Jump to content

Women and children first


Guess who's back

Recommended Posts

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

  • 4 weeks later...

Simply put you have 100 survivors

1) 99 women 1 man = 99 pregnancies

2) 99 men 1woman = 1 pregnancy

This is at one time of course

Women are more valuable in terms of procreation

Wait, 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

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

So true, poverty, lack of food, water, over crowding...... With all these things, more people aren't particularly in dire need

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

...

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

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

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...