Will Women and Children Have to Wait in Line Now?

by Featured Guest on January 17, 2012

By Lyn87

By now, everyone has heard that the Costa Concordia, the 26th-largest cruise ship (formerly) afloat, ran aground off the Italian coast. Details are sketchy, and it will be some time before we get the full picture, but a few things are known about this mishap, nearly 100 years after the RMS Titanic went down in the Atlantic.

Some things have changed since 1912 – other things have not.

What is known is that there was a lot of chaos as the ship was being evacuated – chaos caused in no small part because the senior leadership failed to provide direction. It is in high-stress situations that one learns one’s measure, and being on a 115,000 ton piece of machinery filling with cold water with a few thousand people is one such situation.

While nobody was visibly in charge, there was a generalized expectation that women and children should be the first on the lifeboats. Equally apparent is that not all the men were keen to follow the script. The foreign press was filled with outrage that some men (invariably described as that subset of men known as husbands), were unwilling to be separated from their families in what looked like a life-and-death situation.

We’ve all heard the shaming language: those men were cowards, doncha’ know? Both women and, to a lesser extent, men, were piling on these guys. It’s not enough that they were protecting their families: they apparently had a duty to die for the benefit of women and children they don’t even know once their own families were safe.

Most of us know that there are no feminists in a burning building. We can now add “or on a sinking ship” to that. Even in 2012.

The sinking of the RMS Titanic almost exactly a century ago invites comparison. Sure, there are great differences, such as the body count, the availability of rapid rescue, and the actions of the crew, but some things remain, like insufficient deployable lifeboats and the all-important, “Women and children first!”

The good news is threefold: 1) the ship ran aground and did not actually sink, so the magnitude of the disaster appeared far greater while it was happening than it turned out to be, 2) the number of deaths was a fraction of what it might have been under slightly different circumstances, and 3) a lot of people who responded to the reports berated the people who said the men had a duty to stay on board until the women and children were all safe.

It is those comments that struck me most. The MRM is getting more vocal, and a lot of guys are now saying, “You wanted equality. This is what it looks like.” And they are saying it aloud and in public. Even a few women chimed in, saying that men have no obligation to die for women if women want equality. (Somehow I suspect there wasn’t much, “I am woman, hear me roar, watch me drown” on the Costa Concordia itself, but hey, it’s a start.)

Needless to say, there were a few hamster wheels in hyper-drive, as feminists tried to have it both ways. I even saw the “77-cents-on-the-dollar” argument thrown out, as if being more productive somehow makes your life worth less. But now many people know the “77 cents” argument is bogus, so every time somebody brings it up it has fewer defenders and it gets shot down with facts, so even more people learn the truth about it.

Quite a few commenters still stuck with the idea that men should stand aside while able-bodied women are rescued first, because women were less physically capable and aggressive and more prone to freezing up under extreme stress. A few guys pointed out that people who could not function under stress did not belong in all sorts of places, like boardrooms and battalions.

Ouch. That’s gotta’ hurt.

On the other hand, if they truly are our equals, let them queue up for the lifeboats like everyone else. When they do that, they can make themselves some new shirts with this message:

This is what a feminist looks like

I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

{ 159 comments… read them below or add one }

meistergedanken January 17, 2012 at 05:50

And just when feminists thought there was no longer any value in upper body strength!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 107 Thumb down 4
artemis January 17, 2012 at 05:58

“The foreign press was filled with outrage”

Links, please?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 26 Thumb down 35
Anonymous age 69 January 17, 2012 at 06:10

I once, in response to claims that women were historically enslaved by men, tried to imagine a world or culture in which the slaves were worth so much more than the slave owners that the owners were expected to die to preserve the lives of the slaves.

I failed. And, I was an inveterate science fiction fan from a very young age. I read the most amazing science fiction with every possible strange and exotic world.

I failed because no such world can exist, even in the most exotic imagination.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 125 Thumb down 4
J January 17, 2012 at 06:12

LOL. I read the suffragettes reaction to the titanic which one can still read if they look hard enough. They berated the men for their actions of women and children first during that disaster. Their ideological descenents now berate us the other way? I guess we are screwed if we do, and screwed if we dont!

Im not as upset by that, Im upset as to why we keep humoring these magma breathing harpies! We need companionship since we are relational creatures, but feminized women, these are all we got? Other women better shut them up, before we shut them all out completely!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 88 Thumb down 3
finndistan January 17, 2012 at 06:22

Now wait and watch that some feminist will point to this board’s comment to prove that men hate women.

In a world where the strong and independent shall not be oppressed into being dependent on life boats, providing equality makes for hate.

If my family is there my first line of duty is to make sure my family is safe, the second line of duty is sure I am safe (for my sake and for my family’s); if someone asks me to sacrifice myself for them because they got one of the 3 billion vajayjays on earth, well I only got one life and my family’s got only one father, so screw you.

And to say the truth, the men on the Titanic also did not have the obligation to stand by while the ladies went on the rafts, when these same men have been doing almost all the dying in the wars that raged on during most of these men’s lifetime.

In an age where women use the pill (got nothing against that), where women abort more than one in eight babies, the line “sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive” kinda drowned in the water. Loooong ago.

(Also can add that government does not pay for utilized sperm but pays for a utilized egg, and to add to this the utilized sperm comes with an 18year price tag for its previous owner on it.)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 81 Thumb down 3
Opus January 17, 2012 at 06:23

I had long thought that those 100,000 ton plus cruise-ships looked intrinsically unstable (too much piled-up too high) and thus not sea-worthy, as now seems to be the case; not that I am a Naval Engineer.

A comparison of the behaviour of the passengers and crew – presumably largely Italian (i.e. excitable) in 2012 with the more disciplined passengers and crew (i.e. British) in 1912 might be interesting, though probably a breach of this Blog’s guidelines.

Grandfather Opus was a Master Mariner, whose Ship returning with Passengers and Mail from Cape Town to Southampton was holed by a mine, off Las Canarias in 1936. The Ship limped into the Marseilles. Opus Sr was exonerated of any wrong-doing at the subsequent enquiry. Will The Captain of the Constanzia be as fortunate or will he be made a Scapegoat?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 11
Anti Idiocy January 17, 2012 at 06:26

Anyone who attempts to keep me on a sinking ship because of the genitals with which I was born is attempting to murder me. I have the right to respond accordingly.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 187 Thumb down 4
AmStrat January 17, 2012 at 06:38

Re: Anti Idiocy

Wow, it really makes you think about the situation differently when you break it down into it’s most basic actions and reasoning.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 82 Thumb down 1
Alcuin January 17, 2012 at 06:45

The women one would meet on such a ship would not be worth sinking to the bottom of the seabed for.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 2
Alcuin January 17, 2012 at 06:49

Since a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, it is not right that a man should sacrifice himself for her.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 111 Thumb down 3
Art Vandelay January 17, 2012 at 06:49

I think when the fembots are done sorting the passengers by what value they ascribe to them the ship already hit the ground of the ocean.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 3
Rocco January 17, 2012 at 06:57

Sorry sister, the days of men stepping aside is over.

Children first, no problem…..mothers need not accompany….when they take our children are our feelings considered? No, we know they are not.

Children need the cps, so any woman can do.

Then I would get in line first come first serve.

Order will save lives, I would support an orderly filling of life boats.

Why would I even consider letting a woman ahead of me? Ever? Anywhere?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 100 Thumb down 4
Anonymous age 69 January 17, 2012 at 07:28

Alas, men are not always right, as much as I would want to think so. I suspect the Captain did indeed royally screw up and deliberately went too close to the shore. I hope not, but that is my opinion at this time. Half a klick away as required by Maritime law would not have involved hitting rocks.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 6
Dave January 17, 2012 at 07:30

I have always maintained that the quickest way to get women to back off on equality is to actually treat them as equals.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 133 Thumb down 3
Scipio Africanus January 17, 2012 at 07:31

Google auto-populates “there are no feminists when the lifeboats are lowered”, so some other people have already come up with this one, but Great Minds Think Alike.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 2
AntZ January 17, 2012 at 07:47

Here is a new feminist article about Costa Concordia:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2087585/Cruise-ship-Costa-Concordia-sinking-Whatever-happened-women-children-first.html

Ten worst rated comments:
Feminist shame/blame: 6
Chivalrous BS: 4

Ten best rated comments:
Anti-feminist: 9
Anti-itallian: 1

Feminism owns the media, owns the courts, owns the government — but public opinion is with the MRM.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 104 Thumb down 3
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 07:47

“I am woman, hear me roar, watch me drown”
“77-cents-on-the-dollar”

:) :) This was a fun post to read. Great photo. I think of the pic as the future of feminism. Men are so different than women. We don’t need to hold support groups or read books and go to classes or discuss our feelings with other men to collectively decide on a marriage strike.

Men will still go on cruises yet quietly men will quickly without any need for more than a second’s worth of consideration register an event such as this one. I don’t know to what degree yet slowly more and more men will decide to avoid travel vacations such as taking cruise ships. Personally, I’d prefer a more traditional vacation on a smaller Windjammer sailboat (not on some floating city) or on a nice fishing boat with some cool dudes, great beer, and a couple of hot friendly servant girls to entertain us.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 6
Alcuin January 17, 2012 at 08:01

Obviously women want “equality” when it’s good for them, and chivalry when that’s best for them. They want to have their cake and eat it too. While Spearheads take that for granted, most men I’ve met are too brainwashed and emasculated to see that. Women must laugh at us every day.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 81 Thumb down 4
Thos. January 17, 2012 at 08:03

Actually, I just found this interesting woman discuss the lifeboat business, at least in general terms. She seems to get it.

http://youtu.be/vp8tToFv-bA

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
djc January 17, 2012 at 08:07

@ J “Other women better shut them up, before we shut them all out completely!”

