An eyewitness account of WACF.

By way of Encyclopedia Titanica, the words of Titanic survivor Mrs. Emil Taussig as reported by the New York Times on April 22nd 1912:

“Only twenty women were near the boat, and these were put in. My daughter Ruth was among the first, but I said that I wouldn’t go if my husband did not accompany me. There was room for fourteen more after the last woman had found her place, and they all pleaded to let the men take the empty seats.

“But the Captain said that he would not allow it. I was frantic. There was that boat, ready to be lowered into the water and only half full. Then the order came to lower. The men were pleading for permission to step in, and one came forward to take a place next to his wife. I heard a shot and I am sure it was he that went down.

“Then the boat swung out from the deck. I was still with my husband, and Ruth had already disappeared below the deck. I gave a great cry—I remember perfectly calling out the name of my daughter—and two men tore me from my husband’s side, lifted me, one by the head and one by the feet, and dropped me over the side of the deck into the lowering boat. I struck on the back of my head, but I had furs on, and that fact probably saved me from greater injury.

“The terrible thing was that we had so much room left for the poor men who were snatched away…

According to the biographical page for Mr. Taussig on Encyclopedia Titanica, he did not survive.

Mr Taussig escorted his wife and daughter to a lifeboat (number 8) before standing back. He was lost in the sinking and his body, if recovered, was never identified.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Chivalry, Courtly Love. Bookmark the permalink.

64 Responses to An eyewitness account of WACF.

  1. Cane Caldo says:

    The men were pleading for permission to step in, and one came forward to take a place next to his wife. I heard a shot and I am sure it was he that went down.

    Gay.

  2. Lyn87 says:

    This is the same society that gave the world the Order of the White Feather at the same time the women of that society were demanding the right to vote for wars in which they would never be expected to fight.

    The goddess demands the blood of men, and we seem bound and determined to give her an ocean of it, although no matter how much we give her, she will never be appeased.

  3. Pingback: An eyewitness account of WACF. | @the_arv

  4. No, men aren’t seen as disposable, not at all.

  5. Anonymous Reader says:

    Channeling my inner Tam ye Bam:

    “Ere! At’s not wimmen an’ children first! At’s wimmen an’ children ONLY! Oo’s sposed to man the bloody oars and row the boat away, mate? Them fancy ladies in furs, or th’ wee tykes?”

    Funny (not hah hah) how “women and children first” becomes “only women and children, with a few selected men”, is it not?

    Lyn87
    This is the same society that gave the world the Order of the White Feather

    Odd you mention that. I was just telling some 20 year old college women the other day about that Order, and how many of the white-feather women never found a husband in the 1920’s, because so many Englishmen were killed or maimed in World War 1.

    Men: a renewable resource, but only if properly husbanded. Heh.

  6. Toddy Cat says:

    In Rich Lowrey’s Universe;
    -Ship hits iceberg. Frantic, disorganized evacuation follows, with half empty lifeboats lowered, men gunned down on deck by chivalrous lunatics, and over 1400 dead. Lowrey; Western Civilization’s Finest Hour.
    -Ship runs aground. Calm, orderly evacuation follows, with both men and women saved, no gunfire, no panic to speak of, and 32 dead. Lowrey; Shameful display of cowardice, panic, and lack of chivalry.

    When it comes to cucks, the guy is almost too good to be true.

  7. Tam the Bam says:

    You were warned not to incant my name even once, nevermind thrice.
    Very well. As you wish.
    Shorter Tam:-
    “Stay the heck away from White Knights. Pure cancer.
    I’m sure ra wimminz will be more than satisfied with their exclusive and noble company.”

  8. bob k. mando says:

    since you’re on a Titanic kick, it would seem appropriate to point out that those men actually did get a memorial, paid for by women.

    it’s in Washington DC.

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/article/13045131/whats-up-with-dcs-titanic-memorial

  9. feministhater says:

    Gay.

    I know, right. They should have stormed the officers, removed his gun, shot him in the gut and saved themselves and their wives and children.

  10. feministhater says:

    This is the same society that gave the world the Order of the White Feather at the same time the women of that society were demanding the right to vote for wars in which they would never be expected to fight.

    And yet, they got the vote, got everything for nothing and did not serve in World War 2 or any other war since then that men have be required to give life and limb. Even nurses are voluntary. It’s such a crock of shit.

