Why are women and children saved first?

[Math Is Hard]

I was grousing to my wife just the other day, how come it's women and children first. Why can't I be first just once. What a disaster that was.

Let me guess -- she let you be first all week. First to mow the lawn, first to take out the garbage, first to wash the car...?

 

[Moonbear]

Let me guess -- she let you be first all week. First to mow the lawn, first to take out the garbage, first to wash the car...?

I'll have to remember that one. I think you should give a presentation on these tips at the next sisterhood meeting.

 

[LightbulbSun]

What I DO know is that the elderly person has more wisdom and experience to share.

Says who? My grandparents are racists, think an unusual hair color means you're a freak and one of them is afraid of doctors. You call that "more wisdom"?

 

[Cyrus]

Says who? My grandparents are racists, think an unusual hair color means you're a freak and one of them is afraid of doctors. You call that "more wisdom"?

What a terrible example.....anyways.

 

[Howers]

Quite simple:
Women:
You need only one male to fertilize many women, so you can make do with fewer men than women in building up the population
Children:
The more children who are saved, the less do men need to fertilize women, and hence, they have more time to play among themselves instead..

Wow, dead on.

 

[moose]

What I DO know is that the elderly person has more wisdom and experience to share.

A lot of old people do nothing.

 

[Cyrus]

A lot of old people do nothing.

And babies do what?

Maybe this depends on where you live, but the old people that I know, know people. These 'people' they know used to run programs and government labs, worked on the NASA shuttle program and dealt with congress, etc. They all know people and are great resources.

Because of the older people I know, I could get a job at many many places if I just opened my mouth and asked. And I get tons and TONS of advice and information from them, just from their experience that has been invaluable.

Now, if someone thinks old people just crap their pants and are racists, they need to find better people to be around.

Hell, even talking to an old timmer at a machine shop is great. They will point out any mistakes you have in your design that you wouldn't have thought and give you a simple solution to fix it on the spot. You just can't beat experience.

 

[moose]

And babies do what?

Maybe this depends on where you live, but the old people that I know, know people. These 'people' they know used to run programs and government labs, worked on the NASA shuttle program and dealt with congress, etc. They all know people and are great resources.

Because of the older people I know, I could get a job at many many places if I just opened my mouth and asked. And I get tons and TONS of advice and information from them, just from their experience that has been invaluable.

Now, if someone thinks old people just crap their pants and are racists, they need to find better people to be around.

Hell, even talking to an old timmer at a machine shop is great. They will point out any mistakes you have in your design that you wouldn't have thought and give you a simple solution to fix it on the spot. You just can't beat experience.

You're right that a lot of older people do have a lot of wisdom they can pass on. I love going to the office hours of my old professors because they have an infinite number of amazing stories. However, I have met a countless number of seniors who are just hateful towards the world and don't do a thing anymore. I still hold to my original list. How do you think the list should go?

EDIT: And babies have the ability to become something, and don't take up much room at all. I am willing to bet a baby and a mom takes up about as much room as just a woman.

 

[Cyrus]

You're right that a lot of older people do have a lot of wisdom they can pass on. I love going to the office hours of my old professors because they have an infinite number of amazing stories. However, I have met a countless number of seniors who are just hateful towards the world and don't do a thing anymore. I still hold to my original list. How do you think the list should go?

EDIT: And babies have the ability to become something, and don't take up much room at all. I am willing to bet a baby and a mom takes up about as much room as just a woman.

To be clear, I am not talking about an end of the world senario. If there were a burning building full of people, I would save the old people first. The children can be helped by their parents. After I get the old people out, I'd get the children out (probably starting from age 5 and working my way down).

I expect the adults to get themselves out on their own, and help take their own children or small kids they find along the way out.

I would save the smart people. Those are going to be the ones that actually know the most. Babies don't know anything, and don't really hold much value to anyone other than their parents in the larger picture.

For all the babies that died, their parents could make another one or adopt another one in 6 months. How are you going to replace 60+ years of experience with a baby?

 

[Phrak]

Women are saved first because men do most of the saving. It's their nature. And if they don't there will be hell to pay. It becomes a cultural imperative, and what we'd call sexual descrimination if it were the other way around.

And as we all know, because we've been told all our lives, discrimination is bad. Bad, bad, bad. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Just watch any television program. Can you say "I can't discriminate between ____ and shoe shin?"