Too late. Some of us already have.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 3
Ryu January 17, 2012 at 08:17

The equality hustle is the same whatever form it happens to take.

The AA crowd doesn’t want equality. They want all the goodies without having to work for it. They want their cake and to eat it too. They wish to be judged by the content of their character. If their character should fail, then they still want the AA handicap prize.

If anyone should beg for equality, give it to them. Test their mettle. When they fail, you will quickly determine how much conviction they possess by how quickly they yell “man up” or “racist.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 9
Rocco January 17, 2012 at 08:18

@ Alcuin

Yes, I believe our biggest fans are female and they come here to laugh at us as we figure out they’re trying to screw us,

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 4
Just Some Canadian January 17, 2012 at 08:29

Thanks. She has another video where she covers why men in the MRM seem so extreme.

http://youtu.be/K9G9AAhlMo4

I have two comments:
-To her comments I’d add that men and women are all capable of the same behaviours except that men seem to always take any behaviour you can imagine and take it to super extremes. Therefore, extremism will come more ‘naturally’ to men.
- Is she single? :)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
BSimpson January 17, 2012 at 08:36

I just re-read the headline of the article,” Will Women and Children Have to Wait in Line Now?”

My answer: No..just women.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 67 Thumb down 1
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 08:41

Let there be all women, mother and children cruises. In the event of a disaster no men passengers will take their deserved seats on the life boats since there won’t be any men passengers. There can also be all adult cruises with no kids. That’s fine with me. It’s pathetic that in the event of such a disaster women want men around to help them ‘reach’ the lifeboat. Then women want men to step back and willingly become fish food. I eat fish. Fish don’t eat me. My life is too precious to sacrifice it so some spoiled bitch can have a pussy pass into the life boats.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 78 Thumb down 3
andybob January 17, 2012 at 08:42

The fundamental lack of empathy that most women have for men is never more naked than at moments like these. Men are disposable objects whose utility encompases marching willingly into gaping maws of oblivion so that Team Vagina may continue its hypergamous adventure.

My father was no mangina. He valued himself as a man and taught me to do the same. However, his generation (born 1935) had their naturally protective instincts so thoroughly manipulated and exploited that he probably would have stepped aside to allow random women to secure their safety first. The indoctrination of chivalric expectations was intense – it still is.

I am very grateful to the MRM for teaching me what true equality is all about. It has enabled me to conclude that anyone who believes that my life is inherently less valuable than a woman’s should go and fuck themselves with extreme vigour. It becomes very difficult to uphold the sham of Male Privilege when our sacrifice is so taken for granted.

None of this means that it is acceptable to tread on babies and bitchslap grannies while stampeding for lifeboats. There is a line between embracing your rights and being a douche. No self-respecting man needs to be shown where than line is. He just knows.

Women seem more dazed and confused than ever by this incident. The hostility towards their assumptions of entitlement has thrown them. There are some seriously shifting dynamics at play here. My guess is that they will react, as always, by doubling down on man-shaming. Shame away ladies. It won’t do you any good.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 156 Thumb down 3
Traveller January 17, 2012 at 08:59

I repeat what I wrote in a recent past post comment. I still had to read about that gender rule in Italian news sites. As far as I know right now, the matter is present only in foreign news sites.

I agree of course there should be not preferred placement for women on lifeboats, but not even children. There is no logical reason to do so. They must have their parents near, they wait their turn with their parents.

Reading news since last summer, in USA I noticed there is a good trend to ban children from luxury restaurants – I guess I will be already dead when this will arrive in Italy. That should be on luxury cruise ships too. They do not seem for sure a place for children. Besides, I would rather not be jailed for child abuse because I walked near a child in a ship narrow corridor.

From the site of Costa, I apprehend it is forbidden bring on their ships domestic pets. I am glad no animal was harmed in that disaster.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
PeterTheGreat January 17, 2012 at 09:01

“I even saw the “77-cents-on-the-dollar” argument thrown out, as if being more productive somehow makes your life worth less. ”

One could argue, using their statistics, that the more productive man should get the boat first, while the unproductive/lesser productive woman goes last.

Children first, certainly. Feminists last.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 1
aussieguy January 17, 2012 at 09:02

Things are changing…

Why Men Become MRAs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vA41pnCggI

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Jeb January 17, 2012 at 09:10

As far as I’ve heard, the one and only sport in which women naturally out-do men is endurance swimming. Women are also more bouyant, and as survivalists will explain, women float easiest on their backs (making it easy to breathe while expending minimal energy) whereas men float easiest in “the dead man’s float” (ie. face down, head in the water) and must expend more energy to stay alive. Furthermore, women have more body-fat than men which insulates them better against aquatic dangers such as hypothermia.

Given all these factors it is quite rational for men to pick women up by the seat of their pants and toss them overboard to make way for men and children to safely be rowed ashore on the lifeboats.

It’s all about doing the right thing and saving lives, after all.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 96 Thumb down 4
Rebel January 17, 2012 at 09:10

In my opinion, the way men used to be dissed when the Titanic sank was completely wrong. It was mainly caused by a very archaic customed called chivalry.

This new story is more appropriate, according to me. We have equality.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 2
keyster January 17, 2012 at 09:14

The Captian (who was one of the first to abandon ship), and crew are the governing body. It is their responsibility to maintain order and enforce a “women and children first” policy.

If the governing body insists on enforcing bias against men in favor of women, is it not enacting a passenger Affirmative Action program? In other words shouldn’t any reasonable and thoughtful governing body enforce female advantage (gender normalizing) over males, so we can sustain “true” equality?

How are we to ever reach a state of complete Egalitarian Utopia if the governing body does not impose and enforce laws that advantage or “equalize” the female over the male?

I am woman hear me…blurp….rah…gurgle…raha…ffftt…orr…roar…gurgle…help me…somebody…fffft…please…blurp…help…help me please!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 10
Thomas Tell-truth January 17, 2012 at 09:35

Equality means that when the ship is going down and you are a woman, you had better get out of my way or you are going to drown with my footprints on your back.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 3
Dutch January 17, 2012 at 09:44

That shirt would make a wonderful gift to so many women…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Snark January 17, 2012 at 10:13
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3
Oddsock January 17, 2012 at 10:14

Inflatable sheep for would solve the problem.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8
Oddsock January 17, 2012 at 10:15

Oops,, for men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7
Oddsock January 17, 2012 at 10:19

The origin of ” women and children first ”

In 1852, the HMS Birkenhead was off to war in South Africa when she ran aground and sank off the coast of the Cape.

The only useable lifeboats were quickly filled by the 20 women and children on board, while the 476 soldiers lined up on deck to go down with the ship.

This is where the tradition of “women and children first” was born, and in naval circles is still called “the Birkenhead drill.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 6
Nico January 17, 2012 at 10:23

“A few guys pointed out that people who could not function under stress did not belong in all sorts of places, like boardrooms and battalions.”

Brand new feminist campaign in France calling men to be chivalrous at work and to stand aside so that women can reach “equality”. It’s worth watching.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xnqag5_laboratoire-de-l-egalite_news#rel-page-under-3

The problem is women do not show much generosity on the dating scene with men who fail to rise the social ladder. If you desist from a promotion to let a female colleague benefit from it, your woman may well desist from your marriage in retaliation.

Be chivalrous in the workplace, and women will be ruthless with you in the fuckplace.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 4
Lemon January 17, 2012 at 10:23

“The only useable lifeboats were quickly filled by the 20 women and children on board, while the 476 soldiers lined up on deck to go down with the ship.

1) Women are natural born cowards.
2) Women are children.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 3
Phil January 17, 2012 at 10:27

Some great comments from the readers of the Daily Mail article that AntZ linked:

“In this article the hypocrisy of women and the modern feminist movement. Women today demand equality…but only where “equality” benefits THEM in some way. Somehow they have managed to engineer a situation in which they obtained equal rights, but without accepting the equal responsibilities which go with those rights, and without surrendering any of the privileges they enjoyed in the era before feminism.” —-Roger, Australia

“What happened? Feminism happened. It took our jobs, our children, our freedom and our dignity. It denigrated, and lied, until we were little more than dirt in the eyes of society, unpleasant and expendable individually, though useful macroscopically. In an age of guilty till proven innocent, where law is bent subjectively to suit any purpose, a slow realisation and attitude of resentment is sweeping throughout the psyche of the captor…expect more examples of denial of female privilege, gradually escalating, until something significant changes.” –Adam, Northern Ireland

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 3
W.F. Price January 17, 2012 at 10:34

Be chivalrous in the workplace, and women will be ruthless with you in the fuckplace.

-Nico

Yeah, here’s my aphorism:

“If you put women before work, you’ll soon have neither.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 2
Rocco January 17, 2012 at 10:35

@ Nico

Gallentely let your children do without so she can the promotion you’ve been working on for 5 years?

Really?

God women think men are stupid.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 2
Mobile PT January 17, 2012 at 10:40

“To take your chance in the thick of a rush, with firing all about,
Is nothing so bad when you’ve cover to ‘and, an’ leave an’ likin’ to shout;
But to stand an’ be still to the Birken’ead drill is a damn tough bullet to chew,
An’ they done it, the Jollies — ‘Er Majesty’s Jollies — soldier an’ sailor too!
Their work was done when it ‘adn’t begun; they was younger nor me an’ you;
Their choice it was plain between drownin’ in ‘eaps an’ bein’ mopped by the screw,
So they stood an’ was still to the Birken’ead drill, soldier an’ sailor too”

-R. Kipling

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Craig Himself January 17, 2012 at 11:12

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 31
Norm January 17, 2012 at 11:26

Just like there are no atheists in foxholes.
Here is a blog by a Hungarian. He says why I will give you a job. (women). Interesting read. A posting in itself

http://andorjakab.blog.hu/2012/01/06/this_is_why_i_don_t_give_you_a_job

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
Norm January 17, 2012 at 11:27

I made mistake. It should read why DON’T give you a job. :)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 11:53

The insanity of a world prone to the puritanism of women over logic & reason, will always be a danger to itself ….

