In this ongoing trend on questioning women which they'd rather encounter, I find that males miss the point entirely.
The common male seething response to how most women are answering is
>but bears will mess you up they're so much deadlier/stronger than a man!
Which is misunderstanding the situation. Yes, the bear is more deadly, *if it chooses to attack.* That is the point here - bears are highly unlikely to attack you unless provoked, whereas men are more unpredictable and far more likely to hurt you, and unlike the bear, have a chance of hurting/killing you for no reason at all. Being alone with a man is unironically the less safe option.
I have personally experienced this - when I most recently encountered a bear, I just placed some uncooked hot dogs for him and he enjoyed them and was on his way, no aggression whatsoever despite close proximity.
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Bait thread don't reply
fr
>Bait thread don't reply
Maybe so, sounds realistic to me. This is the inner workings of the average c**toid.
Literally the first post and people STILL reply to this moronic troony pedophile. Do people just not read threads before they post in them?
No, we all saw that reply. We don't care. Calling something bait just to avoid a legitimate discussion is lame.
>bears are highly unlikely to attack you unless provoked
Polar bears are one of the only animals that actively predates on humans.
even then most polar bears encounters do not go that way. I actually watched a documentary on them once, the guy talked about how the mistake is that people panic when, in his words, most of the time polar bears come up to people they're just curious and will sniff you then leave. most attacks, which are exceedingly rare even just compared to encounters, are only because people panic and try to hit or throw stuff at the bear.
In the arctic anything that moves is food, you like all dumb roasties keep projecting human level reasoning on wild animals
>I actually watched a documentary on them once,
You don't live in bear country. You know nothing.
>You don't live in bear country.
I live in black bear country. they are my friends. they just want you to throw them some deli meats or bread
>Again, do you have anything concrete to base this on?
femicides statistics
>femicides statistics
Okay. Show me those. And the stats for bear attacks.
>spoonfeed my incel NEET ass
Just go outside and see for yourself
>Just go outside and see for yourself
See what for myself? Whatever sliver of the world I interact with is insufficient to base a robust generalization model on.
Ok we get it mowgli, now hot dog your way out of the fricking board. kys
You know what I think I'll trust Herman Melville on polar bears over what some limp dick scientist has to say.
Women in the west should be beat more
Lmao literally no roastie is picking man, what a fricking subhuman sex
Men are not far more likely to attack you. Yes, the number of bear attacks is lower, but the number of bear encounters women experience is a fraction of a fraction of the number of male encounters. The fact that so many of you fail to understand this is a testament to your mental deficiency and detachment from reality.
This. Bear attack statistics are based on the astronomical chances of even meeting a bear on your own in the first place. There are no known statistics for how often bears will attack given that the encounter has already taken place.
I know two people personally who have had to shoot and kill brown bears, they WILL try to fight you
Just curious, what do you think is the percentage of encounters with bears that end either in death or injury, vs what do you thing is the percentage of encounters with men that end in death or injury?
>Just curious, what do you think is the percentage of encounters with bears that end either in death or injury, vs what do you thing is the percentage of encounters with men that end in death or injury?
considering how often the black bear is encountered, undoubtedly the percentage for males is higher
black bears are so docile I'd call them friendly. in my region you see them all the time. they're about as dangerous as a stray cat, and the fact that they're becoming so used to people/people-friendly means they're unlikely to be spooked by you either, which is the main reason for bear attacks.
>but the number of bear encounters women experience is a fraction of a fraction of the number of male encounters
yes, I'm saying even if you adjusted for this it would be true. the lone male encounter-violence ratio is higher than the bear encounter-violence ratio if adjusted to the same denominator.
>onsidering how often the black bear is encountered, undoubtedly the percentage for males is higher
Okay. Do you have any numbers to back this undeniable statement up?
>Do you have any numbers to back this undeniable statement up?
no because obviously the vast majority of bear encounters aren't going to be reported if they're non-violent. again where I'm from black bears are seen all the time.
1) again the question as it's being asked in most spaces is about encountering a single man alone without other people around
2) you specifically went for grizzlies when other bears exist, which would be like asking women specifically about black or Hispanic men.
>Men don't attack unprovoked either
no? a ton of femicides are "just because" as a motive. they simply see a woman alone, realize the opportunity, and take it. this is why femicides, especially serial ones, are often difficult to find culprits and go unsolved, because they lack any motive other than desire to kill women.
>no because obviously the vast majority of bear encounters aren't going to be reported if they're non-violent.
