Dragnipur

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
741
Would something like this be acceptable today, forcing men off lifeboats to make room for women/children? Should the Captain go down with the ship? This happened a long time ago but I'm curious if the same sentiments hold today.
 

Kaz Mk II

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,635
Men would peer pressure each other into upholding it. Especially ones with significant others on board.
 
Nov 30, 2017
2,750
Well why should an older person go before the youngest?

If the children are going wouldn't they go with a parent or are we gonna orphan all of them?
 

Z-Beat

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,003
Thought the rule was that the captain could get off once everyone else was safely off the ship.

If you're the captain and everyone else is off the ship you dont have to stand there and wave. I think it's one if those things that has more to it like wild west gun control laws
 

Galkinator

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,112
It should be children and old people I guess, in terms of the ones who need the most help.
No difference between men and women though, that wouldn't pass today
 

Deleted member 6949

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,786
If you got on a lifeboat before children in 2018 like 90 people would film it on their phones and everyone would know forever.
 

Metal B

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,396
Yes, men are physical stronger, so they would have a higher chance to survice. Woman and children would drown much faster. It's just chance.
 

BocoDragon

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,207
I always read it as an example of the deep sexism of the time. I mean if you watch the movie you'll be reminded that this was a time when women had very prescribed roles (of course this was through a 1990s post-feminist lens so they emphasize these things). They were practically property of the men... and so were the children. That's why they go first. The men are supposed to be taking care of the people under their care...

I spoke to some friends from Asia and they interpreted the women and children thing as noble. I was a bit shocked...
 

Xe4

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,295
Definitely children. But yeah, after that it should be in order of those who are most able to survive NOT in a lifeboat, cause there's a real chance you would be rescued in time in this modern age.

So disabled people and the elderly would also have to be prioritized, then women, then men, though obviously that wouldn't be true for all women and men, but good as a rule of thumb.

The goal should be to keep everyone alive, so everyone should stick with a lifeboat and then spend turns inside and outside the boat.

It's worth noting, the Titanic sunk very slowly, so there was time to think of all that. Most ships sinking are fast and cause a panic and so it'd be impossible to organize something like that.

Edit: And that's assuming a modern ship didn't somehow have space on the lifeboats, and I'm pretty sure that's a requirement nowadays, especially for civilian crafts.
 
Last edited:

Reinhard

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,697
Well even similar to back then, it would be the rich regardless of sex/age who got on the life boats first. Of course it should be children first, but there is no reason why men or women should be prioritized one over the other after that. You could argue parents to take care of said children should be prioritized over singles or childless couples.
 

Radd Redd

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,185
I know I'll side eye the men that try to go before all the children.

If I was an old man I would prefer giving my spot up for a mother or younger man.
 

low-G

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,144
Doesn't matter.

Politicians and VIPs would go first and they'd make sure the ship sank faster so the children would tell no tales.
 

RagnarokX

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,931
I always read it as an example of the deep sexism of the time. I mean if you watch the movie you'll be reminded that this was a time when women had very prescribed roles (of course this was through a 1990s post-feminist lens so they emphasize these things). They were practically property of the men... and so were the children. That's why they go first. The men are supposed to be taking care of the people under their care...

I spoke to some friends from Asia and they interpreted the women and children thing as noble. I was a bit shocked...
It comes from chivalry. The idea was that the strong and privileged should endeavor to help the weak and disadvantaged before helping themselves.

From Wikipedia:
As a code of conduct, "women and children first" has no basis in maritime law. According to disaster evacuation expert Ed Galea, in modern-day evacuations people will usually "help the most vulnerable to leave the scene first, likely to be the injured, elderly and young children."[8]

It's more a societal pressure thing.
 

UltimateHigh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,501
Children should go first, and well, children also shouldn't go alone. Prioritize one of the parents at least.
 

apstyl

Member
Oct 25, 2017
492
It's my understanding that Charles Lightoller, an officer on the Titanic, was the person who enforced the policy as women and children "only". Apparently there were spots available in boats, but he made the call to lower the boats regardless. He lived with that regret all his life. Then, in 1940, in his retirement from the Navy, crossed the English Channel in his boat with his son to pick up soldiers stranded at Dunkirk. That's right! The same guy on the Titanic who enforced women+children only is the SAME dude as Mark Rylance's character in Dunkirk. Wild.
 

Hogger

Member
Nov 18, 2017
1,297
100% this would still happen today. And it's still acceptable to have this etiquette.
 

bangai-o

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,527
There might be outrage on the internet. Better make sure everyone equally gets on the lifeboats.
 

Burrman

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,633
tenor.gif

Every man for themselves
 

UltimateHigh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,501
It's my understanding that Charles Lightoller, an officer on the Titanic, was the person who enforced the policy as women and children "only". Apparently there were spots available in boats, but he made the call to lower the boats regardless. He lived with that regret all his life. Then, in 1940, in his retirement from the Navy, crossed the English Channel in his boat with his son to pick up soldiers stranded at Dunkirk. That's right! The same guy on the Titanic who enforced women+children only is the SAME dude as Mark Rylance's character in Dunkirk. Wild.

I had no idea. Thanks.
 

Xe4

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,295
It's my understanding that Charles Lightoller, an officer on the Titanic, was the person who enforced the policy as women and children "only". Apparently there were spots available in boats, but he made the call to lower the boats regardless. He lived with that regret all his life. Then, in 1940, in his retirement from the Navy, crossed the English Channel in his boat with his son to pick up soldiers stranded at Dunkirk. That's right! The same guy on the Titanic who enforced women+children only is the SAME dude as Mark Rylance's character in Dunkirk. Wild.
That's actually pretty interesting, thanks for the tidbit!
 

Solo

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
15,923
It's my understanding that Charles Lightoller, an officer on the Titanic, was the person who enforced the policy as women and children "only". Apparently there were spots available in boats, but he made the call to lower the boats regardless. He lived with that regret all his life. Then, in 1940, in his retirement from the Navy, crossed the English Channel in his boat with his son to pick up soldiers stranded at Dunkirk. That's right! The same guy on the Titanic who enforced women+children only is the SAME dude as Mark Rylance's character in Dunkirk. Wild.

Wait...is this true? How has this guys life not been a movie? Sounds like a tailor made redemption story that Hollywood would love.
 

legacyzero

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,252
I totally don't see anything wrong with Women and children first. Men can't reproduce and children should have their entire lives ahead of them. I think at its core, it's just the right thing to do overall. Old people lived a full life. I personally don't se it as either sexist or chivalrous.

As a husband and a Father, I'd be making damn sure my wife and children were on that boat before me
 
Nov 2, 2017
951
Should thin people have priority over fat people? What if you can fit 10 fat people in a boat, or 20 thin people?

What is the ethical thing to do?