I am a woman. This is a very interesting topic. I have and will continue to give up my seat on public transport where needed to someone who needs it more than me. Male or female doesn't matter. If they are pregnant, disabled, elderly, etc, they can have my seat.

My partner would always give up a seat for me, even if he needed it more, it is the way he was brought up. I would generally accept it from him as it genuinely pleases him to do this. Do I expect it from him or any man? Generally no. However, if I were elderly or frail I might, not necessarily from a man, but someone able-bodied.

Would I accept the place in the lifeboat? Wow, when your life is at stake, how do we know what we would do? My man would offer his place in the life-boat to me first (or his Mum, sister) and almost certainly to any other woman as well. Upbringing; that's how he is. Would I accept it and leave him to his fate? I hope not. I don't think I could stand to leave him behind. Would I expect men generally to give up their places to women in this situation, no, not really. I might hope if I was scared enough.

Should men give up their place in a life-boat to a woman? I would say not as a matter of course, no.

Anti,

I would have thought detracting from the truth was what yarns were supposed to do.

The truth is rarely palatable subsequent to the actual event. Fables or yarns are the substitute.

Some of the bravest people I have known were rather liberal with the truth. They appeared to have little need to tell it as it actually was. One can assume that bravery, as in the case of the Titanic, was a different journey for every individual involved and the journey for those that did survive could never be told in its actuality.

Society dictates that the brave be stoic not terrified.

Anyway, enough from me. I shall leave it all to wiser heads than mine.

Take it easy.

SD

Pelican:"What do you think would be the appropriate response Anti?"

"Appropriate"? Dunno. I think it's become apparent that the "normal" response is for men to be willing to sacrifice themselves. In terms of preserving the genes this is probably the most successful evolutionary strategy.

I'd go so far as to suggest it's part of the extended phenotype of humanity generally, since it seems to be a very widespread phenomenon. Even in countries where the feminist doctrine is that women are downtrodden, men are prepared to die to protect their women. they demand a pretty hefty quid pro quo, but still the drive exists. We never hear about the male victims of the many wars in Africa, but the fact that 80% of the people in refugee camps from the Sudanese war are women or children is a pretty telling stat.

I'd also suggest that a distorted form of that phenotype is responsible for the way in which powerful men have allowed feminism to flourish and smart feminist women have manipulated that mercilessly to a distorted end (female dominance of politics and business), which may be an expression of another aspect of the extended phenotype. Or it might just be there's lots of such women with CAH...

http://www.livescience.com/16086-sex-hormones-influence-career-choices.html

[cont]

Pelican:"Anti you really have to accept that women do not think of men as brutalisers. "

I think I made that clear. The meme of "man as drunken abuser" was prevalent among some parts of the Irish community and has become a standard part of the way we think of Aborigines. Neither is a fair picture of the community in question. However, it's such a successful morality hook that it's been dragged out by feminists to paint all men with the same brush, except that they don't mention the alcohol factor, just the masculinity. That's been greatly assisted by lawyers who want an easy lever to pry the man away from his rights as a father and property-owner following marital breakdown.

The fact remains that few men hit women. Unfortunately, "alls fair in love and war" means that is forgotten when there's a house and kids to be won. It's also pretty easy to say "he yelled at me and I was scared" and it might even be true, but it only works as a pleading because men have an instinctual protective response to female fear.

It's the way in which feminist dogmatic women have tried to distort that noble sense of obligation that I find most abhorrent.

Apart from anything else it's weak-minded and unethical.

On the original subject, I've been prompted by what I wrote above to consider if perhaps the main driver for male altruism in the Titanic was the fact that there were a lot of very scared women and the whole ship must have reeked with fear. there's been work done that shows oxytocin is able to suppress the fear response. http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20051107221302data_trunc_sys.shtml

Could it be that men is such situations are being driven by their oxytocin levels? Several posters have made the point that they'd give up their seat for a loved one or someone who seemed more helpless. Could they have naturally high levels of oxytocin?

"The meme of "man as drunken abuser" was prevalent among some parts of the Irish community and has become a standard part of the way we think of Aborigines. Neither is a fair picture of the community in question. "

No it isn't fair, generalisations rarely are even about feminism. Alcohol abuse is typical of disempowered societies particularly among men where they have been defeated (perhaps emasculated) by an overriding force ie. British colonialism. It wasn't an 'act' of feminism that drove those perceptions only the responses as it related to effects on women.

My husband and I discussed this last night and while we both agree in some ways it was easier when there were more defined gender roles this also came with a price. Some people don't fit into stereotypes well and we are not 'massess' but individuals. As long as there are options for variations from the norm for both men and women who might not fit well into a gender strait jacket.

Women who might wish to remain a 'homemaker' and raise children at home are now restricted from doing so due to economic constraints. All the social supports are now fully aimed at returning to work and formal childcare.

In reality the idea of feminism as being about 'choice' was probably a con.

Dear Pelly,

Resolving this kind of ambiguity is part of the challenge of
social and cultural change. I guess that today's pattern is
one in which many alternative lifestyles and roles are
acceptable for both men and women. Our society is
on the whole individualistic and highly open to change and
experimentation, and that's why men and women are exploring
a wide variety of roles. The younger generations today - don't
seem to consider the gender restrictions of the past. To
them all possible options are open and equally acceptable
for both sexes. And that surely can't be a bad thing -
that a person's individual human qualities, rather than his
or her biological sex, is the primary measure of a person's
worth and achievement.