To discriminate between individuals is 'bad' except when the decriminatin is adopted as a cultural norm--then it is invisible.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I would save the smart people. Those are going to be the ones that actually know the most. Babies don't know anything, and don't really hold much value to anyone other than their parents in the larger picture.

What if there's no time for IQ tests or resume reviews?

For all the babies that died, their parents could make another one or adopt another one in 6 months. How are you going to replace 60+ years of experience with a baby?

When you have to make a fast decision, how do you know if you're saving someone with 60+ years of experience in something, or the elderly, uneducated wino who wandered into the stairwell just before the building caught fire?

This might be another assumption about the scenario that I am missing: that we know something about the individuals to be saved.

As before, I'm not objecting to Cyrus's or anyone's decisions, just noting that there are different circumstances and presumptions that we all come up with in our heads when the decision-making scenario is ambiguous.

 

[Cyrus]

What if there's no time for IQ tests or resume reviews?



When you have to make a fast decision, how do you know if you're saving someone with 60+ years of experience in something, or the elderly, uneducated wino who wandered into the stairwell just before the building caught fire?

This might be another assumption about the scenario that I am missing: that we know something about the individuals to be saved.

As before, I'm not objecting to Cyrus's or anyone's decisions, just noting that there are different circumstances and presumptions that we all come up with in our heads when the decision-making scenario is ambiguous.

I would simply save the older people because a baby literally contains no useful knowledge. Even the uneducated old person could tell you, "dont be like me, I made these mistakes"

A baby won't be able to do anything, nor will it even appreciate being saved.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Let me guess -- she let you be first all week. First to mow the lawn, first to take out the garbage, first to wash the car...?

I always get the last word too. "Yes dear".

 

[Moonbear]

To be clear, I am not talking about an end of the world senario. If there were a burning building full of people, I would save the old people first. The children can be helped by their parents. After I get the old people out, I'd get the children out (probably starting from age 5 and working my way down).

I think you've just added another assumption to the scenario, that someone who is NOT part of the disaster (yourself) is becoming part of it to save people who can't save themselves. On the other hand, your motives seem similar to the women and children first approach, except you seem to be opting for the infirm first...basically, save those who can't save themselves.

I think you're making quite a generalization to assume all older people have more wisdom than younger people. More wisdom than a baby, sure, but I don't have any reason to think that an old person who has done nothing but watch soap operas all day every day has accumulated any more wisdom than a 30 year old who has traveled the world as a member of the Peace Corps. It's another stereotype to assume that age means wisdom.

 

[DaveC426913]

So, you see why making this a moral issue is fraught with pitfalls. You're all assigning a value to each life and basing your priorities on that. And that's quite subjective.

The https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1812625&postcount=34" doesn't concern itself with deciding "who deserves to live more", it simply goes under the assumption that we work towards everybody living - and goes about that the most efficient way possible.

 

[Cyrus]

I think you've just added another assumption to the scenario, that someone who is NOT part of the disaster (yourself) is becoming part of it to save people who can't save themselves. On the other hand, your motives seem similar to the women and children first approach, except you seem to be opting for the infirm first...basically, save those who can't save themselves.

I think you're making quite a generalization to assume all older people have more wisdom than younger people. More wisdom than a baby, sure, but I don't have any reason to think that an old person who has done nothing but watch soap operas all day every day has accumulated any more wisdom than a 30 year old who has traveled the world as a member of the Peace Corps. It's another stereotype to assume that age means wisdom.

The OP says women and children, so I don't know why 30 year olds are in the picture here.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The next time you find yourself on a sinking, unsinkable ship, here's what you do.

1. First you must ascertain whether you are a woman or child. If you are then you should stand around like some kind of Nell waiting for some kind of Duddley Doright to come and save you. No cheating by trying to save yourself here, this will only serve to intensify the man's sense of guilt for saving himself first.

2. Judge the distance to shore. If the ship hasn't taken off yet and is sinking in 3 feet of water, grab all the women and children you can and wade to safety. Go back for more if there are any. If you feel guilty for surviving, you can always go drown yourself afterwards, but first finish up grabbing the women.

