Women and Children First!
When the Costa Concordia made her final, literal “bow” to the Italian island of Giglio, passengers made their way to the lifeboats. I read some accounts that it was “every man for himself” and that some were reluctant to let women and children onto the lifeboats first.
Most of us have never been in life-threatening situations and it’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback these kinds of events from the comfort (and dryness) of our couches, but I wonder what people think of the suggestion that women and children should be allowed to go first into the lifeboats.
When we were on our cruise and attended the mandatory muster drill, we were told to stand where the shortest people were in front and the tallest in back. Granted, I don’t see us lining up like that in an emergency, it may have been so that everyone could see the person conducting the drill. When the kids were separated from me and two women shorter than I were place in front of me, the tall man next to me said, “If this were a real emergency, you wouldn’t let that happen, would you?” I responded, “Absolutely not.”
I am pretty certain that in an emergency, I would glue myself to the kids and be sure to stay with them. But I can’t imagine the conversation with Owen, who is a much better person than I, and who I am fairly certain would let women get on board ahead of him simply because that is what you are supposed to do, even if it meant he may die. He’s just that kind of guy.
Others have suggested that times have changed, and the “women and children first” rule no longer applies. There is no reason for a man to give up his life in order for a woman, a stranger, to keep hers, especially when his family is sitting right there in the lifeboat.
What do you think?
Well, this is a view from 1912 (by Clark McAdams, who was a columnist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, on behavior on the Titanic):
“Votes for women!”
Was the cry,
Reaching upward to the Sky.
Crashing glass
And flashing eye-
“Votes for Women!”
Was the cry.“Boats for women!”
Was the Cry.
When the brave
Were come to die.
When the end
Was drawing nigh-
“Boats for women!”
Was the cry. “Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1051 hrs
What surprised me the most in your post here is that you were supposed to be separated from your children during the drill. I would think that as part of the drill, you would be told to keep your children in view, at at your side… at least by one parent. The fact that you were told to intentionally separate yourself from your children is shocking to me.
As for your original question… Should women and children go first? I would say that without question, children should, because they don’t have the knowledge, or strength to fend for themselves. And I can’t think of a single parent that would put themselves on a boat before their children.
If Ally and I were on a ship, and the choice was her or me, she’s going on that lifeboat even if I have to punch her out and throw her on it. If its me or some other woman? Well… I’d like to think that I’d step aside. Hopefully I’ll never find out if I’m right.
Posted by Nick on January 19, 2012 at 1125 hrs
‘Women and Children First’ is a good fall-back ethos, should the drill and order fall apart.
Because it creates order, in a time and place where there is none.
That could be important to making sure more people survive.
I recall a fire in a dance club, in the 70s. People panicked, rushed for the closest entrance. Lots of them died in the stampede, and crush, and of smoke inhalation when the exit was blocked by panic. If they’d acted like they had some sense most or all of them would have made it out alive.
Taking the long view, women and children need to be first, in the worst extremity. Children because ‘they are the future’ (literally). Women because they can make more children. Men are last because we only need a few men to make more children.Granted those few men might be real busy ...
Posted by Brian Dunbar on January 19, 2012 at 1130 hrs
I would like to think that in this day and age, the technology exists to ensure that there is enough capacity to meet whatever contingies occur in an event where evacuation must occur - maybe this is a situation where laws mandating that would be a good thing. I can’t imagine being in a situation where people have to “compete” for lifeboats. Have there been any modern day maritime accidents where people died due to lack of lifeboats or couldn’t get off the ship in time?
I would also think the “women & children” first dynamic might have to do with “manpower” - the presumption that physically fit “men” are needed to help the “weaker sex” and children.
As it is, I just read where a Hungarian musician on board helped numerous children get their life jackets on. He then went back to his cabin to retrieve his valuable violin, and went missing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1130 hrs
“I would like to think that in this day and age, the technology exists to ensure that there is enough capacity to meet whatever contingies occur in an event where evacuation must occur…”
I think the question was levied in general and not specifically to ship evacuations, but to your point… it’s impossible to account for all contingencies. Even in this case, the ship listed heavily to one side making deployment of some of the lifeboats impossible. Frankly, if she had listed that severely and sunk in deep water, the death toll would have been much higher. The reason it was so low is because she’s sitting in shallow water.
Posted by Owen on January 19, 2012 at 1136 hrs
Character indexes behavior and never more apparently than during periods of extreme stress. That’s when we find out who we really are. Seeing the posers laid bare is certainly disheartening, but every once in awhile we get to see the supposedly meek really shine.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1321 hrs
You can call me old fashioned but I take care of my family first! I guess that is what you call chivalry. Besides, I’m a better swimmer.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1330 hrs
Women have been seeking equality for many years, and that means they have to take the good with the bad. In a maritime evacuation, children should go on the lifeboats first, then the adults, both men and women should compete for the remaining seats. Equality means equal access to jobs, pay and all other opportunities, including access to safety.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1338 hrs
Safety of my family would be my first concern, as that’s my responsibility. Given that I have twin toddlers and another due any day, I’d probably be jumping in a lifeboat with my wife since she couldn’t possibly handle them on her own in such a chaotic situation. Fast forward a few years and I have no idea what I’d do. Separating myself from my wife in such a foreign situation seems a bit unfathomable.
Posted by Joey on January 19, 2012 at 1439 hrs
Joey, and any others who feel that they would note separate from their families:
Take this, not unlikely. scenario:
The ship you are on has taken damage and is listing badly to one side, half of the lifeboats are not deployable; someone is going to have to, at best, try to survive in the water. I think we all agree that children should be the first to get seats on lifeboats. After that, is one parent per family reasonable? I would say yes, and if htat means that the mother of another child goes before you do, as the only parent, are you still going to stick with your ‘not separating from my family’ feelings?
Deciding who should go first is NOT an issue if all lifeboats are available, by law a ship must have enough capacity for all passengers and crew. It is when the hard decisions need to be made that it would be an issue, and at that point, I would say yes, the children and the women (the mothers) would be first…. That said I would put a father ahead of a single woman and all of them ahead of myself.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 1537 hrs
elovrich, I didn’t say the decision I’d make was the best or most altruistic.
You make a good point regarding a father going ahead of a single woman. I would probably put kids with parents first, then parents with kids back home second, then single people. You could debate where the elderly should go in there too (I’m guessing most would put them towards the end, though if they need assistance maybe they’re closer to the beginning).
Bottom line, once a ship is on its side, I imagine the scene is pandemonium. Given the close proximity of the ship in Italy to the shore, I could easily see deciding to swim for it since I’m an adequate swimmer. Put me in the middle of the ocean on the Titanic, I have no idea what I’d do. Like I said, I can easily see being influenced by whether my kids were there. Even if they weren’t, I’d probably be thinking of them losing their dad.
I can sit here and tell you in a blog comment what would make the most sense or what I should do. I can’t tell you with much confidence what I’d do when actually presented with the situation.
Posted by Joey on January 19, 2012 at 1556 hrs
But to stand an’ be still to the Birken’ead drill
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 19, 2012 at 2026 hrs
Well, it’s a man’s responsibility to make sure that the women on board always gets first as well as children because a real man cares for a woman.
Posted by Learn Hindi Through English on January 28, 2012 at 0331 hrs
Total Entries: 20001
Total Comments: 134057
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 03:10 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 02:38 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 98
Total anonymous users: 2
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 04:57 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).