They're human beings, not numbers or statistics.

Or would you have us believe that a certain number of these kinds of murders are OK, because they're just "rounding errors" or "edge cases?"

What's the over/under number?

▲

JKCalhoun a day ago | parent [-]

Of course they're human beings. I think the point is, should you, statistically, live a life of fear based on possibly negligible odds of death or assault?

▲

roadside_picnic a day ago | parent | next [-]

> negligible odds of death or assault?

Negligible odds of death I'll buy, but a very large number of my women friends over my life have been sexually assaulted (and probably far more than I realize, it's not like it's something you bring up during holiday dinner). I'm often shocked by how few men realize how prevalent this is.

The idea that "women who aren't comfortably traveling the world alone depending on the kindness of strangers are living a life ruled by fear" seems naive at best.

Even back in the days when hitchhiking was much more common you would almost never see a single woman by herself, for good reason.

	▲	JKCalhoun a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'm male and I was speaking of males (male friends and co-workers for example).
	▲	buellerbueller a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It is also more likely than not for assault victims that their assaulter is known to them, which goes back to the original point: how much more likely is a woman traveling the world to be assaulted or killed than one who is just existing in her everyday environs? My original point still stands: the commenter made a big claim: world travel is (more) risky for women (than not world travel), but provided little evidence to support said claim.

▲

Windchaser a day ago | parent | prev [-]

The odds of assault for women are not negligible.

And it kinda takes the fun out of such a trip if you have to be on edge in order to protect yourself all the time.