Just A Shark

As an afterthought, there's a horrible irony here. Western culture, far from being awash in misogyny, actually prefers women to men... but it does so in a way that HURTS them. This is because the way it favors women is not explicit privilege or empowerment. It's protection. Specifically, it's a sort of smothering overprotection that deprives women of healthy opportunities for risk, learning, and growth. When little girls watch movies, the only character arc that female protagonists ever have is "she learns to realize she is already perfect, and just needs to believe in herself more to unleash the power that was within her all along." Except real little girls aren't like that. There is no hidden source of divine light within them, nor are they made of sugar and spice and everything nice. They are made of the same fallible carbon biology as little boys. And while the little boys are being told stories of men who sucked, and then did something about it and became heroes, effectively given instructions in HOW to acquire both power and virtue, little girls are being told they already have these things. And they don't. If your culture can't bear to say anything negative about you ever, it cannot give you the critical feedback you require for healthy growth. Worse than that, it makes you so accustomed to uncritical praise that when some male, usually an outcast male willing to break the social mores (neckbeard incel blah blah blah) and tell you when, where, and how you suck, it feels like misogyny, because you've never experienced anything like that before. (Not to mention that from such characters, it's often supercharged by a huge backlog of resentment.) Western society absolutely prefers women to men. But its love for them is not healthy. It is smothering, overprotective, and poisonous. And nowhere is that more evident than in the stories it tells.

Brandishing is a grey area. It doesn't constitute deadly force (guns don't hurt people unless you shoot with them), but remember that what's important is not the objective reality of danger, but the reasonable perception of it. Prosecutors can, and will, argue that brandishing instead of firing right away means that you didn't think you were in danger. But if you do fire right away, they will ask why you didn't brandish first. Also, they will ask why you didn't fire a "warning shot", which is an uncontrolled discharge that ends up god knows where, and can, in itself, be a criminal act. They will ask why you had "dum-dum" bullets that are designed to "shred flesh and cause horrible wounds" if you were loaded with hollow points. But if you weren't, they will ask why you had "full metal jacket" bullets that are designed to "pierce bulletproof vests". If you are calm after the incident, detectives will testify that you had an icy and remorseless demeanor. If you are visibly upset, they will testify that you were hysterical and out of control. Prosecutors will ask if you feel "guilty". If you say yes, they will pretend that you have admitted to wrongdoing. If you say no, they will characterize you as a psychopath. They will spin anything you do, or don't do, in the worst possible light, because their job isn't to find the truth, or punish the guilty. It's to get you. That's what they are rewarded for. Taking down a middle class white lady who was minding her own business when three thugs jumped her in a parking lot is a lot more prestigious than sending a repeat offender back to prison. But the good news is that these bureaucrats will not be passing judgement on you. Twelve ordinary housewives, insurance salesmen, and ice hockey fans will be. Your job is to explain yourself to them, not some hack whose soul died before he even got out of law school. So, do what makes sense tactically, and get home alive. Then be prepared to explain yourself in a way that ordinary people can understand you.