  11. Anon says:

    I’d give anything to see the NRO cuckservative cruise capsize. As feeriker said, there will be the most comedic, inept, cartoonish, buffonish, ocean of gayface clusterfuck from all the manginas aboard begging to be allowed to leave at the same time as the small number of women on such a mangina-heavy cruise.

  12. Cindy says:

    So it was really “women and children ONLY”. Murdering a guy to keep him from taking an empty seat. Gosh. Also, who was to take care of the women and children on the rafts? One lucky ship worker? It never did make any sense, did it? I’d call this definitive proof that WACF doesn’t work in any way that actually benefits women or children. Or men, but obviously nobody cared about that anyway.

  13. Anon says:

    http://www.nrcruise.com/

    The NRO cuckservative cruise has an all-cuck lineup with Lowry, Gay-ratty, Jonah Goldberg, and others all on the same ship at the same time. I bet Wilcucks will be there too.

    Given that only 20% of the attendees are likely to be women, this hilarious cartoonish disorder of the cucks seeking to out-whiteknight each other in the event of stormy seas would be a sight to behold. See here :

  14. Cindy says:

    Toddy Cat said

    “In Rich Lowrey’s Universe;
    -Ship hits iceberg. Frantic, disorganized evacuation follows, with half empty lifeboats lowered, men gunned down on deck by chivalrous lunatics, and over 1400 dead. Lowrey; Western Civilization’s Finest Hour.
    -Ship runs aground. Calm, orderly evacuation follows, with both men and women saved, no gunfire, no panic to speak of, and 32 dead. Lowrey; Shameful display of cowardice, panic, and lack of chivalry.”

    Kinda makes you think maybe some less fit men are just hoping to see more fit, happily mated men die and get out of their reproductive way, doesn’t it?

  15. Dalrock says:

    @bob k. mando

    since you’re on a Titanic kick, it would seem appropriate to point out that those men actually did get a memorial, paid for by women.

    it’s in Washington DC.

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/article/13045131/whats-up-with-dcs-titanic-memorial

    Why the snark?

  16. Anon says:

    Cindy,

    Kinda makes you think maybe some less fit men are just hoping to see more fit, happily mated men die and get out of their reproductive way, doesn’t it?

    That is definitely their thinking. What they fail to realize is that ratio will help them far less than they think, because below a certain cutoff of attractiveness, a woman would rather choose ‘none of the above’.

    Send a tweet to Rich Lowry, calling him out about this..

  17. “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”

    It seems we have more evidence for why the men of the Titanic should have been prepared to ‘hydrate’ those keeping them off the boats.

  18. Cindy says:

    I don’t tweet, Anon. Had quit all the social media for my family’s sake. But I’ll bet Lowry gets his attention drawn to this stuff one way or another. 😉

  19. The Question says:

    @Dalrock

    This Titanic incident also brings to mind one of the White Star officials, Joseph Bruce Ismay, who got on one of the life boats and was ostracized by everybody afterwards.

    Here is an interesting account from his Wikipedia page that proves pertinent to your post, under the section “Criticism.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bruce_Ismay#RMS_Titanic

    The following is based on an official investigation into the sinking:

    “Some maintain Ismay followed the “women and children first” principle, having assisted many women and children himself. Ismay’s actions were defended in the official British inquiry, which found “Mr. Ismay, after rendering assistance to many passengers, found “C” collapsible, the last boat on the starboard side, actually being lowered. No other people were there at the time. There was room for him and he jumped in.”

    Note the last sentence in the account:

    “Had he not jumped in he would merely have added one more life, namely, his own, to the number of those lost.”

  20. Damn Crackers says:

    Thoughts of their memorial must have been comforting while they were drowning in frigid polar waters.

  21. PokeSalad says:

    since you’re on a Titanic kick, it would seem appropriate to point out that those men actually did get a memorial, paid for by women.

    Wellll, that makes it totally worth it. If those men could have looked in the future and seen that memorial, they’d have drowned twice.

    Armageddon: “Look at the bright side, you’ll have a high school named after you someday.”

  22. Pingback: An eyewitness account of WACF. | Reaction Times

  23. Cane Caldo says:

    Wellll, that makes it totally worth it. If those men could have looked in the future and seen that memorial, they’d have drowned twice.

    Hahahaha!

  24. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    feministhater: And yet, they got the vote, got everything for nothing and did not serve in World War 2 or any other war since then that men have be required to give life and limb.

