than your criticisms expressed about how I view this issue. In those moments, in those instances, I knew I was doing the right thing and that’s all that matters. My intervention was because of my empathy… if I were in that position, I would have wanted someone to help me. For you to make it about me patting myself on the back, that shows me where your head is on this matter. You simply refuse to see the good in what I’m saying, you’re confusing me with people that do shit for clout or reputation, when the reality is that there are people out there who do good just because it’s the right thing to do the same way that there are people who do bad just because they are bad people.

 

[MC74]

b) Do you think the solution is that men need to save women from this? Women should not have to rely on a man showing up at just the right time to feel safe. For every one you are able to help, many, many others, are unhelped. Women need to feel safe around men, they don't need the man to come in and save the day like they're some Disney movie princess.

Well, I believe the first step towards any amount of progress is to start holding shitheads accountable for their actions. Far too often, this kind of behavior is tolerated, seen as natural because it's just "boys being boys", but what it really is is toxic, and when you don't do anything to discourage that kind of behavior, then it festers and becomes deeply rooted within the culture.

We need to make it clear it's not acceptable. Hence the reason I mentioned hockey culture earlier. Nothing was done about that and we just keep hearing more & more disturbing shit happening behind the scenes, and I'd say that's only the tip of the iceberg. Who knows what other shit happened behind the scenes we're not privy of.

 

[Mark]

You know what women want to be able to feel safe to men?

They want to be listened to, they want you to ask questions, they want you to care about their perspective.

They don't want to be told how to solve a problem that you don't know shit about when it comes to how they feel.

This conversation with women should really be going down like this:

Man: "Would you rather be in the woods with a bear or a woman?"
Woman: "Bear"
Man: "Why do you feel like that?"
Woman: Explains why
Man: "Is there anything I can do to help with the way you feel?"

Instead they're met with this constant barrage of being told what the solution is after years and years - in a country like America where quite frankly so much shit is going the opposite direction. And you think holding people accountable is going to make women suddenly feel like they can trust men more and they aren't going to be raped?

Fucking come on dude. Have this conversation with more women. It will help. I promise.

Dude, the more you go on, the more it comes across like you’re having this conversation for women. You don’t need to mansplain to me how women feel about being raped and sexually assaulted, I’ve had plenty of women cover the subject with me themselves. Do you think I just woke up one day with the belief that pedophiles, rapists, and any other variation of sexual predator should be flat out killed or incarcerated? No, I got that way after seeing what I’ve seen, having bad shit happen to friends, protecting the ones I love.

There’s a reason why I say it starts with how we carry ourselves as men, how we raise our sons. There’s a reason why I say we have to force accountability and consequences on those men the same way they forced themselves upon those women.

I’ve already said numerous times that it’ll never bring that number to absolute zero. I’ve already said it’ll take work to put a stop to this kind of predatory behavior some men exhibit. I don’t know what else you want from me, but you’re barking up the wrong tree if you think you’ll stop sexual predators by coming down on how guys like me view them and how to deal with them, because we’re a lot closer to a solution than you are… and most importantly, we’re on the same team, the team that wants to make this world safer for women. You should most certainly focus this energy on addressing those clowns you see objectifying women, or treating them like property, or a conquest. You wanna see a change? Try that and see how it works. If enough people do, then the world will become a dangerous place for sexual predators instead of women, and I’m sure everyone would be much happier with that.

 

[TD]

.

 

[TD]

.

 

[TD]

.

 

[Mark]

I mean I've talked to over two dozen women about this over the last 4-5 days and I get where they're coming from. What I'm saying is pretty much what they've communicated to me.

You know why I have to be the voice for so many of them? Because of misogynistic behaviour where men won't even listen to them to begin with and that's already been proven in this very thread.

Many of you very clearly just don't fucking get it.

Just stop with the numbers game, dude. You can talk to one rape survivor or a hundred and none of them are gonna tell you that they rank the experience an 11/10 and would definitely recommend it to a friend. Playing the “I know more rape victims than you, I know better…” angle is weak, it’s a disservice to them.

