If you go by statistics on public sphere violence it's really men who should be more on the lookout.

Because men get into fights with each other, and we're wired to protect our women.

If you go by statistics on abductions and abuse, it's really women who should be more on the lookout.

Men are less worried about some guy jumping out of a bush at night. Just fight him and move on; women can't fight back the same.

Or theoretically possible: the risks are equally big for both genders but men tend to be on the lookout less so end up in trouble for often.

How is it even controversial that women are more at risk walking alone at night? This is ridiculous.

What you say has some truth to it, but it is incomplete.

Consider the following: a weak man has less to be afraid of than a very fit woman, even when she is clearly stronger than him.

Agree

A non-trivial percentage of women are physically larger and stronger than a non-trivial percentage of men, yet those smaller men are not scared to walk alone at night for fear of running across a large woman.

The real hard truth is that some men assault women. The problem is that the assaulters look like every other man, meaning women can't target their fears at just the bad men.

I'm on the lowest percentile of height, and I fear NO woman. I don't have big muscles, I just know there's a difference not only in raw strength, but in animosity and aggression during a fight.

You think small men are afraid at night of a large woman jumping at them? That's a joke.

The percentage of women that are physically stronger than men is extremely small. Negligibly small.

But also true, men are more violent.

For reference, if you take upper body strength as an indicator for this you see the small amount of overlap between the distributions:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Upper-body-isometric-str...

A small % of strongest women are as strong as the weakest "men".

Yes correct, I like to show these kind of graphs because a lot of people (not saying you) do no realize how little overlap there is between the distributions.

That overlap is the "death by snu-snu" zone and honestly most of those small men would be more than happy for those women to be physical with them

> A non-trivial percentage of women are physically larger and stronger than a non-trivial percentage of men, yet those smaller men are not scared to walk alone at night for fear of running across a large woman.

This is just not true. Larger yes, but the percentage of women who are stronger than even a weak man is vanishingly small.