3. Assuming this is a true disaster and not just a hypothetical situation on some physics forum, you need to decide if you save the women first or the children. The usual phrase is "women and children" so I suppose you would save the women first. But if you are a child should you be saving adults? I say yes. You will face a rather bleak future in a world without women. Men wouldn't give you the time of day. Especially if you had saved yourself and his mistress died in your place.

4. Once you have decided which category of your fellow human beings to save, you have to consider which individuals. It has been suggested that certain people are more worth saving than others and I have to agree. At least with rich people there is the possibility of lucrative reward. Therefore, I suggest that before you save anyone, you should ask them how rich they are. Here are some guidelines: Billionaire - save immediately. Millionaire - probably save but first judge how generous they look. Flat busted - are you sure this is a woman?

 

[BobG]

4. Once you have decided which category of your fellow human beings to save, you have to consider which individuals. It has been suggested that certain people are more worth saving than others and I have to agree. At least with rich people there is the possibility of lucrative reward. Therefore, I suggest that before you save anyone, you should ask them how rich they are. Here are some guidelines: Billionaire - save immediately. Millionaire - probably save but first judge how generous they look. Flat busted - are you sure this is a woman?

Unless you're in the will of one of the rich people on the ship. Kind of something to consider when you're making a will or buying life insurance. Never make a good potential rescuer the beneficiary of your will or life insurance policy.

 

[WarPhalange]

....are you 12?

Are you? At what age does "random middle-aged man with average job and average life" become "Wise old man with the power to see through walls"?

My Grandpa is a drunk, other grandpa wasn't fortunate enough to live this long, his wife died a few years ago and had Alzheimer's and my other grandma is a hag who I would rather leave to die instead of some animal.

Old people aren't anything special simply because they are old. I don't understand how this fairy tale keeps getting passed on.

 

[DaveC426913]

Old people aren't anything special simply because they are old. I don't understand how this fairy tale keeps getting passed on.

Not to pick on anybody in particular, but this thread serves less as a collection of wisdom on how we conduct disaster scenarios and more as bait to lure out individuals' real attitudes about the value they place on humans and how they rank their worth.

If I had a big decision to make and I needed to know how people really felt about human life, I'd propose this scenario and then sit back and watch as people happily assigned worth and threw their "less valued" brethren overboard.

I just watched Dark Knight and...

Spoiler

let me tell you, the ferry scene would have been completely different if PFers had been aboard any of the ships.

 

[moose]

The OP says women and children, so I don't know why 30 year olds are in the picture here.

Then why are old people in the picture here?

 

[neu]

If not done so already, can we first establish whether this would actually be implemented in a titanic like disaster? I doubt very much that there is a law that states this.
I can understand saving children, the disabled, injured and the elderly before able adults, but not women before men.
If women can fight on the front line then they are in the same boat, pardon the pun. Is there any justification at all to save women before men?

I think it all comes down to the moment of truth, where the owness, for whatever reason, is on men to take the brunt i.e. die. Perhaps a better question would be to ask why this is so?

 

[rootX]

If women can fight on the front line then they are in the same boat, pardon the pun. Is there any justification at all to save women before men?

I saw a movie in which the guy saves a really beautiful woman and then marries her. Even her sister was really cute! So, the guy loved both of them.

But the sister was deaf... and the guy was a fireman. The girl tried to stop him from working but he never did so in the end he died while saving a man .

 

[Math Is Hard]

I saw a movie where a guy fell out of a boat and a girl saved him.

She turned out to be a mermaid.

 

[LightbulbSun]

What a terrible example.....anyways.

Typical.

 

[BobG]

I saw a movie where a guy fell out of a boat and a girl saved him.

She turned out to be a mermaid.

I remember that movie. Darryl Hannah was in it, wasn't she?

 

[Math Is Hard]

I remember that movie. Darryl Hannah was in it, wasn't she?

Yup, and Tom Hanks and John Candy, too. I watched part of it Wednesday because they were having a summer film series on campus and showing movies at lunchtime. They were all nice aquatic themes this year. Two weeks ago they showed The Incredible Mr. Limpet.

 

[Cyrus]

Typical.

...o-kay...that does not make your example good.

 

[Cyrus]

Then why are old people in the picture here?

You have taken what I said out of context, so I don't understand the point of your comment.

 

[stickythighs]

I saw a movie where a guy fell out of a boat and a girl saved him.

She turned out to be a mermaid.

You're talking about the movie Splash.