It’s precisely because of the puritan movement, we have women being used to kill off men, any chance they get

Putting women & children first proves, feminists actually hate women, to the point theyd kill, the only thing able to keep them safe in a disaster … men

This is why the concept of putting women & children has never really worked …

Why the hell are women saved with the children?

What part of women are a liability in disasters, dont these feminist & manginas understand?

For example in a sinking ship, the woman is a liability to the child, if the life boat tips over, or the child goes overboard, the woman is pretty much useless in the strong undercurrents of ANY sea

The sheer idiocy of putting women with children is ludicrous

Men are DESIGNED to protect children, women arent … its that simple

A child has a MUCH better chance of surviving ANY disaster if the man is kept WITH the child

Again this proves, feminists actually hate women, to the point theyd kill, the only thing able to keep them safe in a disaster … men

The same thing occurred on the Titanic, women & children policies, are ALWAYS designed to kill the women by killing off men first

By killing men first, the women & children stand NO chance in a life threatening event

How many MORE children & women would’ve survived if men were allowed to stay with their families?

Women & children policies are ALWAYS designed to kill the women & children FIRST

Putting women & children into lifeboats, without strong able men to GUARANTEE their safety is INSANE

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 4
Rocco January 17, 2012 at 12:28

Well RMaxed

You are clearly not a woman. To a woman, she is primary, they are secondary.

She can have multiple children, they are just one. You must preserve the mother to preserve the human race, this is the way women think.

Well, with 7 billion people on the planet, your eggs are just as expendable as my gametes so wait your turn honey.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 2
confused January 17, 2012 at 12:33

A female friend was recently on a Meditteranean cruise. Her experience was that Italian and middle eastern men would regularly cut in lines – specifically in front of women – while waiting for food, tickets…Not sure what generalizations can be made but I know I’ve never been anywhere where this was the case in the US.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 5
Ealow January 17, 2012 at 12:43

I think this has nothing to do with feminism. Just normal behavior for Italian (or Greek or any other Mediterranean) sailors.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14
Sources, please? January 17, 2012 at 12:54

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 63
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 13:58

@ Rocco

Actually men are capable of having children well into their 90′s …

While women only have a window of around 5 years, from 25-30

So the vast amount of women on ANY given ship, is INFERTILE …

The truth is, these are INFERTILE women wanting to put women & children first …

Put correctly, they’re women, who want to put infertile women & children first …

The VAST majority of women on this planet are infertile …

In fact all theyre saving are fat, infertile cowardly chicks … with ZERO reproductive value whatsoever …

Who else but infertile feminists would call to save their own none reproductive asses along with children…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 6
Boxer January 17, 2012 at 14:16

Dear Rmaxd:

I think for western women, a better range of fertility is 17-35, though demographers and geographers usually count women 15-49 as fertile (I don’t know any 49 year old women who have had kids, but I suppose it does happen once in a blue moon, and somewhere there’s a retarded kid to prove it).

You’re absolutely right though. I find it hilarious when women trot out that “well you need us to have babies, so you better get used to it” line. There are, what, 7 billion people in the world? A few dozen women drowning won’t make or break the human race. The scope of modern environmental damage suggests we need less useless eaters, not more, so tossing some trashy single moms, and thug baby-daddies off the side of the ship would only have been an improvement in the grand scheme of things.

Regards, Boxer

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 3
Stoltz January 17, 2012 at 14:24

Sources, please? January 17, 2012 at 12:54

Feminism is about equality, not superiority… at least that was the way I was raised.

Come again? Maybe circa 1968, but definitely not today.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 5
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 14:24

@Sources

If you want sources check the link in the original article …

Your feminists raised you incorrectly, equality is supremacy when it puts women first

Also there is NO such thing as gender equality …

IF feminism was about equality with men, it wouldnt have the word FEMINISM in it … it would be called Manism or Human Racism or something to denote applicability to BOTH men & women

The word Feminism CLEARLY spells it out as a female furthering ideology … do you see ANY male or ANYTHING implying equality in the word feminism?

Lemme spell it out for the fembot …

It starts with FEM, as in female, & ends in ism

IF you want TRUE equality, change it to human racism, oh wait the human race IMPLIES gender differences …

Feminism is all about erasing gender differences, NOT equality BIG DIFFERENCE

True equality, implies gender differences, when feminists try to erase gender differences, they in turn ERASE TRUE EQUALITY …

As EVERYONE knows, theres no such thing as true equality, precisely because of the gender differences between men & women…

Men are stronger, faster, & designed to excel in competitive environments, women are designed to hold together a social network

How exactly do you intend on getting equality with one gender, who’s designed to raise children & a family, & another gender designed to excel in harsh adaptive environments ?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 2
RMM January 17, 2012 at 14:25
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 14:30

‘Whatever happened to women and children first?’ was an interesting piece at the Daily Mail. Here are some interesting:

‘When the Titanic went down in April 1912, the Captain’s orders were: ‘Women and children first!’
‘Yet surprisingly, perhaps, such an attitude provoked sharp responses from early feminists, who believed that ‘women and children first’ infantilised women, and it gave rise to the slogan ‘Votes not Boats’ for the female sex.’
(an early feminist) ‘wrote a poem in the paper saying that the men who perished in the Titanic disaster achieved a mercifully quick death and instant glory whereas their wives were left to grieve and fend for themselves.’
‘There were only a few exceptions to the unvarying tales of heroism: three men in steerage who disobeyed the rule — Italians, coincidentally — were shot.’
‘The chivalry was reflected in survival rates: 74 per cent of the women were saved; 52 per cent of the children; and just 20 per cent of the men.’
(author concludes with) ‘the disappearance of a chivalric code is a sorry reflection on society today’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2087585/Cruise-ship-Costa-Concordia-sinking-Whatever-happened-women-children-first.html

A follow-up comment by a reader is below:
‘We have to remember that when the Titanic went down, boys were classed as men from the age of 12 years. This meant that boys were deprived of lifeboat places to accommodate women. There can be no logical reason for such discrimination, it was shameful. I suggest that in future, children (under 18) get automatic priority. There is no need to load their mothers with them, the elder children can look after the younger ones, also there will be some crewmen aboard to keep order and man the vessel. After the children’s boats have set off, adults of both sexes would be free to help others or fend for themselves according to their consciences.’

Aharon’s comment:
Those complaints by the early feminists with how the men practiced chivalry on the Titanic are hollow. If those early feminists had been on the ship, their behavior and words at the time of the disaster, would be different. Notice that on the Titanic 74% of the women were saved and ONLY 52% of the children followed by a mere 20% of the men!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 14:32

@Boxer

I chose 25-30, as the vast majority of western women have kids at this age …

17-23 year olds rarely have kids

Also the demographers etc., are clearly wrong, after 30 a woman has only a 20% chance of fertility, at 35 it drops to 2%, at 40 its none-existent …

All doctors call 35 year old women, geriatric pregnancies …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 14:33

I meant …

17-23 year olds rarely have kids in the west … unless theyre black then all bets are off …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6
David G January 17, 2012 at 14:46

My comment on the Dailymail site.

The ship is going down so everyone must make for an orderly and fast exit via the lifeboats.
That means first come, first served.
We’re not going to line people up on the deck and start a selection process based on “value” or “physical weakness”. Imagine a crew member guarding the lifeboats “Yes you ma’am, not you sir, you grandma, you little boy”, etc.
Its first come, first served for all – man, woman, elderly, disabled or child. All humans are of equal value. That is the fairest and quickest way to evacuate a sinking ship.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 14:49

“boys were classed as men from the age of 12 years. This meant that boys were deprived of lifeboat places to accommodate women. ”

So 80% of the men who died on the titanic, comprised of BOYS and adults

So essentially the 75% of the women who survived are clearly child murders & committed child infanticide on a MASS scale

Maybe we should start handing out white feathers to all the 75% of the female survivors of the titanic, clearly labelled child murderers & mass infanticidists?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 15:03

Oh yes, let’s remember if 80% of the men who died on the titanic, comprised of boys

& only 52% children survived, versus 72% women, that implies 48% of the GIRLS DIED to save 72% of the women …

So the titanic, wasnt just a mass infanticide of boys, even though the vast majority of children dying were boys … as they were classified as adults …

We can safely presume around 70-80% of the boys died, versus 48% girls dying, to save 72% of the women

So these feminists, were in fact covering up one of the largest mass infanticides in recent history …

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Jim January 17, 2012 at 15:46

Women and children? A little redundant huh?

This country needs an adjustment to put things into perspective.

The Fire Rises

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 3
tiredofitall January 17, 2012 at 16:03

“A female friend was recently on a Meditteranean cruise. Her experience was that Italian and middle eastern men would regularly cut in lines – specifically in front of women – while waiting for food, tickets…Not sure what generalizations can be made but I know I’ve never been anywhere where this was the case in the US.” confused

Just for shits and giggles go to any non-white majority city and get your fill. Should take ya about 10-15 minutes.

I think a lot of women are only now figuring out that in a “Titanic situation” like this, equality is great until the cold water hits your ass.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 4
Boxer January 17, 2012 at 16:06

Fascinating comments brothers.

Rmaxd writes:
17-23 year olds rarely have kids in the west … unless theyre black then all bets are off …

You should see the neighbourhood I drive through every day on my way to work. Lazy, slouching white teenagers, all kids of single moms. Most of the boys are “blinged out” and acting like “gangstas”, some are dressed like nazi skinheads. Many of the girls are pregnant starting at age 14. It’s about 90 percent white. This is the matriarchy in action: with women in charge of everything, kids become feral and grow into a new generation of uncivilised, useless adults to expand the cycle into new generations of fucked up dysfunction.

