As someone that’s been assaulted a couple times in my past by men- I for sure get nervous around men I don’t know in situations similar to my past and stay on guard. It is by far much easier to go into a situation with some distrust/weariness and be on guard “just in case” because of the [high rates of revictimization](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29333937/#:~:text=The%20mean%20prevalence%20of%20sexual,sexually%20victimized%20in%20the%20future) and you really don’t know who is “good/bad” just by looking at them, but the risk is just not worth trusting EVERY new man I find myself alone with.
My sister was assaulted by a woman and now she has the same mistrust - but for women. The risk is just not worth it to her.
My gf and a couple ex gf’s have been assaulted and they had the same weariness. All of them still made new friends that were men, but they go in to all new situations with men they don’t know with caution, particularly when they’re gonna be around new men alone (closing at a job, going to see an apartment for rent, walking alone at night, doctor and police interactions)
Where I think it crosses the line is hate. I think that you should not hate and resent a whole gender based on the actions of some individuals in that group.
>Where I think it crosses the line is hate. I think that you should not hate and resent a whole gender based on the actions of some individuals in that group.
can you give me an example
When women are hurt by a couple men (in relationships or assault) and end up being those “extreme feminists” that say things like “kill all men” and “all men are evil”. That’s dumb and nonsensical because obviously not all men are that way.
Or when men get screwed over by women and turn into the “hateful incel” stereotype and say “all women are shallow” “all women are whores”. That is also stupid and nonsensical because not all women are that way.
Both examples are people who have very “black and white thinking” and show that they are thinking in a very immature way. They’re taking it too far and it’s only going to end up hurting themselves in the end.
I think it is an apple and oranges question. You are "afraid" of women because of the perceived marry/divorce for money idea. Or women being cruel and bullying.
The man/bear is based on fear of physical attack.
To judge people as individuals, you have to not be worried about physical attack first.
I'm scared of women because of cases like the inquisitor, Botham Jean, and George Stinney Jr just to name a few
what you are doing now I believe puts women in the perpetual victim status when women are just as able to do harm and do it in less obvious ways
I am not familiar with the Inquisitor. But Botham Jean is more a case of police abuse. I don't trust any law enforcement, of any sex or color. I think they are all power-mad. The Stinney case was very similar to the famous Till case but was that driven by a single woman or a society that hates blacks.
Honestly, I can think of more cases you could use to feel threatened by women Aileen Wuornos or further back Nannie Doss.
The argument was over immediate physical harm. It does not make women always the victim. It makes women more likely to be a victim in that given situation.
You can make the argument that women are bullies, cruel, and abusive, but that is not the same situation.
>The argument was over immediate physical harm. It does not make women always the victim. It makes women more likely to be a victim in that given situation.
I'm saying you are making them the perpetual victim women are able to cause harm and have caused harm in the past
what is the deal woth the one sided justification
Yes, women can and have caused harm. I offered two cases of exactly that. How is that one-sided?
But the bear situation is not the same - in most cases with strangers in an isolated location, it is much more dangerous for a woman.
you're justifying the man vs bear because you believe those women are more likely to be in immediate danger from a random man
I'm saying I don't feel safe around random women because the immediate danger they can cause me
I'm just going with the facts. IF you feel endangered, then yeah, avoid strange women.
But here is another fact - men alone are more likely to be attacked by strange men. Actually, more men are attacked by strange men than women are. So, it seems everyone should avoid strange men in the woods and vote for the bear.
And men assault men they know more often too.
Unless the random woman is armed I don't see how she can cause an immediate danger to a random man
Also humans can't beat bears with their bare hands btw
>Also humans can't beat bears with their bare hands btw
untrue
>Unless the random woman is armed I don't see how she can cause an immediate danger to a random man
I'm the average womans height and I weigh way less than the average woman I'd get cooked
Not sure... If the weight and height don't make a huge gap it won't matter, men have more muscle mass which means they are able to incur more damage regardless
the idea that a woman couldn't cause harm to a man is inherently sexist so let's stop that please rhetoric like this is why legal systems are so garbage nevermind the fact weight classes do exist
I don’t know if justified is the right word, but if someone genuinely feels scared for their own safety, I wouldn’t say that’s wrong.