I’ve talked to women. I’ll continue to talk to women. I’ll listen to what any woman has to say on the subject for as long as she’d like. What I won’t do is pussyfoot around the issue that some men are pieces of shit, they need to be identified and ostracized from our society until we get to a point where we collectively as a society have effectively eliminated those kind of people. What I won’t do is accept accountability for another man’s actions, or, inactions. I treat people with dignity and respect. I am not going to be categorized with people who don’t, I have too much self-respect for that, and you should, too. You’re a good man, with good intentions, you shouldn’t let people shit on you because of people with the same genitals that do bad shit to people with the other set of genitals. We, as men, owe it to the women in our lives to separate ourself from those “men”, and to deal with them appropriately… not give them a slap on the wrist or blame their hormones.

 

[Mark]

When one of your opening statements was blaming this shit on women themselves, then yes - you need to be "mansplain"'d to.

Go ahead, glaze over the part where I said that I’d have said the same thing to you if you went into the woods unprepared, because that doesn’t fit the narrative you’re trying to fabricate.

lol Now you're trying to gaslight me as if I'm the one disservicing them when you literally blamed women for feeling like that about men?

Get off your fucking high horse. I'm done here and we're done.

See above.

 

[Mark]

Not being able to block admins feels like an abuse of forum power but I digress.

Let’s go over a chain of events, then.

First you wanted to act like I’m out of touch and I should go talk to some women.

When I corrected you and informed you that I have, and even went as far as letting some read this entire thread, your posts and all, suddenly you knew more rape victims than me.

When I mentioned intervening in instances of assault, then you intervened in multiples.

You’ve turned this into “who’s the whitest knight?” instead of “we should do something about these piece of shit rapists”, and now you’re wanting to block me? Make this make sense to me. I haven’t been disrespectful to women, to you, or to the totality of men. I’ve singled out the offenders, and the ones that are complacent in allowing them to exist among us. I’ve been disrespectful towards predators, people unworthy of respect.

 

[Kat]

That's a fair point. If a woman was alone in the woods and saw both a bear and a man, I don't think she would run to the bear for help, though.

No, I wouldn't. I also would not run to the man for help. I'm getting the fuck out of there and hoping they distract each other from me.

Men can kidnap, torture, rape, etc over long periods of time. I get where she's coming from, I just don't think that's a realistic occurrence for like 99.9999% of men.

That number is waaay too high. You really think only one out of a million men would hurt a woman?

For me personally, the percentage of men I've dated who eventually physically or sexually assaulted me in some way is at least 10%. Maybe even 20%.

I'm specifying men I dated because I avoid being truly alone with guys I don't know. There's not much reason for it, so I'm not sure what the percentage is if you include strangers I crossed paths with once in a remote area. I'm excluding "alone in a public place where anybody else could appear at any time" because that's a much riskier situation to attack somebody.

You may think being alone on the street is riskier than alone in an apartment, but in my experience, it is not.

I encounter solo women when hiking all the time. In this case, she's alone in the forest with a stranger. When I picture being alone in the forest with a man, I think of like a hiking trail. I'm not picturing a man leering at me from behind some trees in a forest. If that's the scenario, give me the fuckin bear because that's creepy as shit.

Yeah, that's why I specified I'm assuming the question is alone in the back country, not on a well-traveled hiking trail. I agree running into a random guy on a hiking trail is generally fine, but that's not being alone in the woods.

One time I was on a hike with a (female) friend of mine, and it had a sharp difficulty jump, so most people abandoned it quickly. When we got to the end, there was a dude by himself kinda tucked behind a corner. It did freak us out a bit and we "joked" about him being a serial killer.

Probably nothing would've happened even if I were alone, but I'm glad we were together.

It’s sad that you’ve found yourself in that situation enough times to use the word “men”, but ignoring the semantics… the “men” you’ve had to fight aren’t men at all. They’re boys trapped in the body of an adult that do not have any self-respect, let alone any respect for others, let alone respect to what they perceive to be an inferior woman.

