Should Women & Children Have Priority Being Rescued or Helped Over Men?

Question

Telekinetic-Potato · Accepted Answer

Why not? If you don't have moral constraints on society, it will collapse.

People think these are arbutrary rules. They're in place because in general, they're a pretty good starting point for figuring out who to save first.

Let's say instead of save the woman and children first, it was just a free for all. What does that mean for us as a society to say that?

In the event it's on a ship, well the children never really had a choice whether or not they wanted to be on the ship in the first place right? So how fair is that to them?

You might say, well screw those kids, they're not mine. Fair enough, but when large numbers of people think so selfishly in that way, the only way to survive is to be completely Machiavellian which always turns to chaos.

Let's say that person who values themself over anyone else in the world was the president of America, what about just a senator or a judge? What if someone who thought like that was your boss or college. What if they were the teacher for your kids kindergarten class?

You can believe in and do whatever you want, but as a society of people who all rely on eachother, we should be very careful of what kinds of mentalities we dictate general discourse through. Selfishness in over abundance is not a value which brings a society to a high standard of living.

nolabels · Accepted Answer

All societal considerations being put aside, this question must ultimately be answered by the laws of biology.

One man can inseminate multiple women. It is a woman who must carry that new life to birth and eventually, hopefully to a prosperous life.

Children are the interim generation, those who've survived infancy. They are the strongest hope for the soon-to-come future.

Biologically speaking, other than for the diversity of genes which would be supplied by a larger group of men, and then going forward, providing protection, security, and much in the way of sustenance, a man's initial contribution to the continuance of mankind on this planet is a small one.

Certainly, women and children first.

jennifer_bloom · Accepted Answer

I believe all lives are equal but I think they made this rule because they wanted to protect the woman and children, not because they thought the lives of women are more important than the lives of men.

Like if I babysit a kid, i's not because I'm afraid of being punished if I do not watch over them, it' because I enjoy babysitting them and looking out for them and protecting them.

OldWomanBySoul · Accepted Answer

Kids, people with disabilities and older people should be prioritised, those who are grown adults and physically ok can help themselves whether a man or a woman (if were talking about sinking boat then also those who can't swim should be helped)

BeMuse · Answer

Nope. Determine the order of priority based on probability of survival. In the case of shipwrecks, men are twice as likely to survive as women and children have the worst odds of survival overall. The goal is to save the most lives possible... The traditional order is backwards based on hard data.

Anonymous · Answer

Should they? No.

Do they? Absolutely.

In many important issues the needs of women and children are always given priority. There are plenty of examples which prove that point.

Take paternity fraud for example. The laws about this issue are based on the underlying assumption that it is best for the child to allow a man to unknowingly raise a child who is not biologically his, thereby legally protecting the deceitful mother. The man comes last in that equation.

Another example, there is literally zero legal requirement for a mother to even let the father know she is pregnant or he has a child. A man can live his entire life never knowing he has a child, let alone having the opportunity to get to know and be a part of his child's life. Again, the needs of the mother are put ahead of those of the father.

Those are just two examples of many that most people don't even consider due to the gynocentric nature of our allegedly "patriarchal" society.

purplepoppy · Answer

No, it should be based on social status or you'll just get loads of guys suddenly identifying as women to jump the queue.

inhua · Answer

lmao looks like the male feminists here don't actually believe in equality after all

just a bunch of virtue signaling like they always do and shame tactics as always

kids should definitely be prioritized over adults though

Static_In_The_Attic · Answer

It’s all a bunch of bullshit & it’s not what you think. History tells us “Women & Children First” however a lot of these gentlemen had nagging wives & their kids were brats & a lot of them said fuck it I rather go down with the ship.

Yannishka · Answer

No I believe some people are more valuable than others although we can't know for sure. But if one is a drunk with no future and the other is a hard worker with a good heart who happens to have a dick? You with the dick! Step aboard!

richardcory · Answer

I want to say yes for children but women and men get equal priority. But... I couldn't let a woman die in my place, I could never live with myself if I did the.

SaoirseS · Answer

The Birkenhead drill is a thing of the past, and that's not how it works anymore. The disabled, children, and (in many cases) the elderly have priority. They are the ones who need the assistance.

KostasKouvalis · Answer

I agree with him, especially after I seen how women and children are sent to terror training camps.

AnusNdaPainus · Answer

It doesn’t really matter whether they should or shouldn’t

the fact of the matter is that when a male turns 18 the world will watch you starve and die

I don’t see why men would maintain the infrastructure and protect a society that turns it’s back on them

Kiss_Me · Answer

We have a society where everyone wants to be equal. That means in an emergency situation it's first come, first serve.

bolverk · Answer

Women with their family yes, single women with no children should have to take their chances, like men have to, after all they claim they are equal in every respect

Anonymous · Answer

I despise feminism and really don't like hypocrites, but there is a biological reason for this. A man is considered expendable or replaceable because any man can impregnate hundreds of women but only woman can reproduce so take away 1 woman and the population is reduced by the children she potentially would have had. Children, it's obvious, we have sentimentality for because they haven't had a chance to live their potential, they are unable to defend or protect themselves.

_piotr · Answer

This rule was always racist/sexist. Men are treated as inferior disposable garbage just because they were born males. I am for equity here. First children, then adults.

Anonymous · Answer

Children yes. I do feel women have less of a chance of survival. An example of this is the refugees crisis, very few women and children able to escape

Lliam · Answer

Yes, unless men are cowards. Real men rescue others.

LiamJHayden · Answer

It is based upon survival of the species / society. Ten men and one hundred women can make a lot more babies in a generation than can ten women and one hundred men.

Anonymous · Answer

They’re not anymore important then anybody else. Well children I understand. But being male or female doesn’t determine human worth

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

Yes. Do to our stronger physical nature women should be givin preference in a emergency besides the fact children need to be raised by their moms.

Anonymous · Answer

I think this is a choice every man an woman need to make for themselves. I mean we are in the age of equality after all. I left kids out because kids NEED to be protected.

Pohjolan · Answer

Pregnant women and children have a higher priority due to being vulnerable but women in general don't.

andreasderjuengere · Answer

Priority should be to have enough lifeboats at hand - and staff that knows how to handle them? One other priority: don't book a ship cruise. (this principle is transferable)

NathanDavis · Answer

yes... that's what the real men decided, in consensus... if the majority didn't want this, then it would not be a thing

LimitedBenefits101 · Answer

Children ofc and always women? tf no, aren't they independent and dont need men? thought so.

CuriousMufuxka · Answer

I say yes. They are mostly helpless. The awesome women and kids will stay around ad help!

4ngelic · Answer

children yea, adult women no

poetic_pisces · Answer

children before anyone

msc545 · Answer

children yes, women NO.

Sparkie460 · Answer

Absolutely they should have priority over men.

Agape93 · Answer

Nope. First come, first served. I won't judge.

Should Women & Children Have Priority Being Rescued or Helped Over Men?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Should Women & Children Have Priority Being Rescued or Helped Over Men?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.