Ship sinking: is "women first" moral/LEGAL?

Females are not better and do not deserve better than males; equality is to be preserved.

It is the chivalrous thing to do, in that kind of circumstance. Traditional values and all that.

I can't say whether it is morally correct or not because I understand it is a controversial way to look at things given gender equality...

However if I was a man, I believe I would want women and children to go first, because they are seen as the most vulnerable.

I would say that I would definitely want children to go first, and then the reasons for women going first, at least those with children is reasonably self- explanatory. Although I understand why fathers would want to go too.

Would you deny a child entry on to a life boat for yourself?

You horrible sexist, it is not 'Harriet Harman', it is 'Harriet Harsperson' you rapist

OK then see it this way then; men and children first. Not so happy now are we?

As a man this would sicken me. Clearly your selfish; I really hope your not representative of the majority of women.

Well, it's hard to think that there is anything moral about not allowing a person on a rescue boat because of his gender, especially with all this gender equality that's been going on (or is it just equality when it benefits women? ) It's like not saving a person due to his/her colour.


I think that men should only be gentlemen when the women are deserving 'gentlewomen' themselves.



Most of the male posters here say that children are the most important. The real debate is if women should really go before men. You say that if you were a man you'd put women & children first? LOL I bet you'd say that wouldn't you!

I say children, then men & their children, then women & children, then men, then attractive women, the the rest of the women, but I know that these days it's likely to be a FFA.

Against women you mean?

Would you see it as discrimination if a man offered to stay behind so women and children were saved?

Okay fair enough that makes sense Does that mean if someone offered then you wouldn't be angry, because they aren't made to do it and it was their choice?

why wouldn't it?? It is a stupid rule that simply goes against equality and human rights. Children first, I get it. but this is simply unfair.

Every man for himself ... literally.

OK then see it this way then; men and children first. Not so happy now are we?

As a man this would sicken me. Clearly your selfish; I really hope your not representative of the majority of women.

How is it discrimination against women? It's discrimination against men. I may be female but I get annoyed at sexism directed at men just as much as when it's directed at women. Sexism is sexism.

And no to your second question - because it isn't forced. In that case someone is offering to stay behind so that someone else can go ahead. Completely different scenario.

Oh no. It's more the idea of men being forced to give up spaces on lifeboats etc that makes me angry. But if a man did offer I'd accept because I'd be terrified (and I'm a coward) but it goes against my morals because I don't believe I deserve to get off that boat any more than him.

it's supposed to be the gentlemanly thing to do. in dire situations like that, moral/legal considerations would hardly be on their minds imo.

Yes, but I felt it may be discrimination against women as people treat them as weaker than men, thats what it means to me I thought. Obviously it is discrimination against men too. Can be seen both ways.

I didn't realise they had completely killed it off, but I understand your point. And yes I know it is easy for me to say but I honestly believe I would.

It is interesting to see which would be put first in your argument, why should men and their children, and then women and theirs? If women and men are equal then they should go at the same time I suppose.

If it's gentlemanly, it shouldn't be enforced. That way you can see who are the real 'gentlemen'. Of course, stigmatising men who aren't 'gentlemen' is fine, but somehow stigmatising women who aren't 'ladylike' is unacceptable



I think the group with the better grounds for claiming discrimination are the ones who are dead or were forced to swim...