Social media has been buzzing with the news that if they were alone in the woods, many women would rather encounter a bear than a lone man. And the mens are MAD! Oh, they are in their feelings!
But before I engage further with the bear in the woods thing, I need to know: is the bear carrying a balloon and singing a song about hunny? Or wearing a raincoat, perhaps? Just want to check.
This meme is the exact opposite of mansplaining. Mansplaining is a man explaining something he might (might) understand, but definitely assumes the non-men around him do not understand. But here, we have non-men who understand something pleading with various men either to understand something they don’t understand, make a little more effort to understand something that shouldn’t be beyond their power of comprehension, stop pretending not to understand something they definitely do understand, or (and this is probably the real thing) to be a little less precious (perhaps even… man up) and show some dignity in the face of a truth that makes them uncomfortable. Whatever the words, there's a lot of gninialpsnam (plansmaining? Snailmanpin?) going on here.What are men trying hard not to understand (or acting performatively offended to hear)? At its heart, a simple repackaging of the “all men are rapists,” discussion. If you get that idea, and why people deploy it in conversations, you can skip to part two of this blog post. You don't have to (maybe you like the way I write or something?) but you can.
There are some added paws, claws, marmalade and occasional ‘wakka wakka’s, but it boils down to the same reality: a lot, maybe most, perhaps even nearly all women feel unsafe around men they don’t know. We’re guilty until proven innocent.I probably deeply felt the injustice of being expected to prove my innocence, my good guy-ness, at some point in my life, but a lady friend really brought it home for me when she asked me, “how do you prepare for a date with someone you don’t know that well? For example a blind date?”
My checklist was pretty typical for my gender, I think: dress nice, shave, make sure there's cash in the wallet, gas in the car, tickets for the thing and reservations at the place. If things are hopeful and you weren’t raised in the “wait for marriage” community some of us were, condom in pocket, too. Check the trunk of the car for that duffel bag of fur handcuffs, riding crops, harnesses, fireman helmet and French maid costume, fresh batteries, consent forms, robe and wizard hat every sensible person keeps in the trunk of their car next to the spare tire. Nothing unusual for a garden variety man-on-a-date.
“Okay,” my lady friend said. “Here’s what I do…”
-influence planning to ensure the date’s at a place and time that will be well-lit and busy enough to have witnesses
-locate her self-defense device (pepper spray, brass knuckles, taser, etc.)
-make sure it’s full/charged/loaded etc.
-put it in a spot in her handbag for very quick access
-match it with shoes that were ok for running in a pinch
-tell a trusted friend where she’d go, when she’d be back, and what time to start worrying (text updates for changes of plan)
-set up a “quick exit” codeword to text to that friend, at which time the friend would call back and pretend there was an emergency, so she had to go. (this was not, she assured me, as cool as when Trinity does it in the Matrix. It was scary.)
During the date:
-only visit the toilet when her drink was empty, or a girl has agreed to “watch my drink” while she goes
-scan places she entered for the number of exits, and number of women around
This friend wasn’t choosing “risky types” of boys to date - she did all this invisible work on the off-chance, because the most dangerous guys don’t look dangerous.
“On the off chance, you say?” says the Fictional Person Who Argues With Me (FPWAWM), “Sounds kind of… PARANOID!”That’s a good word, paranoid. Let’s unpack it a bit.
FPWAWM: (Groans dramatically)
A paranoid person takes precautions, but not all precautions are paranoid. Can we agree on that?
So, FPWAWM, we need to measure that "on the off chance" a bit more accurately before bringing the word paranoid into the conversation. Words mean things.
![]() |
"and will you be having the fish, the chicken, or our vegetarian option for the meal?" |
So what’s the risk of sexual assault, which is the real subject of the bear discourse, then? Is a woman taking all the measures listed above more like the weirdo on a commercial flight in a skydiving suit, or more like a soccer mom telling the kids, “buckle up” before she starts the car?
(that airplane crash chart is courtesy of Statista.com)
Even without data, if you were online in 2017, during that October when #MeToo first went viral, you know women's risk of being a sexual assault victim is pretty high, that a lot of women experience that sometime in their lives.
FPWAWM: “…”
You want data, I guess, FPWAWM?
FPWAWM: “Yes.”
Are you sure?
FPWAWM: “Yes.”
