"Choosing the Bear” : Symbolism, Gendered Discourse, and the Misinterpretation of Feminist Allegory

Abstract

In recent online debates, particularly among gender discourse communities, the phrase “women are choosing the bear” has ignited widespread confusion and criticism. Detractors, predominantly male commentators, often take the metaphor literally or reductively, arguing that women are irrationally preferring danger (a bear) over the safety or companionship of men. However, this framing misses the allegorical and symbolic richness of the expression. This article explores the deeper meanings embedded in the “choosing the bear” discourse, arguing that it is not about zoology, but about lived female experience, disillusionment with patriarchy, and a demand for more meaningful forms of empathy and introspection from men. Through the lens of feminist theory, symbolic interactionism, and narrative analysis, this article decodes the metaphor and reveals the deeper truths it conveys.

The Bear as Symbol, Not Creature

When a woman says she would "rather choose the bear" than engage with certain men, she is not expressing suicidal intent or a preference for being mauled by wildlife. Rather, she is drawing upon a rich metaphor that critiques male behavior, gendered safety, and emotional labor in contemporary society. This rhetorical gesture evokes both satire and survivalism.

Online discourse has seen many men respond with confusion, condescension, or derision - focusing on the literal impossibility of a bear being preferable to a human partner. This reaction underscores the exact issue the metaphor critiques: a failure to listen, interpret symbolically, or understand the emotional and existential toll of being a woman in a patriarchal world.

Allegory and Symbolism: Feminist Linguistic Tools

The use of allegory has long been a strategy in feminist and marginalized discourses. As Mary Daly (1978) and Hélène Cixous (1975) noted, symbolic language allows women to articulate complex emotional and social realities that literal language often fails to encompass. "The bear" functions here as a metonym for raw nature, inevitable threat, and honest danger - in contrast to the subtle, gaslighting, socially sanctioned, and often invisible harm some women experience from men.

The choice of the bear is deliberate: it represents a known risk. In contrast, choosing certain men carries the ambiguity of microaggressions, manipulation, emotional neglect, and sometimes overt abuse - all cloaked in the pretense of care, civility, or even love. The allegory suggests that at least the bear is honest about what it is.

A Failure of Interpretation: Masculine Literalism

The backlash to this phrase is not new; it echoes historical patterns of what feminist theorists call “masculine literalism” or “discursive fragility.” According to Susan Bordo (1993), men often engage with feminist language through a defensive lens that interprets critique as personal attack. Rather than asking why women are drawing on such metaphors, they focus on disproving the metaphor’s surface logic.

This reaction is also a defense mechanism. By mocking the metaphor, the deeper implications, about how women feel unseen, unsafe, or emotionally exhausted in relationships with men - can be ignored or dismissed. This is what bell hooks (2004) refers to as the "patriarchal refusal to hear."

The Emotional Subtext: What Women Are Really Saying

To say “I choose the bear” is not a declaration of misandry or madness - it’s a cry for help, a moment of exhausted honesty. It is a refusal to continue pretending that being with a man, as society prescribes, is automatically safer, more rational, or more fulfilling.

This metaphor encapsulates a long lineage of social critiques:

- It points to how statistically, many women experience greater harm inside intimate relationships than in wilderness (UN Women, 2021).
- It alludes to the exhaustion of caretaking roles, where women are often expected to manage men’s emotional immaturity while suppressing their own needs (Gilligan, 1982).
- It expresses existential fatigue, where women feel alienated not by solitude, but by the prospect of emotional erasure in heteronormative relationships.

The Real Message: A Challenge to Men

Rather than asking, “Why would a woman choose a bear?” the more relevant question for men is: What has our gender done to make ourselves so unappealing, threatening, or exhausting that a bear feels preferable?

This metaphor is not meant to indict all men, but to highlight a systemic failure. It invites introspection, not outrage. It asks men to examine their socialization, their emotional labor deficits, their complicity in patriarchal norms 0 even when those norms seem “normal” or “harmless.”

Choosing Empathy Over Ego

“Choosing the bear” is a symbolic rejection of emotional neglect, not of men per se. It signals that many women are no longer willing to pay the psychological cost of placating male egos. The backlash against the phrase illustrates, ironically, the very dynamic it critiques: the impulse to dismiss women's symbolic speech rather than sit with its discomfort and ask what it reveals.

In the end, the bear is not a threat. The real danger lies in the continued refusal to listen.

References:

• Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body. University of California Press.
• Cixous, H. (1975). The Laugh of the Medusa. Signs, 1(4), 875–893.
• Daly, M. (1978). Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Beacon Press.
• Gilligan, C. (1982). 

In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Harvard University Press.

• hooks, b. (2004). The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. Washington Square Press.
• UN Women. (2021). Measuring the shadow pandemic: Violence against women during COVID-19. Retrieved fromhttps://www.unwomen.org
  
  

Disclaimer:

This article has been written by a HASSL Ambassador as part of our community content initiative. While all ambassador contributions are reviewed for clarity, tone, and alignment with our values before publication, the views expressed are those of the individual author and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of HASSL.

These articles are intended to amplify personal perspectives, lived experiences, and knowledge from our wider community. They are not authored by the HASSL team, and HASSL does not claim ownership over the content.

Please note that the information provided is for general awareness and educational purposes only. It should not be taken as professional, medical, or legal advice. If you require support or guidance in any of these areas, we strongly recommend consulting a qualified professional.

Interested in writing for HASSL or joining our other ambassador initiatives? Learn more and sign up here: https://hassl.uk/pages/ambassador-program