That's a lot of words to defend misandry

…That's the point.

Ok, lemme try to explain this as clearly as I can. All these women who are posting about how they'd rather meet the bear than the man are saying it because they hate and/or fear men, and not only that, but they feel comfortable posting about how much they hate and/or fear men. Indeed, it is likely that most of them will face no serious consequences for their hatred and/or fear of men over the immutable characteristic of being male.

The point of "turning the question around" by saying "What if it was a black man?" is that these same women that feel comfortable posting publicly that they hate and/or fear men wouldn't dare to post that they hate and/or fear black men, because then they'd face consequences. They'd be called racist and ostracized from their social groups. They might even say something like "Well you shouldn't generalize black men like that!" despite the fact they were comfortable publicly posting their hateful and/or fearful generalizations of men.

In fact, if they actually hated and/or feared men that much, the intellectually honest thing to say would be that they would still take the wild animal over the black man. After all, black men are included in the category of men. But they wouldn't say that. Therefore, these women are intellectually *dis*honest, and adding the "random detail" about the man exposes this fact.