Would you rather be stuck in a forest with a bear or a man? - aka Debate user doodoocaca on the validity of rape victims

Would you rather be stuck in a forest with a bear or a man?

  • Total voters
    199
Cherry Eyed Hamster said:
You’re the retard here. I’m aware bears are omnivores and have eaten humans. However they mainly attack humans if they feel threatened. They seldom eat humans and it’s even rarer for them to hunt humans, unless they’re polar bears but this is a forest we are talking about.

Also they don’t kill people for “fun”.
Click to expand...
Always fun to interact with people whose knowledge of things is exclusively what they've read online or heard in YouTube videos
 
  • Like
Reactions: RollerGator, AngryAboutInternets, Kalsarikännit and 6 others
This is kind of a bait question and depends on a lot of variables. Honestly it kind of tells more about what assumptions people have more than actual fact.
For instance is the man already there wandering around, just one single person alone? Was he just spawned in like in a video game? Even most serial killers and rapists plan their attacks. what kind of person does a totally random murder like that? I cant even find data on the frequency of senseless murders
Even most rape is done by perpetrators known to the victim ~80%, and furthermore the case of rape or murder by a stranger in the wilderness are exceedingly unlikely (at least in America):

Sexual assault by a stranger was more likely to occur in the home of the victim (43% v 28%, P < .001)

Alcohol and drug use have long been recognized as important risk factors for acquaintance, as well as stranger rape.2-5,14,15 Alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, and other illicit drugs were used by 46% of all the women in our population.

Those assaulted by strangers were more likely to be married, file a police report, and to have used alcohol or elicit drugs before the sexual assault.
Outdoor assaults by an unknown assailant accounted for 23% of all sexual assaults by an unknown assailant, so (23/100 outdoors)* (30/100 unknown assailant)*40 per 100k per capita rape victims in the USA equals approximately 2.76/100,000 per capita random outdoor rapes by unknown assailants in the USA including all shades of brown men

this also does not factor in rape where there are no instances of drug use from the victim

Maybe one fatal black bear attack per year? 300k bears = .3 per 100k just shy of one order of magnitude difference, but doesn't seem to be that far off in terms of likelihood for the very specific scenario described of being absolutely randomly raped in the woods by a stranger
this also does not include bear attacks that are not fatal which may or may not make the odds more equivalent

the homicide rate in the USA is 6.4 and then what portion of that are random unprovoked murders in the woods? probably even less

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Something else to consider is that bears may be conditioned to avoid humans due to negative experiences, considering that many humans are not far off from the size of prey many bears might consider eating.

in fact many governments for instance run culling programs for "problem bears":

"Because of this perception, management of human-bear conflicts in British
Columbia has been primarily reactive: that is, ”problem” bears were translocated
(moved to another area) or destroyed. In British Columbia, the Conservation
Officer Service receives an average of 9000 complaints per year and destroys
over 1000 bears per year. The cost of having the Conservation Officer Service
respond to human-bear conflicts in this manner is estimated at more than one
million dollars annually."
Pretty much the entire western world is corralled thanks to men and modern technology. Im glad we are doing our best to tear all that down.
These people who are going on about how "men can do such despicable things!" as if animals dont. Being eaten alive is torture you insufferable faggot and worse than rape, go outside touch grass and preferably kys.
 
  • Agree
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Feels
Reactions: Great General Ri Shin, The Deep State, DOUBLE_WHEEL and 7 others
img_1_1715297003671.jpg
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Like
  • Lunacy
Reactions: grenouille crétine, The Deep State, Am I Very Wrong and 6 others
Cherry Eyed Hamster said:
You are all completely missing the point of this question, yet the responses some of you give simultaneously prove its point.

Women have to think about this question because men can be dangerous. Same with bears. There is a good chance the man is fine, more so than the bear won’t attack you, but men still have that capacity to inflict horrific violence onto women, anything from rape, torture, or murder. If you asked a man if he would rather be alone in a forest with a woman or a bear, all men would say “women”. Men don’t have to ponder the question, whilst women do because they are taught from a young age that they can be targeted.
Click to expand...
As if women don't abuse, rape, torture or murder men. Men choose women because every woman on the planet isn't a 200+ pound carnivorous predator with claws like steak knives. I don't know how small of a caliber is acceptable for bear, but I know every 9mm handgun is more than enough for the average woman.
 