They are men. They are male humans that are over 18 years old. If you say to me "you meet a random man in the woods", it could be one of those assholes or somebody else like them.

At this point, though, we’re essentially creating an unconquerable scenario. We’re stepping beyond the black and white discussion of “man vs. bear” and aligning several of the worst possible case variables you could ask for in a situation like that to produce the worst possible outcome. Naturally, I would lose in a scenario like that, as would anyone else cocky enough to think otherwise. That’s part of the point people debating this are making, and why it’s looked at as rage bait like @Smacktard said and @The Flame alluded to.

It's not a worst case scenario or unconquerable. I'm giving you the scenario as I see it for myself. The man who can easily overpower you will likely not choose to do it. The point is he could, because if you put me alone with a random man, that's the situation for me. I'm not weighing "am I more likely to win a fight with a man or a bear?" I don't expect to win either. Repeated personal experience tells me I do not stand a chance. My only consideration is "is the man or bear more likely to want to do me harm?" And I feel like "man" is easily the winner, so I'll take the bear.

You still use a lighter even though fire can burn, right? You still use electricity even though it’ll only take less than one ampere to stop your heart, right? Risk assessment and risk mitigation never reach absolute zero. There will always be variables that create outliers.

What does that matter? The question isn't "would you ever risk encountering a man without other people around?" It's choosing between a man and a bear. A bear will definitely not rape me, and a man might. So I choose bear.

what are you even doing in the woods to begin with to where this is a scenario that’s a possibility? Why would ANYONE, male or female, place themselves in such a position without weighing the pros and cons of it? I’m not saying that if you’re lost in the woods, go get raped and have fun, but… what the hell was going on in this theoretical woman’s mind where she thought it was okay to wander off into the wilderness?

It's completely normal for people to be in the woods. I personally wouldn't go by myself, I'm a klutz and would probably hurt myself, but plenty of people do it. People do lots of somewhat risky things for fun. Would you say the same thing about somebody who skis?

People that regularly experience danger, and not hypothetically, tend to have a different outlook towards dangerous scenarios. It’s a very analytical process, there’s more time spend observing than theorizing.

I actually think this is a big part of why men and women see this so differently. Men often have experienced scuffling with another man and it turned out fine, or maybe they've never needed to but imagine they could hold their own. Women are much more likely to have tried to fight a man and been unable to stop him from attacking her.

I'm sure some women can kick men's asses no problem, but for me personally, I know there's no way.

But I still think it's misandrist to paint all men is dangerous because SOME men are bad men.

Nobody said all men are dangerous. A random man is dangerous because it's not stated if he's violent or not, and the odds that he is are high enough that the situation is concerning.

It's not a moral judgement against men in general. It's just an acknowledgement of reality that's required for me to keep myself safe.

Based on all this, I think there are three things causing the big divide here:
1. Men underestimating how helpless most women feel about defending themselves against men.
2. Men underestimating how likely a man is to attack a woman when there is no chance of anybody else intervening, and how that's different from passing someone in a quiet street.
3. Men and women disagreeing on how dangerous bears are.

 

[Quagmire]

That number is waaay too high. You really think only one out of a million men would hurt a woman?

For me personally, the percentage of men I've dated who eventually physically or sexually assaulted me in some way is at least 10%. Maybe even 20%.

I know at least 8 women who have experienced this or worse, and those are just the ones comfortable enough to share that with me

. I'm not weighing "am I more likely to win a fight with a man or a bear?" I don't expect to win either. Repeated personal experience tells me I do not stand a chance. My only consideration is "is the man or bear more likely to want to do me harm?" And I feel like "man" is easily the winner, so I'll take the bear.

Yep, not sure how this gets lost so much, its not a who do you want to fight.

I actually think this is a big part of why men and women see this so differently. Men often have experienced scuffling with another man and it turned out fine, or maybe they've never needed to but imagine they could hold their own. Women are much more likely to have tried to fight a man and been unable to stop him from attacking her.