That’s really the best point against the “women and children first” mentality. Why should a productive man die to save a worthless single mom and her bastards, all sired by different unknown men? It’s simply counterproductive on every level. Those women who are sensible enough to live decent lives will have a husband to take care of them. The rest can hang. This sounds brutal, but nature and reality are very brutal things.

Regards, Boxer

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
Jim January 17, 2012 at 16:12

Spot on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT4dzJhvy-U

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
jk January 17, 2012 at 16:24

Pinette: In 1999 I was on a cruise ship near the cost of St. Martin. St. Martin is a beautiful island in the Carribean.
And it has rocks around it, big rocks, we’re gonna call them bad rocks. The cruise ship came too close to the bad rocks. I don’t know why, because everybody knows about these rocks . . .

Don’t you have a rock finder? thingy? It’s a half a billion dollar cruise ship. Shouldn’t something flash ROCKS! ROCKS! ROCKS! hahahahaaaa

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Attila January 17, 2012 at 16:28

A fembot needs a lifeboat the way a fish needs a cellphone ——–nice gargling on the way down!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Attila January 17, 2012 at 16:30

Ah ain’t givin’ mah goddamm sport for no hoe or her goddamm kiyidzzz—hear?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd January 17, 2012 at 16:32

Hi boxer,

I was referring to obviously average women, single women living in ghettos, or teen moms, dont really count as women …

What you’re describing is the result of feminist women creating ghetto’s to try & recreate the feminist ideal & failing miserably

Single moms & teen moms, essentially travel in packs & herds, creating massive ghettos & undereducated streets …

What you’re referring to as a matriarchy is actually alot worse …

These are herds of women, trying to live the feminist version of the picket fence, but essentially dont have the sugar daddies to send them to college, or the brains …

These single moms, are essentially socially indentured economic zombies

So indoctrinated & disabled by popular culture & feminism, they no longer serve a real role in the real world

They are the handicapped by social engineering & feminism class, brainwashed & so attached to their ideology of feminism, they no longer see the need for work or goals, or ambitions …

They achieved all those, just by being born … lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Paradoxotaur January 17, 2012 at 16:56

@Rocco: “Well, with 7 billion people on the planet, your eggs are just as expendable as my gametes so wait your turn honey.”

Also, aging feminists are quite aware that claiming superior status as the sacred keepers of the fertile womb no longer applies to them personally. I’ve noticed that they’re using different justifications to claim superiority now and exclude men from assistance. After the earthquake in Haiti, the fembots denied emergency aid to men and provided it to women because women were supposedly more important to the social fabric and inherently more generous and sharing. As desperate men started committing desperate acts to survive these putrid old women used it as further justification to deny men aid.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 January 17, 2012 at 17:07

Thanks for the links, RMM. When I wrote this piece I didn’t expect anyone to be naive enough to doubt that men were being criticized for getting on lifeboats before all the women and children did so. Apparently

artemis January 17, 2012 at 05:58

and

Sources, please? January 17, 2012 at 12:54

don’t get access to search engines with their internet service.

I’ve read several stories about this and every single one I’ve seen mentioned the “lack of chivalry” of some of the men on board, and most of them had that as the main point.

I have to admit to being a little conflicted about all this. I’ve been “child-free by choice” my entire adult life, and the social stigma applied to CFBC can be pretty irritating, too. We’re much less likely to end up in jail for bogus crap than fathers, and I will never pay a penny in child support to anyone, but we do get the short end of a lot of sticks – such as the expectation that we’ll cover for parents in the workplace whenever little Sally or Jimmy has a soccer match or a sniffle. As a man and CFBC… Let’s just say I’m glad that I almost never interact with women professionally, and never as colleagues now that I’m a civilian again.

One aspect of this that I didn’t get to in the original piece was the universally-accepted idea that children should get seats before adults. Even the feminists in full-on hamster-wheel hyperdrive agreed that children should get first priority (although whether that would translate into action in an actual emergency is far from certain). I guess I don’t have a problem with that by itself, but everyone from the most strident feminist to the most rock-ribbed MRA seemed to agree that parents should get priority over childless adults as well (at least if people didn’t think so they generally refrained from saying so). I think that is worthy of further discussion. I don’t see how my life or my wife’s life has less worth than someone who has reproduced.

It’s hard to say how one would react unless one is in such a situation. I’m reminded of a line from the song “Knock on Wood” by the Mighty, Mighty Boss-tones:

I’m not a coward, I’ve just never been tested.
I like to think that if I was I would pass.
Look at the tested and think, “There but for the Grace go I.”
Might be a coward I’m afraid of what I might find out.

But after 20+ years in the military I have been in a few life-or-death situations and I never lost my head: I’ve been shot at and I know I’m not a coward. Then again, part of my duties in Afghanistan entailed being the last person in the shelter if mortar rounds came in (I had to account for EVERYONE before I left my post), so I’m not sure I wouldn’t sacrifice myself anyway if push came to shove – it’s pretty deeply ingrained. Realistically, had I been on the Costa Concordia I would almost certainly have helped people into boats then swum to the island they crashed into.

Now if I was faced with the certainty of death… Can’t say – never been there.

Knock on wood.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Oddsock January 17, 2012 at 17:15

Boxer

“You should see the neighbourhood I drive through every day on my way to work. Lazy, slouching white teenagers, all kids of single moms. Most of the boys are “blinged out” and acting like “gangstas”, some are dressed like nazi skinheads. Many of the girls are pregnant starting at age 14. It’s about 90 percent white. This is the matriarchy in action: with women in charge of everything, kids become feral and grow into a new generation of uncivilised, useless adults to expand the cycle into new generations of fucked up dysfunction.”

Boxer, with respect, read over the excerpt from your comment.

Ok, consider this. There are almost identical neighbourhoods to the one you drive through in most towns and cities all across the UK. I am sure its the same in the USA and many other western countries.

Just look at a few of the characters found in such environments. Now just give some serious consideration into how many jobs are created and needed to service all this dysfunctionality.

Without listing all the jobs, at a quick glance, I suspect it’s easily a multi billion dollar/pound/euro business. Or, look at it another way. If for some reason, all this dysfunction stopped and just for fun, lets add into the mix the end of divorce etc. How many people do you think would lose their job and income ? How about the special needs teachers the probation officers the prison guards the police the housing the health care the shrinks the lawyers the list is almost endless.

Begs the question? Why on earth would the PTB want to fix it, especially if you are making a decent living from it all ?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 17:25

Scientists must create a long term blue birth control pill that all women must take by law in the presence of state medical observers. If a woman wants to have a child she must petition for approval proving that she can financially support the child and that there will be a man/father figure in the child’s life so to provide that child with direction and a proper upbringing. If she is approved a red pill will be given to the woman allowing fertilization to occur.

Doesn’t the above read like some of the feminist comments directed at men on the Internet only reversed?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
T January 17, 2012 at 17:31

I am a woman and I agree that women should not be given preference over men in such a situation.

My order of things:

-children first
-if the kid’s too young to go alone, pick whatever parent to go with them
-the elderly
-then all the other able-bodied people

Men don’t have to die for women they don’t know.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 16
NWOslave January 17, 2012 at 17:35

I’ve noticed nearly everyone that was interviewed was a woman.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
Oddsock January 17, 2012 at 17:43

T

“Men don’t have to die for women they don’t know”

Hmmm, so does that include all the wars the workplace deaths the Firemen the Policemen the suicides the homelessness of men et al ?

Are you, as a woman, charitable enough to have the same view you expressed above? Or, are you going to continue to remain silent for another 50 years ?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
namae nanka January 17, 2012 at 17:43

“Feminism is about equality, not superiority”

This was feminist equality in 1912:

Under the married women property act a husband has no jurisdiction over his wife’s property and income. Under the income tax he is responsible for her taxes. If the taxes are not paid, the husband, not the wife, is imprisoned. Mrs. Wilks refused to pay her income taxes–$185–and her husband was locked up. He will spend the rest of his life in prison unless the wife pays or the laws are changed.

http://fullofgraceseasonedwithsalt.blogspot.com/2011/01/sends-husband-to-jail-to-aid-suffrage.html

“what’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine” and if you deny it, you relegate women to property status.

Some more feminist equality here(taken from the Legal Subjection of Men, 1908):

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/mark-driscolls-feminist-foolishness-posing-as-christian-wisdom/#comment-28478

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
WOW January 17, 2012 at 17:44

Oh what a dream….to be eye to eye with a feminist as your boat is sinking and only one seat left in the life boat.

“What are you gonna do cunt? That’s my seat. You can wrestle me for it, but the strength that built our civilization will triumph. Think about the sons, fathers, uncles who have died building your civilization. Think about them as your lungs fill with water. C’ya!”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
PT January 17, 2012 at 17:48

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/01/17/there-is-no-homogeneous-%E2%80%9Cstripper-tragedy%E2%80%9D/

Stripping is a noble profession? Feminism fits anything and everything women do into the “good” category it seems.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
GT66 January 17, 2012 at 17:48

Children, the elderly and special needs first. Women have fought long and hard for equality with men and have earned the right to die right along with us!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Boxer January 17, 2012 at 18:17

Dear Oddsock:

Interesting point.

Begs the question? Why on earth would the PTB want to fix it, especially if you are making a decent living from it all ?

I suppose you could analogize it to farming crops (the ruling class, or as you call them the PTB, have always used people in the way working men used land).

You can pack your field with row after row of high yield winter wheat, year after year, and make as much as you can, and when the soil is totally exhausted you leave and let the dust bowl consume what’s there.