    They certainly did get “everything” without having to serve in war. They even got the uniforms, medals, honors, and military pensions of serving in war, without having to actually serve in war.

    Every Memorial Day I hear people eulogize the “brave men and women” buried in this or that military cemetery. I always wonder, just how many women are buried in this military cemetery? How many of them died in combat? It’s mostly men, yet all the politicians, and celebrities, and even the “conservative” radio talk show hosts pretend that it’s “brave men and women” who served gallantly in our military.

  25. Byzantine says:

    As for the Titanic disaster, there are some quite plausible theories out there on the net as why did it happen the way it happened. I.e. if you were aiming to kill some important rich people standing in your way you could hardly expect your semi-litterate ship crew to know who they are. So, preventing ALL men from boarding lifeboats makes a lot of sense within proposed theory.

  26. SkylerWurden says:

    Everyone hates the Devils Advocate, but allow me to play the part for a moment.

    Life is hard. Our Western comforts are the exception and not the rule, and they will eventually fade away and we will need to be hard again. In those times, the fact is that young men (and sometimes older men) will have to be ready to sacrifice their body and life for a purpose that may or may not be useful. We don’t always have the option of saving everyone, or only sacrificing if it is a guarantee that our sacrifice will have a tangible effect.

    Regardless of the specific situations we can point to where this social rule results in less useful outcomes, the rule existed and exists for a reason. Society depends upon it.

  27. Dalrock says:

    @SkylerWurden

    Life is hard. Our Western comforts are the exception and not the rule, and they will eventually fade away and we will need to be hard again. In those times, the fact is that young men (and sometimes older men) will have to be ready to sacrifice their body and life for a purpose that may or may not be useful. We don’t always have the option of saving everyone, or only sacrificing if it is a guarantee that our sacrifice will have a tangible effect.

    Agreed.

    Regardless of the specific situations we can point to where this social rule results in less useful outcomes, the rule existed and exists for a reason. Society depends upon it.

    No. This isn’t true. WACF was largely a romantic fiction, going back to the fictional chivalric code of courtly love. It was practiced only a handful of times during a very limited time period. The namesake/original instance of WACF was on HMS Birkenhead in 1852. This was not an ocean liner, but a troop ship. Titanic followed a mere 60 years later, after the Birkenhead drill was immortalized in verse. More importantly, as I’ve shown in great detail, WACF is about romance. You may love the way the idea makes you feel, but it isn’t about necessity. It isn’t about saving lives. Separating families during evacuation slows the whole process to a halt. It multiplies chaos and confusion.

    But it feels good. It feels heroic. It feels romantic.

    So be honest. You love the romance. So be it. Just own it.

  28. The Jack Russell Terrorist says:

    Great article and comments. Many “white feather” women also could not find a man after WW1, besides lack of men, was once men found out who they were, many shunned them. Off topic but worth reading. Binge drinking on the rise among older women. The comments left could have came off this forum.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-older-women-baby-boomers-binge-drinking/

  29. We don’t always have the option of saving everyone, or only sacrificing if it is a guarantee that our sacrifice will have a tangible effect.

    Regardless of the specific situations we can point to where this social rule results in less useful outcomes, the rule existed and exists for a reason. Society depends upon it.

    I’m think Gen. Patton here. I’m also not wondering about what happens to a Skylerwurden civilization of women sitting on a stack of romantically stacked male bodies when the real rape culture shows up.

  30. SkylerWurden says:

    I didn’t explain myself very well. I am not romantic at all, in fact I am brutally utilitarian.

    Young men need to disregard their own life. Society does need this. I don’t care why they do it, the reason is unimportant. All that matters is that they stand ready to do it, and with no better reason than older men ordered them to do so. WaCF may be a specific case of this idea being applied in a silly or counterproductive way. I’m not arguing for or against WaCF. I am arguing against the idea that a young man’s life is worth more than the simple whims of society. His life is worth something only insofar as he is ready to lose it for a purpose he may never understand, and may in fact be useless.

    Whether he doesn’t for women and children, does it for God, does it for Bushido honor… I don’t particularly care why he does it. All that matters is that he be willing and indeed eager to do so. Obviously we have to romanticize it to some degree, or otherwise they would not do it. It is the same with soldiers. The mission they were on may or may not have been useful. They may or may not have had any effect upon the outcome of the war or battle. Regardless, we romanticize them, call them “héroes” say they died for all of us. It is a fiction readily apparent to any who have served in real war. But it is a necessary fiction.

