904
Son, we need to have a serious talk!
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
904 points (90.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
4775 readers
2154 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
Related communities:
- !whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !best_of_mastodon@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
imo for pedants like myself, it needs to be made clear if the bear is LIKELY to harm you
If its a black bear, red panda, or the like that is not even fair, EVERYONE would rather be with a bear that doesnt want to be near you rather than some potentially dangerous rando
From what I've read, unless you're doing something like going between a mother and her cubs, if it's not a grizzly or polar bear, it's likely more scared of you than you are of it.
I don't think that's a concern, because pandas (red or otherwise) aren't technically part of the Ursidae family and wouldn't qualify.
I'll spot you that polar bears and brown bears would likely be more of a problem in person. I believe the other kind of bear could conceivably be more of a threat online, but only because they tend to have sharper wits and tongues than the heterosexuals in their genus.
Pandas are ursidae, but not ursinae
Here's the thing. You said a "red pandas are ursidae." Are they in the same order? Yes. No one's arguing that. As someone who is a scientist who studies red pandas, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls red pandas bears. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing. If you're saying "bear family" you're referring to the taxonomic grouping of ursidae, which includes things from short-faced bears to dog bears to giant pandas. So your reasoning for calling a red panda a bear is because random people "call the cuddly ones bears?" Let's get raccoons and koalas in there, then, too. Also, calling someone a human or an ape? It's not one or the other, that's not how taxonomy works. They're both. A red panda is a red panda and a member of the ailuridae family. But that's not what you said. You said red pandas are ursidae, which is not true unless you're okay with calling all members of the carnivora order bears, which means you'd call cats, dogs, and other mammals bears, too. Which you said you don't. It's okay to just admit you're wrong, you know?
(I said pandas are ursidae, not red pandas, but I liked your passion!)
Edit: I forgot about jackdaws
Red Pandas are Ailuridae. So even farther away.
That is probably their point though.
Too many humans act like dangerous randos (men and women alike, but men are usually more physical), so being near a bear that for the most time just fucks off and mind their own business is more preferred.
Yes, but you encounter at least 1000 people a year, assuming you leave the house. Most people never encounter a wild bear.
If a bear doesn't kill you 99.9% of the time, and a man doesn't kill you 99.999% of the time. Which would you rather have 1000 encounters with?
The "point" is that men are dangerous, it's just being poorly made and is clear rage bait.
This feels a lot like a certain image board talking about FBI crime statistics
it's strange tho. could it be strangely rabid?