OK then. RAINN - the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network reports here (RAINN link) that one in six US women will be the victim of an attempted rape or completed rape in her lifetime. Men get raped too (1 in 71, sez Wikipedia, which isn’t nothing, but which is fewer than 1 in 6) Wikipedia link (I know, I know), but even for male rape, the rapists are still overwhelmingly male. How overwhelmingly? Ninety-frikkin' nine percent. (no, that is not a typo). What percentage of rapists or would-be rapists are actual members of the Ursidae family? I think the number there is zero, or really really really close to zero (shudder).
Who are we meeting in the woods again?
1 in 6, plus 1 in 71, with 99% of it perpetrated by men… context-free, that’s enough on its own, isn't it? Is that enough risk assessment? Can we say precautions are not paranoid?
FPWAWM: "..."
Fine. Context: here are some other risky things humans do. Many humans drive cars. We did not evolve to drive cars, but we do anyway. 1.3 million people a year die in car accidents.
What precautions do we take to avoid being part of that 1.3 million? We pay car insurance, wear seatbelts, swallow the extra cost (without even complaining) of manufacturers building safety features (required by law) into our cars, consent to an entire system of safety regulations and traffic laws run by the government and enforced by the police, and basically accept the tickets and fines we get if we don’t follow the rules. We whine, but we pay, and we accept that those safety laws exist, and should.
Eight million people a year die of smoking-related diseases. For that eight million, society tolerates or even welcomes massive cigarette taxes, taxpayer-funded anti-smoking advertising and education campaigns, extensive regulations over every aspect of the tobacco industry, and we even let them put horrifying photos on every cigarette package, which go on display where kids can see them. We send smokers off to designated smoking areas like grade-school kids standing in the corner. IMAGINE how much complaining we'd hear from any other group with any other habit if we told them they had to leave the building and stand in the winter wind to indulge their habit. But eight million people a year is enough that we more or less consent to it.
Is one in six US women (sometime in their lifetime), extrapolated to some worldwide number, more than eight million a year worldwide? I’m not going to torture you with my back-of-the-napkin math here: it’s hard to math this math because:
It’s hard to stack that 1 in 6 up with other countries, because of differences in laws, definitions of rape, understandings of consent, and other differences make it hard to compare country to country with confidence that we’re doing an apples-to-apples comparison, and not apples-to-oranges. Add to that the fact a lot of rapes and rape attempts go unreported, even in anonymous surveys, for various reasons, and the real number might be more than one in six. Maybe a lot more. Probably not less, though.
Most of the data I’ve seen about sexual harassment and rape is of the “at some time in her life” or "during her university years" type, which is hard to translate into a “per year” number that stacks up directly against the 1.3 million car crash deaths and the eight million smoking deaths per year. It is hard for me to brain those numbers because I am a word guy, not a statistics guy.
But even without braining them rigorously, I can lick my finger, stick it in the air, and say I’m pretty sure, in fact almost certain it shakes out to WAY more than 8 million assaults a year worldwide, even more than the 9.3 million we get if we combine car crash deaths and smoking deaths. If men were a car, there’d be a recall.
If anyone knows a link where someone brained the math more mathily, please share it! Or if someone is data-brained enough to number-crunch those numbers, I’d be grateful. But for today, it is enough to say we are definitely way above the threshold of “dangerous enough to take precautions,” and what level of precautions? We'd still be far, far from paranoid at the "everybody wears a seatbelt by law" level of precaution, which is a lot, if you think about it. If you disagree, Evil Knievel and the cast of Jackass would like a word with you.
1 in 6 is one spin of Russian roulette.
And that 1 in 6 was ONLY for rape and rape attempts. Add leering, following, catcalling, obscene texts or phone calls, stalking, groping, lewd comments, gross nonconsensual camera stuff, and how high does the ratio go? That stuff, which all adds to that constantly on-edge, unsafe feeling women are talking about when they bring up the bear thing, isn’t even counted in the 1 in 6.
If you’re a man reading this, and you’re mad about being compared to a bear, ask a woman who’ll tell you the truth how high above one in six she thinks the ratio would go if we counted all that noise, too. I have a feeling I know what answer I’d get.
One spin of Russian roulette. It’s perfectly reasonable to be nervous about a strange man in the woods.
(This webpage says 35% of women have faced sexual harassment… but again, what are our definitions?)
FPWAWM: “I’m not convinced.”
Really? Well, let’s keep going, then.
Next question: Why DO bears hang out in the woods? What are they up to? And what is a MAN doing in the woods?