    If for no better reason than to serve as an example, the men of Titanic were greater than those of the cruise ship.

  31. Mark MacIntyre says:

    Regarding the older women binge drinking article, it says: A study published last October also found the gap in drinking between men and women is closing.

    The study featured in the article found 1,700 women and 6,500 men who were binge drinkers. The rate is rising at 2% per year for women and 1% per year for men. That gap is closing about as rapidly as an octogenarian swimming through molasses in slow motion. It’s clearly a problem that primarily affects men, like suicide, but—just like suicide—they’re framing it as a female problem.

    But why are women drinking more? I have one possible answer, although I’m sure they wouldn’t want to hear it:

    In a study of women born in 1972 and 1973, those who had 2.5 or more sexual partners per year were much more likely to develop a substance abuse disorder. Women who had had more than 2.5 sexual partners by the age of 32 were 17.5 times more likely to develop a substance abuse disorder.

    Oxytocin—the bonding hormone—and alcohol have similar effects in the brain. Being tipsy and being in love feel somewhat similar. Not only that, oxytocin reduces addiction to alcohol. I posit that we have a generation of divorced women who have burned out their oxytocin systems with their slutty pasts, self-medicating their woes with alcohol and also are less able to moderate their alcohol consumption due to their burned out oxytocin systems. It’s like a perpetual motion machine of sluttiness and booze.

  32. Spike says:

    In short, manginas existed then, and manginas exist now.
    Chivalry would be dead without its’ White Knights, and Feminism would be dead without its’ manginas.

  33. Anonymous Reader says:

    SkylerWurden
    Young men need to disregard their own life
    I am arguing against the idea that a young man’s life is worth more than the simple whims of society. His life is worth something only insofar as he is ready to lose it for a purpose he may never understand, and may in fact be useless.

    Cool. You first.

    No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his. US Army General George Patton, who knew something about war.

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    SkylerWurden
    If for no better reason than to serve as an example, the men of Titanic were greater than those of the cruise ship.

    Dying for no reason is not a good example. It is foolish. Plus dying ain’t much of a living, boy.

  35. Pingback: LARPing Lancelot | Dalrock

  36. Mark MacIntyre says:

    @SkylarWurden:

    Young men need to disregard their own life … with no better reason than older men ordered them to do so.

    No, no, no.

    I can go along with the idea that men should align themselves with a purpose greater than their own self-interests. That’s all well and good. But unquestioning obedience to your elders is asking for rigid authoritarianism.

    The history of Christianity is filled with examples of people who rightly acted contrary to the will of the authorities of the day. Otherwise, we’d never have had Jesus, Moses, Peter, Paul, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, etc. Even in the secular sphere, the path of scientific progress has been primarily paved by young men acting individually against the status quo.

  37. Lost Patrol says:

    Women and Children First? Not Anymore

    On the one hundredth anniversary of Titanic’s sinking, efforts were made to make sure we understand that Titanic and Birkenhead represent a two trick pony. In fact, aside from those two shipwrecks women usually have had things harder than men. I’m glad for the reminder. For a minute there I had forgotten that women always have it harder than men in all things.

    http://www.seeker.com/women-and-children-first-not-anymore-1765739418.html

    – The code “women and children first” went down with the Titanic 100 years ago, says a new study.
    – Women and children die to a much larger extent than men in maritime disasters.
    – Women fared worse in shipwrecks involving Union Jack ships.
    The chivalrous code “women and children first” appears to have sunk with the Titanic 100 years ago.

  38. Rollory says:

    Society 1, of men without women. Rome. They go take the Sabine women and continue without missing a beat.

    Society 2, of women without men. Swedish feminists. They spread their legs for Muslims – a society of type 1.

    Men are not disposable and should not consider themselves as such.

    This is, incidentally, one of many things Robert Heinlein got exactly wrong.

  39. OT: I ran into this gem from Focus on the Family at Barnes and Noble yesterday…

    https://store.focusonthefamily.com/raising-a-modern-day-princess

  40. Ray Manta says:

    SkylerWurden says:
    I didn’t explain myself very well. I am not romantic at all, in fact I am brutally utilitarian.

    I consider myself a realist at heart too.