There should be reliable estimates with generous confidence intervals.
>again where I'm from black bears are seen all the time.
Where I'm from men are seen all the time.
again the question is about lone male encounters without other people around. moron
>How many of these "tons" have happened over the last 5 or so decades?
well last year alone in the UK alone there were 95, they hold a conference each year on international women's day for it. so, extrapolating from that, worldwide for 50 years it's probably quite a lot more than a dozen.
>Look at the race of the culprits of these incidents and where they were located.
so in my cited case, a first world country and primarily white? so in other words for India and Africa and such it would be even more?
also remember when that UK representative said we shouldn't count femicides as a hate crime because "b-but then they would compose the vast majority of hate crimes!" and skew the numbers away from race lol
>again the question is about lone male encounters without other people around. moron
The overwhelming majority of murders are committed by people who know and are close to the victims. At least in western nations. The likelihood of a random guy who you meet on a walk in the forest murdering you is significantly lower that the likelihood of you being murdered by a man at all, which is tiny to begin with.
95 in a country of ~67 million people with extremely high population density. Wooow.
>so in my cited case, a first world country and primarily white?
The uk is only "primarily white" in some locations moron. London is not primarily white, many areas in south and even northern england are nor primarily white. Please cite the location of all these events so we can attribute them to the correct races :^)
>well last year alone in the UK alone there were 95
London is literally majority non white and there are tons of islamists living there.
>a ton of femicides are "just because" as a motive
How many of these "tons" have happened over the last 5 or so decades? I recon about a dozen at most and tje vast majority being in shitholed like india.
Look at the race of the culprits of these incidents and where they were located.
>no because obviously the vast majority of bear encounters aren't going to be reported if they're non-violent. again where I'm from black bears are seen all the time.
If merely being in the vicinity of a black bear - like driving by one on the shoulder of the New York Thruway, for example - counts as an "encounter", do you know how many MEN every woman "encounters" in the course of a year?
You apparently have absolutely no idea the impact the DENOMINATOR has on a risk assessment. That's what has enraged the people who have to listen to you spew fricking nonsense.
If you went to school, you sat in a building with hundreds of males for 6 or 7 hours a day for YEARS. Do you know what would happen to you if I locked you in a warehouse with 400 black bears for 6 hours a day for 12 years? You would not survive that, no matter how "docile" you falsely believe black bears to be.
>again the question as it's being asked in most spaces is about encountering a single man alone without other people around
NO, that was the initial scenario, but the discussion of that scenario led fricking morons (like you) to make the blanket assertion:
>whereas men are more unpredictable and far more likely to hurt you
That's what you wrote in your fricking post, you intellectually dishonest sack of fricking dog shit.
>If merely being in the vicinity of a black bear - like driving by one on the shoulder of the New York Thruway, for example
that wouldn't count here. talking lone bear encounters vs lone male encounters. I'd say if you're in a car it doesn't count
>led fricking morons (like you) to make the blanket assertion:
yes, again, lone males, obviously they're not going to attack with other people around to hold them accountable.
>That's what you wrote in your fricking post
I didn't think you were so moronic you needed that part spelled out.
What makes you think a man will atack you for no reason?
Her subhuman foid brain wired to see only stone acting brutes as men
Men kill random women all the time. You are literally at the mercy of random males every time you leave the house and you shouldn't trust a single one of them because they're just waiting for an opportunity to attack you.
>random
>posts a woman that deserved it
>women getting beheaded by thugs
>deserved it
Her crime was walking on the streets and looking a man in the eye for a split second which triggered the man's killer instinct. This is the aftermath, this is what you get for looking at a man directly, gang rape and murder.
Based. Why was she not with her father or husband, and why was she dressed like a prostitute? She earned her punishment
>What makes you think a man will atack you for no reason?
because they attack women for no reason not infrequently, and I am a woman.
>not infrequently
That's an understatement. You're more likely to get killed by a random man than dying in a car accident.
You have no idea how unsettling it is to me to watch that guy taking the stabs motionless, and that many stabs as well, I don't know why. The fricking security doing nothing...
this was a lesbian couple in China, the man attacked them for no reason. This could happen to you any time when you're around men.
>because they attack women for no reason not infrequently
Again, do you have anything concrete to base this on?
>anything concrete
Crime statistics and real life isn't enough?
>Crime statistics
Reliable stats on the chances of the matters talked about in this thread would be enough. Show them to me.
What makes you think most of these attacks are completely unprovoked? Men aren't just deranged wild animals. They don't just throw away their whole future without good reason
>Men aren't just deranged wild animals.
