Women and Children first - General

[QUOTE=coolsteve;34492382]women have the babies and children are the future they are more important[/QUOTE] But we're talking about a survival-of -the-group situation, rather than survival-of-the-species. Sorting out the order of who's allowed on to the lifeboats first wastes time. Just get people out of danger as soon as possible. There's a group of, lets say 150 people, assembled to get into a boat. If a group of families are near the back (slower to arrive due to small kids), you'd halt the evacuation, get them brought forward through the queue, maybe argue with the husbands about being split up from their families? You're not going to launch the boat until it's full, so who cares who gets in first? Just get everybody in as soon as possible and get away.

[QUOTE=coolsteve;34492382]women have the babies and children are the future they are more important[/QUOTE] men are the ones [i]who supply the fucking babies[/i]

Where do the elderly and the disabled come in? Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

[QUOTE=coolsteve;34492382]women have the babies and children are the future they are more important[/QUOTE] Firstly, as has already been said, it is survival of the group, not of the species. Secondly, In modern times, a man is not allowed by society to impregnate multiple women because bigamy is not socialy acceptable. This renders the arguement of 'Women have the children' useless because you require (in modern times) a 1:1 ratio of Man to Woman, so the best system (assuming there is limited capacity) for breeding (although not necessary) is an equal number of men and women.

NOPE.AVI. [editline]1st February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=coolsteve;34492382]women have the babies and children are the future they are more important[/QUOTE] WOMEN HAVE SAND IN VAGINA.

[QUOTE=CrispexOps;34210045]It's out of respect for the women. A man is supposed to lay down his life for the women he loves, it's been that way for years. Also, care to post a link to the article?[/QUOTE] And what does the man get in return?

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;34496231]And what does the man get in return?[/QUOTE] Fellatio.

[QUOTE=MingeCrab;34497412]Fellatio.[/QUOTE] After sacrificing himself?

women can make more children, children are small and generally cute you only need 1 man to inseminate a lot of women

[QUOTE=xXDictatorXx;34497577]After sacrificing himself?[/QUOTE] hot

If you're a man and you don't agree with "women and children first" then you are nothing more than a [B]coward[/B]. It has nothing to do with what's best for the species. A single accident won't affect humanity at all. It's about being a man. Your duty is to protect the weak. Don't be fucking cowards.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34498112]If you're a man and you don't agree with "women and children first" then you are nothing more than a [B]coward[/B]. It has nothing to do with what's best for the species. A single accident won't affect humanity at all. It's about being a man. Your duty is to protect the weak. Don't be fucking cowards.[/QUOTE] Sorry, but in modern society, men don't need to be SUPER STRONG MANLY MEN, it's just not necessary anymore. To say they do, and to insult them for [i]not being willing to die[/I] is extremely sexist, on top of just stupid. Or can you tell me WHY they should. Why is it their duty? [editline]1st February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=MingeCrab;34497412]Fellatio.[/QUOTE] They make machines for that now.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34498112]If you're a man and you don't agree with "women and children first" then you are nothing more than a [B]coward[/B]. It has nothing to do with what's best for the species. A single accident won't affect humanity at all. It's about being a man. Your duty is to protect the weak. Don't be fucking cowards.[/QUOTE] I disagree because I can't think of a single logical reason why "women and children first" should be enforced in life or death situations, it seems to be being defended purely based on tradition and chivalry rather than reason. Say I hopped on the last spot of a lifeboat and got out of there leaving some 19 year old, very nice looking woman behind to die. Should I have stayed behind and drowned in order to let her take my place? Now what if the woman was 45 years old and 300 lbs. Does this change your answer? And I don't think "being a man" necessarily has any sort of objective meaning or duty like "you must be big and strong and protect weak people". Though I myself might be inclined to help based on the way I was raised, I personally see no logical reason why it should be made the rule.

Grow some fucking balls and be a man.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34498886]Grow some fucking balls and be a man.[/QUOTE] Why?

You're embarrassing the rest of us...

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34499126]You're embarrassing the rest of us...[/QUOTE] Uh, the rest of who? Are you the official representative of every male in the world? Most men aren't strong anymore, it's not important to be. You don't need to be manly, just be who you want to be and let everyone else do their thing. Also, I'm not a man.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34498886]Grow some fucking balls and be a man.[/QUOTE] This is not debating.

It's a matter of principles. It has nothing to do with physical strength.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34499921]It's a matter of principles. It has nothing to do with physical strength.[/QUOTE] Saying it's a matter of principles doesn't make it correct. Why do those principles exist, and why are they necessary and correct?

Well in the end it all boils down to not being selfish and taking one for the team. In a perfect world, we would all share this quality.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34500030]Well in the end it all boils down to not being selfish and taking one for the team. In a perfect world, we would all share this quality.[/QUOTE] Perfect world scenarios are pointless because in a perfect world [i]no one dies and no ships wreck.[/I] So why are women allowed to be 'selfish' and keep their lives instead of 'taking one for the team' like all the men are apparently supposed to?

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;34500069]Perfect world scenarios are pointless because in a perfect world [i]no one dies and no ships wreck.[/I] So why are women allowed to be 'selfish' and keep their lives instead of 'taking one for the team' like all the men are apparently supposed to?[/QUOTE] Because that's just what men do.

I can understand, how you as a woman, have a hard time understanding how one could ever possibly value someone else's life more than your own. I'm not even gonna try to explain it.

[QUOTE=coco911231;34500107]Because that's just what men do.[/QUOTE] Why? [editline]1st February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rad McCool;34500164]I can understand, how you as a woman, have a hard time understanding how one could ever possibly value someone else's life more than your own. I'm not even gonna try to explain it.[/QUOTE] You can't explain it because it's wrong. Also, I'm transgendered. Male to female. I know what it's like to be a man, so don't give me that shit. I want explanations.

Ok then you're just selfish. That's all.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34500164]I can understand, how you as a woman, have a hard time understanding how one could ever possibly value someone else's life more than your own. I'm not even gonna try to explain it.[/QUOTE] I, as a guy, value some other peoples lives above mine and would sacrifice my life for theirs, but that is MY CHOICE. Forcing someone to do so or creating a construct in which they are taught that they must is wrong. Also, the point that a man can impregnate multiple women is nullified by societies objection to bigamy.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34500219]Ok then you're just selfish. That's all.[/QUOTE] No, I am not. I would be likely to give someone else my seat, not because they were a woman, not because they were a man, but because they were a fucking person. And how fucking cold are you that you criticize someone for not being willing to die?

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;34500261]I, as a guy, value some other peoples lives above mine and would sacrifice my life for theirs, but that is MY CHOICE. Forcing someone to do so or creating a construct in which they are taught that they must is wrong.[/QUOTE] Yeah I guess, that's a good point man.

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34500289]Yeah I guess, that's a good point man.[/QUOTE] Yes, it is. So, just gonna ignore my post then?