I've always known to some extent at just how easy it is for a man to overpower a woman, but play wrestling with my wife or past partners, I can easily pin them down and that is only using a fraction of my strength. Sure they are holding back a little, but not nearly as much as I am

Nobody said all men are dangerous. A random man is dangerous because it's not stated if he's violent or not, and the odds that he is are high enough that the situation is concerning.

It's starting to sound like the All Lives Matter thing which was to devalue the Black Lives Matter movement. No one ever said Black Lives were more important than anyone else's

Based on all this, I think there are three things causing the big divide here:
1. Men underestimating how helpless most women feel about defending themselves against men.
2. Men underestimating how likely a man is to attack a woman when there is no chance of anybody else intervening, and how that's different from passing someone in a quiet street.
3. Men and women disagreeing on how dangerous bears are.

I think some Men also take this as some personal attack too, which is what is getting them triggered, they feel threatened by someone potentially not choosing them

 

[Kat]

@Mark you've said a lot about how holding men accountable and all that would improve things so women feel safer (which I agree with, though that's easier said than done). However, that's not currently the world we live in.

Given that you've said you've helped multiple women escape violence from men in locations where it was possible for such an attack to be thwarted, do you understand why women would not choose to be alone with a man in the woods? Or do you still think that's crazy and inherently flawed?

 

[Benzine]

i choose the man because i can have more of a chance of winning if the bear or man don't have my best interests at heart. there's many men i could beat off, but not many bears.

 

[Joseph Snapple]

tbh when i heard about this i was very confused to learn it started a whole big fucking thing just because the answer seemed so obvious simply based on "only one of these two is something that belongs in the middle of the woods"

 

[Mark]

@Mark you've said a lot about how holding men accountable and all that would improve things so women feel safer (which I agree with, though that's easier said than done). However, that's not currently the world we live in.

Given that you've said you've helped multiple women escape violence from men in locations where it was possible for such an attack to be thwarted, do you understand why women would not choose to be alone with a man in the woods? Or do you still think that's crazy and inherently flawed?

It doesn’t really matter what I think, because I’ve never been a victim of a sexual assault. All I’ve ever experienced were other acts of violence and dangerous situations with other men, some bigger and stronger than me, and some not. From where I’m sitting, and from where I’ve been sitting this entire time… I don’t see theoretical situations. I see a very real problem women face, and it requires a solution. Is it a solution that seems easier said than done? Absolutely. No decision worth making like that is ever easy, but it’s what must be done to protect people. Do I think it’s crazy that a woman would feel safer with a bear? Absolutely. That’s the entire point of the exercise, to show with slight exaggeration the threat women face daily and to put it in perspective. What I don’t understand is the disconnect between my proposed solutions and how I’m suddenly the bad guy because of how I feel this issue needs to be addressed. If it doesn’t work, then it was an effort. If it does? More women don’t become victims. I just wish someone could help me understand what’s wrong about what I’m suggesting happen to these individuals, and how we can hopefully teach younger generations to do better. It’s completely lost on me how my suggestions are perceived the way that they are, because I’ve gotten nothing but agreement from the women that know me personally. How women that know me can totally agree with every word I’ve said about accountability, both for the men committing these crimes and the theoretical woman unprepared in the woods, and yet it flies right over the heads of men like I’m speaking a foreign language because I’m not parroting the same demeaning language about all men that they are is wild to me.

I’ve been a go-to choice for help, advice, anything, for the women I know for decades. Not once has any of them ever told me any of this shit about my views being problematic. If anything, they’ve thanked me for not giving the same tired “oh, that sucks, I’m sorry you had to go through that, men are scum” speech and leveling with them about how bastards raise bastards, and how we’ve gotta do SOMETHING to change the way boys treat girls, and that’ll spread to how men treat women. Hearing contrary, especially from men, is just blowing my mind, but it’s not surprising… because of accountability. Hearing contrary from you hits a little different… you’re a woman, in an environment where you can run into a bear (I think? Are they in Oregon?), a prior victim, etc. Instinctively, I attribute that to Baltimore girls not knowing shit about bears and woods, and only knowing about bad dudes. I think that’s the fairest assessment for that, don’t you? Under that assumption, it’s safe to say it makes sense to me why you’d try your luck with the bear. Although, I still wouldn’t recommend it, I do get it, and I wish you didn’t feel that way.

