Faydra Posted March 27, 2014 Share Posted March 27, 2014 The ship will most likely sink before anyone sorts out who's more deserving of living. Pointing your finger at a crowd and saying that one should live or die based on race or gender is plainly wrong. The most efficient thing would be to evacuate those who are next to the nearest boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phaing Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I was just wondering how the people who posted here feel about the whole thing now, since what happened in Korea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACVG Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Simply put you have 100 survivors 1) 99 women 1 man = 99 pregnancies2) 99 men 1woman = 1 pregnancy This is at one time of courseWomen are more valuable in terms of procreation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 We don't need anymore people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerenthaClone Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Women are more valuable in terms of procreation Who the fuck cares about procreation capability in this day and age? The human race isn't exactly in danger of going extinct in the very near future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Simply put you have 100 survivors 1) 99 women 1 man = 99 pregnancies2) 99 men 1woman = 1 pregnancy This is at one time of courseWomen are more valuable in terms of procreationWait, so like, the entire human population is on one boat?You just want to be that one dude, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Whilst assuming all of the humans are on one ship is a bit much, you might assume all the peoples of a particular island are on one one boat. But from a purely genetic viewpoint if you had 100 women and one man, all the children would be descended from that one man. Which is an extreme genetic bottleneck, any genetic mutations that guy was harbouring, recessive diseases, would spread throughout the population in a couple of generations very quickly. You just want to be that one dude, don't you?It would drop off. I was just wondering how the people who posted here feel about the whole thing now, since what happened in Korea.I don't really know enough about how it happened to say, from the sounds of things I've heard people just got off as quickly as they could (which is the most sensible course in my view.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerenthaClone Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 So true, poverty, lack of food, water, over crowding...... With all these things, more people aren't particularly in dire needYou're defending an argument that we should put women first because they're more important for procreation by saying that people are in dire need because of over-crowding. You might want to think about that one a little more. Plenty of humans are in very great need, don't get me wrong. Large masses of humanity could, can, and do die very quickly. Humanity as a whole isn't exactly going to go, nor are the vast majority of ethnic groups small enough to fit on a boat in the first place. The argument from procreational value is ridiculous. edit: vvvv They directly quoted my reply to exactly that argument, so reading it otherwise is somewhat strained. No, that argument was not put forth by Unencumbered, which is why I never said he did so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 You're defending an argument that we should put women first because they're more important for procreation by saying that people are in dire need because of over-crowding. You might want to think about that one a little more. Plenty of humans are in very great need, don't get me wrong. Large masses of humanity could, can, and do die very quickly. Humanity as a whole isn't exactly going to go, nor are the vast majority of ethnic groups small enough to fit on a boat in the first place. The argument from procreational value is ridiculous. Did Unencumbered actually make that argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phaing Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Hmm... PC sure makes it difficult to speak one's mind, don't it?I never let it slow me down, let alone affect my speech. The reason I brough this up vis a vi the Korean disaster is because it sums up the results of the whole "screw the women & children" viewpoint I see displayed in this thread.I think the results speak for themselves; Meanwhile, South Korean media outlets said 46 lifeboats were still attached to the ferry, further fueling their rage. Looks as if the only lifeboat that made it out was the one the Captain took. http://nypost.com/2014/04/17/only-1-lifeboat-deployed-from-sinking-ferry-287-still-missing/ Okay, so procreation is frowned upon in this Brave New World, so be it... just gotta wonder where these people think their Social Security checks wil be coming from. Even so, I'll give a woman or a child my seat.Have you ever heard a Child screaming in agony, or watched a crying woman die when she didn't have to?Someday, most of you will, then we can talk. I keep hearing that we should protect those weaker than ourselves, but these days I guess it's only said be people reaching for my wallet. When it comes to the real thing, those same people will kick pregnant women to the curb and cite population stats to justify that... really? Maybe, maybe not.IMHO, most of you would do the right thing when the time came.Those that would not, those are in the minorty because they tend to Darwin themsevles out of existance, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 This whole Korean thing seems more like incompetence on the half of the crew. If most of the lifeboats (if not all) are still attached, it implys there were no selfish people putting themselves first, as the lifeboats could not actually be launched. They just did the sensible thing and got off as best they could. The critical thing was the extreme delay (and possible oversight) of informing the passengers, and ordering an evacuation. They were told to stay put, but once the list gets too bad, navigating the ship becomes hard. You make it sound like there was some scrum, with women and children being trampled, I've only been briefly reading about the disaster, but do you have any sources for this? The problem with the Women and Children first mentality, is the delay it would cause. And as has been shown by this event delays are deadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Like it was on Titanic. Do you agree with this?Like it was on Titanic. Do you agree with this?Somerset Maugham always preferred to travel on Italian liners as there was "none of this nonsense about women and children first". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Let's put it in other words. Single guys, you all die first.Guys with children... coinflip on whether you die.Single ladies... you may have a chance at not dying, but it's not guaranteed.Mothers and children... ok... you're cool to keep living. Sounds fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlefingers In The Air Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You're all beating around the bush. Make it an issue of weight, do it by pounds and flip a coin to decide if the order goes from small to large or from large to small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serious Callers Only Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 cut as many legs as required. Problem solved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Surely you want some fat people around, if you need to start eating folk, you wouldn't want a boat full of stringy buggers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phaing Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 ... You make it sound like there was some scrum, with women and children being trampled, I've only been briefly reading about the disaster, but do you have any sources for this? The problem with the Women and Children first mentality, is the delay it would cause. And as has been shown by this event delays are deadly. The kids were ordered to stay put, where they died. The way I see it, people are using the whole "we have too many people on the planet!" arguemnt to save their own skins. God help anyone I see trying to push a women & her baby out of the way in that kind of situation, and God had better be quick. I'm sorry, but that's just too riduculous and disgusting for me to even engage the discusion anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Surely you want some fat people around, if you need to start eating folk, you wouldn't want a boat full of stringy buggers. Meh, you want meat, not blubber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Walker Texas Ranger Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 The kids were ordered to stay put, where they died. The way I see it, poeple are using the whole "we have too many people on the planet!" arguemnt to save their own skins. God help anyone I see trying to push a women & her baby out of the way in that kind of situation, and God had better be quick. I'm sorry, but that's just too riduculous and disgusting for me to even engage the discusion anymore. No one's defending the action of the captain and crew, but pinning it on a the decline of traditional male chivalrous duty to defend woman and children or a demise of traditional gender roles and virtue is a huge stretch. Especially considering everybody involved is Korean and may not have had those cultural traditions to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 The kids were ordered to stay put, where they died. The way I see it, people are using the whole "we have too many people on the planet!" arguemnt to save their own skins. God help anyone I see trying to push a women & her baby out of the way in that kind of situation, and God had better be quick. I'm sorry, but that's just too riduculous and disgusting for me to even engage the discusion anymore. If population has been used as an argument it's to defend putting women and children first, much to my chagrin. So I'm not sure that such an argument is as useful for this case as you want it to be. IMHO, most of you would do the right thing when the time came. Those that would not, those are in the minorty because they tend to Darwin themsevles out of existance, simple as that. Just to be clear: not giving your seat to a pregnant woman and dying is "Darwining yourself out of existence"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.