These webms have clearly shown that they are. Women aren't safe anywhere.
he just said without good reason kek
>"but but everyone has the right to live"
nah
>this handful of webms with zero context has PROVEN that ALL MEN are psycho murder rapists!
Oh, to see the inside of a foid's mind for just one day.
They are not likely to do that. It's like 1 in 10000 and most of it happens in 3rd world countries where the average iq is 80. I bet you live in the west.
>yes, I'm saying even if you adjusted for this it would be true. the lone male encounter-violence ratio is higher than the bear encounter-violence ratio if adjusted to the same denominator.
And I'm saying you're a lying moron, like most women.
There is no reason to bear attacks, animals dont need a reason to maul you. See black people to understand better.
>the lone male encounter-violence ratio is higher than the bear encounter-violence ratio if adjusted to the same denominator
Do you have data for that or are you strictly talking out your ass?
again:
>no because obviously the vast majority of bear encounters aren't going to be reported as they're non-violent. again where I'm from black bears are seen all the time.
a while back I literally had to stop for a bear and her cubs crossing the road. she cast me a brief glance and nothing more.
again, I'm talking about when adjusted for per capita. males always screech "but muh per capita!" projecting their IQ onto me. I *AM* talking about adjusting the ratio of encounters.
obviously then I would prefer the teenage boy. we're not talking about consensual encounters
Okay so you are strictly talking out your ass.
I think you might be too low iq to understand and discuss these things, anon. You are purely arguing with feelings and have no argument in terms of actual reason.
>I have personally experienced this - when I most recently encountered a bear, I just placed some uncooked hot dogs for him and he enjoyed them and was on his way, no aggression whatsoever despite close proximity.
If you did the same with a random man and he didn't attack you, would you have come here to say that men are not aggressive?
why would I give a man uncooked hot dogs
>to get away from the men around you.
the question going around specifically pertains to lone male encounters where you are left alone with the man/no one else around
I said nothing about reasoning. they're not reasoning, they're just objectively unlikely to attack and mostly just inspecting you out of curiosity, which is common animal behavior.
Lone male encounters? Your surrounded by white knights frick off stupid roastie
As a man, I would prefer that you gave me raw liver instead of hot dogs. I would absolutely be your friend if you did
Go to a zoo with a bear enclosure and evaluate whether you should climb in to get away from the men around you.
You are laughably moronic and I sincerely hope a bear rapes and simultaneously eats you. You deserve this fate. Leave this website, woman
No, you still don't get it, you absolute fricking moron.
There is absolutely no doubt that if there were 160 million grizzly bears in the United States and you encountered them everywhere you currently encounter men, eventually you would suffer vastly more attacks from grizzly bears than you suffer from men.
The apparent statistical lack of "grizzly bear risk" is ENTIRELY A FUNCTION of the rarity of your encounters with them.
>WAAAAAHHHHHHHH nooooooo bears only attack when provoked!
You have no way to control what bears will, and will not, perceive as a provocation. Simply walking in the direction of a bear with cubs is often seen as a provocation.
It is precisely the fact that you utterly lack the ability to properly assess your own risk that fills us with fricking contempt for you.
>I prefer a carnivore that killed native americans over a human male
Roasties my god
You are such a fricking moron
The chances if a man attacking you is extremely low. Men don't attack unprovoked either and you are most likely to get harmed by a man that you are in a relationship with so just don't frick the man in the woods.
You are such a low iq moron pretending to be smart.
women walk by thousands of men each day safely
how many bears have you walked by? im curious
>women walk by thousands of men each day safely
The number is probably closer to billions
I meant more for a single woman in a day. Like any woman in a big city has walked by near a thousand guys if she is there all day
again, you absolute moron, as I've said several times now:
>the question going around specifically pertains to lone male encounters where you are left alone with the man/no one else around
Why do you, as an ugly 30 year old woman, think I would give you the time of day, much less bother killing or raping you?
> Yes, the bear is more deadly, *if it chooses to attack.* That is the point here - bears are highly unlikely to attack you unless provoked, whereas men are more unpredictable and far more likely to hurt you
A random average bear, encountered in the wild, is more likely to attack you than a random average man, encountered in the wild.
>and unlike the bear, have a chance of hurting/killing you for no reason at all
The bear also has a chance of randomly being provoked attacking you.
tl;dr: Women (including OP) believe that a man is more likely to attack them since there are more attack by men than attacks by bears. This is because women (including OP) are unable to differentiate between the two very different concepts of per capita and on average, This is a sign of low IQ commonly found in oversocialised normies.