 

[MC74]

Hockey culture is such a small fraction of this.

You got women who are regularly raped by their own fucking partners; it goes way beyond accountability.

It goes down the rabbit hole of men treating women like property, not people.

Sadly, it's an issue that is deeply rooted within our own culture, and one that doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon. Yes, you need to hold people accountable and that would be a step towards progress, but as it stands, we've got a long way to go, and even then, it's still something that can easily be rolled back just like the abortion rights were.

It doesn't take much to set the clock back. The truly scary part about that is, for the amount of damage that can potentially be done in such a short amount of time, it can easily take decades to get back on the right track. That's the exact situation we are in right now with the current political landscape. So yes, putting things forward in motion to protect women is a lot easier said than done, especially when the majority of the conservative base is hell-bent on rolling back women's rights.

In my brutally honest opinion, I seriously doubt it gets solved anytime soon. Definitely not in our lifetime.

 

[shortkut]

there's many men i could beat off,

 

[Kat]

Do I think it’s crazy that a woman would feel safer with a bear? Absolutely. That’s the entire point of the exercise, to show with slight exaggeration the threat women face daily and to put it in perspective.

It's not an exaggeration at all. Maybe some women are picking bear to be snide or insult men, but I 100% genuinely would take a random bear over a random man, and I bet many other women are too. It feels a bit dismissive when you say stuff like this.

What I don’t understand is the disconnect between my proposed solutions and how I’m suddenly the bad guy because of how I feel this issue needs to be addressed

It doesn't make you a bad guy IMO. I don't understand how you can acknowledge it's such a big problem while also dismissing the idea that a woman would feel safer alone with a bear than a man. I think if your message was more "wow, it's awful women feel that way. Here's an idea of what we can do to improve things" and less "women are ridiculous for choosing a bear, we just need to hold men accountable, problem solved", you'd get a different response.

Also, your "solution" is a bit like suggesting if we all stopped using fossil fuels, then climate change would be much less of a problem. Sure, it's true, and championing for individuals to do that is better than nothing, but it's not actually going to solve the problem. Acknowledging you cannot actually solve it and it's a thing women have to deal with would be appreciated.

the theoretical woman unprepared in the woods

Why are you assuming she's unprepared? Because otherwise she'd have bear spray and neither would be an issue? I'd still choose the bear in that case.

How women that know me can totally agree with every word I’ve said about accountability, both for the men committing these crimes and the theoretical woman unprepared in the woods, and yet it flies right over the heads of men like I’m speaking a foreign language because I’m not parroting the same demeaning language about all men that they are is wild to me.

Who here has been using any demeaning language about all men? I haven't seen any of that. There's some towards men who assault others, and some towards men who react poorly to this question, but none towards all men generally that I've seen.

 

[Mark]

It's not an exaggeration at all. Maybe some women are picking bear to be snide or insult men, but I 100% genuinely would take a random bear over a random man, and I bet many other women are too. It feels a bit dismissive when you say stuff like this.

So you’re saying the whole point of using an example of being in the woods with an animal the size of a bear and with the capabilities of a bear isn’t to signify with a certain level of dramatic effect the risks a woman would sooner take over being in the same woods with a man? That’s all I meant.

It doesn't make you a bad guy IMO. I don't understand how you can acknowledge it's such a big problem while also dismissing the idea that a woman would feel safer alone with a bear than a man. I think if your message was more "wow, it's awful women feel that way. Here's an idea of what we can do to improve things" and less "women are ridiculous for choosing a bear, we just need to hold men accountable, problem solved", you'd get a different response.