Allowing society to devolve into ultraviolent matriarchy where kids grow up with a tee vee for a father is strip mining a society which would otherwise be sustainable and productive. Let’s not kid ourselves that people would lose their jobs. The divorce attorneys and social workers could go get a real job on an assembly line someplace, probably make more money, and be good. As it is, this shit-hole (North America) will likely devolve into grass huts and people wearing animal skins in a few generations.

Good points you raised.

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
MistaThang January 17, 2012 at 18:48

Well over at Yahoo there’s an article about this incident and virtually 97% of the responses come from people who still believe in the chauvinistic Birkenhead Rule. Here was one post that made sense; naturally, it was hidden due to low ratings:

20
Ryan • Greenville, South Carolina • 3 hrs agoReport Abuse
WOW this is pretty much the only news report of this tradgedy that didnt chastise men for “daring” to ditch the “women and children” first #$%$ policy and save themeselves.Thanks yahoo for understanding that “chivalry” (which I hate) doesnt mean that men have to sacrifice themselves to save the ohh so much more important women.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
B January 17, 2012 at 18:49

The ‘women and children first argument’ in life threatening situations can be looked at in different ways. One may see it as sexism, others may think of it as a biological priority that females and children survive because (a) children will grow into adults and contribute to society and (b) women have the potential to create more children, whereas men do not.
The basic idea that men are expendable is personally insulting to me as a man, and if one were to practice real equality women would be just as expendable as men. But, back to the days when humans were in tribes and survival was a very real everyday struggle, the protection of women and children was a number one priority.

I hope I never get on a ship and be in a life threatening situation, If so, my life is just as much a priority as any womans. But, the Captain of the Costa Concordia did have a responsibility TO STAY ON THE SHIP AND CO -ORDINATE RESCUE EFFORTS! That was his job! Whether it be a man or a woman, the Captain bears the burden of command. Captain Francesco Schettino failed miserably in that task.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
Rebel January 17, 2012 at 18:50

Many women are grieving for the death of chivalry: the same chivalry that cost the lives of countless men.

Seems to me that what kills men also pleases women. Maybe the only way men have to please women is to die for them. Funny enough, the praying mantis expresses the same grief..

I wonder if the male of that species has heard about chivalry..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Richard January 17, 2012 at 18:58

Re: the 77 cent issue.

This was linked on Google News earlier today (this is not the original context, but I couldn’t find the original).

http://www.funnyphotos.net.au/images/working-hours-around-the-world1.JPG

Guess what you get when you divide percentage of women working 40+ hours by percentage of men working 40+ hours?

Drum roll please…..

77%!

And yes, I know random internet charts prove nothing, but then neither does feminist whinging.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Richard January 17, 2012 at 19:00

On the issue of disabled and elderly first, I don’t buy this either. Strong first, then weak. Just as nature intended.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
GT66 January 17, 2012 at 19:44

Richard “On the issue of disabled and elderly first, I don’t buy this either. Strong first, then weak. Just as nature intended.”

I’d still take care of the weak. I’d keep with that male role as I personally think it is the right thing to do. Those of equal or greater value though – they are on their own.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10
Taqman January 17, 2012 at 19:44

On the issue of disabled and elderly first, I don’t buy this either. Strong first, then weak. Just as nature intended.

Traditionally the weak were looked after by the strong, but that is ending because their is no balance anymore.

Now the “strong” (young men) are being ground into dust to provide ever more benefits for the takers of society and the strong have increasingly become callous.

Take a look at this

5% of Americans Made Up 50% of U.S. Healthcare Spending

The old geezers are destroying the economic opportunity for the young. In addition to feminism, men can’t start families of their own because of the costs to the economy of providing for end-of-life care for the old. The old who got to live through the peak of western civilization and had no such burden placed on them during their youth.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4
DirkJohanson January 17, 2012 at 19:56

Nico wrote: “Be chivalrous in the workplace, and women will be ruthless with you in the fuckplace.”

Gold!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
DirkJohanson January 17, 2012 at 20:16

The whole notion that women should live because they can produce more children is so absurd on many levels – not the least of which is that guys can produce a heckuva lot more children than women.

A guy of any age who survives the sinking can impregnate thousands of women; on the other hand, a woman who survives, if she can produce any lives at all, can produce no more than a handful.

Guys first!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 20:30

“And yes, I know random internet charts prove nothing, but then neither does feminist whinging”.

@Richard,

http://data.un.org/ is the site that put out the data and chart. The UN! Itself the UN is a biased misandrist organization. The chart actually shows women working a heck of a lot less. Maybe the thing is accurate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 20:36

If a feminist is thrown over the side of a sinking ship, and no one cares, does her body hitting the water make a sound? Perhaps the next time that a ship has a disaster at sea and sinks the mystery will be solved.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
Aharon January 17, 2012 at 20:50

Women and their ‘we’re the baby makers so you men kiss our ass’ is now a joke. How women have under-estimated men. They pushed too far too much. Now, we want out and away from women, society, and government. Now, it’s out turn to do self-actualization, ghost, MGTOW, and be eternal bachelors.

The world has a growing over-abundance of people on a finite planet with limited resources. Feminists bash men for exploiting mother-nature yet it is women that in America do 85% of consumer (mostly wasteful) shopping. Diamonds would not be mined for jewelry if women did not expect and demand it. I could live simply and happily in a small wood cabin, and be somewhat self-sufficient with my own garden and chickens supplemented with hunting and fishing. How many women can do that?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4
Attila January 17, 2012 at 21:16

Praying mantis, Black Widow, notice how many of them are female?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
Jaego Scorzne January 18, 2012 at 00:26

The female praying mantis begins to eat the male even before he finishes impregnating her. But she starts from the head down so it doesn’t stop the act itself (insects have less centralized nervous systems than we do). Do not human females begin to fuck with our heads early on – even during the act of coitus? And use access to their vaginas as an excuse to feed off our substance?

A few of the male praying mantises escape – the MRA’s!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
finndistan January 18, 2012 at 01:47

Women lost the right to call themselves “necessary” for the civilization because they incubate babies when they decided to abort 1 in 7.something babies (Finnish official statistics), the ones they did not abort, subject the living half to unsuitable growth conditions by ditching the fater/alienating the father/shacking up with a thug/cuckolding the father making dna based health assessment impossible/infanticide.

I am sorry ladies,

Once you kill your babies, and impair (psychologically, mostly) you loose the “I make babies, I go first” trump card.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
finndistan January 18, 2012 at 01:48

One question, how do I get rid of moderation?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Robert K January 18, 2012 at 02:08

If it came down to me or a woman for the last remaining seat on the last remaining lifeboat, the woman would lose. You wanted equality, bitches? Here it is.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
Slicer January 18, 2012 at 02:15

“I’m still not seeing where the MSM is blasting men for not letting women and children go first. – Sources, please?”

Read the comments section you will find hundreds of comments from women calling men cowards and wimps because they didn’t let women go first:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086826/Costa-Concordia-cruise-ship-accident-French-survivor-tells-husband-gave-lifejacket.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Canadian January 18, 2012 at 02:29

http://lifestyle.sympatico.ca/living/news_contentposting/why_are_canadians_aborting_female_fetuses/b9af37d9

Women are against abortion, but only because it is FEMALES who are being aborted. I wonder if anyone would be up in arms if these were male fetuses being cut out.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
crella January 18, 2012 at 02:39

Sources Please? “If you go to any feminist site, you’ll be hard pressed to find a feminist who thinks she should have priority over a man for the sake of her gender. ”

I’d like a source for THAT, please…..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3
David G January 18, 2012 at 02:43

My feminist teacher in the mid 1980s, when asked this question, stated that it took only 1 man to impregnate hundreds of women and hence women are more valuable.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Depravo January 18, 2012 at 03:12

Yeah David G, I’ve been given the same line from feminists trying to justify the continuation of traditional female privileges in an age of supposed equality. Of course if you try and carry the women-as-breeding-machines logic to its conclusion, they will scream bloody murder.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Opus January 18, 2012 at 03:15

Titanic famously had less life-boat places than there were passengers and crew on ship. As we see from The Costa Concordia, no matter how many lifeboats one has, it is never going to be enough; as, with The Concordia half the life-boats were underwater and the winching equipment failed with the remainder.

It is only at The Spearhead (and the like) that people reveal Misogyny and claim that they would physically force women (and children?) to one side. I am going to suggest that in any emergency – such as The Titanic – that would not happen and that in fact men, even readers of The Spearhead would be offering their places on the boats to women, particularily older women or women accopmpanied by small children, as that is the natural instinct of a man – its hard-wired. Behind all the equality-crap, it is clear that men will ultimately always reveal, by their actions that they regard Females as the weaker sex and no matter how many Feminists and Manginas that Academia can muster, nothing will change that (much as they might protest). Feminine equality is simply posing.

I predict that the release of Titanic 3D in a couple of months will by reason of the advance publicity provided by The Concordia break all its own box-office records.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9
Maaldweb January 18, 2012 at 03:34

Well western females aren’t interested in making babies so that argument makes no sense anymore. Moreover, lesbians cannot be counted in the baby-making group and since most feminists are lesbians I would expect feminists no to rush to the lifeboats.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Rmaxd January 18, 2012 at 03:35

“women have the potential to create more children, whereas men do not.”