    It is the same with soldiers

    Soldiers may have to be sacrificed to achieve legitimate military goals. It’s certainly not the same as “the whims of society”. Little old ladies who think young men should sacrifice themselves to make them feel good about themselves should be fitted with the scold’s bridle and paraded about town. The same is true for the “white feather” campaigners who sent numerous underage boys to their deaths in WWI.

    I have a different fate in mind for the male cuckservatives who think men should throw themselves under the bus. They should be given the privilege of leading by example. And if they refuse, they can be ostracized like Bruce Ismay was.

    The mission they were on may or may not have been useful.

    During the Vietnam war, a significant percentage of deaths in the military were due to the “fragging” of unpopular commanding officers. Men who are unfairly treated have the means to retaliate. Good.


    Whether he doesn’t for women and children, does it for God, does it for Bushido honor… I don’t particularly care why he does it.

    The idea of a young man sacrificing himself for an obese skank with a tramp stamp and more mileage than the Lincoln Tunnel is not inspiring. Let’s be brutally utilitarian about this. If women don’t have much (or anything) to offer men, men will reduce or eliminate their investment in society accordingly.

  41. bob k. mando says:

    Dalrock
    Why the snark?

    why do you think that was snark? i wasn’t even trying to be funny.

    it’s just always struck me that, at least back then, women were at least appreciative of the sacrifices men made.

    and now you have to travel through a slum in order to even find the statue. most people don’t even know it exists.

  42. Robert What? says:

    How ironic to realize that today the same selfless sacrifice is expected of men, but the same loyalty and honoring is no longer expected of women.

  43. SkylerWurden says:

    Quotes from a movie actor who was a pacifist in real life notwithstanding, the fact is that soldiers will be put in situations where they will die. Blind obedience is better than what we have now, which is basically “I’ll sacrifice if I feel like it, when I feel like it.”

    As for whether the women and hidden deserve it, well, I can only say that I am happy Jesus didn’t wait for someone who deserved his sacrifice.

  44. cynthia says:

    In regards to the White Feather brigade and post-Great War feminism, it’s even worse than it sounds. I’ve stumbled upon a number of articles regarding feminism in the process of doing unrelated research, and it appears that the feminists of the 1910s period used male deaths in the war, as well as women stepping up into wartime manufacturing jobs, as a prime reason for why they should be allowed to vote. (The Delineator in 1917 ran a long series of articles about this)

    So you force men to go off and die in a horrific war, then use their deaths to further your political agenda.

  45. Ray Manta says:

    SkylerWurden says:
    Quotes from a movie actor who was a pacifist in real life notwithstanding

    Which actor would that be? The only individual quoted in this thread that I saw was George Patton. He is not a fictional character.

    the fact is that soldiers will be put in situations where they will die.

    That’s not relevant to the discussion. We all know that soldiers may risk losing their lives to achieve military objectives. That’s quite different from the pointless sacrifice of men’s lives for some silly ideal. It had no place in the Titanic disaster, and it’s even less desirable today.

    Just so you know, the nature of modern warfare has driven American casualties way down, despite the stupidity and inefficiency of the military. The US lost > 400,000 in WW2 while between Iraq and Afghanistan it lost less than 6,000. So maybe there isn’t such a dire need for men to lay down their lives “for the greater good”.

    Blind obedience is better than what we have now,

    You mean you like it better. It is not going to happen in our current social milieu, cannot happen, and there’s no reason it should happen.

    which is basically I’ll sacrifice if I feel like it, when I feel like it.

    I know of no one who has a job that involves physical risks that has that attitude. Firemen and police willingly take on the possibility of injury and death in the line of duty in return for extra compensation. We’re not even talking about that. We’re talking about blind self-sacrifice by men who haven’t signed on to immolate themselves because “it’s what society expects”.

    As for whether the women and hidden deserve it, well,

    Since, they don’t, men will (rationally) reduce their investment in them accordingly. If society as a whole wants or needs men’s cooperation, it has to be willing to pay the costs of it.

    I can only say that I am happy Jesus didn’t wait for someone who deserved his sacrifice.

    Surely Jesus didn’t want young men to die uselessly simply to satisfy someoene’s sick whim.

  46. Snowy says:

    Ridiculous stupidity. Waste of life.

  47. Dalrock says:

    @SkylerWurden

    As for whether the women and hidden deserve it, well, I can only say that I am happy Jesus didn’t wait for someone who deserved his sacrifice.

    You aren’t interested in Christ. You are interested in young men dying. You like the death, and Christ is only of interest to you if you can use His name to get more of it.

