Meet Swingers

Online Now: 2,024

Entertainment

Fun and Games

Information

Shopping

Site Stats

Members:
1,200,403
Msgs Sent:
111,575,264
Photo Ads:
628,111
User Pics:
475,546
Search
Next »
  1. 1
  2. 2
< >

 

3rd Jul 2009 - 10:29am
Witchy's AvatarWitchyGodlike
Joined:
24 Dec 2008
Posts:
1703
Location:
Hotel
Californification
ProfilePM
I'm a little at sixes & sevens with the whole issue.

I'm a woman.
I'm capable of looking after myself physically.
I'm not easily intimidated- if I want to walk down that street at 1am, I bloody well will.

However, I still appreciate gentlemen. I can see that men in the age group I mostly spend time with were bought up to treat a woman as something to be protected- and whilst I don't need that protection, I know that it's something they offer for the right reasons, not out of wanting to patronise.

EG, I joined the ship I was crewing at a town local to me. The day in question was my birthday, so I'd arranged to go home for the night. I went with other-significant-other for a drink in town after we'd docked. After a while, we were joined by some more deckies. Time came for me to make a move. It was 10.30ish, in a town that held no threat for me at all and that I knew much better than he did. We'd just been joined by his mates. Naturally, I was about to take the 10minute walk back to the ship for my kit by myself. He insisted he walked me back. I said "You really know you don't have to do this" to which he replied "I wouldn't be me if I didn't"- and I responded that "I wouldn't be me if I didn't tell you you didn't need to."

He was bought up to be a gentleman- it's in his nature to protect.

Usually, if theres anything really heavy to be lifted at home, it's done by me & the OH. When the OSO is here, I'll let them get on with it. They're both bigger & stronger than me, and better equipped- so why would I struggle my ass off to make a point?

Back on tangent... icon_lol.gif

I got stuck in a lift once in Germany with the OH, three small kids, and lots of tourists. There was no sense of order to who got out first. I've always been petrified of being stuck in lifts, and given this when the OH got me & the kids to the front of the "queue" I gratefully accepted. The kids needed to be got out, and in that situation so did I. It wasn't a woman thing, it was a freaks-out-in-lifts thing.

However, if we were in a situation where we were in peril on the water, and just for example there was only one lifejacket left between me and the OH- I would bloody insist he took it. While he can swim, he panicks in the water if he's out of his depth. I'm much better in the water than he is- he might protest but he would bloody well take the jacket.

Somewhere in there, you may find my point. Happy hunting. icon_rolleyes.gif
 

 

3rd Jul 2009 - 10:43am
Resonance's AvatarResonanceGodlike
Joined:
19 Jun 2008
Posts:
1817
Location:
In a world of my own
ProfilePM
I think I'd rather die than know that I condemned someone else to death through my own selfishness and actions.

I'd probably be the the fool who tried to help people get out and snuffed it. I would of course prioritise my family and friends first, but I couldn't then stop and see others needing help and not give it.

As for women and children first. I don't see this as a sexist issue. An "average" man is stronger and quicker than an "average" woman who is stronger and quicker than an "average" child. I see it as giving help to those who are more likely to need it initially. But that works only on likelihood and averages and that is entirely dependent on the situation.

So lets turn this around. A 68 year old chap in a wheelchair, A female Olympic 1500m runner and a newborn baby boy... In this instance I'd help the newborn baby boy and the chap in the wheelchair first. Why? Well surely it's screamingly obvious isn't it? (Incidentally, I'd expect the Olympian to lift a finger too, otherwise she'd get a flea in her ear).

In situations like that I'd have to make a snap judgement based on need. As such it is more likely the youngest would need our help, then perhaps the oldest, then perhaps those who aren't quite as strong or able as others. While sex and age do not define those boundaries completely, they do in a very general way.

And when the ships sinking, it's probably quicker to say "women and children first" than "Those under the age of 5 in catagory Subgroup C, fully bipedal with no inherent physical problems, can form a line begind those in subgroup B who have some form of latent, intermittent problem with gait. Ingrowing toenail sufferers behind them while those with gout should move their clothes onto the lower peg before lunch, after prep, once they've written their letter home, before getting their haircut after the ship sinks..."

Sorry I got confused there...Where were we? Ah Yes! Sex...sex...sex...sex.

I need a lie down. The heat's getting to me. Save me Witchy!
 

 

3rd Jul 2009 - 5:32pm
Sandybeach1's AvatarSandybeach1I've got chair sores
Joined:
20 Jan 2008
Posts:
405
Location:
sandybeach
ProfilePM
I always thought it was women and children first not purely from the perspective of being gentlemen but from the perspective of future procreation, sort of making sure the next generations will go on.
Personally i wouldn`t care where i came as long as my children were ok and safe
 
Next »
  1. 1
  2. 2
< >
Search