Completely False

Men have a fertility of over 90+ years, women only have a fertility of around 5 years, from the age of 25-30 in the middle class group

Men are far more biologically reproductively superior & valuable than women, as they can have thousands of kids, with hundreds of women, versus a womans 4-5 kids, before her womb literally explodes from continous childbirth … not a pretty site …. lol

If you carefully examine the social constructed artificial stereotypes of women, you realise theyre actually used to hide the real truth about women …

Women were labelled pure & virginal, precisely because of their utter uselessness & refusal to do hard labour, as they were ladies …

Women were labelled as being more biologically valuable, to cover up their ridiculously short fertility rate

Women are simply too immature to have kids from the age of 17-23, making women have only a 5 year window of fertility, from the age of 25-30, after 30 they only have a 20% chance of fertility

If we examine the 72% of women saved, versus the 20% men, who were most likely boys … the 12 year old boys were classified as men, back then …

The vast majority of the women saved, wouldve been infertile & have ZERO reproduction value, as it is infertile women who make the majority in any given city

The fertile women, would’ve been around 17-23, too immature to have kids

Leaving ONLY a small percentage of women eligible women to have & reproduce children … virtually negligible

So in short, the 72% of women saved on the titanic, the vast majority were infertile & the vastly smaller remaining women too young & irresponsible to have children, who lets face it, shouldnt be having kids anyway for the good of society … lol

Now COMPARE that to the 80% of men who died, who from the age of 25 upto the age of 90, with their ability to have kids upto the age of 90

How many UNBORN children were lost, as a result of the loss of those mens lives, versus the useless majority of infertile women saved on the titanic …

Women, in particular feminists have always been child killers & mass child infanticides, the massive death of thousands of children to save 72% of mostly infertile women, is nothing new if you read history & truly see how feminist women REALLY treated their children, throughout history …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
Maaldweb January 18, 2012 at 03:36

not*

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rocco January 18, 2012 at 04:00

@ Opus

Like I said, if a woman had her family ahead of me or was infirm I would yeild.

If they were not, I recommend arming the crew because I am no misogynist but I am also no martyr, I played that game and will never play again.

What happened on the boat was clear, everyone for themselves…..everyone acted as they were taught in school from pre-school on and in indocrtrination classes…..they acted like feminists and since we live in a feminist world………I pay to Ceasar what is Ceasars and society will be treated as I am treated.

MRM to feminists on sinking boat: GET IN LINE

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Opus January 18, 2012 at 04:07

@Rocco

They acted like Italians – no idea how to form a line (queue – pronounced kew – as we say).

I don’t really think (academic) Feminism has much to do with it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Maaldweb January 18, 2012 at 04:12

Moreover, to argue that women should have priority because 1 man can impregnate many women doesn’t make sense in any form of society other than one where harems are accepted as a societal norm.
And we know that feminists find harems demeaning to women. Hence such argument should be regarded as offensive to women and any female (feminist or other) that presents them in the debate should be characterised as “sexist”, “hater” and “misogynist”.

Plus no matter how many women would get drowned in a disaster like that their number cannot be critical for the survival of the species. Certainly not with 7 billion people around.

Last but not least, don’t get excited with those feminist commenting on the net and arguing that they wouldn’t accept special treatment in situations like that. In real life they would forget their feminist ideas and take on their “I am a fragile female, please save me big man”-expression.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
Rocco January 18, 2012 at 04:46

@ Opus

As I said in my initial post I think forming an orderly line would greatly enhance everyones survival….I would agressively assist in keeping order.

And as mens rights activists I think it’s important to address another issue here.

The captains behavior was less than heroic and his choice of passage was most likely in error.

But with men still taking the high risk jobs, men, IMO, have a chance in the MRM to stand up for such men and tell the truth.

The truth is he made an error but by bringing the boat to shore, he saved many lives, many more than we realize, I’m a sailor of 30 years.

He may have his character flaws but judging head men for decisions made in the heat of the moment is unfair.

But we will fry him because he wasn’t manly.

Then, like you said, we’ll write homage’s to the men who needlesly died on the Titanic with half full life boats, filled with old women who like Romney pay 15% tax rates.

They were the grandmothers of the PTB that are the same ones that call dead broke dads who aren’t even allowed to know their own family irresponsible, another unmanly cut.

Women love to blame a man if they can.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3
Rocco January 18, 2012 at 04:50

OT

This is what your tax dollar is funding through DV courts, from our newest Frankenstien monster: Teen Mom II:

“Yes I was arrested again. It’s okay, Hannah’s just calling her own bluffs. How can I harass u with phone calls when u clearly don’t own a cell phone? I’ve dropped this argument weeks ago. Haven’t been paying attention to u but u have the balls to tell yr little “fans”.. ‘imma f***king kill that b****’ ?! How’s threatening who here ?! Lmao she’s mad cuz I took out charges first on Duffy for cyber stalking. She claims that she move out becuz I said I would “eventually kill her” when clearly her old phone has texts that states ‘look I’m moving out to yr house Duffy so we can move to new jersey so I can get famous for my singing’. Yes u set me up and yes u will go down. CAN’T WAIT FOR COURT!”

http://www.theinsider.com/gossip/48764_Teen_Mom_Jenelle_Evans_Arrested_Again/index.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Robert January 18, 2012 at 05:13

Aharon January 17, 2012 at 20:36
If a feminist is thrown over the side of a sinking ship, and no one cares, does her/his body hitting the water make a sound? Perhaps the next time that a ship has a disaster at sea and sinks the mystery will be solved.

Corrected that for you. Not all feminists are women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Robert January 18, 2012 at 05:14

Perhaps one of manboobz “male” members, or any other” male ” feminist will be on that ship.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Rmaxd January 18, 2012 at 05:19

@Rocco

“The truth is he made an error but by bringing the boat to shore, he saved many lives, many more than we realize, I’m a sailor of 30 years.

He may have his character flaws but judging head men for decisions made in the heat of the moment is unfair.”

Great comment, it would be nice, if this was in an article of its own, the captain saved plenty of lives by bringing the boat to shore, there’s no way he’s going to get credit for his rock solid action

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Opus January 18, 2012 at 05:49

@Rocco

I almost misread what you wrote. I read that the Captain made a wrong choice of Passengers, but in fact you wrote Passage.

I can only imagine that in the shock of the capsize there was little time for any form of order to be made – unlike The Titanic – where they still had time to rearrange the deck-chairs, shoot a few Italians for trying to escape in lifeboats (nothing changes) and organise things.

What would one do on an All-Male boat? What will happen when the Russians or The Chinese sink the USS Carl Vinsen with its mixed crew? Had the Captain of the Contrario been a woman would they be blaming her?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Somehow Somewhat January 18, 2012 at 07:19

It is the ‘paternalistic’ (shouldn’t it be ‘maternalistic’?) view by feminists that the rest of women are oppressed by the evil patriarchy and cannot have right views without the help of feminism. This includes being treated as equals, with agency, willful choice for their very own actions.

A very insightful website: http://www.feminisnt.com/topics/feministisms/ on the ‘maternalistic’ actions of feminism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Emma the Emo January 18, 2012 at 09:03

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 26
keyster January 18, 2012 at 09:16

“However, the human race is reproducing just fine, so there is no reason to save women first anymore.”

That’s true. The once exalted Gestational Carrier of our species now has complete control over whether we reproduce or not. Once respected as such, she’s become rather pedestrian; more like a man only not quite as capable or competent, and a little fussy too.

“Why are their lives still seen as more valuable than adult’s?”

That’s a good question. After all, aren’t they nothing more than fully realized fetuses? Really, why even bother?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Doug1 January 18, 2012 at 09:20

It’s not enough that they were protecting their families: they apparently had a duty to die for the benefit of women and children they don’t even know once their own families were safe.

Most of us know that there are no feminists in a burning building. We can now add “or on a sinking ship” to that. Even in 2012.

Yeah forget that noise. Not in this feminist age.

For purposes of discussing the sort of moral / customary issues presented by the Titanic and the recent Costa Concordia incident, there are two types of disasters: 1) those for which there are enough lifeboats (and probably enough time to evacuate everyone etc.), and 2) those for which there are not.

In the first case it makes social sense and hence moral sense to expect the able bodied to assist the infirm, the very young and the young and the otherwise weaker to escape, and hence to treat them first, since it will take more time than for the able bodied to evacuate by themselves (under leadership). In the later case where there isn’t room or time enough for everyone, no such automatic priority can rationally, or at any rate compellingly, be made. Why are they more valuable than the able bodied? In neither case do I see much that is morally compelling in favoring all women, especially in this feminist age, when women defer to or favor men as men on nothing.

What would in fact be rational in such later not room or time enough cases, would be to favor those most beneficial to their own families and then society, and perhaps the very young as well. This would lead to leaving out of lifeboats first the elderly of both genders, then the merely retired of both, and then those parents whose children were living independently and were not longer being put through education in whole or part by them, and then after that the single of both genders.

If still more room was needed, we might rationally start excluding very young children and even infants, since not too much parental investment has yet been made and who are thus “replaceable”. That however will get agreement from zero parents, so forget I brought it up as a logical extension.

I suppose if there were any truly outstanding talents aboard who were still contributing those talents, they too of whatever age should maybe get priority, but this too will be real controversial in this professedly egalitarian age.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Aharon January 18, 2012 at 09:22

“Corrected that for you. Not all feminists are women”.

@Robert,

You have made a very important point and distinction here. MRAs, IMO do not focus enough time and energy going after the enabling supportive manginas and white knight males. We usually keep bashing feminists and maybe that is because it is easier and more fun. Thank you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Aharon January 18, 2012 at 09:34

“However, the human race is reproducing just fine, so there is no reason to save women first anymore”.

Keyster,

I do get your point. Just to play with the subject further, the human race with more than seven billion people on the planet has over-produced. Therefore, we must limit the source of the over-population on this finite planet with limited resources. The source of the population problem is female. The only logical finding is that women be recognized as a danger to the continuation of the human species. Therefore, during a shipboard disaster, men must be given priority to live since men contribute more to society, human survival, the earth, and women are harming and endangering all three.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
Dubcik January 18, 2012 at 10:02

The first report I read on this indicated that the families were huddled together with the parents (esp. fathers I am sure) making sure their family members were secure. The ship was tilting badly, people were falling and sliding, glass was shattering, objects were flying around and it was generally a dangerous place to be, for everyone.

