You're correct; it does have no scientific basis. What I did was added the incidence of psychopathy 1.5% and sociopathy 4% in the population and added them together. That gives us 5.5% - I've ignored the fact that these figures would include women too, and simply accepted that all the sociopaths/psychopaths are men. I don't believe that to be true, I wrote an article about it. https://medium.com/lucid-nightmare/lucy-letby-innocence-and-deception-the-paradox-of-female-psychopaths-3452284bf052
Dismissing the 30% figure has no bearing on empathy at all - they aren't related.
But let's meet in the middle and say that 15% of men are abusers and chancers. Exactly how does the bear problem help with that? What good is it doing? As I suggested in the article, these figures have already reached the men who need to know about it. What's the purpose of attempting to get sociopaths and psychopaths to reflect or empathise? They can't, they won't... and in the meantime, generally throwing nonsense arguments into the air and giving Andrew Tate et al ammunition to say that feminists are mental is counter productive to what feminists are trying to achieve.
That's why I'm not a feminist. I'm a gender egalitarian. You actually want to differentiate feminism from femagoguery and misandry? Here you are.
https://medium.com/lucid-nightmare/how-amber-heard-crashed-the-course-of-feminism-c0ec43ff7a52
