Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have reservations about the explanation that a consistent positive outcome can be chalked up to pure luck. She may not know what she was "doing right," but I think it more likely she was doing something that helped foster positive outcomes.
I would guess that GP's reasoning is flawed; in this part of the world, the likelihood of a "normal, honest person" picking up a young woman is much higher, due to the knowledge of a high crime rate.
Nonetheless, I am consistently and insistently told that I am simply lucky as the entire explanation for those outcomes. It doesn't matter how reasonably I engage, I'm outright dismissed in a manner consistent with the idea that no woman is capable of having useful skills that substantially influence the odds that they will remain safe.
No matter how clearly I state that luck is always a factor in all situations and so forth, I get basically this la, la, la not listening! response.
This has been a consistent pattern across various forums for many years. Ergo, my conclusion that it boils down to an assumption that women can't actually be competent that I stated in some other comment here.