So, can you imagine yourself a father in this situation, protecting your family, and then they come around and tell you to leave them? That only the women and children were to be removed from the ship. No wonder the men didn’t just stand idly by, they were doing what men instinctively do, protecting their families.

I heard that some people fell into the water trying to get into the lifeboats, perhaps a mother with kids, trying to do this alone, in a dark sinking boat, because her husband had been told to go away. I never heard that version of the story again.

The next day the story had changed to one about the selfish loser men on board who were trying to take the places of the women and children.

I know which version I believe.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10
criolle johnny January 18, 2012 at 10:15

Children first, full stop.
Women, being equals, can wait in line like everyone else.
As a career mariner, the ship’s captain leaving before an accounting is made is inexcusable. and abominable. No need to go “down with the ship”, but leaving while passengers, for whom he is responsible, are screaming for assistance defies comprehension.
Leaving a MAN behind is inexcusable. Leaving a child is …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
keyster January 18, 2012 at 10:27

“I suppose if there were any truly outstanding talents aboard who were still contributing those talents, they too of whatever age should maybe get priority, but this too will be real controversial in this professedly egalitarian age.”

Having the crew assign a commitee to decide who has more value than the others, while the boat sinks–notwithstanding; he that aggressively muscles his way to the front of the line and selfishly claims a seat on the life raft, leaving the timid and weak to perish, will be the one that survives and carries-on to breed another day.

This is why belligerent assholes will never be extinct.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Rebel January 18, 2012 at 10:36

@ Emma the Emo

” So while men have much more fertility, it’s the women who are the more valuable source of children here ”

This sounds to me like a dangerous path to take.

Some seventy five thousand years ago, when humanity went through a “bottleneck” and the species was almost extinct, it was surely true, but with seven billions of us now on the planet, being a “source” of children may not be something to look for.

Conversely, if fertility is considered the deciding factor, does it mean that an older woman is not worth saving?

I have no idea of what a proper solution may be other than making sure such decisions (who is worth saving) never have to be made. For example: build unsinkable ships.

Seems to me that engineering, more than politics, can provide a satisfactory solution.
Why stack so many floors on one ship? Doesn’t that call for disaster?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
mensvoices January 18, 2012 at 10:43
Ken January 18, 2012 at 10:57

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21
ARA January 18, 2012 at 11:05

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 43
W.F. Price January 18, 2012 at 11:24

One question, how do I get rid of moderation?

-finndistan

If your IP is flagged by akismet, I can’t do anything about it. You can try to get a new one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel January 18, 2012 at 11:44

@ARA January 18, 2012 at 11:05
Women, being the fairer sex, deserve preferential treatment.

That was true in the past. But women are now strong and independant. Besides, they no longer need men for anything.
There is no more “fairer sex”. Sorry, but women are no more deserving than men are. Look up your dictionary for the word “equality”.
Women are not entitled to any priviledge. Not anymore.

Remember your feminist mantra: apart from very minor differences in genitalia, men and women are identical: no one is entlitled more than anyone else.
E-q-u-a-l-i-t-y.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Lyn87 January 18, 2012 at 12:21

Doug1 brought up an excellent point: not all disasters are created equal. In those cases where it is possible to save all the initial survivors (adequate space to evacuate and adequate time to do so in an orderly fashion), it makes sense for the strong to assist the weak before taking care of themselves – that’s an easy one. But when some of the initial survivors are probably going to die due to inadequate space in the rescue craft or insufficient time to get everyone to safety, different factors come into play. I will posit that those two possibilities are different from each other, though.

It is almost inconceivable that there would be a situation with lots of time but inadequate rescue space. In such a case the group COULD set up a death panel to hear everyone’s reasons why Suchandso over here is more worthy of life than Whatshisname over there. But situations like that only seem to occur in Social Studies classes and late-night dorm discussions. Even Solomon wouldn’t be able to figure that one out. In the real world emergencies happen far too fast for such considerations to matter. So the real question is how to decide rapidly.

If there is not enough time, anything that slows down the evacuation process results in needless loss of life. In that case it’s hard to see how taking the time to rack-and-stack people according to some esoteric calculus of human worth and potential would not be needlessly deadly. So people go for a short-hand version of that calculus: “women and children first.” Feminism has destroyed any rationale for including adult women in that group anymore, but that brings up a new set of problems. Most people think parents (or at least mothers) deserve a seat on the boats with their children. But consider that every parent you save means that a non-parent has to die. Also, does your kid have to be there with you? If the rationale for saving parents is to prevent their kids from being orphaned, that applies equally to parents traveling without their kids. And are all you child-free MGTOW guys really okay with drowning to save some skank simply because she popped out a kid from some thug she met in a bar? Not so easy anymore, is it? But if we say “children first,” what do we do to parents who try to board with their children rather than queue up with the other adults for a chance at a later boat? You probably can’t shoot them all.

We could say “children and one parent first,” but in practice that leaves us nearly where we are now, except that childless females no longer get special treatment. It’s a start, but let’s face it: fathers would be pressured to give charge of their children to one of the women on the boat anyway.

Any finer gradation is almost certainly going to take more time than is available, so any discussion of, “Children, then a parent, then the handicapped, then the elderly, then the third-cousin-of the-President, then red-headed pole dancers, then people with I.Q.s over 120, etc…” is a pointless exercise in navel-gazing. My only stipulation is that Oddsock doesn’t get a seat, since he can make a raft out of his inflatable sheep.

The bottom line is that it comes down to the application of brute force. If all the big guys want to get on the lifeboat and leave everyone else behind, nobody will be able to stop them from doing just that. The fact that that almost never happens is proof positive that the feminist “patriarchy” myth is complete and utter crap. But if the big dudes decide to enforce “women and children” first, nobody will be able to stop them from doing that either.

In a stressful situation you will act in accordance with your most deeply held beliefs. And is it stands now, we’re nearing the tipping point between vestigial chivalry and self-preservation for a critical mass of men. I think we all know which way the pendulum is swinging, so when the bottom drops out from under Western Civilization it may be a especially bad time to be a shrewish woman with no practical skills.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd January 18, 2012 at 12:46

@Emma the Emu – not a typo … lol

“So while men have much more fertility, it’s the women who are the more valuable source of children here (cuz it’s so limited). ”

That only applies in forms of scarcity, there hasnt been a scarcity of women, for MILLIONS of years now …

Making men the more valuable & superior biologically, the b.s about women being more valuable biologically, was simply one of the oldest socially engineered rumours designed to benefit walking wallet, enslaving stayathome mothers …

As for your comments on children, i’m guessing your trolling …

For the record, children are our biological imperative, we dont kill our biological imperative …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Traveller January 18, 2012 at 13:36

“But if the big dudes decide to enforce ‘women and children’ first, nobody will be able to stop them from doing that either.”

That’s a worrying thinking… because this is exactly what they do in all the whole society. Cops, judges, politicians, business onwers. They just would save women and afterwards, themselves, leaving the weak betas die.

I hope in this event the resentment of all the betas will explode and they overnumber and throw over boards all the big guys and the (their) women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Snark January 18, 2012 at 13:52

“But if the big dudes decide to enforce ‘women and children’ first, nobody will be able to stop them from doing that either.”

This is the history of patriarchy and of feminism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Anonymous January 18, 2012 at 14:34

The Titanic was the excection not the rule. In 1915 the Lusitania sank of the coast of Ireland and it was every one for themselves.

Most of the articles I have seen criticised the crew for not helping the passengers and the captain for abandoning his ship.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 January 18, 2012 at 15:16

Traveller and Snark,

I hope you both understand I’m not advocating the idea that “might makes right.” I’m just saying that the strong have the ability to impose their will on everyone else, not that they have the right to do so.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Newt January 18, 2012 at 19:07
Trapped January 18, 2012 at 19:56

I agree with @Traveller re: children first. Why shouldn’t it be “first to the lifeboat with your life vest on and ready to perform, first in?” If a family arrives together, load them together. If you don’t want to go without someone and they aren’t there yet, go to the back of the line. It is the crew’s duty to make evacuation as quick, safe, and orderly as possible.

In all the fire/tornado drills I have experienced at work and school, it has been orderly and there was no preferential treatment. There have always been people with extra training to guide the process. The drills are to ensure that people know what to do when it really happens. Every cruise I’ve been on had a muster drill before we set sail.

That being said, if someone gets out of line, people need to react appropriately in the moment… Like Rayon McIntosh in the McDonald’s self defense case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
therecanbeonlyone January 19, 2012 at 04:51

@AntZ – In addition to MRM’s owning public opinion, we also have one item: the ability to physically survive when the SHTF. The courts, gov’t, media, and even feminized academia cannot save them when the ship sinks. Even “grrrll power” fails them.
@Art Vandelay – “I think when the fembots are done sorting the passengers by what value they ascribe to them the ship already hit the ground of the ocean.” No, it would take them forever just to form a support group and get gov’t funding.
@ the forum in general – Feminism is starting to fall on its own sword. If, according to feminists, gender is nothing more than a social, rather than biological, construct, created to maintain the power of the patriarchy over women then the actions of men on the Concordia is a declaration on the part of men that we get it. We respect the notion that men and women are equal, therefore nobody should be accorded special privileges. Welcome to the land of equality sisters…with the Concordia being the official welcome wagon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Emma the Emo January 19, 2012 at 05:32

Rebel,

“Some seventy five thousand years ago, when humanity went through a “bottleneck” and the species was almost extinct, it was surely true, but with seven billions of us now on the planet, being a “source” of children may not be something to look for.”

Precisely! That is what I meant.

“Conversely, if fertility is considered the deciding factor, does it mean that an older woman is not worth saving?”

