this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
973 points (92.7% liked)

Comic Strips

14137 readers
2491 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The entire "bear" thing is the exact same situation from the other side. The reality is that there is always nuance, while it is more popular / more often that people see the extreme outliers and attribute that to the entire group.

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The point of the bear question isn't blaming men. It's assessing risk, and the risk of random man in the wilderness is far greater than random bear. Yes. A bear can maul, kill, and eat you, but a bear will never assualt, torture, or throw you in a pit for years on end. The risk of sexual and psychological abuse is worse to women than the threat of being eaten by an animal. It's not about blame at all.

[–] tias@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I love that they made my point for me.

[–] Shou@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Which makes sense. You get only one shot at life. So being more sensitive to negative bias could be an advantage to the individual.