I love how once they get called out on how stupid they are, rather than change their opinion to something logical they start trying to justify by asking shit like "well it depends what kind of bear. Some bears are more violent depending on the color"!

...But they never ask to clarify what color man, those stats don't matter.

all of my el oh els
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Autistic
Reactions: The Deep State, RollerGator and Android raptor
What matters most, strength, or intelligence?

The guys here act like bears are the fucking terminator or something it's a dumb animal. You have a brain there's probably some survival tactic situation to get out of it. We're the species that invent cars and nukes suddenly one animal you'd all just stand there and get mauled. Yeah I have never dealt with a bear and never will but c' mon. We're the ones putting them in zoos not the other way around.

Are men in general more of a threat than a bear?.


No men are just dickheads who wander around out for a coffee or beer. A bear would be out for survival.

Can man be more of a threat than a bear?

Yes, because they have intelligence which is more dangerous.

If I had to duke it out with a man or a bear? I'd choose the guy because I can punch a guy a bear would be stronger.

Who is more moral? The bear is more innocent as it is a simple animal as opposed to mankind as a whole who nuke cities and have done God know what horrors.
 
  • Disagree
  • Autistic
  • Winner
Reactions: The Deep State, Am I Very Wrong and Gangstalker #32194
redcent said:
If I had to duke it out with a man or a bear? I'd choose the guy because I can punch a guy a bear would be stronger.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the question isn't who would you rather fight, it's who would you rather be stuck in a forest with. You're stuck in a forest - a man is far, far more likely to be of assistance to a woman in this situation than a bear which at best is going to ignore you, at worst kill you. Compared to a guy who the overwhelming majority of which would be making sure you got out of the situation together.

As an aside, for anyone who wants a distilled collection of irrationality and lack of perspective, the Mumsnet Women's Right section has a thread which is a goldmine of such. Reminding us that though they may share our wariness about the trans movement, it's still a beehive of madness.

 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: There Is Light At The End, Great General Ri Shin, The Deep State and 5 others
Overly Serious said:
Sure, but the question isn't who would you rather fight, it's who would you rather be stuck in a forest with. You're stuck in a forest -
Click to expand...
Yeah, but stuck in a forest doing what?

Do I have time to prepare, say, a trap for the bear out of crude tools? Or has the bear got the jump on me? Do I have a manual or a phone to google "how to not get eaten by a bear", do I have say a buzzer to scare it off (or mace or whatever tactic americans use to deal with thus problem)

Am I a hunter myself for whatever reason? Maybe I am out to make a bear fur coat and I have an arsenal to actually carry out killing it? Am I looking for some rare endangered bear? In some situations the bear can be a positive. Maybe the "stuck" is situational, say my ride home is late due to traffic or due to a log in the way and I want to make most of my time with the bear.

This is a thought experiment and I want to have fun with this.

a man is far, far more likely to be of assistance to a woman in this situation than a bear which at best is going to ignore you, at worst kill you. Compared to a guy who the overwhelming majority of which would be making sure you got out of the situation together.

As an aside, for anyone who wants a distilled collection of irrationality and lack of perspective, the Mumsnet Women's Right section has a thread which is a goldmine of such. Reminding us that though they may share our wariness about the trans movement, it's still a beehive of madness.

Click to expand...
I agree in general, the man is more of a use.

But what if I am not the innocent? What if, say, I drove my car into the guy's house and he's pissed (just as example) or the guy is a cop and I just robbed a bank and I am on the run? The man can be a negative even if he is not totes rapist. Would a copper with a gun be better or worse than a bear? What if the copper is out to stop me hunting the bear for my fur coat?
 
Last edited:
  • Autistic
Reactions: The Deep State
VeteranOfTheRetardWars said:
View attachment 5982734
Click to expand...
"pulled over" implies some traffic thing, which would just result in some fine at worst, regardless of the cop's gender, so cop of course. But I understand in USA there's this cop hate, or at least this distaste for submission to authority, so I am interested in what others response is.

If if it was stuck in forest, depends what I am up to. I might have an arsenal with me, and I would be able to take out both bear and cop, but there would be less consequences if I kill a bear compared to a human, in which case I'd be up against courts and a lot of pissed off people.

And country is important. If I'm likely to go to some cushy jail, just choose the cop, of course. If I'm expected to go to Thailand prison, I'd choose the bear hands down.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: The Deep State
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back