bmmg39 makes a good point, THF. Chivalry was very much alive and well back then, as well as a certain amount of self-loating among men (or an exaggeration for the worth of women and children) so that would explain them giving their lives. But, like the previous comment mentioned, it probably wouldn't fly very well these days.

After Katrina flooded NO, the helicopter rescues took the women and children first. Why? Are they worth more than the lives of the men they were with? Of their fathers, husbands or sons? Is this another way the patriarchy enforces 2nd class citizenship on women?

The last one is the most peculiar. Wouldn't your true status in society be determined simply by the order in which you're saved from threats to your life simply because it shows you your life's worth to society?


THF, your last two commenters are trolls. Just a bit of advice: these guys harass all feminist blogs. Learn their names and cut them off.


I'll say it again, ginmar: I was invited here. Invited. By The Happy Feminist herself. After she had read my contributions on another blog. Another blog that, if I'm not mistaken, and I am not mistaken, you excoriated because the host dared to allow people who disagree with ginmar to post there.

You still haven't learned the definition of "troll." "Troll" does not mean a person who disagrees with ginmar; it refers to someone who invades a blog with insulting, disruptive posts. I often agree with HF, but even when I do not I respect her too much to disrupt her blog, especially since she had the decency and kindness to invite me here. And that is not empty flattery; I am sincerely appreciative.

In my above post, for example, I stated where I agree with HF, even complimenting her for her positive and fair attitude (take a lesson from her, please). One would have to be delusional to think I am "harassing" her blog.

It is a free country and you are welcome to have your own nice little blog on which you and like-minded souls refer to guys as Men's Rights Assholes. HF goeth another way, though, and you will have to deal.


"THF, your last two commenters are trolls. Just a bit of advice: these guys harass all feminist blogs. Learn their names and cut them off." - ginmar

Well, this is a first. I've discussed far hotter topics, yet I'm called a troll simply because I disagree on certain parts of the OP.

The Happy Feminist

Right. There are some blogs that are intended only for feminist commenters, and I think it is completely appropriate for those blogs to bar commenters with other viewpoints.

This blog, however, is intended to be open to anyone . As long as a commenter engages the issues in the post or the thread, I don't consider that commenter a troll. I don't consider bmmg39 or Rex to be trolls.

I am also trying to maintain as liberal a policy as possible. I have only deleted 2 comments since starting this blog in Oct. and I am hoping to continue in that vein.



You do an excellent job of posting interesting topics and attracting interesting people. If I had not said it before, I will say it again: Thanks!

The Happy Feminist

I have just had a chance to read bmmg39's comment and Rex's comment. I think bmmg39 and I are on the same page, just with slightly different emphases. At the risk of sounding naive, however, I do hope that I would strive to help weaker people in an emergency, even if it means risking my own neck. I also hope that I never have to! I thinkcommitting to a course of action now will ensure that I would be brave in the event of an actual emergency.

As for Rex's comment, I have to disagree with the following: "Wouldn't your true status in society be determined simply by the order in which you're saved from threats to your life simply because it shows you your life's worth to society?" I think that "women and children first" is undoubtedly an ADVANTAGE that women have enjoyed that men don't enjoy. And it's an advantage that I think bears critiquing from both a feminist and a men's rights perspective. But that survival advantage in a fairly narrow category of situations does not change women's second class status throughout recorded history and even today in many areas.

I am not sure about the protocols in Hurricane Katrina-- was it "women and children first" or "women with children first." One issue that I think bears examination is the fact that women still tend to be the primary caretakers of small children (a fact that often disadvantages us in many ways). So if a small child is to be evacuated, shouldn't the mother be evacuated with him or her? Or perhaps it should be "parents and children first"?

Three comments on the structure of pre and post ww1 thought (Edwardian).

1)I once heard Ursula Leguin talking about the "glory" of war she said it was mytholized because "Young men are expendable". Expendable because they threatened the older established males for property and females. It was preciesly within this cultural ideal that ww1 occurred. The meat grinder of that war changed how society thought of war in general. My family directly lost at least three young men in that disaster. So its only been a few short generations where war has not been considered the pinacle of glory for young men.

2) In WW1 90% of all casualties were military. By the end of the 20th century in all conflicts reported 90% of casualties were civilian and 10% are military....the new "women and children first".

3) In many parts of the world the preference for males is skewing the gender balance to such an extent that there are millions of young men with no access to wealth, or potential families, are these (very young) men the "expendibles" of our future world?


Name the blog, Rex. I keep seeing MRAs whine that disagreement isn't allowed. What isn't allowed is distortion and lies. MRAs excell at it.

Self-loathing amongst Victorian men? Please. You've been reading Warren Farrell again.

I'm sorry, Happy, but if this is going to be a playground for MRAS, I'm gone, however polite and civil they are.

The Happy Feminist

Ginmar, you're always welcome here, but the threads here are also open to MRAs, conservative Christians, and anti-feminists as well as feminists and liberals.

The comments to this entry are closed.