NationStates

In Titanic most of the survivors were women and children because the men were denied seats in the life boats.

As a consequence, 74% of the women and 52% of the children on board were saved, but only 20% of the men. Some officers on the Titanic misinterpreted the order from Captain Smith, and tried to prevent men from boarding the lifeboats. It was intended that women and children would board first, with any remaining free spaces for men. Because not all women and children were saved on the Titanic, the few men who survived, like White Star official J. Bruce Ismay, were initially branded as cowards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and ... st_century

In similar situations do you think you would personally hold the same line of thinking where the women and children get rescued first?

Personally, I am of the opinion of first come, first serve. My life is not worth less any of theirs.

Yes, I would save the women and children first. I would rather die than a woman or a child die.

Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Exactly.

Sundiata wrote:Yes, I would save the women and children first. My life isn't worth more than a woman or child's.

I would rather die than a woman or a child die.

Well I hope you signed up for donating your organs cause a lot of women and children are currently dying on the waiting list. I mean you dont need two of each organs amirite, after all your life isnt worth more than a womans or a child.

Save Children, pregnant women, those with injuries etc first then begin evacuating abled bodied people both men and women. I hate this notion men should stay behind and die, men should not be seen as expendable.

Or you know make sure ships are outfitted with enough rowboats and emergency craft for the total number of crew and passengers it can carry so you dont have to discriminate based on sex or anything else.

Sundiata wrote:

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Exactly.

It's almost too simple. Next, we'll just be telling people to stay off the damned trolley tracks to begin with.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Save Children, pregnant women, those with injuries etc first then begin evacuating abled bodied people both men and women. I hate this notion men should stay behind and die, men should not be seen as expendable.

Damn you huskar, stealing my ideas

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Titanic is just one example. I am thinking of every situation where this is a thing.

Plus on the Titanic they were letting half empty boats down because it was women and children only.

Iwassoclose wrote:

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Titanic is just one example. I am thinking of every situation where this is a thing.

Yes, I know. It's the trolley car hypothetical, but not really since an easily avoidable aspect of the scenario forces the insurmountable one-or-the-other choice.

Hindsight, etc.

Iwassoclose wrote:Plus on the Titanic they were letting half empty boats down because it was women and children only.

That's just plain old stupid, moral philosophy aside.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Save Children, pregnant women, those with injuries etc first then begin evacuating abled bodied people both men and women. I hate this notion men should stay behind and die, men should not be seen as expendable.

Or you know make sure ships are outfitted with enough rowboats and emergency craft for the total number of crew and passengers it can carry so you dont have to discriminate based on sex or anything else.

SEXISTS HATE HIM

Watch this based Huskar completely OWN sexist logic with FACTS and REASON

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Point of order: Titanic was already carrying more lifeboats than was required. Its just that the amount carried was based around the idea of needing to ferry passengers to a ship already on scene rather than "get everyone off and wait for rescue".

Iwassoclose wrote:

Sundiata wrote:Yes, I would save the women and children first. My life isn't worth more than a woman or child's.

I would rather die than a woman or a child die.

Well I hope you signed up for donating your organs cause a lot of women and children are currently dying on the waiting list. I mean you dont need two of each organs amirite, after all your life isnt worth more than a womans or a child.

I think everyone should be an organ donor.

Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Save Children, pregnant women, those with injuries etc first then begin evacuating abled bodied people both men and women. I hate this notion men should stay behind and die, men should not be seen as expendable.

Or you know make sure ships are outfitted with enough rowboats and emergency craft for the total number of crew and passengers it can carry so you dont have to discriminate based on sex or anything else.