    Be honest. Like you were just yesterday:

    …a young man’s life is worth more than the simple whims of society. His life is worth something only insofar as he is ready to lose it for a purpose he may never understand, and may in fact be useless.

    Whether he doesn’t for women and children, does it for God, does it for Bushido honor… I don’t particularly care why he does it. All that matters is that he be willing and indeed eager to do so.

  48. Anonymous Reader says:

    SkylerWurden
    Blind obedience is better than what we have now, which is basically “I’ll sacrifice if I feel like it, when I feel like it.”

    You moved your goalposts. You are not arguing in an honest fashion. Previously you wrote:

    a young man’s life is worth more than the simple whims of society. His life is worth something only insofar as he is ready to lose it for a purpose he may never understand, and may in fact be useless.

    You have no point other than to urge men to seek meaningless death. At this point you appear to be nothing more than someone trolling for an argument, seeking to jam a discussion.

  49. That eye-witness account is horrifying! Imagine knowing your husband died for no good reason 😦

    All this talk about the hunger for male death and “cartoonish chilvalry” makes me think of the game Wolfenstien.
    My husband and I played it last year (well, he played, I watched), and you get all the way to the end and then *spoiler alert*, you die. So pointless and frustrating!
    Felt like they were trying to drive home the message that real male heroes die.

  50. SkylerWurden says:

    Okay I’ll be honest, Darrick. I don’t particularly care for the brand of Christianity that seeks to make this world more comfortable, nor do I have much sympathy for the idea that men are oh so put upon in a society where they enjoy greater comforts than any of our ancestors could have imagined. Nor do I particularly give a shit what you think about my arguments, though I do find it funny that you feel the need to immediately strawman my argument instead of addressing it. But since your all so convinced of your own intellectual superiority, let me believe it and try once more:

    You’re conflating two different arguments. On the one hand, I made a prescription for SOCIAL order and maintenance, namely that young men be ready and willing to die. This has no religious component because it’s not a religious discussion. Society did not come into existence during the crucifixion. Whether a society is good or not is dependent upon its religion and devotion to God. Whether it survives or not is, in the short term, a completely different matter. I didn’t find Biblical proscription for my argument here because the argument concerns SOCIETY, irregardless of whether or not said society is Christian.

    Now, as to the hilariously transparent attempt of your commenters to justify the lack of sacrifice on grounds that women “don’t deserve it” I addressed that with a Christian example because that DOES concern the faith. God sacrificed his only son for our disgusting, corrupt, and undeserving asses. If you think you can get away with claiming responsibility for only those who deserve it than you will very shortly find yourself on the outside of God’s responsibility. (Now go ahead and nitpick my particular wording here so you can avoid the substance)

    As to whether our modern society will survive the coming conflagration, this remains to be seen. Our men certainly are, broadly speaking, unwilling to sacrifice anything and thus far they have not been asked to do so. Whether this continues, we’ll have to wait and see. Less soldiers die, that is true. More people reach old age this is true. If our goal is immediate comfort, then we’re doing a bang-up job so far.

    Personally, I think the very fact that your blog exists is evidence that our society is both spiritually and physically very unhealthy. I think you know this too, but your too scared to accept what it really means. I think you want the Kingdom without the King, and I think you’ll find very soon that the idiotic men of yesteryear, whom you reduce to simplistic creatures whose sole motivation was pussy-worship, actually weren’t the caricatures you have invented to fit within your oversimplified explanations. I think you’ll find that the men who built the society in which you live had more reasons for their actions and beliefs than you give them credit.

    I also think I knew what I was asking for when I decided to challenge long-held assumptions and prejudices, and subsequently will probably be ignored and accused of trolling, so I think I’m out after this comment. Have your echo chamber. Lord knows some men need it.

  51. PokeSalad says:

    On the one hand, I made a prescription for SOCIAL order and maintenance, namely that young men be ready and willing to die. This has no religious component because it’s not a religious discussion. Society did not come into existence during the crucifixion. Whether a society is good or not is dependent upon its religion and devotion to God.

    By this standard, Islam is the most vibrant, healthiest society on earth…look at all their young men ready and willing to die for their devotion to God.

    You didn’t “challenge” anything, except logic and common sense. You’d do well in a freshman-level seminar at Middlebury College, though, or some such.