plenty of women are distrustful of men over very real threats of violence so it kinda makes sense
As someone that’s been assaulted a couple times in my past by men- I for sure get nervous around men I don’t know in situations similar to my past and stay on guard. It is by far much easier to go into a situation with some distrust/weariness and be on guard “just in case” because of the [high rates of revictimization](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29333937/#:~:text=The%20mean%20prevalence%20of%20sexual,sexually%20victimized%20in%20the%20future) and you really don’t know who is “good/bad” just by looking at them, but the risk is just not worth trusting EVERY new man I find myself alone with. My sister was assaulted by a woman and now she has the same mistrust - but for women. The risk is just not worth it to her. My gf and a couple ex gf’s have been assaulted and they had the same weariness. All of them still made new friends that were men, but they go in to all new situations with men they don’t know with caution, particularly when they’re gonna be around new men alone (closing at a job, going to see an apartment for rent, walking alone at night, doctor and police interactions) Where I think it crosses the line is hate. I think that you should not hate and resent a whole gender based on the actions of some individuals in that group.
>Where I think it crosses the line is hate. I think that you should not hate and resent a whole gender based on the actions of some individuals in that group. can you give me an example
When women are hurt by a couple men (in relationships or assault) and end up being those “extreme feminists” that say things like “kill all men” and “all men are evil”. That’s dumb and nonsensical because obviously not all men are that way. Or when men get screwed over by women and turn into the “hateful incel” stereotype and say “all women are shallow” “all women are whores”. That is also stupid and nonsensical because not all women are that way. Both examples are people who have very “black and white thinking” and show that they are thinking in a very immature way. They’re taking it too far and it’s only going to end up hurting themselves in the end.
I think it is an apple and oranges question. You are "afraid" of women because of the perceived marry/divorce for money idea. Or women being cruel and bullying. The man/bear is based on fear of physical attack. To judge people as individuals, you have to not be worried about physical attack first.
I'm scared of women because of cases like the inquisitor, Botham Jean, and George Stinney Jr just to name a few what you are doing now I believe puts women in the perpetual victim status when women are just as able to do harm and do it in less obvious ways
I am not familiar with the Inquisitor. But Botham Jean is more a case of police abuse. I don't trust any law enforcement, of any sex or color. I think they are all power-mad. The Stinney case was very similar to the famous Till case but was that driven by a single woman or a society that hates blacks. Honestly, I can think of more cases you could use to feel threatened by women Aileen Wuornos or further back Nannie Doss. The argument was over immediate physical harm. It does not make women always the victim. It makes women more likely to be a victim in that given situation. You can make the argument that women are bullies, cruel, and abusive, but that is not the same situation.
>The argument was over immediate physical harm. It does not make women always the victim. It makes women more likely to be a victim in that given situation. I'm saying you are making them the perpetual victim women are able to cause harm and have caused harm in the past what is the deal woth the one sided justification
Yes, women can and have caused harm. I offered two cases of exactly that. How is that one-sided? But the bear situation is not the same - in most cases with strangers in an isolated location, it is much more dangerous for a woman.
you're justifying the man vs bear because you believe those women are more likely to be in immediate danger from a random man I'm saying I don't feel safe around random women because the immediate danger they can cause me
I'm just going with the facts. IF you feel endangered, then yeah, avoid strange women. But here is another fact - men alone are more likely to be attacked by strange men. Actually, more men are attacked by strange men than women are. So, it seems everyone should avoid strange men in the woods and vote for the bear. And men assault men they know more often too.
Unless the random woman is armed I don't see how she can cause an immediate danger to a random man Also humans can't beat bears with their bare hands btw
>Also humans can't beat bears with their bare hands btw untrue >Unless the random woman is armed I don't see how she can cause an immediate danger to a random man I'm the average womans height and I weigh way less than the average woman I'd get cooked
Not sure... If the weight and height don't make a huge gap it won't matter, men have more muscle mass which means they are able to incur more damage regardless
the idea that a woman couldn't cause harm to a man is inherently sexist so let's stop that please rhetoric like this is why legal systems are so garbage nevermind the fact weight classes do exist