Think of all the things bears do. 100% of those things happen in the woods. They eat, sleep, climb things, search for Eeyore’s tail, and make marmalade, all in the woods. That means, “find and harm a lone woman” is a long ways down on a bear’s to-do list, far far below "find a tree trunk that can also be a back-scratcher"
If you ask “What is that bear up to, by itself in the woods?” the answer is, “Where else would it be?”
Then, ask what that MAN in the woods is up to?
Well, of all the things men do, most do not happen in the woods. Towns, villages, buildings, houses, cars sports bars and bowling alleys all rank higher than the woods. Also, the things men do in the woods are usually group activities, like hiking or camping or LARPing or calling on dark spirits from the unknowable beyond. Of the things men ONLY do in the woods, and ONLY alone… the list is getting short. The top few items are still probably harmless: (find a cool walking stick, practice ninja skills, rehearse arguments they lost earlier) but a little ways down the list are a few that happen in the woods specifically because the woods don't have escape routes, lines of sight, locking doors, CCTVs, law enforcement, or nearby witnesses. What kinds of activities check THOSE boxes? Nothing wholesome.
“What is that man up to by himself in the woods?” The best answer is, “I don’t know, and I don’t care to find out.”
There’s a very small cost for thinking a man in the woods is up to no good, and being wrong. My punishment for avoiding him: a little lost time, and a lost chance to meet someone who might be cool.
On the other hand, there’s a very very high cost for thinking a man in the woods is probably safe, and being wrong. Walk up to the wrong man thinking he's safe, and we’re dealing with life-altering trauma.
This is what the saying “better safe than sorry” was invented for.
FPWAWM: “I’m not saying you’ve persuaded me, but…”
At this point, FPWAWM, it’s starting to seem like you just don’t WANT to see it from women’s point of view. Really think about whether that's happening right now, and that would mean.
FPWAWM: “No comment.”
Another thing about bears: the same actions – the stuff in the forest safety pamphlet – will keep you safe from almost every bear. Unless that bear really really wants you to win an Oscar, you’re probably good.
But men are not so predictable. Backtalking a catcaller can have a range of effects, from an abashed apology to being followed and targeted. You never know what you’re gonna get, from man to man, or even from the same man on different days.
That uncertainty is terrifying when someone is bigger, probably stronger, and might be inclined to violence (and you won’t know if he is until it’s too late). Add to this the knowledge that if he attacks you, a lot of people won’t believe you, have even been culturally programmed to blame you if you report it. If you follow the tips on the safety pamphlet, bears usually aren’t inclined to violence. They’re inclined to bear stuff, like catching salmon, the bare necessities of life, and preventing forest fires.
FPWAWM: “But I’m a Good Guy! I’m not One Of Those Guys! Not All Men are like that!”
Sure, but she doesn’t know that yet, does she? And don't forget that most human predators know how to make themselves appear harmless, so rando mando is guilty until proven innocent.
FPWAWM: “Perhaps if I just had a chance to explain that I’m not a predator…”
Good luck with that, but think on this: the things you'd say to try and persuade a woman that you're okay... are the exact things a predator might say to get that woman alone and… preda her. Saying you're one of the good ones IS a red flag itself, kind of the same way the people who say "Trust me" the most are the biggest liars, and people who say “I know a lot about this,” often don’t.
FPWAWM: Well, ok. I’m not saying those reservations are unreasonable. I’m really not. But… if I’m guilty until proven innocent, isn’t it fair that I get a chance to, you know, prove that I am… innocent?
Fair point… but perhaps alone in the woods is not a time and place where your chance of doing so is very high.
FPWAWM: So what can I do?
Read the fucking room! Instead of alone in the woods, approach women in the places where it’s socially acceptable and normal for men to approach women, like singles bars, club meetings, and social gatherings. Take your shot in places where the answer to the question “what’s he doing by himself HERE” is something obvious and boring like "getting a latte, looking for a book to read, or sharing one of his interests with like-minded people.”
FPWAWM: “Okay. I get it. Join a book club. But I’d just like to point out that any persuadable person would have already been persuaded 400 words ago, Rob.”
So you admit you don’t want to be persuaded?
FPWAWM: “I admit no such thing. I just want to know why you are really still going on about this?”
I’m glad you asked.
FPWAWM: “Oh shit. That’s your ‘pontification’ face.”
It is.
FPWAWM: “What have I done?”