  52. SkylerWurden says:

    “All through your army career you men have bitched about what you call ‘this chicken-shit drilling.’ That is all for a purpose—to ensure instant obedience to orders”

    Since you all love Patton so much…

  53. SkylerWurden says:

    “This has no religious component”

    “Well I guess Islam is the best”

    No, your right. Your so smart. Such brilliance is rare indeed. Allow me to bask in it further.

    (Though I will say this, Islam is beating us. That’s happening for a reason. Anyway, this is pissing into the wind, so I really am out now, lol.)

  54. Gunner Q says:

    “God sacrificed his only son for our disgusting, corrupt, and undeserving asses.”

    Christ was not a martyr. He was a buyer. He considered us worthy of His sacrifice without our having to earn that status. Therefore, the lives of young men are sacred by the decree and act of God Himself. Nobody will wrong them without answering to the Judge.

    And on a secular note,

    “I made a prescription for SOCIAL order and maintenance,”

    The purpose of civilization is to benefit its members, not consume them.

    Whatever you’ve been exposed to, Skyler, it wasn’t Christianity. Ours is a positive religion. You should be proud that Christ found you inherently worthy of his investment and effort and in response, invest in and encourage the next generation of men. But instead, you beat yourself up because you are not God’s equal, as if humans were ever meant to be, then turn around and project your self-hate upon your fellow man.

    I just saved you thousands of dollars of therapy. Keep listening and we’ll unplug you from the devil’s lies.

  55. Lyn87 says:

    SkylerWurden says:
    March 31, 2017 at 12:05 pm

    “…Islam is beating us.”

    You have clearly never been among them in a place where Muslims are in charge for any length of time. If you had, you would know that Islam is a gutter religion with no long-term future, and Muslims can barely get out of their own way. I recently spent over a year living in a Middle Eastern country, and I can tell you this: everything with more than two moving parts was designed, built, maintained, and operated by foreigners. If not for the geographical accident of them living atop a sea of oil, and the fact that we’re too civilized to just take it from them (as they would do to us if the roles were reversed), their population would be 10% of what it is, and they would spend all their time throwing feces at each other from camel-back.

    Let’s face it, without the use of imported equipment, expertise, and probably labor, the Egyptians couldn’t replicate the pyramids of Giza today… something that primitive pagans managed to do thousands of years ago.

    Islam is like feminism: it can only exist as a parasite. If its host dies, it dies as well. And like feminism, it is incapable of killing a host that wants to live, but it occasionally does a good job of convincing the host to not fight back (I expect that to be a temporary state of affairs).

  56. SkylerWurden says:

    Okay, that one I just can’t let go unanswered:

    “Father, if it is your will, remove this cup from my lips”

    He did NOT want to do it. You were not worth it to him. He did it for the Father. As to whether the Father thinks you deserved it, that is entirely unknowable. We know he loves us, but we don’t know why he does so, and most Christian thinkers would not claim it is because by our actions we deserve said love.

    Anyway, you’ve got your little caricature of me nice and created so I don’t really see any more that can be said. Keep tilting at windmills, it’s very impressive.

  57. Gunner Q says:

    “Okay, that one I just can’t let go unanswere”

    Ah, we approach the chewy nougat center of your problem. Christ paid his life and in return, will now enjoy redeemed humanity forever. Is that not a purchase?

    “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Matt. 20:28, Mark 10:45

    “In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered. 11 Both the one who makes people holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters. … Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.” Hebrews 2:10-11, 14-18

    “What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” 2 Cor. 6:16

  58. Ilion says:

    The majority of you people are no less inimical to the continuation of civilization than the open leftists are.

    If men are not willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their society, then that society dies.

    If the *young* men are not willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their society because the older men have ordered them to do so, then that society dies.

    If the women are not willing to sacrifice their narrow interests/desired for the sake of their society because the men have ordered them to do so, then that society dies.

    It is mutual trust between its members that makes a society; all three of the above refusals follow from a lack of or spurning of such a trust.

    Like ‘SkylerWurden’, I am neither defending nor condemning WACF; I am rubbing your noses in your own hypocrisy (leftist under close examination) … and stupidity.

    Whether or not WACF was a good idea and policy, that is what the men of that time and society had decided upon. The biggest reason its implimentation during the Titanic sinking upped the death count is because the women refused to obey the men.

    One would thing that you set, of all people, would have seen that right off.

