I have a dvd on my shelves called 'McLintock'. It's a sixties John Wayne comedic western, and despite being hugely sexist (very loosely based on 'the Taming of the Shrew') it is a favourite of my wife and daughters.
The point that is interesting to me in this movie is a speech written, or dictated by the fictional chief of the Comanche, (played by Australian Michael Pate) and spoken by the Duke at a hearing concerned with moving the tribe to Fort Sills. In part, he says:
“It is the Comanche law that no chief ever eats, until he sees that the pots are full of meat in the lodges of widows and orphans.”
In the movie, the chief's name is Puma, not Quanah, and I have not been able to verify whether this is the true custom or not.
I would suggest this is a remarkably 'human' law. Predatory animals, like the great cats, can make instinctive calculations concerning economics. For instance, they will only chase their prey so far. They instinctively know that to expend too many calories on a lost cause (or on prey with too few calories) will weaken them too much for the next chase.
Equally, while a mother will defend her cubs fiercely and courageously, if pushed to the limit she will save herself; she has a better chance of surviving to have other cubs, than young cubs have of reaching breeding age.
So the question I pose is this. If you were the only breadwinner at a large table of 'widows and orphans', would you feed them first, even if it meant going hungry yourself, or would you rationalise that as breadwinner you need to keep your strength up, to continue to provide?

Grim:”If you were the only breadwinner at a large table of 'widows and orphans', would you feed them first, even if it meant going hungry yourself, or would you rationalise that as breadwinner you need to keep your strength up, to continue to provide?”

Feed them first. I read somewhere some time ago… men instinctively sit with their backs to the wall if sitting in a restaurant with their family and that if a female is without a male she will instinctively do the same thing. When a man is not around a female will take both roles.

But yeah, I was a solo mum for four years, outside of living in the jungle you feed the children the good stuff, take a vitamin and eat a sandwich. I’ve never been impressed with lionesses – they do let their cubs get eaten quite regularly by competing males aye.

"Equally, while a mother will defend her cubs fiercely and courageously, if pushed to the limit she will save herself; she has a better chance of surviving to have other cubs"
I was for many years sole parent and I do not think most mothers, most fathers will try to savy her/his life than the lifes from their children. Personaly I prefer to be dead than to feel as a killer of my children, in the rest of my life.
I think there is a spider- mother which when does not have food enouph for her children lie down, allowing her babies to eat her body. I love the people who are strong enouph to stay over the death, who know to live and die with integrity, who never forget their "mission",
Grim the fear is an extremely strong instict, our top defence system, but if we want to stand over our life, if we want to do something more important from our life, then we must release our self from the fear.
We can not do it very often, but we must learn to do it!
While it is easier to win the fear of the death and gife the food toy the children, it is not easy, or it is impossible to resist to tortures for long time. Unfortunatly in these cases there is not chance even to suiside and keep "clean" your integrity.
ALWAYS FIRST THE CHILDREN!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

it is usual that woman and children eat first...[in camp

but

it is well known that the hunt..sheds blood..often the blood is drank[and the kill gets gutted]..things like the head/feet/tail get cut off...as often they serve little use...with the exception that the soft bits[brain/eyes are kept...if old people are in camp..

a fire is often built so scavenging meat eaters dont get attracted to the hunt zone...or then follow the blood trail back home..and the offall bits[liver heart etc]..often are eaten...as the spoil quickly

my family totum is the head of the deer...i have the head,because in the time it was granted there were no old people needing its brain or eyes...

there is the head of the kill..that is often left in the forrest out of respect for the nobil animal that gave its life in sacrifice..[that we may live]..often it was taken though..for its products[beyond feeding the old,..

ie its horns/antlers were usefull in creating weopens..[for egsample]...and in times of real hardship..they were boiled down to extract jelly..[or if the horns were fresh the blood within them]...

thus..my other family totum is the single-horn of the ox of sacrifice...for the head was left free in the good early times..[and the single horn left..as sacrifice on the pyre in the hard times..when even the old..needed to give their share to the young

...for me the matter is beyond the symbolism of sentimentalism or rational..[for this is a time of plenty].thus my horn[now]..signifies the horn of plenty...yet also it sounds its call of warning..for some remember the times past..wernt as rational..

yet chose to remain full of delusional sentiment...that rationality without nationality shall avail

I would DEFINITELY feed them first and foremost. "Logic" would have nothing to do with my actions, because as you say in the animal world, if worse comes to worse, the parent will save his/her self and then go on to procreate and start all over again. But humans are a bit different to the rest of the animal kingdom; we are not necessarily as driven to "save ourselves". We are often prepared to give up our own lives, be it saving a child or being a suicide bomber. Human behaviour is often unfathomable.

Interesting conundrum.

I think answer is to be found according to the urgency of the circumstances.

For example, if in a plane and due to problems oxygen masks are required, we are advised to place the mask on ourselves first then help others like children or other people requiring assistance. This makes good sense in the immediacy of an emergency.

In the case of a community as you described from the movie; the overall survival of the tribe is more important. The chief has greater access to hunting than widows and orphans, therefore, I would feed the widows and orphans first, knowing that my hunger is more temporary than theirs.

Speaking of wisdom in unlikely places, in “High Sierra” another western made in 1941, starring Humphrey Bogart, part of the plot involves panning for gold dust in the High Sierra mountains. To do this the prospectors divert a stream and carve into the mountain-side, after they have found as much gold as they can, the elderly prospector who has lead Bogart to this location insists that they repair the damage done to the environment, saying something along the lines of “we have taken from mother nature and now we must put back.” I can’t remember the line exactly and it was not a necessary part of the narrative, however, it was one of those comments that remain in one’s mind. We have always known that we impact on the natural environment, it is nothing new. I hope you forgive my digression from your topic.

Cheers