We are not.
The Titanic sank in 1912 after hitting an iceberg. Of the 2,200 people on board, 1,517 died. The Lusitania sank in 1915, victim to a German U-boat torpedo. Of the nearly 2,000 people on board, 1,200 died. In addition to carrying about the same numbers of passengers, the demographic composition of the two ships - adults, children, men, women, old, young - was also similar.
Two stark differences distinguish the tragedies. One was the fact that the Lusitania sank very swiftly, only minutes after it was struck, while it took four hours for the Titanic to go under the waves. The other is that on the Titanic, most of the survivors were women and children: 75% of women and almost all the children were saved as against 20% of the men, while on the Lusitania, of the 639 who escaped, it was a question of sauve qui peut. The fittest amongst both men and women aged 16-35 were likeliest to survive.
According to a new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the altruism of the Titanic and the length of time it took for the ship to sink are causally linked. Benno Torgler, study author and economics professor at Queensland University of Technology in Australia explains that circumstances dictate levels of altruism. According to the study, since the Titanic passengers had a few hours to consider their options, "there was time for socially determined behavioural patterns to re-emerge."
The time factor in determining selfish or unselfish behaviour strikes one as a reasonable insight. Panic arouses atavistic instincts of blind flight; more time to consider allows the intellect, the emotions and one's sense of -- call it what you will: duty, honour, morality -- to surface and in some cases overwhelm terror.
But now let us consider these "socially determined behavioural patterns" that allowed so many women and children on the Titanic to live.
The sinking of the Titanic occurred in 1912, well before the emancipation of women. Indeed, 1912, before the "lights [had] gone out in Europe" with World War One, may be said to be the last moment when the patriarchy held fairly complete sway over the lives of women. After the war, a dearth of men, coupled with women's adventures in autonomy in the work force and taking charge of their domestic domains, along with the extinction of "honour" as a viable ideal after an honour-based war's senseless horrors, the patriarchy was on its way out, gender equality on its way in.
So these heroes who willingly sacrificed their lives for women and children had been brought up in the very heart of the same robust patriarchy that feminists today use as a shibboleth to frighten young girls with. According to the feminist mystique, these men should have been controlling, egocentric, self-serving bullies, for whom women were nothing more than sexual and domestic conveniences, little better than slaves. They should all have been candidates for anger management, not a chivalry so breathtakingly selfless that they almost to a man went to watery graves in stoic humility so that total strangers might live, simply because of their sex.
It is precisely in a crisis that we often learn a great deal about what our values actually are. So this example of male heroism in as indisputably existential situation as imagination can conceive, and ideally placed to consider their deepest convictions before acting should, it seems to me, remain in the forefront of our collective consciousness. For these men were the product of a particular culture, one that perceived chivalry and honour and duty as the highest values. And the highest expression of those highest values was the privileging of women and children's lives over their own. And they acted on that perception.
Yes, women were infantilized in many ways in the patriarchy, which a cynic might say was the driving impulse behind the chivalry of the Titanic's men. But so what? At the moment when it mattered most, the notion that men should above all act as protectors of the vulnerable in times of danger to all committed them to death in the service of others. Was there ever a more noble or selfless act?
The study reminds us that the heroism of the Titanic was a willed phenomenon, and one that feminists do not wish to discuss (I have tried).
Instead of fetishizing the victimhood of women at men's hands and the deviance from our cultural norm that Marc Lepine represented with man-bashing dirges across the land every December 6, would it not make more sense - and would it not be more ethically fitting and socially unifying - to celebrate the more representative manliness of men every April 15, the date of the Titanic's sinking? Still six weeks left to plan it.
Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/02/barbara-kay-how-patriarchy-ran-into-its-own-iceberg.aspx#ixzz0hAGg2JMB
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.
Too few of the willing but a Facebook effort may rack up some numbers.
by Denis Pakkala
Grant Brown used the same analogy of the sinking of the Titanic to explain the innate social behavior of alpha-males in deferring to women interests. Feminism has a natural ally in traditionally chivalrous men who continue to support discriminatory social policies.
WOMEN AND CHILDREN FIRST
“Feminism has enjoyed remarkable success, in an historically short period of time, reshaping society to eliminate the disadvantages suffered by women under traditional gender norms. This success has been possible only because feminism preys on a powerful, natural inclination of deference to women that is bred into both men and women alike. If women feel passionately about wanting something, it just isn't manly or prudent for men, individually or collectively, to deny it to them. In the ideological battle of the sexes, it is of the first importance to understand the origins and power of this innate inclination of deference to women. “
Traditionally, women have always had the power to influence men and men have always acted to provide for women what they want and need. It is important to pay proper respect for men’s historical role in society, but let’s not mourn the passing of simpler times when gender roles were more defined. Feminism has won and now we must deal with the repercussions that this has on men’s equality and men’s place in society.
Men’s place in present society is explained very well in this series of videos:
LIVING IN A FEMINIST, MAN-HATING MATRIARCHY
Equality is a double-edged sword and chivalry is dead!
I've often been accused of being old fashioned in the ways that I treat women. I hold open doors, walk on the outside of the sidewalk offer my coat on a chilly night and perform all sorts of other antiquated gestures. Much of the time this is still appreciated but there have been occasions where I've been accused of sexism or of having some dark ulterior motive for my actions.
The truth is, I respect women and I would like to think that had I been on the ill-fated Titanic that I would have done my utmost to ensure the survival of as many women and children as I could.
Maybe these days that just makes me stupid, but I know my Grandma would be proud.
by Denis Pakkala
Ms. Kay is actually writing a positive article about men, rather than the typical misandry found in the liberal MSM.