  59. Snowy says:

    @SkylerWurden

    God IS love. What is love? Love is FOR others. God exists FOR others. God exists FOR His creation, not His creation exist for Him.

    Christ was fully human, just like you and me. What human would relish the thought of being crucified? That was His humanity talking when He said, “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.”

    He was utterly torn up inside by the FREE CHOICE before Him. But, thank God, He ultimately FREELY CHOSE the will of the Father in Him, to die for us, when He said, “NEVERTHELESS, not as I will” (His humanity), “but as thou wilt.” (the Deity in Him; the Father; the only true God) (Matthew 26:39).

    The Positive of the Deity in Him (the Father; the only true God) overcame the Negative of His humanity. He chose the right use of His human self (O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done” Matthew 26:42). He had no further hesitation going through with it after that; the thing was settled.

  60. Ray Manta says:

    SkylerWurden says:

    nor do I have much sympathy for the idea that men are oh so put upon in a society where they enjoy greater comforts than any of our ancestors could have imagined

    Since men these days enjoy suck enviable comforts anyway, you shouldn’t have any problem removing women’s special privileges with respect to men. Or do you?

    You’re conflating two different arguments.

    You toggle between a “hyper-rational” argument about men needing to be sacrificial lambs for the good of society and then a pseudo-Christian argument when the first one gets shot down (and vice-versa). It’s s sleazy, dishonest tactic. I don’t believe for a minute that you would fail to take your place on a Titanic lifeboat. That’s something for the other guy to do.


    I made a prescription for SOCIAL order and maintenance, namely that young men be ready and willing to die.

    And it’s been pointed out that society has collectively chosen not to pay the costs necessary for that – proper socialization of women, greater social status for men, and a stake in the future. Your only counter-argument is a lame “young men should act more Christ-like” jab. It simply will not work out that way. You might as well demand that young men find obese, hideous women more attractive to be more Christ-like. Not gonna happen.

    As to whether our modern society will survive the coming conflagration, this remains to be seen.

    I expect that life expectancy will continue to go up, and military (and other casualties) will continue
    their downward trend, excepting local reversals. Disaster porn fetishists may disagree.

    Less soldiers die, that is true.

    Technological advances have increased the strategic advantages of taking cover in military operations. The paradoxical effect is dwindling casualties.

    I think you’ll find very soon that the idiotic men of yesteryear,

    The captain of the Titanic having a man murdered to prevent him from taking an empty lifeboat
    seat is certainly engaging in idiotic behavior. So is a glory-hound military officer who risks
    his men’s lives needlessly. Men do have a built-in propensity for self-sacrifice but bad actors
    who pervert this or take advantage of it for their own gain need to be severely punished, or put
    down.

    so I think I’m out after this comment.

    That’s your choice.

    Okay, that one I just can’t let go unanswered:

    That one’s in the third reply after the above comment. I can only presume you’re not serious about your resolution to quit this thread.

  61. Ray Manta says:

    Since men these days enjoy suck enviable comforts anyway,

    Sorry, made a typo. Should be:
    Since men these days enjoy such enviable comforts anyway,

  62. Oscar says:

    @ Lyn87 says:
    March 31, 2017 at 1:08 pm

    “Islam is like feminism: it can only exist as a parasite. If its host dies, it dies as well.”

    We’ve all heard the myth of medieval Islam’s “tolerance” towards Christians and Jews. In reality, it was pragmatism. Muslim leaders discovered that Christians and Jews were better administrators than their fellow Muslims, and therefore maintained Christian and Jewish populations big enough to provide them with administrators, but not big enough to overwhelm the Muslims.

    Even Saddam preferred to have a number of Christians in his government for that reason.

  63. Anonymous Reader says:

    SkylerWurden
    On the one hand, I made a prescription for SOCIAL order and maintenance, namely that young men be ready and willing to die. This has no religious component because it’s not a religious discussion.

    It has no logical component, either. Clearly it has some sort of emotional component for you. Only you can know what inside your head is driving this bizarre idea.

    Ask yourself why you desire that many other young men die for a start.
    Your vision is very naive as it ignores both human nature and human history.
    A culture where young men are ready and willing to die would soon be taken over by another culture that teaches young men to fight, to kill, and when necessary to die nobly.

    Perhaps you could expand on this death-cult fascination you have, explaining why it is necessary for other young men to die at the whim of..well, who? In your dream world, who gets to order young men to their deaths? You, perhaps?

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s