The entire argument of a woman meeting a bear or a random man in the woods is dumb from the start.
Most bears would run away from a human in the woods, a normal human is not seen as prey in most situations.
So this makes the argument more like asking:
Would you rather catch a glimpse of a bear in the woods or meet a random man in the woods?
Which makes far more sense both logically and emotionally, especially when people pick the bear over the man.
As a man, the original question about meeting a man or a bear in the woods, initially triggered a feeling of being compared to a lethal animal or certain death, and coming up short.
This obviously feels unfair to most men (and to be completely fair, it IS completely unfair to most men).
However, looking at the more realistic outcome of "meeting" a bear, i.e. catching a glimpse of it, it makes far more sense.
Sorry for the ramble, I am just annoyed at the stupid question and got caught up overanalyzing it.