Even then it’s contradictory. Men wouldn’t be upset about being chosen over a bear and women wouldn’t be safe if the bear was chosen, so in that specific context it’s nonsensical.
Most bears don’t seek out and attack women, but many men do. One of those happens far more often than the other, and you’re either uninformed or willfully ignorant about that fact.
Indeed. It strikes me as pointlessly gendered. All people, safety is more important than feelings.
you know what else is pointlessly gendered? the patriarchyfeminist messaging has to be gendered because the patriarchy is a gender issue.
that said, feminism is for everybody. liberating women from oppressive structures by nature does the same for men.
If it’s not gendered and is for everybody, that isn’t that just the original statement? That safety is for everybody? That seems rather circular.
But I think I get what you’re saying. We focus on lifting up women, and everyone benefits.
If this weren’t gendered I’m not sure I would connect that this was posted as result of people’s reaction to the bears vs men thing.
The whole thing was meant to be rage bait.
or it’s purposefully gendered in response to the man vs bear thing
Even then it’s contradictory. Men wouldn’t be upset about being chosen over a bear and women wouldn’t be safe if the bear was chosen, so in that specific context it’s nonsensical.
Most bears don’t seek out and attack women, but many men do. One of those happens far more often than the other, and you’re either uninformed or willfully ignorant about that fact.
Which is also rage bait