100 men versus a gorilla
thought experiment, debate, and internet meme
"100 men versus a gorilla" is a satirical thought experiment originating from the Internet concerning the winner of a hypothetical battle between one hundred male humans and a silverback gorilla. It typically assumes that the men are unarmed. First recorded in a Reddit post in 2020, it inspired internet memes upon gaining newfound popularity in 2025.
History
The question's first known appearance was on the subreddit r/whowouldwin in a 2020 post by u/probablycashed. The question went viral on TikTok in 2022. In April 2025, the question went viral again on Twitter, and then spread to Facebook and YouTube.
Scientific assessment
Tara Stoinski, president of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund, said that people often overestimate the power of gorillas, saying that despite gorillas having strong muscles and jaws, these traits are used more for protection than a hunting attack. She thought that a large group of humans could use their ability to cooperate and coordinate, taking turns to attack, to "prolong a battle that could eventually wear a gorilla out". Primatologist Michelle Rodrigues agreed that gorillas are "not typically aggressive" and "pick their battles", and that in this situation a gorilla would try to flee.
Ron Magill, communications director of Zoo Miami, believed that human attackers could win by "working together to envelop the gorilla and create a human straightjacket", but would suffer some deaths and serious injuries from concussion, bite wounds and broken necks.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “100 men versus a gorilla” as thought experiment, debate, and internet meme. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as thought experiment, debate, and internet meme. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 9, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q134311080. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2020, 2025 and 2022.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “100 men versus a gorilla”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow 100 men versus a gorilla primary sources, 100 men versus a gorilla archive and versus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “100 men versus a gorilla”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “100 men versus a gorilla” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.