Oh, well that's a misunderstanding on my part as well.

You can try and qualify down the specifics, if you want, but we can always do the same with the bear: "Well the majority of these won't be when they are hungry, they might not have seen you, they are usually on the move to feeding grounds or home so they won't bother..." etc etc etc. For every excuse we create to excuse the men as a factor, we can create one to excuse the bear. The fact boils down to - For all interactions with men and bears, the vast majority of the time, the men... Who I should point out, if they wished you harm, have the capacity to follow you until you are alone, simply aren't interested in causing you harm and despite possessing the means to do so if they wish, do not wish. Burrow down into it if it helps, but it doesn't change that any belief a woman has that a bear is less dangerous to her than a man isn't held up by fact and is purely a fabrication of her reading/watching/listening to so much modern social media that attempts to tell her she's constantly at risk of rape or death from men.

For more specific figures, I recommend you create a Bear Man stadium and lock 10,000 women in it, allow them into a secluded clearing at a home and deposit a random man or a random bear with her and record the results... And I promise I'll visit you in gaol when you're done, because they don't understand, but I know you're doing it for the betterment of humanity!

Sure. The thing is that's unusual behaviour for a bear, and less usual for a man.

No, see, here is where we've now gone back to square one. The figures show it's Very unusual behaviour for a man. Again, if we think about it, we interact with maybe hundreds of men each day, much closer and sometimes much more vulnerable and personal than we do with a bear, yet despite this, women aren't attacked 3-5 times a day. In fact, most women, despite being inches from men dozens of times a day, don't get attacked at all. This brings us back to the initial point where you pointed out statistics showing there are numerically more attacks by men and less by bears, but didn't take into account that women spend 24/7 surrounded by men, but not by bears, and when I mentioned that you said it wasn't about statistics.

You can't just say: "Men are more dangerous than bears", then have someone questions that logic, then say it's not about that logic, then come back to men being more dangerous than bears. The conversation becomes circular.

Unlikely as a woman. (x 3ish?)

But not as unlikely as it would be against bears. That's the point. You have agency against a man that you don't against a bear. Can a woman outrun a man? Often no... Can she outrun a bear? Far less likely. Bears get up to 48km/h, while Bolt is just under 44, and most men aren't Bolt.

Credit where it's due, though: If a man is planning to attack a woman, it's normally with the distinct purpose of doing something specifically to her, while a Bear might give up and look for easier prey if she's getting away or making life difficult. For the bear it's a case of: "Can I get more energy than I use by eating this pink ape?", for a man it's: "I've got to get her now. Can't have her getting back to town and telling people I tried to attack her!"

yeah. Feeding bears is illegal, because it creates a situation where a bear will approach people when its hungry which creates a bear that is unnaturally dangerous. But in a pinch you'd at least not pack up your lunch if you think your life is on the line.

I imagine that a bribe would at least slow them down.

I'm no bear expert, but I understand this changes from bear to bear. For example, I know a Polar Bear will stop and investigate literally anything you drop... So if one is chasing you, and you throw your hat, it'll stop chasing you to check out the hat, while, from what I'm told, a Brown Bear that has decided to kill you will run past anything you drop to kill you. Mind you, I don't think tossing off your clothes in an environment where you'd meet a Polar Bear is going to end much better. :( Just a different, slower way to die.

I think it's just which would you feel more in danger from if you encountered a lone one in the woods, before you know anything about them.

Sure, sure... Maybe it's just the ignorance of the average person as to how powerful and wild a bear can be? Maybe, because they are surrounded by men and can see evidence of men being frightening, their hind-brains focus on the danger that is present: Could I be killed by a box jellyfish? Maybe, but I'm not surrounded by box jellyfish at all times. Could I be killed by a car? Yes, and there's cars everywhere - Ergo, I'd rather be in a swimming pool with 10 box jellyfish than 10 cars!

Maybe we should get women to listen to that tape of that girl who called her mum while she was being eaten alive by a family of bears, or that dude who decided he was one with the bears and went to live with them. Maybe it would help link their minds to the potential danger of a bear, despite not personally seeing it very often.

Either way, this was cool, but that's enough bear for me. I've had all I can... Bear...