I will not elaborate on the stupidity of choosing a bear in regards to how likely you will be attacked since people above my post already did that.
Even if the man you were in the woods with attacked you so he could rape or beat you up for some reason a woman is still better off with said man because the chances she dies being by herself is higher (not even counting the bear here) than her being with a man.
Maybe what woman want to say with choosing the bear is that in case of attack they would rather be killed and man sometimes leave them alive while the bear and nature itself would just kill her off.
what about the bear or your heckin teenage virgin boy who would rail the frick out of you
if you have nothing more important that to discuss this hypothetical, you are an npc. this also goes for all the guys crying about it
if we play under the assumption that whatever you will attack you in the encounter, you are an idiot if you do not choose man.
If we are assuming there would be no attack then bear is understandable but boring
If there could be but doesn't have to be an attack, then man is once again the safest choice.
>if we play under the assumption that whatever you will attack you in the encounter
uh no? that's the point
a wienerroach is different as it's inherently disgusting.
no it isnt
women only dislike wienerroaches because they are socialized to
there is nothing inherently disgusting about them
And bears are bigger and stronger than wienerroaches and actually kill you unlike one
She would probably prefer to encounter a bear instead of a wienerroach, because it would her feel safer. Statistics be damned.
>She would probably prefer to encounter a bear instead of a wienerroach, because it would her feel safer. Statistics be damned
1) wienerroaches carry diseases
2) yes because bears are my friends. they're silly little guys who want my hot dogs
Ah an animal fricking white female
>wienerroaches carry diseases
and bears don't? Lol
>yes because bears are my friends. they're silly little guys who want my hot dogs
So you admit that it's irrational and based on feelings then. You don't care about the actual implicit danger. You just care about how it makes you feel and bears look cute despite being objectively more dangerous than wienerroaches
How the frick are bears cute?
Women actually have no survival instincts or sense of self preservation.
Lol put a wienerroach near them
They are evolutionary bystanders, they have evolved to do one thing, which is giving birth.
Anyway, I'm glad this shit is picking up, I want the relationship between men and women absolutely demolished and this meme will contribute to it. I'm looking forward to the future of women being chased by deranged Black folk and no one lifting a finger to help them.
Glad I'm not the only one with this mindset. They are genuinely so cruel that they were able to break male's innate desire to simp/protect
Its astonishing how they continue to double down but I love it
Random stabbings here in Vancouver are picking up but unfortunately its still male on male because a male is the only one engaging the drug addict to make sure he doesn't harm anyone (and end up dying)
OP however only sees the one deranged mugger and not the fact that its still a male standing up for others pro bono and risking his life
Women would never but they'll b***h either way
Womens rights were a mistake
i choose the man so i can rape him obviously
I love these kinds of "men bad" memes because they always leave the women spreading them looking either sociopathic or mentally challenged (the latter in this case).
And even if it were true, men are not a monolith, it isn't fair to push accountability for what other men do onto us. All you're doing is attempting to deepen divisions between the sexes.
>All you're doing is attempting to deepen divisions between the sexes.
That's a good thing. Women should live in a world where they have to provide and fend for themselves.
Why do you care about this instead off talking with a guy on hinge like you wanted in your last post?
>Why do you care about this instead off talking with a guy on hinge like you wanted in your last post?
I don't have enough pictures to make a hinge profile, and realized I would be wasting my time as men are not good people.
this is just sad tbh, if you can't take 6 pics if yourself bc you just sit at home arguing with people on the internet
>men are not good people
Most are but you are usually not attracted to them.
Is OP a fricking genius or something?
She is always able to trigger robots easily and her threads are the fastest threads on /NSFFW/, the frick? How do I acquire this power?
Baselessly insult men by writing something that looks like an argument but isn't and use a few big words that you don't understand to try to appear smart.
>Is OP a fricking genius or something?
yes.
my intellectual superiority causes the manbeast to cry out in pain as it attempts to strike. it's seething at the recognition of its own inferiority, combined with its dog-like impulse control, means it has no choice but to express its rage.
You have to be provocative, verbose, and smug. Basically a pseud. Generalize and make wild claims without any evidence. Keep arguing in bad faith to trigger people. Common topics include gender, race, religion, and politics as those are the most likely to make people emotional.
so the entire point is... bears are unlikely to attack?
youre life would be easier if you didnt hate men
Of course this stupid prostitute has to grace us with her take on the stupid prostitute bear meme
No, males understand the situation correctly, women are just being moronic as usual
A bear is going to attack you almost all of the time in relative close proximity, which the scenario implies. If it is not close proximity you are not "stuck" or "trapped" with anything by definition.