SEXISTS HATE HIM

Watch this based Huskar completely OWN sexist logic with FACTS and REASON

FUCK YEAH

This is exactly what we refer to as Birkenhead's Drill. HMS Birkenhead was one of the first iron-hulled ships built for the Royal Navy. However, the vessel was wrecked on 26 February 1852, while transporting troops to Algoa Bay at Danger Point near Gansbaai, 87 miles (140 kilometres) from Cape Town in the Cape Colony. There were not enough serviceable lifeboats for all the passengers, and the soldiers famously stood firm on board, thereby allowing the women and children to board the boats safely and escape the sinking. Only 193 of the estimated 643 people on board survived, and the soldiers' chivalry gave rise to the unofficial "women and children first" protocol when abandoning ship, while the "Birkenhead drill" of Rudyard Kipling's poem came to describe courage in face of hopeless circumstances.

Sundiata wrote:Yes, I would save the women and children first. My life isn't worth more than a woman or child's.

I would rather die than a woman or a child die.

Agree unless I knew the woman to be evil.

The tone of this thread has gotten quite energetic.

Nattily Dressed Anarchists on Bicycles wrote:Hidden option three: Bring enough lifeboats.

Hindsight is 20/20

Save women and girls first.

I'd be more constructive, but Huskar pretty much said everything I wanted to say.

Treating people as expendable because of their gender is bad, and bring enough lifeboats kids.

If anything one of the factors that also determined chances of survival in the Titanic disaster was class. Leaving aside the crew—of whom three quarters died—the majority of men, women, and children who died were third class. The overwhelming majority of women who died were third class (89), and the 52 children who died were all third class.

Source: https://comparecamp.com/titanic-statistics/#TOC3

The New California Republic wrote:If anything one of the factors that also determined chances of survival in the Titanic disaster was class. Leaving aside the crew—of whom three quarters died—the majority of men, women, and children who died were third class. The overwhelming majority of women who died were third class (89), and the 52 children who died were all third class.

Source: https://comparecamp.com/titanic-statistics/#TOC3

"Third class" in this case means the poorest, doesn't it?

Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:If anything one of the factors that also determined chances of survival in the Titanic disaster was class. Leaving aside the crew—of whom three quarters died—the majority of men, women, and children who died were third class. The overwhelming majority of women who died were third class (89), and the 52 children who died were all third class.

Source: https://comparecamp.com/titanic-statistics/#TOC3

"Third class" in this case means the poorest, doesn't it?

Yes.

This is exactly what we refer to as Birkenhead's Drill. HMS Birkenhead was one of the first iron-hulled ships built for the Royal Navy. However, the vessel was wrecked on 26 February 1852, while transporting troops to Algoa Bay at Danger Point near Gansbaai, 87 miles (140 kilometres) from Cape Town in the Cape Colony. There were not enough serviceable lifeboats for all the passengers, and the soldiers famously stood firm on board, thereby allowing the women and children to board the boats safely and escape the sinking. Only 193 of the estimated 643 people on board survived, and the soldiers' chivalry gave rise to the unofficial "women and children first" protocol when abandoning ship, while the "Birkenhead drill" of Rudyard Kipling's poem came to describe courage in face of hopeless circumstances.

I think all human life has value, however I wouldn't call this sexist or ageist. Obviously the moral duty of these soldiers may make it more understandable in their particular position, and my point is not to discount the somewhat unfair and arguably sexist concept of male expendability. However, I do believe that generally speaking as parents should hold the responsibility of putting their children lives before their own and soldiers should before those of civilian status, we should as a society generally in situations such as these first ensure the safety of children, then following those of women who do not hold specific positions of responsibility such as in the case of being for example a soldier/servicemember. And then if such is sufficient consider other priority individuals. I do believe in a level of a specific kind of masculinity that is derived from self sacrifice in order to save others. Such a concept may be arguably outdated and sexist. However, I do not believe so. I think chivalry still has a specific role to play in situations like this that require said kind of courage to ensure anyone let alone a specific category of people survive the situation.

The New California Republic wrote:

Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:
"Third class" in this case means the poorest, doesn't it?

Yes.

Man I don't even know why I bothered to ask.