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.
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.
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.
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.
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.