The most simple and common scenario, the man is completely the correct choice, and these women are retarded. That's a given.
But for the sake of autistic argument, it is a very much more context-dependent question than it first seems, with a lot of inbuilt assumptions.
Are you on a hiking trail, where people are expected? Again, seems the most likely. Are you trespassing on someone else's land? Are you in an area where drug labs/farms might be set up? Are you in black bear country, or grizzly? Are there cubs nearby?
If it's just your average man versus your average bear, which I think is a fair assumption, the man is the correct choice, every time. But, again, just for the sake of argument, there are scenarios where I'd be totally correct to pick the bear. I'd rather run into a black bear than a pot farming gang member illegal.
But I'm giving this way more thought than these feminists did.
Oh, I'm not giving them credit. I'm not trying to outline their thought process, just my own, because I found the whole "bearpill" debate hilarious, so ended up thinking it over.
The one and only good point I've seen re: men being more dangerous is that lots of serial killers prowl hiking trails since it's infinitely easier to murder a random woman and get away with it out in the wild than to do the same in populated areas.
And I only heard that point from one woman I already know in a private conversation.
But otherwise, yes, the vast majority of the discourse is just grown women acting like teenage girls who are trying to piss off their dads.
There aren't lots of serial killers period. It's a tiny, tiny percentage of the population, and I think statistically most of them are in cities anyway. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but chances are, even if it's really remote, if you run into a dude on a hiking trail, he's not a serial killer.
A fair number of people go missing in forests without a trace, there might be serial killers who are unaccounted for.
But I agree, they're still far more rare than just regular dudes who go hiking, and women listen to too many truecrime podcasts. In any event no one, especially women, should go hiking alone anyways, you're more likely to die by simply being unprepared than by a serial killer or even a wild animal.
This whole discourse has revealed more than anything just how shockingly ignorant so many sheltered urbanites are of nature. Which, my own devils advocacy aside, I'm sure makes up the vast majority of people who go missing in forests, because they made the mistake of not respecting nature, getting lost, and dying of starvation, dehydration, disease, and/or hypothermia.
A fair number of people go missing in forests without a trace...
Largely national forests, as I recall. Hardly your average hike, but I take your point.
...women listen to too many truecrime podcasts.
It's not the true crime podcasts. They find the serial killers hot. It's the feminism, where they convince themselves all men are disgusting, evil, oppressive, and responsible for all their own failures in life. No one, literally no one, hates men because "serial killers."
In any event no one, especially women, should go hiking alone anyways, you're more likely to die by simply being unprepared than by a serial killer or even a wild animal.
Men can go hiking alone within reason. Even women can go hiking alone in many areas, but your point's a good one. Caution is key, regardless of sex. There are plenty of trails neither men nor women should venture out on without a companion. There are plenty of ways to get completely fucked up on your own.
This whole discourse has revealed more than anything just how shockingly ignorant so many sheltered urbanites are of nature.
I don't think nature is the point, but yes, agreed. Feminists are retarded. I'm glad they continue to prove it centuries later.
...devils advocacy aside, I'm sure makes up the vast majority of people who go missing in forests...made the mistake of not respecting nature, getting lost, and dying of starvation, dehydration, disease, and/or hypothermia.
Lost is the big one, all the others lead from that. You're not going to go out in the forest and starve...you're going to go out and get lost and then starve.
Personally, I suspect it's a combination of lost and injured...which leads to the same problem; not being able to get back to where you want to go. Unprepared people do stupid shit and can't get back to where they they need to be.
Yeah, there sure are a lot of serial killers on hiking trails and in the countryside...in Hollywood movies. Yeah, they've been drilling it into people's heads for almost a century that all rural people are mentally unstable inbred hicks who will kill anyone for looking at them funny, and you need to stay the hell out of them and remain deep in the metropolis, where it's safe. When the truth is the vast majority of criminals and murderers that are hostile to outsiders tend to live in the urban sprawls.
The most simple and common scenario, the man is completely the correct choice, and these women are retarded. That's a given.
But for the sake of autistic argument, it is a very much more context-dependent question than it first seems, with a lot of inbuilt assumptions.
Are you on a hiking trail, where people are expected? Again, seems the most likely. Are you trespassing on someone else's land? Are you in an area where drug labs/farms might be set up? Are you in black bear country, or grizzly? Are there cubs nearby?
If it's just your average man versus your average bear, which I think is a fair assumption, the man is the correct choice, every time. But, again, just for the sake of argument, there are scenarios where I'd be totally correct to pick the bear. I'd rather run into a black bear than a pot farming gang member illegal.
But I'm giving this way more thought than these feminists did.
Oh, I'm not giving them credit. I'm not trying to outline their thought process, just my own, because I found the whole "bearpill" debate hilarious, so ended up thinking it over.
The one and only good point I've seen re: men being more dangerous is that lots of serial killers prowl hiking trails since it's infinitely easier to murder a random woman and get away with it out in the wild than to do the same in populated areas.
And I only heard that point from one woman I already know in a private conversation.
But otherwise, yes, the vast majority of the discourse is just grown women acting like teenage girls who are trying to piss off their dads.
There aren't lots of serial killers period. It's a tiny, tiny percentage of the population, and I think statistically most of them are in cities anyway. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but chances are, even if it's really remote, if you run into a dude on a hiking trail, he's not a serial killer.
A fair number of people go missing in forests without a trace, there might be serial killers who are unaccounted for.
But I agree, they're still far more rare than just regular dudes who go hiking, and women listen to too many truecrime podcasts. In any event no one, especially women, should go hiking alone anyways, you're more likely to die by simply being unprepared than by a serial killer or even a wild animal.
This whole discourse has revealed more than anything just how shockingly ignorant so many sheltered urbanites are of nature. Which, my own devils advocacy aside, I'm sure makes up the vast majority of people who go missing in forests, because they made the mistake of not respecting nature, getting lost, and dying of starvation, dehydration, disease, and/or hypothermia.
Largely national forests, as I recall. Hardly your average hike, but I take your point.
It's not the true crime podcasts. They find the serial killers hot. It's the feminism, where they convince themselves all men are disgusting, evil, oppressive, and responsible for all their own failures in life. No one, literally no one, hates men because "serial killers."
Men can go hiking alone within reason. Even women can go hiking alone in many areas, but your point's a good one. Caution is key, regardless of sex. There are plenty of trails neither men nor women should venture out on without a companion. There are plenty of ways to get completely fucked up on your own.
I don't think nature is the point, but yes, agreed. Feminists are retarded. I'm glad they continue to prove it centuries later.
Lost is the big one, all the others lead from that. You're not going to go out in the forest and starve...you're going to go out and get lost and then starve.
Personally, I suspect it's a combination of lost and injured...which leads to the same problem; not being able to get back to where you want to go. Unprepared people do stupid shit and can't get back to where they they need to be.
Yeah, there sure are a lot of serial killers on hiking trails and in the countryside...in Hollywood movies. Yeah, they've been drilling it into people's heads for almost a century that all rural people are mentally unstable inbred hicks who will kill anyone for looking at them funny, and you need to stay the hell out of them and remain deep in the metropolis, where it's safe. When the truth is the vast majority of criminals and murderers that are hostile to outsiders tend to live in the urban sprawls.
Also true. Though country people should really play up the stereotype of the deranged hillbilly to keep the pozz away.