this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
164 points (99.4% liked)
Memes of Production
1007 readers
1601 users here now
Seize the Memes of Production
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great Communities:
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I always just thought it was silly. The premise itself is just so comically nonsensical.
There’s this one youtube video that talks about a question like this one (but it’s about a math problem) that I’m going to see if I can find it and paste it here later.
But the conclusion is basically: the question itself is wrong.
The question is straightforward at first glance, but if you think about it, it’s actually vague.
But the question doesn’t provide these details, so we will by default assume these blank spaces by ourselves.
Which means, each person with their own story and background will assume completely different things. A woman that had bad experiences with men will obviously assume that the man will be the worst kind. A man that never had bad experiences with other men will not assume the same.
So all the arguments about this question are between people that are not starting from the same page in the first place. They are screaming at each other because they are arguing their points from different assumptions.
I’ll try to find the video because the guy explains this much better than me, even though the video is about a completely different question.
i feel like the point is that you have to take the uncertainty into consideration. you are gambling on what kind of bear or what kind of man and so the question is, which one, of unspecified danger, would you rather choose?
and so, since there is uncertainty baked in, it's basically demonstrating that women are, generally, more familiar or wary about the dangers of men than bears (there's a lot more one could say here, but this is basically the point i wanted to make)
That’s a fair way to look at it.
For me it’s just that not answering (because the question is vague) OR asking for clarification are also valid responses.
For example, your rewritten question - between an unspecified man or unspecified bear, which would you choose? - is already more clarifying than the original.
You are specifying that it’s a gamble, so the gamble is part of the question. The original question doesn’t say that, so assuming it’s a gamble is yet another assumption that we would need to make to answer it
Deleted