1. a bear is more likely to attack you on average than a human, by a significant margin
2. a bear is vastly better at tracking you than a human
3. a bear cannot be overpowered, you will not win a fight against one basically ever, you cannot suffer an injury from a bear and go on to win, one attack is enough to do you in, you will be able to win a fight against humans some of the time and individually their attacks cause substantially less damage than a bears allowing you to last longer against them and not die from your wounds even if you win
Anyone choosing a bear in the scenario as described without additional context like "the bear is friendly" or something, is just completely stupid, and had society not coddled you and kept you secure darwinism would have been the fate of all such people long ago
It's no wonder our societies are a shitshow when we're forced to put up with people who merely a century or two ago would have wiped themselves out entirely with their clown iq, and we let these people vote and consider their opinion equivalent to someone who wouldn't have tried to have a tea party with a bear.
>women are just being moronic as usual
Well, let's not generalize too much. Let's leave it at OP and certain vocal groups on X, reddit, and tik tok.
>a bear cannot be overpowered, you will not win a fight against one basically ever, you cannot suffer an injury from a bear and go on to win,
except people do. one thwonk on the nose will send a black bear running unironically. they're the pansies of bears
>The uk is only "primarily white" in some locations moron.
I'm talking about the femicide victims
no most men are not good people, statistics/research on empathy and how stats show most men say they'd rape if they could get away with it supports this, look it up
Okay. It's been fun, but I'm not really interested in having a conversation where all the assertions are not based on anything concrete. Take care.
>statistics/research on empathy and how stats show most men say they'd rape if they could get away with it supports this, look it up
This is one "study", done with a sample size of 86, from one university lmfao.
It is not remotely valid or scientific at all, it's a typical "we want to be able to say x so lets conduct a 100% fake study which meets no minimum criteria for any scientific method that gives the result we want"
The black bear will not "run", you are trapped and stuck in this scenario by the fricking wording, it has nowhere to run in the first place, it will fight no matter what because of this
>you are trapped and stuck in this scenario by the fricking wording
no. you made that up. that was never part of the scenario
Those words have definitions and meanings dumbass, go ahead and post the question that was posed verbatim and we'll see if it included them and how they affect the scenario posed :^)
again the scenario is a lone encounter with a man, versus a lone encounter with a bear. nothing about that implies being trapped, it just means that the man/bear is solitary and that no one else is around.
post the sentence that was posed to these women verbatim or you admit defeat anon, there's no further discussion here if you can't do that :^)
the actual original question was
>if you were alone in the woods would you rather encounter a bear or a man you don't know?
so no implications of being trapped in a confined space
>You just care about how it makes you feel and bears look cute despite being objectively more dangerous than wienerroaches
to you. bears are not more dangerous to me because they are my friends
no, the less afraid they are the less likely they'll panic and attack. being fed raises their friendship meter
>being fed raises their friendship meter
man, it was funny the first time, but now you're just making it too obvious, lol
why don't you test out that theory again? livestream it so we see it
Reminder the OP is s female teacher aka a boy fricking pedophile, disregard any negative thing she says about men because say a 8 year old tied her up and raped her, she would fight you if you tried to punish him.
>most men are not good people
Since when do you b***hes like good men?
was the bear cute, bears look cute but also scare me
literally women are built for big bear wiener
Women dont want to have to awkwardly sit near an ugly man in a forest
they want to be MAULED by bbc
Do fembots want to be MAULED and SWALLOWED?
You are 0.009% likely to meet a murderer in the us. And most of those murderers had a reason so we can even lower that percentage but im going to be generous and leave it at 0.009%. and IF SOMEHOW you meet one you can outrun hit with a stick throw stones or dirt at hes eyes. If a bear wants to kill you its game over.
Imagine getting SWALLOWED alive big a big masculine hairy and horny smelly bear after he pumps you full of his bear seed
I would rather be with a bear than a woman. The bear wouldn't accuse me of rape and ruin my whole life making me suffer as long as i live. It would just kill me.
OP, would you rather bury your face in a mans ass or a bears?
