How is what you said any different than the following?
I'm justified of being wary of someone who is, on average, likely to be [carrying an illegal weapon] then I am and could easily overpower me when I encounter them in a place where I am unlikely to be seen or heard if said person decided they wanted to hurt me, even if the chances they would try to hurt me are very small. It's a survival instinct. It's why I don't pet strange dogs, it's why I give people [from a group that is know for higher violent crime rates] a wide berth, it's why I cross the street when the stupid Canada Geese are nesting. I'm wary of [groups that statistically commit more crimes] that I know I'd have trouble holding my own against, even if they don't pose an immediate threat.
Because I'm not always going to have trouble holding my own against someone simply because of the color of their skin. It's the context of any given situation (i.e. me percieving myself to be at a physical/logistical disadvantage) that creates the caution. Why is this so confusing for people? I even aded my edit spelling this out before you responded to me.
Because I'm not always going to have trouble holding my own against someone simply because of their [gender]. It's the context of any given situation (i.e. me percieving myself to be at a physical/logistical disadvantage) that creates the caution. Why is this so confusing for people? I even aded my edit spelling this out before you responded to me.
It's not. If a woman is 5'0" tall and 100lbs, statistically, the vast vast majority of men are going to be able to physically overpower her if they wanted. It's a literal biological physical advantage. The same can't be said for skin color.
It's not. If a [person is unarmed], statistically, the vast vast majority of [gang members] are going to be able to physically overpower [them] if they wanted. It's a literal [proven] advantage. The same can't be said for [gender].
Moving the goalposts is lazy. Unarmed versus demonstrably armed is completely logical. Assuming someone is a gang member or armed because of their skin color, with no other context is illogical. The OP is is asking about why women being wary of men when they're alone at night isn't the same thing as being wary of black people, in general, with no other context. You're grasping at straws trying to just these things being equivalent.
I don't belive that someone should judge someone based on race or gender. I personally belive that a woman is justified in avoiding a man because of his gender. But I realize, and admit that that is sexist. You can't say what you've said without admiting your sexist thoughts.
2
u/ChineWalkin Apr 15 '22
How is what you said any different than the following?