Titanic numbers

[brian44]

So an adult woman is more valuable than a child of either sex?  That's disgusting.  Puts the whole "women anc children first", "think of the children" stuff in prespective, doesn't it?

I think that it might say more about the value of working class people. The one's travelling down in third class/steerage were far more likely to drown. In fact, first and second class children had a 100% survival rate whereas the third class ones had 34.18%. Now that, to me, is truly disgusting.

http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm

[gwallan]

Egyptian Ferry Carrying More Than 1,300 Sinks in Red Sea
May be worth keeping an eye on numbers here given that it's current.

[Chris Key]

The women basically saved themselves ahead of the children, and that shows that even back then, they were selfish and immoral.

In other words, the women were willing to put the lives of children at risk, just so that they could save themselves.  Only an immoral, self-centred and evil beast would place the needs of itself ahead of the safety of a child.

A lot of single-women are willing to use artificial methods to inseminate themselves, and they do not care about the fact that the children will be raised WITHOUT a father.  Women are willing to abort an unwanted  foetus as it's easier than taking accountability for their actions - yet they have the audascity to state it is the *responsibility* of a man who was the victim of paternity fraud to support a child that he is of no biological relation to him.

Women have always been pampered and privileged in society, as the Old English Law System gave the women a large degree of legal impunity.

[dr e]

The women basically saved themselves ahead of the children, and that shows that even back then, they were selfish and immoral.

This breaks the rules here.  That's a warning for you.

E

[Chris Key]

The women basically saved themselves ahead of the children, and that shows that even back then, they were selfish and immoral.

This breaks the rules here.  That's a warning for you.

E

Political correctness is the very concept that has allowed feminism to gain so much power within the realms of University Curriculum and the law system.

If you wish to interpret my statement as a *misogynist generalisation*, then that's your prerogative, however I doubt you can refute the historical evidence that shows the men have always worked far harder than the women of society in the Western world.  Prior to the industriailised revolution, the men performed the most hazardous and physically demanding jobs, while the women worked in the comfort of the house and the farm.

After the industrialised revolution, the most hazardous and physically demanding jobs (IE. work in the factories) were performed by the men, while the women were able to remain in the safety and comfort of the family home.

During the early 20th Century, the English women tried to shun the men who refused to defend England in World War 1, yet those very same women refused to join the military.  Women have always possessed the belief that any form of work that is hazardous and physically demanding should be performed by the men.  That is a sign that women believe they are of a higher value than the men.

- http://www.mens-rights.net/commentary/darrenblacksmith/2006-01-30.htm
- http://members.garbersoft.net/spartacus/bax.htm
- http://www.canlaw.com/rights/thumbrul.htm

If you wish to censor the MRA's who speak the absolute truth about female behaviour, then that makes you a feminist and a hypocrite.

If you were consistent in your application of strict rules that prohibit any form of *generalising*, then that would be fine, but so far you have failed to act in an impartial manner.

The women on this board are able to make the most unsubstantiated, bigoted and fallacious claims with impunity, and you tend to sit by and accept such behaviour.

For example, typhonblue made a statement that is both abhorrent and fallacious, yet I cannot remember you warning her about such conduct.

From - http://www.standyourground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5573&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

What's wrong with being a chauvanist?

I'm a female chauvanist pig.

Matriarchy is the default for the human species. Patriarchy only exists fleetingly and only in grubby, technologically backwards societies.

Now if I can only encourage my sisters to let go of their inferiority complex and treat men(who are socially and psychologically weaker) with decency, my life's work will be complete.

In fact, you might say I want to start chivalry for women.

I have provided a thorough refutatiobn of typhonblue's comments at the following address - http://www.mens-rights.net/forum/index.php?topic=104.0

Dr. Evil, are you an MRA, or are you just a sex-maniac who is looking to gain female attention?  I can see why Roy is angry with you at the present.

[PaulGuelph]

It is not my place to debate this, but I appreciate Dr. Evil's work as a moderator. Unmoderated forums become unfocused and chaotic. I have chosen to come to this moderated forum.

Men's activists are against the ideology of feminism, we are not against women.

[angryharry]

If you look at my Human Rights table in the left sidebar of my front page, you will see that there is some 4-10 times as much on the internet concerning "women's rights" when compared to "children's rights". And "women's rights" are referenced some 100 times more than men's rights.

[Chris Key]

It is not my place to debate this, but I appreciate Dr. Evil's work as a moderator. Unmoderated forums become unfocused and chaotic. I have chosen to come to this moderated forum.

Men's activists are against the ideology of feminism, we are not against women.

As a Men's Rights Activist, I am NOT against women - I only oppose feminism.  In my post, I merely commented about the manner in which the two sexes viewed each other during the early 20th Century.  If you're wondering why I chose to word my statement in a political incorrect manner, then here is why.

Political correctness is the VERY concept that has allowed the feminists to gain a large degree of power OVER men, as it allows normal women to make unsubstantiated statements against men that are misandrist in nature.  If a man were to reply to such a woman in a manner that was precise, he would be condemned and labeled a *misogynist*.  It is no longer *acceptable* for men to state that there are differences between men and women, that is unless it portrays women in a positive light.

Such a policy has ensured that the women can make the most hysterical and fallacious claims WITH impunity.  Political correctness has allowed the most misandrist, illogical and bigoted women to take the *moral high ground*, as they can use the *Ad-Hominem* attack of labeling a man as a *sexist pig* if he merely states the truth about women.

