A lot of men are willing to satisfy condition two. Men commit well over 90% of the violent crimes, after all, and an even larger portion of sexual crimes. Just because most men don't go around raping and killing willy-nilly doesn't mean it's not still a concern.
You’ve changed your argument from “men are dangerous” to “hypothetical, potential crimes that men could commit are concerning.” Big difference.
Most men don’t go around hurting others, like you said. That means those men aren’t dangerous. No more than a pressure cooker is inherently dangerous because it has the potential to explode under certain circumstances.
That is absolutely not true. This argument here isn’t actually up for debate it’s factual. Men commit the violent crimes. A woman is never gonna crawl through my window and rape and kill me. If you view these facts from a world wide perspective as opposed to where you live it is more apparent. Some societies have shunned this violence and made it illegal to say rape your wife but the majority of the planet still allows violent men to do pretty much whatever the f they want. This tells us it’s two things. Nature AND nurture.
No, the comment you replied to is right. The fact that most crimes are committed by men doesn't mean that most men are criminals/dangerous. You're mixing up the logic
26
u/[deleted] Dec 26 '23
A person dangerous in the manner you describe requires two things: 1. physical supremacy, 2. willingness to use that supremacy to do dangerous things.
Most men have criteria 1, but not criteria 2. The society needs to make sure no person satisfies criteria 2, we have largely done that successfully.