If you live in a very small group of people, like thousands of years ago, and you can only save a limited amount of people, then yes, an old woman is less worth saving than a young one. Because without enough fertile women your group might die out. Of course it’s not applicable to world today.

“I have no idea of what a proper solution may be other than making sure such decisions (who is worth saving) never have to be made. For example: build unsinkable ships.”

I think with 7 billion people on the planet, you don’t have to worry who is “worth more”. Just make people form a line, calm them down as much as possible, and save them without putting anyone ahead of another because of their qualities or group. A calm crowd is better at saving itself than a panicky violent one. I’m not sure it’s possible to make people this calm, since the urge to push people aside to save yourself can be strong. But this is what I got so far.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9
Emma the Emo January 19, 2012 at 07:27

“As for your comments on children, i’m guessing your trolling …

For the record, children are our biological imperative, we dont kill our biological imperative …”

It’s a serious question. I understand why parents might give up their seat in the boat to their kids. But why are adults expected to sacrifice themselves for other people’s kids? Or even let them go first. Other people’s kids are not your biological imperative. The two reasons why you should do it that I came up with are these:
1)If everyone does this, then everyone’s kids will be saved, so in a way you’re saving your own when you’re saving other people’s kids. But you can apply the same argument to your wives, so I don’t know…
2)You should help people weaker than yourself into the boats because the stronger can shove them easily aside. It doesn’t really prove you should sacrifice yourself for them though. Just help them while you are going there yourself.
Any better reasons?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10
namae nanka January 19, 2012 at 18:29

“the forum in general – Feminism is starting to fall on its own sword. ”

If anything it’s the exact opposite, what with Hillary’s “women and children are the worst sufferers of war”. Even the 1912 feminists weren’t that stupid/arrogant enough.

“Women, being the fairer sex, deserve preferential treatment.”

So white men over black men?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
bruno January 21, 2012 at 08:35

Wait,… there were MEN on board that cruise ship??
MEN are taking cruises??
Ooh Lord,… what has happened to this world?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zircon Tweezers January 21, 2012 at 09:06

Equality? They sure don’t like it when the SHTF! I can assure you that this will be the last time that this will happen.
The feminazis didn’t like what they seen here at all. Not the part about the women having to fend for themselves, they could care less. The part they really don’t like is men having a choice!
Stay tuned, because I can guarantee you they and their minions are working very hard behind the scenes to get big daddy to legislate them to the front of the line.
Never let a good crisis go to waste, especially when you can use it throw men in jail!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
aaa January 21, 2012 at 14:27

@Emma: the ideal is that the persons least likely to survive floating in (presumably cold) water should get priority to enter the lifeboats. Another commentator trenchantly noted that women with their lower bone density and higher percentage of subcutaneous fat are at less risk of drowning and are marginally more insulated from cold temperatures.

The “who deserves to be saved” issue has been argued in relation to organ transplant lists. Is an infant’s life more valuable than that of a small business owner who employs dozens or hundreds of workers in his community? Is a beautiful 20-yr-old meth-addicted streetwalker more deserving of life than a homely 60-yr-old grandmother who is the bedrock of her children and grandchildren’s lives? What about a cancer researcher on the verge of a breakthrough, or a beloved pastor, or top-notch neurosurgeon? Trying to rank human being’s lives in order of relative value seems absurd after just a little mental experimentation.

Andybob’s post on Jan 17 08:42 was excellent.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
nugganu January 22, 2012 at 00:37

Wow, you guys really Cassandra the worthless whore at manboobz with this one

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Anonymous January 22, 2012 at 17:15

With feminist accusations of “sexism” to help women and, now, legitimized hypergamous behavior, it’s wonder a few women didn’t thrown over the side.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
David G January 23, 2012 at 01:44

Maybe its time we gave everyone real world experience of what a “women-first” world really looks like. Why limit such chivalry to sinking ships? We should apply it to all dangerous situations.

I propose that the next time there’s a fire drill at your workplace, all men should head to the entrance but not exit the building.
They should wait by the door in an orderly queue until all females have exited the building, including the fat and slow ones, those who were in the bathroom, those finishing off their emails, and those chatting with their girlfriends.
Only when it has been confirmed that all the precious vaginas are safely out of the building can we nasty penis holders start to leave the building.

I wonder how President Obama feel about waiting in a burning White House while Jennifer the tea lady waltzes out courtesy of her Pussy Pass® .

I suggest we all right letters to Hilary Clinton and Michelle Obama demanding that this become the official evacuation procedure in all workplaces. Anything less is surely misogyny.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Fire January 23, 2012 at 10:56

Alcuin January 17, 2012 at 08:01
Obviously women want “equality” when it’s good for them, and chivalry when that’s best for them. They want to have their cake and eat it too. While Spearheads take that for granted, most men I’ve met are too brainwashed and emasculated to see that. Women must laugh at us every day.

……….

They do laugh at us everyday….. thats why we need to do something about it.

and using logic most likley wont do it.

most men respond both to logic and shaming tactics.

most women dont respond to logic…… only shaming tactics

(i did my own pua experiment to show this)

i call it “the playboy experiement”

….

becuase most women dont respond to logic….. only shaming tactics…… and becuase most men are not willing to shame women…… we are gona need to start playing dirty….. it may be the only way to fix this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
crella January 23, 2012 at 17:32

“LOL we been manboobed”

In other words, we’ve had him lurk, take multiple quotes out of context, had the rest exaggerated and posted on his blog for his little minions (who haven’t the sense to actually follow a link to see if what he’s saying is accurate) to froth over. He did this at NiceGuy’s as well…he lurks and never once has actually challenged a comment on the sites he’s criticizing. He takes what he wants and scurries away to discuss it with his followers. Such a courageous activist, is Manboobz….

He wouldn’t have a blog, were it not for dogging MRA sites.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price January 23, 2012 at 18:28

In other words, we’ve had him lurk, take multiple quotes out of context, had the rest exaggerated and posted on his blog for his little minions (who haven’t the sense to actually follow a link to see if what he’s saying is accurate) to froth over. He did this at NiceGuy’s as well…he lurks and never once has actually challenged a comment on the sites he’s criticizing. He takes what he wants and scurries away to discuss it with his followers. Such a courageous activist, is Manboobz….

He wouldn’t have a blog, were it not for dogging MRA sites.

-Crella

I wish he’d write his own material for a change. I actually had some hopes that the guy would contribute to some dialog, but no, it’s all point and sputter, e.g. “how dare they vote that way! it’s hate!” or, “look what this anonymous commenter said! it’s hate!”

I think the problem is that Dave is fairly competent as far as writing copy is concerned, but otherwise he’s in over his head, or else, as I suspect, too lazy or scared.

One telling event is when he tried to write something for feminists and was seriously excoriated by the radfem collective. Maybe getting burned like that taught him a lesson: as a man you can only work for the feminists, not with them.

I do remember that Dave was really particular about the old debate he had with Paul Elam. He was very concerned about its presentation, and I wondered why he cared so much. It just strikes me that the guy has severe issues around the image he projects, and he ought to just get over it. If there’s anything I’ve learned, it’s that people will trash you no matter what. You can run, but you can’t hide. Why doesn’t Futrelle just stop hiding? He’s really no different from angry anonymous commenters that way.

Whatever the case, I don’t wish any harm to Mr. Futrelle — he’s just a guy like the rest of us. Dust to dust and all that. But for God’s sake why can’t he just open up and be himself? Why do other people’s opinions have to matter so much to him? It’s a real flaw, IMO. If you have a problem with people’s opinions, give them truth, not shame and condemnation. Some of us will accept error. I am always happy to learn I’m wrong about something — it’s a relief to correct an error or flaw in my reasoning. In fact, truth is often the only comfort in our harsh world. At least it’s something we can – and must – accept. Immutable laws are much easier to put up with than our fallible, human creations.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
crella January 23, 2012 at 18:37

‘If you have a problem with people’s opinions, give them truth, not shame and condemnation.’

And, have the courage to address them on their own turf.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
billy williams January 23, 2012 at 21:43

You can’t have it both ways women, Either you’re equal everywhere, or nowhere -You can’t just pick & choose when you want to be equal, and when you want special privileges.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Fire January 23, 2012 at 23:10

women dont respond to truth…. in case you have not noticed.

but they do respond to shaming tactics and condemnation.

look at the evidence….. most women cant handle truth if it makes them feel bad.

most women dont repsond to logic.

men need to shame women for there sexist habbits….. its very effective.

but they wont….. becuase they dont want to hurt there chances of getting laid…. as well as our own weakness to shaming tactics.

thats why eventuly…. we will need to start playing dirty.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Fire January 24, 2012 at 13:19

hey guys….. lets just all do what women do.

give them a taste of there own medcine.

watch this.

“a REAL women would always put a man first!”

hmmmm….. that almost sounds…. sexist.

hmmmm….

wait!…. i got another one!

“a REAL women always pays for the first date”

hmmm…. im kinda liking this game. =)

“a REAL women never hits a man, even if he hits her first”

” a REAL women suports her man financaily”

“a REAL women always suports her kids”

“a REAL women respects men”

“a REAL women opens doors for men”

“A REAL women gives men sex when ever he wants”

” a REAL women, pulls out chairs for a man.”

“a REAL women never curses in front of a man”

…….

wow…. most women are so pethtic…. i almost feel justtified when i use them for sex….. scratch that….. i do feel justfied.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Scott January 24, 2012 at 22:17

I’m late with my comments and will probably echo a few people already in the thread.

But … YES!, a resounding YES!
This is what their equality has come to – if they have to wait in line, they jolly well woman-down and wait in the god-damned line!

In 2012 I sure as hell plan to force their equality up their stinking c-holes! (And you can brand me a woman-hater – I don’t care anymore.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: