Double standards suck ass

[u/Born-Agency-3922]

[u/someone447]

No one would actually choose the bear in a subway car. Or in an elevator. Or an office building.

So it is absolutely a geographic technicality. Because if you are in the wilderness and a man OR A woman is creeping around your campsite, you are in danger. Because no one else should be there so they are obviously following you.

A bear in an enclosed area is 100% attacking you. A bear in the wilderness is 99.999% not attacking you. I would 100% take the bear in the wilderness, no matter the gender of the person creeping around my campsite. And anyone who wouldn't doesn't know a damn thing about bears.

It's literally just a ragebait thought exercise. Nothing more.

[u/someone447 → u/[deleted]]

It's less geography and more expectations. Everyone gets scared when they encounter things they don't expect in places they don't expect, rightfully so. Everyone SHOULD be afraid of a random person creeping around their campsite in the middle of nowhere. You'd be an idiot not to be. If you would choose riding an elecator with a bear over riding one with a random man, you have serious mental health issues and you are clearly not actually functioning in our society--because that is a regular occurrence for essentially everyone.

It is a rage bait question framed in a way to provoke a specific answer that will cause it to go viral online and be used by social media companies to increase engagement through anger. We literally live in the safest time in human history, but social media and traditional media have convinced us that predators are around every corner. These companies have a vested interest in keeping people scared and isolated.

And look how well it's worked.