Question:
Women and Children first?
Sheree
2009-10-30 10:30:52 UTC
Most of us have heard of the saying women and children first, the women and children's lives are to be saved first in a disaster. In an 'equal' society should this still be put into practice? What do you think about the men left behind?
Nine answers:
Blue Eyed Christian
2009-10-30 10:36:57 UTC
I think it was heroic that men would lay down their lives for their families, for those who are weaker. But at the same time, their lives are not worth less, and it's tragic to think of a wife and kids being left behind without their husband/father.



I think in an equal society, it would be "children and whoever is weaker or needs help" first.
anonymous
2009-10-30 17:48:51 UTC
It's really outdated, an artifact from earlier times when life was tougher and we needed a high output of births to offset the high mortality rate of children and people in general. Women are far more valuable than men reproductively speaking -- they can only make a finite number of babies in their lifetimes and there is at least a 13 year lead-in before they are fertile, and once impregnated they are out of commission for about a year, while men can impregnate many women and downtime is only about 30 minutes or less. So relatively few men are necessary to keep a given population viable, but conversely if most of a nations's women are killed or die, it will take hundreds of years before recovery, if ever. [Population growth is an exponential function.]



Children are the future and have always and will always be protected. It is very bad if a society loses many of its children, or is not producing enough, which will lead to an aging society that is doomed to be conquered or die out.



It should always be children first, but now, after the evil hand of feminism has tried to destroy the family and our culture, they have brainwashed women into becoming pseudo-lesbians/pseudo-men that don't want children, (their most important, valuable and cherished function), and only have a very low number of children if the do disobey their lesbian separatist masters. So, after "feminism," women are no longer of higher value than men, and should not be given that special privilege as long as they shirk their responsibility to gestate our progeny. Also, fewer children are needed since we have made so many great advances in technology and medicine -- the mortality rate has plummeted so their isn't a great need for as many births as in the past, but we do need at least replacement levels, so we need to undo a little of the evil programming of the feminists if we wish to survive as a culture.



The men left behind is just the way things go and have always meant. Men have always been the cannon fodder, often against their will -- strange that the "oppressors" get treated the worse. What kind of idiot could ever take the lies of the feminists seriously?
Jason
2009-10-30 17:46:25 UTC
There is not and never will be such a thing as an equal society. Biology doesn't allow it. Men are better at some things, women are better at others. Which is not to say that there aren't exceptions and that men and women can't do the same things, but by and large the sexes are suited to different roles. Intellectually, women and men are equally as smart but tend to be smart in different ways.
Vertical Reality
2009-10-30 17:43:11 UTC
I think the real question is could you rid yourself of the practice?



I could definitely see women/men getting on an even footing in a disaster situation...



but I can never see people and families putting adults ahead of children, even though it might be the smart thing to do.
Holly
2009-10-30 17:38:16 UTC
This is an archaic term. Ships dont embark without enough life rafts for everyone aboard anymore.
BH2K
2009-10-30 17:38:54 UTC
i say yes because children cant always take care of themselves and the mother is needed to take care of them. And to the person that said pets first, get laid.....animals are not to be put before humans.
Know It All
2009-10-30 17:36:27 UTC
That's why I say pets first! I can't imagine people living a contented happy life in a world that's devoid of pets!
Michael
2009-10-30 17:58:57 UTC
i believe VERY strongly in women and children first..... i cannot stand a woman being hurt... or a child..
Scatta
2009-10-30 17:44:44 UTC
Please don't report Mike, he can't help it.



I agree with Blue Eyed Christian, and also with Know It All! hehehe!


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...