Trolling might have been where it started, but this is the natural amplification process of reactionary media.
The question is bull shit, the answers don’t really matter, and the articles generated from it are just there to capture your time and attention. This whole article and the social media posts that started it are all pointless.
Yep. Just try and logic people to death instead of wondering why they feel that way and taking it to heart to try and not be part of the problem.
If people actually had this choice, we all know most would choose a person over a bear. But it does speak to the fact that people have mostly good experiences with wild animals that are supposed to be a danger to them and lots of bad experiences with random men. They’ve felt threatened and have actually been assaulted by men, and not by bears.
Your chances of being killed by a bear are slim to none. Meanwhile the leading cause of death for pregnant women in the US is homicide. These are the kind of things people think about when weighing these kinds of problems in the abstract.
So the real question is why wouldn’t women fear those that have actually harmed them vs a group that honestly just wants to keep to themselves and has no interest in you unless you’re a threat?
Honest question, the way the original question was phrased, do you think that the resulting discussions have been a net positive or negative for increasing empathy and understanding?
Well yeah, it’s an impossible hypothetical, it’s not supposed to have a point. Actually, it did have a point, which it very easily accomplished: trigger incels. Just remember, there would be no reactionary media without media consumers being reactionary.
Trolling might have been where it started, but this is the natural amplification process of reactionary media.
The question is bull shit, the answers don’t really matter, and the articles generated from it are just there to capture your time and attention. This whole article and the social media posts that started it are all pointless.
It didn’t start with trolling, it started with an article trying to get people to think for once instead of just react.
It’s just people are dumb, so they thought it was trolling.
Yep. Just try and logic people to death instead of wondering why they feel that way and taking it to heart to try and not be part of the problem.
If people actually had this choice, we all know most would choose a person over a bear. But it does speak to the fact that people have mostly good experiences with wild animals that are supposed to be a danger to them and lots of bad experiences with random men. They’ve felt threatened and have actually been assaulted by men, and not by bears.
Your chances of being killed by a bear are slim to none. Meanwhile the leading cause of death for pregnant women in the US is homicide. These are the kind of things people think about when weighing these kinds of problems in the abstract.
So the real question is why wouldn’t women fear those that have actually harmed them vs a group that honestly just wants to keep to themselves and has no interest in you unless you’re a threat?
Honest question, the way the original question was phrased, do you think that the resulting discussions have been a net positive or negative for increasing empathy and understanding?
Well yeah, it’s an impossible hypothetical, it’s not supposed to have a point. Actually, it did have a point, which it very easily accomplished: trigger incels. Just remember, there would be no reactionary media without media consumers being reactionary.