1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Value of a life

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by Hitch, Jun 5, 2013.

  1. Hitch

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Gender:
    Male
    Sorry just doing everything i can to put off studying. For some reason chivalry was the topic i choose to procrastinate with. Let me first say that i show everyone respect regardless of age or sex. But i can't help but think how ridiculous chivalry is in 2013. I am all for equality and maybe i just take it to the extreme. I will treat a women exactly how i treat a man.
    I was reading an article about chivalry and they used the Titanic as an example. From what i read, about 2/3 of the women lived and 2/3 of the men died. This may or may not be true, just trying to remember what i wrote. There was a code, women and children first. I'm all for saving the kids, but am I a bad person if I don't think that a woman's life shouldn't have any more meaning than mine. I'm thinking that this code was mostly in place to make sure that one of the parents lived.
    So this got me thinking, is a mothers life more valued than a fathers life. Is a parent more valued than a single person? Are single people suppose to sacrifice there life for the parents.

    How do you decide who gets in the life boat first, second, etc...
    Kids?
    Parents? Mother or father?
    single people?
    everyone for themselves?


    Well that blew off a few minutes.
    Thoughts?
     
  2. Argentwing

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Messages:
    6,696
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    New England
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I don't think the point of "chivalry" as we understand it today is to assert that women are more important. The idea behind it is that grown men are usually better equipped to deal with immediate physical threats than women or children, since we are usually a lot more formidable in stature. It usually makes sense in a confrontation or escape scenario.

    Beyond that, I'd agree that the age of feeling that only men do the hero work is long gone, and ought to stay that way. Men pride themselves on courage and saving others, but why shouldn't women exercise bravery? Children, I'd say, are mostly too young to sacrifice themselves for others, but fully-grown women know exactly what they're in for, and have every bit of the hero potential. Reverse chivalry may make a man look bad to the traditional eye, but he will thank his savior when it really matters.