I don’t recall saying that I think women are ridiculous for thinking that, if anything, I’d sooner think the idea of creating theoretical scenarios over addressing the root issue is ridiculous. I don’t think women need these scenarios to tell people that sexual assault is bad, I think men need to just do better. The fact that women feel that they have to provide these scenarios to men, though, is ridiculous, because it should have never gotten to the point where it’s felt that it needs to be explained that way. It should be common sense that sexual assault is bad, the fact that it isn’t is ridiculous.

Also, your "solution" is a bit like suggesting if we all stopped using fossil fuels, then climate change would be much less of a problem. Sure, it's true, and championing for individuals to do that is better than nothing, but it's not actually going to solve the problem. Acknowledging you cannot actually solve it and it's a thing women have to deal with would be appreciated.

Which is why I attacked the alternative… just sitting around theorizing and talking about it, or getting mad at guys like me who want to do more than just talk about it. As I’ve said numerous times, I recognize that it’s not an immediate solution or an overnight cure to a systemic issue that has gone on for centuries, but it’s something. It isn’t attacking my fellow man because of something he’s never done and despises himself. It isn’t trying to find the right way to illustrate the severity of the issue to people. It’s attacking the issue head-on… the ones committing these heinous acts against women.

Why are you assuming she's unprepared? Because otherwise she'd have bear spray and neither would be an issue? I'd still choose the bear in that case.

Well, the entire premise of the story seems to be centered around whether or not she’d be more prepared to encounter a male or a bear, so I just assume she’s unprepared for either? If I were in her shoes, I’d be spooked if I saw a bear in the woods, and I’d be just as spooked if I thought I was alone and saw some random person… male or female.

Who here has been using any demeaning language about all men? I haven't seen any of that. There's some towards men who assault others, and some towards men who react poorly to this question, but none towards all men generally that I've seen.

I’m not the only individual that picked up on it, and I’m not the only one that said something about it being wrong to generalize men because it removes accountability from the perpetrators and places it on their genitals instead. Being, obviously, the most vocal of them, I will speak for myself when I say it’s disheartening to hear another good man generalize all of us the way I’ve seen in this thread. Personally, I’ve been a good man to people, even those that didn’t necessarily deserve it, because that’s just who I am. I’ve helped people out when they needed it, because that’s just who I am. I’m bringing it up now, for context, but I don’t brag about it, and I don’t wave it around like I’m superior to anyone. To have someone criticize my opinion on how to handle those assholes that do that kind of unforgivable shit to women, and then generalize me with them as if I wouldn’t give my life to save someone in that kind of situation when I’ve willfully thrown myself into some fucked up scenarios where I could have died to save a perfect stranger is insulting to say the least. I can deal with being insulted, though, I have my big boy pants on. What I can’t deal with is another excuse passing the buck to “men being men” when I know that I am, that many other men are, and that the men saying it are all better than those monsters who prey on people and don’t deserve to be lumped in with them. I will always demand accountability for sexual predators, I will always advocate for justice for the victims of those crimes, and I will always loudly voice my disapproval of those men. I can’t change the world, but goddamnit, I can refuse to compromise my values and do my part to keep the people around me safe while refusing to acknowledge that all men should be categorized together as one, with the sexual predators, child abusers, and all the other disgusting fucks out there. They don’t represent me or what I stand for. You know how it feels to be generalized based on your gender, so you don’t have to try hard to imagine what it’s like to be someone in my position saying “whoa, that ain’t me, that might be some of y’all, but that certainly ain’t me.”

 

[VashTheStampede]

I'm brick

 

[Smacktard]

I've seen enough. I'm team bear.

 

[Mark]

I’ve toyed around with the idea of reaching out to people privately, because I’m trying to wrap my brain around why my words are being interpreted the way they are, but I’ve decided against it, and instead opted to address it publicly since I got into this publicly. I’ve always said, and I’ll always admit when I’m wrong. However, I can’t admit that I’m wrong in this situation when I feel like my words are being misunderstood.

First and foremost, I’m not team “man” or team “bear”. I’m team “this shit has gone on long enough, and sitting around talking about it has done nothing.”

