FEMINISTS END 'WOMEN AND CHILDREN FIRST' AND STILL MEN GET BLAMED

With the angst about the capsizing of the Costa Concordia two strands have been running.

Firstly the implicit male-bashing by some of the mediawho have latched onto the fact that a few men were trying to get off the sinking ship without letting women and children go first (some articles implied that men were pushing women and children out of the way but no mention made that some women were probably doing the same as well). One commentator on BBC Breakfast on Tuesday actually said you shouldn't prioritise anyone because the priority is to get everyone off quickly and picking up slows things down. Also if there was a family, it was vital the family unit stayed (including the father) together. 

Secondly, it has raised the whole debate about whether 'women and children first'  still applies. Well it used to and still in many minds it remains true but feminism especially modern day anti-male feminism, says it doesn't. And this is the ruling ideology. And remember this!

And of course, because the anti-male feminists only speak when it is on their terms, people like them are keeping their head down when the debate is raging. This is because they hypocritically want their cake and eat it/bread buttered on both sides.

They want equality but then still want privilege and special treatment for women, and undermine men whenever they can. What those who are calling for the return of 'women and children first' is that women are more important than men, so where is the equality there?

If people like Harriet Harman, Caroline Flint, Theresa May, Lynne Featherstone, every writer at the Guardian, Anna Bird, Katherine Rake etc really do want equality then they should be making comments that it is right that 'women and children first' no longer exists. But instead they stay silent because they want both equality and privilege at the same time.

This is the the clearest example of double standards of modern feminism and they are to blame for the ending of 'women and children first'.

Posted by Skimmington

Media coverage of issue (good debates in comments section) - Daily Mail 1, Daily Mail 2, Daily Express, Guardian, Daily Telegraph, Independent

Comments

[Bob]

Yes this "Women and Children" broken record in so many walks of life only serves to underline the casual acceptability of discrimination against men.

Had it been "Whites and Children first" or "Christians and Children first" you can imagine the backlash.

Most saddening is the fact tha so many men subscribe to their own discrimination, however I think as more and more men are directly affected by today's blatant misandry that there is a real momentum toward unmasking modern feminism for the sexist, hate-filled doctrine it is.

[John Kimble]

Most of the feminists listed above aren't going to be fully supportive of "women and children first" anyway. Just look at our education system or domestic violence services for proof of their contempt for male children.

"Women and girls first" would is surely their preferred rule? They just use the term "children" to hide their sexism and to portray women as innocent and vulnerable by association.

[Groan]

Yes the reporting on this does expose the contradictions.
The first point I'd want to make is that Crew members (including people in "hotel" roles as well as sea men) would have to rush to their emergency stations first to get evacuation underway. This may have looked like something else to panicked passengers.
The second is that one would expect children to be helped.
All in all the stories do reinforce the idea of a double standard of men in default role of hero and women damsel. As you say you'd think feminists would want to rip into a double standard. Perhaps they use ferries a lot.

[Bob]

Yes good point John. I hadn't noticed that. When it suits them its "Women and children" but then they claim females need protection from "Men and Boys", so they have a bit of a dilemma as to what stance they actually take. Seems to me they change their tack so as to attack men as much as possible.

Indeed Groan, no cries of foulplay from the feminists, perhaps they have decided to take on the damsel in distress role for this one. another duality from their double standard.

[teadrinker]

Apparently, there is still a women first rule on the Costa Concordia's sister ship, the Costa Serena - although I'm not sure whether this includes male childen.

Last week, BBC reporter Tom Burridge and a female colleague posed as passengers so they could produce the investigative report on its lifeboat drill procedures linked to with video footage below:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16649589

Passengers are arranged in rows with females at the front nearest the lifeboats whilst male passengers are ordered to queue behind them.

[Dave]

1 – So a widowed father on holiday with his children should die after shoving his kids off on a lifeboat and helping female strangers, huh?
2 – And a Father on holiday with his family should sacrifice his life-long job as a Father of those children in favour of helping other women whom he knows absolutely nothing about?
3 – Not forgetting that an 18 year old man is supposed to give up his life whilst a 17 year old is put in the lifeboat! Who decides that one on the day?
4 – Then there are the similarly aged Brothers and Sisters who are separated at the scene based on gender!
5 – And let’s not forget that big strong, healthy, fit women will be granted their lives whilst lesser able, males at the weaker end of the scale should die.
6 – And disabled men should die because they are, well, men, despite the fact that it’s sometimes hard to differentiate disabled people.
7 – Also, women generally have more fat reserves than men and could probably survive longer in freezing waters, plus everyone seems to think that they have a higher pain threshold. But what the hell, let the men drown instead.
8 – Then there’s the fact that most men (regardless of age) are still capable of getting off of a ship and Fathering children on behalf of society. But instead they would die in favour of saving a vast proportion of females who no longer have the capability of contributing to the gene pool!?!
9 – And a Father is supposed to save his wife and daughter while he ignores his Son?
10 – Oh, and are guys not supposed to help their Brothers?
11 – And am I right thinking that a 19 year old lad should die in favour of saving a 75 year old woman?
The list goes on and on and on! What a hypocritical load of nonsense this so-called “cultural” policy is. People who believe and preach that women should get saved before men should be punished for spreading such damaging nonsense. No wonder it is utter mayhem in crisis situations like these. I’m absolutely certain that this ridiculous confusion regarding who gets preferential treatment actually costs more lives than it saves! There ought to be a global policy banning gender preference when it comes to evacuation procedures. I’m all for saving children though – that’s a given. But do you know what I’m really sick of? I’m sick of the MEN out there who foolishly support this idea that men’s lives should be disposable in favour of saving other female strangers. They do it either because they are indoctrinated with the notion from an early age, or they want to look big and strong to impress the women. Either way, they are a bunch of nobs, including the Captain of the Concordia, Francesco Schettino, who one minute was heard to say “How many women and children do we have down there” and yet the next minute abandoned ship after falling into a lifeboat! Kind of sums him up as an idiot even before knowing that he crashed a ship into a rock after purposefully altering course to wave at someone on an island and potentially killing thousands of people! I find this all very, very sad.

[libido enhancer]

I feel really motivated after read this share. At present time equality and same privileges to all people whether they are men or women. This is the modern world and each one had his own rights. So feel free and live in the world of your choice.