fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3173 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3173 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

[Detroit Metal City]

__________________________________________________

06.

(Gravity Falls, Criminal Minds)

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for X-Files (new series)]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Sly Cooper 4: Thieves In Time]

__________________________________________________

10. [SPOILERS for Mass Effect 2]

__________________________________________________

11. [SPOILERS for Steven Universe]

__________________________________________________

12. [WARNING for sexual assault]

[Chrissie Hynde of The Pretenders]

__________________________________________________

13. [WARNING for rape and assault]

[Hockey RPF]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #453.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Reminded by the thread above but not directly related.

In what disaster/rescue scenarios is "women and children first" still a rule?

If a child had a single father, would the father be rescued so as to not orphan the kid?

Note: Not MRA stuff. Disaster fic plot bun stuff. :)

Or did that rule sink with the Titanic era? Is it ever put into practice informally, if not formally? Etc.

The Titanic rule was an exception. It's a myth that it was common.

IIRC, was never actually a rule, but has been put into practice informally in some situations.

It's never actually been a rule; if you look at the overwhelming majority of transportation disasters, usually, the crew saves themselves first (because they're closest to the rescue equipment and know how to use it), then able bodied adult men out-fight everyone else for the next shot at it, then able-bodied adult women, and so on down the line. Kids, the elderly, and the disabled account for the majority of deaths.

The Titanic was a notable exception that's been utilized (when convenient) to mythologize the actual behavior in the era, which wasn't any different from today. "Women and children first" was an ideal because of the aforementioned grown men using their strength and size to make sure they get first crack at survival equipment/push others out of the way so that they're the first to leave/etc. It happened with the Titanic largely because the crew was under the impression that they had a lot more time before sinking, and many thought a nearby ship would arrive before it sank, and passed along that this was a "precaution" only to the passengers at first. Thus men and crew could make a grand gesture of letting women and children go first without serious repercussions... only that turned out not to be the case.

http://www.history.com/news/women-and-children-first-on-sinking-ships-its-every-man-for-himself

So, basically, no it's not a rule and never has been. If it is, it's abandoned immediately the moment the situation becomes dire. If there's some kind of (preferably armed) authority enforcing this rule, and they have the good of the people in mind, it depends largely on the values of the society.

They could be:
1) Full-on Victorian-style chauvinists: women and children first regardless of age or martial status because it's a man's duty to protect a woman and even if a child is orphaned because of it, it's better that the kid goes to live with relatives than that spot be taken by its father instead of somebody's nearly dead grandma.

2) Utilitarian (maybe the survival of the human race is at stake?): Children and women before menopause only. The reproductive capacity of a population is dependent on the number of breeding-aged females it has, it only needs a few males, and those male children who will be reproductively capable in a few years will have the longest breeding careers themselves, so to speak (also they can start right away, depending on how averse this society is to child rape).

3) Egalitarian: children and young men and women, from youngest to oldest, in that order, until there are no spots left. I.e. a 25-year-old man won't be kicked off the boat in favor of a 45-year-old woman, even if she has young kids, because he hasn't lived as long, and will (probably) have kids of his own.

4) Idealist/emotional: children, the sick, the elderly, and parents are saved first. I think this is the best case scenario for your single father. People least likely to help themselves, and most likely to be missed go first.

5) Realistic: as above. Crew --> grown men --> grown women --> children/the elderly/the disabled. Your single father could also possibly survive this scenario over a woman because he was able to rip the survival gear out of her hands and save himself/his kids? That could make for a really interesting story scenario, imo. It wouldn't make him an asshole necessarily, either, just someone who was trying to make sure his kid lived, and say two grown women refused to let the kid on/give up their seats for the kid/share survival equipment, so the father had to fight for it, and in doing so saved himself and his kid. Maybe he's still utterly wracked with guilt about it.

Just food for thought! 4,5, (and 3 if the father is very young) would probably work for him

Late but that's very very helpful. Thank you!

[ SECRET POST #3173 ]

Re: Stupid questions.

Re: Stupid questions.

Re: Stupid questions.

Re: Stupid questions.

Re: Stupid questions.

Re: Stupid questions.