• FarraigePlaisteaċ (sé/é)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s data, not evidence. To treat it as evidence you’d have to understand the causes (poverty, segregation, policing patterns, etc.).

        And you’re mixing two things: using group averages to judge individuals vs managing risk under uncertainty. The first is prejudice, the second is safety behaviour.

        Men on average are simply a higher physical risk to women than women are and so cost of being wrong is higher.

    • Nimbly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Judging all men based on the actions of others (pre-judging them, if you will) just because of what group they are in, is prejudiced.

      • FarraigePlaisteaċ (sé/é)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        The post literally says not “all men”. I don’t know why yourself and so many other commenters are inserting a straw man to argue with. If it’s intentional, it’s a bad-faith practise. If it’s unintentional it’s a literacy issue (common problem is USA).

        • Nimbly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The post literally says not “all men”.

          Really? Because the title of the post is “All men are dangerous”

          Even if the post didn’t say that, that’s what others in the comments are defending and/or advocating for.