The tragedy here is that so many women are terrified of unknown men. A real culture of fear we’ve got going, which serves to isolate almost everybody.
I’m not completely naive - I know this stuff does happen - but the chances of being kidnapped are far lower than, say, being in a road traffic accident, and yet billions of people drive daily without a second thought, without fear, just assuming everything will be fine.
It’s more than the probability, it’s the level of harm. It’s similar to how we protect our kids from paedos with a high degree of safety even though the risk is really low. It’s because the harm from a paedo is fucking huge. The harm a man can do to a woman is fucking huge, life shattering, soul destroying. Women go to lengths to avoid that because it does happen and it’s impossible to know when, where, who. The only truth we have is that it is a possibility now, here, with this stranger.
The chances are low, yes, but the potential consequences could make life not worth living.
The classic analogy is the jar of 100 sweets. If I offered you a sweet from a jar of 100, and warned you that one of the sweets in the jar was laced with strychnine, would you take one?
One in a hundred? No, of course not. One in five million? Actually, still no, because I don’t like sweets very much. But lets replace the sweets with 20oz wagyu steaks… and yes, I think I would!
Lol, well I probably would because I don’t know what that is. And it sounds like an artificial sweetener.
But I get your point. Humans aren’t good at feeling out chronic ‘mundane risk’ and significantly deemphasise it in favour if acute, ‘dramatic risk’.
Much as how 9/11s death toll permanently transformed America politically and culturally on multiple levels, whereas the severity of far greater numbers of vehicular (or firearm) deaths are accepted as unavoidable facts of life.
The tragedy here is that so many women are terrified of unknown men. A real culture of fear we’ve got going, which serves to isolate almost everybody.
I’m not completely naive - I know this stuff does happen - but the chances of being kidnapped are far lower than, say, being in a road traffic accident, and yet billions of people drive daily without a second thought, without fear, just assuming everything will be fine.
It’s more than the probability, it’s the level of harm. It’s similar to how we protect our kids from paedos with a high degree of safety even though the risk is really low. It’s because the harm from a paedo is fucking huge. The harm a man can do to a woman is fucking huge, life shattering, soul destroying. Women go to lengths to avoid that because it does happen and it’s impossible to know when, where, who. The only truth we have is that it is a possibility now, here, with this stranger.
Yeah, the US got a lot of hubris talking about how other countries are dangerous, and then I see posts like this every month.
The chances are low, yes, but the potential consequences could make life not worth living.
The classic analogy is the jar of 100 sweets. If I offered you a sweet from a jar of 100, and warned you that one of the sweets in the jar was laced with strychnine, would you take one?
One in a hundred? No, of course not. One in five million? Actually, still no, because I don’t like sweets very much. But lets replace the sweets with 20oz wagyu steaks… and yes, I think I would!
Same with traffic incident tho.
Good point. There are some risks we just accept as a society.
Lol, well I probably would because I don’t know what that is. And it sounds like an artificial sweetener.
But I get your point. Humans aren’t good at feeling out chronic ‘mundane risk’ and significantly deemphasise it in favour if acute, ‘dramatic risk’.
Much as how 9/11s death toll permanently transformed America politically and culturally on multiple levels, whereas the severity of far greater numbers of vehicular (or firearm) deaths are accepted as unavoidable facts of life.