• Contramuffin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The question is designed to be as divisive as possible. It categorizes large swathes of people into just 2 groups - man or bear. The man group contains mansplainers, but it also contains regular people who simply view humanity as naturally altruistic. The bear group contains people with concerns about men overpowering women, but also contains people who earnestly believe that most if not all men will try to do it if given the chance.

    The problem is that people either are unable to or unwilling to acknowledge that these categories are not monolithic. And in claiming that all people in the man group are incels, you are inadvertently insulting everyone in that group. Likewise, in claiming that all people in the bear group are misandrists, you are inadvertently dismissing everyone in that group.

    It is not productive to make claims about people based only on their answer to the question. In fact, it appears to be entirely the intention of the question to divide even rational people by exploiting the general human inability to see subgroups within larger categories

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I thought it was from the woman’s perspective. She doesn’t know if the man is an incel or a regular, well behaved person.

      The point is: do you roll the dice on the man, who could be anything, or the bear, who is a bear.

      • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The known potential bad is better than the unknown potential bad. At least a bear won’t rape you before/while killing you.

        IMO, the answer given exposes more about the life experiences of the women answerers, and the result seems to be that their experiences have been bad.