>when I most recently encountered a bear, I just placed some uncooked hot dogs for him and he enjoyed them and was on his way
a fed bear is a dead bear
now it's going to associate human beings with food and will approach them more often, increasing the chances of an attack
you may have just indirectly killed/maimed several people just to save your own ass
good fricking job
the only reason bears are less likely to attack you is the fear of the unknown, a bear that knows human beings is far more likely to attack than a regular dude
good bait though, managed to hook me this time
I actually agree with women that the bear is less threatening. That's just facts. I hike innawoods all the time and I can tell you that a random man is 100% scarier than a random animal. Like, I'm a dude and "Is this a psycho who wants to rape me" crosses my mind.
Plus I can legally just put 30 rounds of soft-tipped 7. 62x39mm into a bear on-sight, can't do that with a man
your fear is not proportional to the threat dumbass. just because you're more scared of the human cause its less predictable does not necessarily make it more of a danger than a bear, good god
nor in the given scenario do you have a fricking gun, otherwise neither would be a threat
The very LEAST I go into the woods with is a bow and arrow and a hunting dagger. Why would I ever go outside of civilization without weapons?
>Why would I ever go outside of civilization without weapons?
because that's the scenario posed for the hypothetical you fricking moron, you don't get to alter it
>Plus I can legally just put 30 rounds of soft-tipped 7. 62x39mm into a bear on-sight, can't do that with a man
I mean technically if it's out in the woods there's no one to prove he wasn't attacking you and you can claim self defense
Exactly, which is why the man is more dangerous.
The bear is just a dumb animal. It can eat more damage, it's built like a tank, one swipe will crush ribs, it's fast as FUARK, I get it. But the bear is not actively calculating a legal defense in advance of entrapping and shooting me from a fricking treestand. The bear does not have trail cameras. The bear cannot leave razor wire at neck height or shit on a punji spike because mentally he's back in 'nam. The bear cannot swap between projectiles and melee. The bear does not have chloroform on a rag. The bear is not a redneck lunatic who threw 60-70 ball bearings and screws into an airsoft grenade rigged with homemade explosives and held together with duct tape, and the bear is not itching to test it out. The bear does not have a shipping container converted into a soundproof rape shed. The bear does not want to hunt down and silence me because I stumbled across his cartel weed grow op. The bear is not mentally ill and trying to play real-life PUBG with me in his homemade ghilly suit. The bear can't fricking lie to me.
>That is the point here - bears are highly unlikely to attack you unless provoked, whereas men are more unpredictable and far more likely to hurt you, and unlike the bear, have a chance of hurting/killing you for no reason at all.
See, but that's not true at all. A bear will attack and kill you for any reason they see fit. This whole delusion that bears are super tame, passive creatures has been perpetuated by edutainment youtubers who profit off the "um actually" crowd. Every time you are close to a wild bear, your life is in danger. Whether you're in its territory, or it sees you as a threat, or it has babies nearby. There is no reasoning with a bear or negotiating with a bear. Bears will fricking kill you. On the other side, men don't just kill random women unprovoked. Men are generally reasonable. Furthermore, if a man does attack you, you've got significantly better odds of escaping the encounter alive than if a bear attacks you. Bears are 800lbs of pure muscle. You can't fight a bear. You can't choke a bear to death. You can't hurt a bear badly enough to convince it to run away.
Women only choose the bear because their perception of men is warped beyond belief. The average man isn't going to attack you. The average bear might.
Women
>are stupid as frick
>are paranoid to a delusional degree
>are incapable of understanding statistics
These threads are very educational.
>are incapable of understanding statistics
>men commit 99.99% of violent crime
Like I said, you're stupid as frick.
not my fault you can't understand statistics
you're not supposed to feed wild animals and especially bears you stupid b***h
YOU are not supposed to. bears are my friends and they want me to feed them
You'll feed them alright, tubby.
Women are deranged and love beastiality. This was a bestseller in canada kek. Imagine flicking your bean to bear rape erotica
for me the question comes down to what percentage of men would rape women if there was no consequences for it and rn I think that number is around 60%.
but the rate of bear attack fatality is around 10-15%. plus I would rather die or get disabled rather than live as a rape victim.
>for me the question comes down to what percentage of men would rape women if there was no consequences for it and rn I think that number is around 60%.
literally any observation of wartime or a college party with a girl passed out would suggest the number is significantly higher than that
Link one decent source that suggests that
I'd rather fight a bear than ask a woman out as well tbqh
I don't give a shit. I feel you wasted a minute of my life by making me initially think this thread was about something other than that dumb social media bullshit c**ts are on about.
Of course you choose the bear. You could just scare it off with your rotten shit breath, fatty.