Secondly, I don’t think women are stupid for saying they’re safer with a bear. I think it’s stupid that they’ve had to break it down into this kind of scenario in order to get men to talk about their behavior.

Thirdly, I don’t disagree with anyone’s rationality for choosing a bear. It’s sad that people feel that way, another point I made that was greatly overlooked.

Finally… the overarching point that I keep circling back to, accountability, isn’t a solution for every scenario and isn’t going to keep every woman safe, but it’s a start. I’m not sitting here and acting like I’ve solved world peace because I have an idea like some say, but what’s the realistic alternative to this that isn’t raising our boys to be better men that don’t do this kind of shit and holding them accountable when they do? I’m a problem solver by nature, and I have yet to see anyone offer a solution to how we stop men from acting like this. All I’ve seen is people shitting on men instead of singling out the offenders, and picking apart my proposed solution, which, is just an idea, by the way… it’s not like any of us have any real power.

What is wrong with starting with the younger generation, raising them to be respectful men, teaching them that it’s wrong, and working to eliminate the issues women face that way? I’ve seen plenty of people react negatively, I’ve seen plenty of people comment negatively, but I’ve yet to see any tangible “instead, why don’t we do this?”

Maybe there’s a piece I’m missing, I’ll admit it, but I’ve combed through this thread, my other half and my friend have combed through this thread and the only conclusion we’ve been able to come up with is “what’s the other option? Keep creating more and more dangerous scenarios for comparisons and hope that it clicks that some men need to straighten up? Keep talking about it and hope one day someone gets the memo? Keep generalizing men and let the good ones take shit for the bad ones because diplomacy is easier than singling out individual perpetrators?”

I’ve even asked myself… is it a setting thing? Could I just have zero faith in the justice system and have a “we gotta do this ourselves, then” attitude? I’ve seen countless people get away with fucked up sexual crimes here, so that could be part of it… a zero tolerance approach because I’ve seen too much. That couldn’t be it, there are other members here that have seen it, too, and they’re not at that point where they agree with my suggestion.

Then, I asked myself, could it be because my solution is too complicated or unrealistic? @Kat touched on it being unrealistic, and she’s not wrong for feeling that way, so do I. My problem is… just throwing my hands up and admitting defeat is a problem, clearly, as evidenced by this thread. Am I at fault for wanting to live in a world where we raise our kids to treat people better, though? I’d hope not. Should I “admit defeat” and say I don’t have a solution for this? Probably, but that’s not in my nature either. Everyone else can resign themselves to think that this is just the way it is, and that’s part of the problem, because that line of thought perpetuates whatever came before it. I can’t do that, though, because I want to see a solution where women are safe from predators and where predators aren’t safe to carry out their acts.

So, without laying the whole “you need to educate yourself” speech on me, can someone please explain to me what’s so wrong about what I’m saying? In a whole bunch of words, I have effectively only said “this is wrong, we need to do something about this, I propose we start here, women shouldn’t have to manufacture these scenarios to illustrate to men how they feel around us, please don’t play with bears either, ladies”.

Some of you may look at me and see a white male oozing with privilege. I don’t care what you see, there are people that look at me and see a brother, a father, a step-father, an uncle, a significant other. They are the people I’m saying this for, the people I use my “privilege” to protect from people that use their “privilege” to exploit. I’m not being combative with any of you, and I’ve certainly felt no need to be disrespectful to any of you. I’m genuinely trying to figure this shit out, because this isn’t just an internet forum discussion for me, there’s much more at stake, like the lives and safety of my loved ones. If my solution is wrong, or my ethics on this matter are skewed because of all the bad shit I’ve seen, I wanna know.

 

[TD]

.

 

[shortkut]

My hot take on this thread: too many words

TD and Mark were having different conversations with each other
- one conversation is just to listen and understand that people feel a certain way
- the other conversation was how can we try to prevent situations where people need to feel that way

The posts on both sides were very verbose. Both conversations interest on the manbearpig topic many times, so it is easy to see how it would appear to be the same conversation.

In conclusion