The man or bear hypothetical (1 Viewer)

[bigdaddysaints]

Is it really so hard to comprehend that the answer, for many women, is the bear because a bear will not violate them sexually? "Well, yeah, but a bear will kill you." And the answer remains the same. Let that sink in.

If a bear randomly attacks a woman, no one will ask if it was because her skirt was too short or if too much cleavage was showing...

 

[St. Widge]

If anyone thinks there wasn't a fallout of men avoiding women as a result of the MeToo movement, just do an Internet search for "men avoiding women MeToo." There are plenty of articles about it - men avoiding women at work, men fearful of mentoring women at work, etc. Men tried to give women what they asked for in order for them to feel safer - distance - but that got seen as a problem, too.

Articles don't always reflect reality. They often reflect what people want to think it reality or anecdotal evidence based on how some people feel. The problem with this sort of thing is there is no valid scientific way to test it. Which allows some to think it's true because many people say it's true.

But, from an anecdotal point of view, I have been working in an office environment since 1999 and have seen almost no change in the way men and women work with or interact with each other. The one exception I have seen is that at 75 year-old man found out you could not go around touching a secretary's arse.

Frankly, that doesn't seem too hard to learn or too onerous. And, again, anecdotally, the only men I have seen who seem to have an issue with what they see as new rules are men who were butt crevasses to women before. Nobody I am friends with had an issue with these "new" rules because it didn't change how they interacted with or treated women.

 

[St. Widge]

Is it really so hard to comprehend that the answer, for many women, is the bear because a bear will not violate them sexually? "Well, yeah, but a bear will kill you." And the answer remains the same. Let that sink in.

That to me, is the most startling and important part of this.

 

[Cage1]

Is it really so hard to comprehend that the answer, for many women, is the bear because a bear will not violate them sexually? "Well, yeah, but a bear will kill you." And the answer remains the same. Let that sink in.

It's a little difficult to comprehend. If you change the hypothetical to where it's a grizzly bear or a man who can and 100% will sexually violate me, I'll still take the man. And there's the difficult disconnect. As much as that would suck and scar me, physically and emotionally, it's still better than them paws. A lifetime of therapy and fear is still a lifetime.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

That seems to handwave the plethora of societal ills predating the interwebs

Societal ills have indeed been with us for as long as there have been human societies but the Interwebs made things worse, IMO.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

It's a little difficult to comprehend. If you change the hypothetical to where it's a grizzly bear or a man who can and 100% will sexually violate me, I'll still take the man. And there's the difficult disconnect. As much as that would suck and scar me, physically and emotionally, it's still better than them paws. A lifetime of therapy and fear is still a lifetime.

They would rather die than be raped.

 

[BoxerJoe]

Articles don't always reflect reality. They often reflect what people want to think it reality or anecdotal evidence based on how some people feel. The problem with this sort of thing is there is no valid scientific way to test it. Which allows some to think it's true because many people say it's true.

But, from an anecdotal point of view, I have been working in an office environment since 1999 and have seen almost no change in the way men and women work with or interact with each other. The one exception I have seen is that at 75 year-old man found out you could not go around touching a secretary's arse.

Frankly, that doesn't seem too hard to learn or too onerous. And, again, anecdotally, the only men I have seen who seem to have an issue with what they see as new rules are men who were butt crevasses to women before. Nobody I am friends with had an issue with these "new" rules because it didn't change how they interacted with or treated women.

Articles don't never reflect reality either. There are articles that give percentages of men who feel uncomfortable being assigned to work with women, etc. And I seriously doubt women were complaining about the male butt crevasses staying away from them at work. There are men at work whom women are attracted to and hope that something more could become of things but many of those guys are too afraid of saying or doing something that could be taken the wrong way (whether it actually would or would not).

They would rather die than be raped.

It's not just dying though; it's literally being eaten alive. A bear doesn't go for your jugular to kill you first.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

It's not just dying though; it's literally being eaten alive. A bear doesn't go for your jugular to kill you first.

Can't tell if this is deliberate or not.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

It's a little difficult to comprehend.

you could have stopped there - not trying to overplay it, but that's exactly what SWJJ was talking about
instead of saying 'women don't know what they're talking about', what about 'maybe i don't have the perspective to weigh in here' and i could listen

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

It's not just dying though; it's literally being eaten alive. A bear doesn't go for your jugular to kill you first.

the 'well, actually' answer might not be the point to take away here
just saying

 

[BoxerJoe]

the 'well, actually' answer might not be the point to take away here
just saying

The argument is disconnect and absurdity. Nevertheless, someone has the right to rather be viciously eaten alive instead of sexually assaulted, though that highlights my first sentence.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

The argument is disconnect and absurdity. Nevertheless, someone has the right to rather be viciously eaten alive instead of sexually assaulted, though that highlights my first sentence.

Oh, there's disconnect alright.

 

[BoxerJoe]

Oh, there's disconnect alright.

Oh, indeed...in-double-deed.

 

[Madmarsha]

That's not the point of the question, though. It is a crude way to reflect the feelings of insecurity and vulnerability the average woman feels just walking down the street. There are many surveys and studies about that.

Some time ago, there was a video, in which a young woman walks around NYC wearing sweatpants and a t-shirt, while someone else with a hidden camera records male behavior around her; the amount of whistles, cat calls, unwanted approaches, the persistence of some of the approaches... it was overwhelming for me, and I am a man watching the video.

The average man doesn't think about it... I think many men would be surprised by the number of women in their lives who have been victims of sexual harassment, and even raped.

As a woman, I understand both sides. I've often felt that the average man just doesn't think about a women's vulnerability 24/7. I have never been a victim of a sexual assault on the street (or ever but I think we're talking about stranger danger here) so I probably take it for granted myself until something happens to ping my Spidey senses.

But the point of the question is stupid. A bear is ALWAYS a dangerous wild animal. Not every man is.

 

[Madmarsha]

We need to do better at holding other men accountable for their misbehavior towards women, not being that guy and looking the other way when that guy behaves badly towards women is not enough.

One thousand percent. This is the "boys will be boys" dilemma.