Do you have anything intelligent to add?
In Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen has Caroline Bingley say (falsely) of Elizabeth Bennett that she is the type of woman who denigrates her own sex to get the attention of men. I think that shoe fits Barbara Kay quite nicely.
Skull you aren't old fashioned you have manners and grace, never abandoned those positive traits.
by Richard V
No doubt. Let's all follow Kay! Up with the patriarchy, so we won't have to read her garbage any longer! (But we might be able to enjoy her sweaters and baked goods).
by Denis Pakkala
Ms. Kay has wrote quite extensively about the rampant man-bashing in society by feminists elements. Most people recognize this, although there are many who prefer to deny it.
Marc Lepine has been used by the women's shelter industry as a false symbol of female victimhood.
There is nothing "typical" about Marc Lepine and any suggestion of such is pure misandry and male-hate.
I can not recall any article where Ms. Kay has denigrated women, other than telling the simple truth.
Feminists are not necessarily women and they definitely do not represent all women.
If the NP had any gumption, it would fire this woman. Her views are sickening, stupid and puerile.
by Denis Pakkala
"the lives of the women Mark Lepine cut short in a typically male act of barbarism."
by Denis Pakkala
Would you like a list of moms who have exterminated their children in the past week world wide. They are by far more likely to kill their young that the dad. How do you explain that?
You do live in the nether world of feminist fairy tales don't you.
You have the name of a sweet smelling herb but you don't seem to fit the bill with your man hating vitriol. its folks like you who keep the gender wars burning brightly.
Try reading about the most recent female multiple murderer in the news, Amy Bishop.
Get help, ambrose.
In 1989, Marc Lepine, (born Gamil Gharbi) the son of an Algerian immigrant who was taught Taliban-like misogyny by his Muslim father, walked into the École Polytechnique de Montréal, and killed or injured 24 women and 4 men.
The conclusion of these two tragedies? Western men are monsters. Great.
Your analogies are very good. Men are both hard wired and socialized to protect those weaker. That is typically women and children but it also applies to other men. If you study men in battle they will literally risk life and limb to rescue a wounded brother and they will die with dignity and honour while trying.
If you watched carefully on 9/11 you will have noticed a broad selection of burly men, young and old racing into the World Trade Towers to save people. Many knew as they looked way up at the carnage before entering they would not likely get out alive. Yet they raced up 90 plus flights of stairs and started guiding people down. One man stayed with another who was in a wheelchair knowing full well he was going to die because of it. Four hundred and eleven (411) first responders died trying to save others. The vast majority if not all were men. Our generation saw all of that unfold on TV and in movies but yet men are still vilified.
This is a masculine trait that feminism would ridicule because testosterone is involved until it was they trapped in falling debris and burning steel hoping a strong man would race through all of that chaos to find her, throw her over his shoulders and carry her to safety or die trying.
An columnist in the Irish Independent who I share a world view with coined the term Lifeboat Feminism. The sinking ship is a classic example of this tribe of victim oriented feminists (not unlike ambrose 99) who seek entitlements, brand men as abusers, believe the Patriarchy still rules their very lives and they have no control or choice, but view themselves as more than equals. In terms of things like parenthood, teaching, multi-tasking (which is a fiction but we humour them) they view themselves as superiors When the ship is sinking they are the first to jump in the lifeboats with the children. They are the types who want all the privileges of equality but not the consequences.
Masculinity takes a beating, even from feminized men, who don't completely understand it. Many do not have good male role models as dads are marginalized by social engineers called family court judges.
Masculinity has discovered the earth, the oceans, the atmosphere, the mountains, rivers and under ground. It has discovered space and the cosmos and developed the tools to explore them. It has invented almost everything useful know to human kind but if you believe the feminists like good old ambrose99 we are evil abusers and mass killers.
We are not.
Didn't this all lead to Ms.Kay having a column in the newspaper instead of using her brain to concentrate on her knitting?
I really don't know how you are able to get through life from day to day.
You don't get it at all - do you! Are you sure you are a man or are you faking it?
They are all hard done by and victimized, these are the same people that look the other way when someone screams for help.... for them it is dog eat dog and all is fair in a me first world...really it is all mute, todays generation would have made the damage to the iceberg the number one casualty.
Honour, integrity, morality, they went out the door when the beacon of freedom and democracy...the US of A, said it was okay to, and proceeded to, renague on the secured creditors of GM..........nothing makes sense anymore, unless you believe in anarchy.
How's a Mirror supposed to get any sleep when you boys and girls keep turning the Light on??? LOL
Sorry I can't articulate how much I appreciate how well you talk about this vital subject. Keep up the good work.
Sadly, this is what the people who make decisions have to put up with too, so if any politician ever tries to be pro-male, they'll immediately be bombarded with the problems women face and be told to sort them first.
by From the farm
Really? Then by the same standard, it would also censor your rabid ravings against writers such as Kay.
Just like the TorStar censors most of the comments from those who show dissent with its hard-core, leftist views.
So who, really, is it that tolerates freedom of speech? Certainly not the left-wingers like ambrose and mel.
Barbara - Thank you for bravely shining a bit of light onto a subject of which few are even aware and most can certainly not articulate.
Hey clown,if all you can do is make realy stupid comments like that.Do everyone a favour, SCRAM !
by Tossed Salad
Mike I take a little bit of exception to your statement "Men are both hard wired and socialized to protect those weaker." I think you meant (though I do not want to put words in your mouth) physically weaker or mentally infirmed. The lefties like ambrose will jump on that as evidence that we perceive women to be intelectually "weaker" which of course we know is not the case but the loons will grasp at anything.