Dr. Evil CHOSE to take my comment out of context, and in my opinion, his intent is most likely a derivation from the reply I left in the following topic - http://www.standyourground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8232

[dr e]

Chris - You broke the rules here.  Arguing won't do you any good.  If you continue to break the rules you will be banned.  If you don't like the rules here find somewhere else to post.

[dr e]

Dr. Evil, are you an MRA, or are you just a sex-maniac who is looking to gain female attention? I can see why Roy is angry with you at the present.

I consider that a personal attack.  That is your last warning.  The next time you break the rules here you will be banned.

[Chris Key]

Chris - You broke the rules here.  Arguing won't do you any good.  If you continue to break the rules you will be banned.  If you don't like the rules here find somewhere else to post.

I see you have failed to chastise typhonblue for the abhorrent and fallacious generalisation that she made about men.  I also see that you have failed to refute my argument, and that shows you are acting on raw emotion rather than logic.

If you wish to throw your weight around and ban me, then that is your decision.  However you have just portrayed yourself as a hypocritical and illogical bigot.  I have made a post about this on my forum, and the members on there are aware of your tactics - many of them hate your guts.  You can take a look and see for yourself if you wish.

You're only giving the Men's Movement a bad reputation, as you seem to be instilling the SAME totalitarian ideologies as the socialists-feminists, and in my opinion, that makes you an ENEMY of the Men's Rights Movement.

If you are unable to engage in rational discourse, then do not discredit the rest of the MRA's by trying to *portray* yourself as one.  No one wishes to align themselves with a totalitarian-enforcing pro-feminist male who offers women a large degree of impunity.

The BEST MRA in the world is Carey Roberts, as he confronts the feminists and he REFUSES to word his statements in a *Politically Correct* manner.  When you have obtained the success and status of Carey Roberts, then you can sit there and tell everyone how they can act, but until then, you're just an underling who is not qualified to discuss Men's Issues.

If the rest of the members are looking for a REAL Men's Rights Forum, then feel free to join http://forum.mens-rights.net where REAL MRA's are allowed to post their opinions about feminism and male/female behaviour.

There is no censorship at the Men's Rights Online Forum.

[neonsamurai]

The BEST MRA in the world is Carey Roberts, as he confronts the feminists and he REFUSES to word his statements in a *Politically Correct* manner. When you have obtained the success and status of Carey Roberts, then you can sit there and tell everyone how they can act, but until then, you're just an underling who is not qualified to discuss Men's Issues.

So can I assume that you have obtained the success and status of Carey Roberts and this is why to can tell Dr Evil how to run his board?

[Chris Key]

The BEST MRA in the world is Carey Roberts, as he confronts the feminists and he REFUSES to word his statements in a *Politically Correct* manner. When you have obtained the success and status of Carey Roberts, then you can sit there and tell everyone how they can act, but until then, you're just an underling who is not qualified to discuss Men's Issues.

So can I assume that you have obtained the success and status of Carey Roberts and this is why to can tell Dr Evil how to run his board?

I merely offered a citation to the instance in which typhonblue made an abhorrent statement - her claims were fallacious and cannot be substantiated - and he NEVER even chastised her for it, however he attacked me for merely stating a FACT about the early 20th Century English women.

If Dr. Evil wishes to administer a forum that is called "Stand Your Ground", then it's his duty to moderate the board in a fair and impartial manner.

[neonsamurai]

Chris,

We get lots of folks coming through these pages, some are genuine, but  some are whackos trying to either give us a bad name or have a MAJOR chip on their shoulder about women. A lot of them are feminists who are trying to put words in our mouths like a BBC undercover reporter. But the rest of us just make mistakes.

Doc's pretty much called all of the regular posters on what we're saying at one point or another. We've all made negative generalisations in a post, even if they weren't meant that way. But some lurker does a cut and paste and suddenly SYG has become a place where 'hatemongers' come to spread sexism and racism and any other sort of 'ism' you can imagine.

We all know what you meant by your statement about 20th Century women, hell that's why we all post here. It's just the way it was worded could be cut and pasted or linked to and you can be portrayed as a 'woman hater' on any number of misandric websites. They don't care that it's not what you meant. Not that you should care about what they think, I know I don't, but SYG will be blamed by association.

If Doc has slipped up on his moderating with Typhon, that's because she's been around here for a long time and at the moment you're the unpredictable new gun in town, so you'll get more attention. I don't think it's anything personal.


Neon

[TheManOnTheStreet]

Not that my opinion really matters but here is my take.

In reference to the case above, I agree that E may have misinterpreted your statement.  But he DOES in fact pay for this site, so his rule is law.  You may not like it, I may not like it sometimes either, but that is the way it is.  

Actually, I believe you claimed something similar in nature when dealing with a trollish person on your site.  Am I correct?  What is the difference?  Is it because the offending person was a she?  Same argument, different site, IMHO.  You have rules as well.  If they are broken, then you are "suspended" or confined to the "Troll City", correct?  Again, I ask, what is the difference?

Secondly, I have been reading your forums for a while now, and personally I think that although the site, as a whole, is it is full of very valuable information.... it is riddled with crude terms towards women in general.  Refering to women almost exclusively by some as C***S and B*****S is counterproductive to the MRA, and the movement as a whole.  It adds creedance to the claims by some feminists that all men, specifically MRAs, are sexist pigs.

Lastly, I don't really recall if I have ever been warned by E, but if I were I probably disagreed.  I also feel that sometimes there are some folks that APPEAR; better yet, lets say "appear", to be given a little more room than others.  I don't honestly know for sure.  What I do know is the rules of this site.  I know that if I break one of those rules, I will be warned.  If I am warned three times, on the fourth incident, I am gone.  

For what it's worth.

Al


Note: Edited for typos.