« "Psssst.... It's Not Working" | Main | Sleep Tight - Don't Let the Bedbugs Bite »

January 18, 2012

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc?

Could the causal connection be any more clear? I think not.

1912: Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose/Republicans become the first national party to champion womens' suffrage. Shortly thereafter, the Titanic hits an iceberg.

Stupid/evil/chumpy white knights, not yet having read their copies of the feminist manifesto, heroically offer women and children first dibs on available lifeboat seats.

1915: A second ship, eerily similar to the Titanic, sinks. But this time it's every man for himself!

The makeup of the passengers and crew on both of them was similar, and the sinkings happened relatively close in time, the Titanic in 1912 and the Lusitania in 1915.

In their analysis, the researchers studied passenger and survivor lists from both ships, and considered gender, age, ticket class, nationality and familial relationships with other passengers. The differences emerged after a closer look at the survival rates.

On the Titanic, the study found, children were 14.8 percent more likely to survive adults, while on the Lusitania they were 5.3 percent less likely to do so. And women on the Titanic were 53 percent more likely to survive than men, while on the Lusitania they were 1.1 percent less likely to do so.

The implication, Dr. Torgler said, is that on the Titanic, male passengers went out of their way to help women and children.

From chivalry to "Dude, where's my lifeboat" in just three years. You've got to hand it to those horrid feminists... They're fast. And apparently quite effective.

There are two inescapable conclusions we can draw from this sad story:

1. We womynfolk have far more power than we ever suspected.
2. When bad things happen, it's a fair bet that Republicans are involved.

************

Update: Smitty eloquently defends a vanishing idea - we are all responsible for our own actions:

The traditional, mutually supportive roles of women and men are as simple as 2+2=4. Just because Andrea Dworkin and company came along and contended that arithmetic was an oppressive patriarchal regime, and that 2+2=5 is every bit as emotionally satisfying as the correct answer, does not an excuse make.

I am reminded of a quote from one of my favorite movies:

A king may move a man, a father may claim a son, but that man can also move himself, and only then does that man truly begin his own game. Remember that howsoever you are played or by whom, your soul is in your keeping alone, even though those who presume to play you be kings or men of power. When you stand before God, you cannot say, "But I was told by others to do thus," or that virtue was not convenient at the time. This will not suffice.

I'm also reminded of one of my favorite definitions of masculinity:

Manliness," he says, "is a quality that causes individuals to stand for something."

... Manliness, says Mansfield, thrives on drama, conflict, risk, and exploits: "War is hell but men like it." Manliness is often aggressive, but when the aggression is tied to the concept of honor, it transcends mere animal spiritedness. Allied with reason, as in Socrates, manliness finds its highest expression.

Manliness cannot be taken from a man, but it may be voluntarily surrendered. I thank God each day for men who utterly refuse to be defined by the actions of others.

Posted by Cassandra at January 18, 2012 12:10 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4011

Comments

I was reading this morning about the captain of the cruise liner and his 2nd and 3rd in command. He claims he tripped and fell into the lifeboat, and somehow his 2nd and 3rd in command ended up there with him.

My first thought was, "oh for pity sake, quit trying to excuse yourself and accept your punishment like a man." Which immediately put me into a furious circular tail chase.

Just for the record, on both ships there were older women who gave up their seats on the lifeboats to stay with their men. Sterling character traits can be equally distributed between the sexes.

Posted by: Allen at January 18, 2012 12:14 PM

The mystery movie quote is from Kingdom of Heaven, according to IMDB. Never saw it, but might have to now.

Posted by: Sig at January 18, 2012 12:27 PM


Just for the record, on both ships there were older women who gave up their seats on the lifeboats to stay with their men. Sterling character traits can be equally distributed between the sexes.

Thanks, Allen. I was curious about that but hadn't followed the story closely enough to find out.

Sig, Kingdom of Heaven is one of my favorite movies. There are definitely bits of annoying PC blather in the movie, but despite that I rather liked the director's cut (full version). It filled in some gaps in the story.

Posted by: Cassandra at January 18, 2012 12:31 PM

Just for the record, on both ships there were older women who gave up their seats on the lifeboats to stay with their men.

Last weekend I was at the movies and saw a preview for Titanic in 3-D. I haven't seen the original, but there flashed a split-second picture of a very well-dressed gray-haired couple lying on their bed and clutching each other as water swirled into the compartment and around their bed. Instant tears sprung to my eyes--it couldn't have been more clear that they planned to die in each others' arms. It still makes my eyes a bit damp to think of it likely being quite true-to-life...

Posted by: FbL at January 18, 2012 01:41 PM

That was my favorite part of a movie that I otherwise hadn't much use for.

I clicked through to the article about the Lusitania. Its thesis was that the big difference was that the Lusitania went down in 18 minutes. Not enough time for social mores to kick in; maybe not even enough time for the best-meaning men in the world to have much effect in saving people weaker than themselves. But the current fiasco was more of a slow-motion, Titanic-like affair, wasn't it? Or should we consider how fast the ship rolled over?

Posted by: Texan99 at January 19, 2012 02:27 PM

I'm glad you asked that question, T99. I was waiting for someone to do so.

The thought process behind my "causal connection" silliness at the beginning of this post was to illustrate the weakness of a post hoc argument that explictly tries to link events for which there are multiple other explanations (and which may not be related at all).

I sort of expected the formulation to be attacked on the merits, but maybe it was too obvious that I was being sarcastic :p

Most articles I saw that blamed feminism didn't bother to present any kind of explicit argument for linking feminism to what happened on that ship. It was what I'd call a suggested or asserted argument, which I think attempts to slip under the radar of conscious thought or criticism by appealing to emotion.

Obama does this - a LOT. It's one of his signature tactics, and because he's always so purposely vague, rebutting him is rather like trying to nail Jello to a wall. Obviously, the tactic is extremely effective.

Posted by: Cassandra at January 19, 2012 02:37 PM

Second post after seeing you were back, and I think I might be kicking the hornets nest.

I absolutely agree with your conclusion, but I'm not sure I can agree with how you got there.

Your comments seems to imply some level of consious thought is occuring, during or before: "Let's punish those darn feminists, We'll show them". I don't think that anything like that happened/is happening.

In times of stress people revert to their level of "training". I put those in scare-quotes because by-in-large people don't practice abandoning ships, getting in car wrecks, fleeing burning houses and the like. But you see it all the time in athletes. They develop a bad habit in their technique and even when they make an effort to correct it, they can do it perfectly in practice where they can be calm, think, and concentrate. But put them in a close game and they go right back to the old habits. It takes a lot of time and consistency to make the correction an automatic unthinking response.

I do think that our society today does a worse job in providing that time and consistency of a sense of duty to others compared to our past and so it is to that "me first" attitude that people more easily revert to. This isn't women's fault, it isn't feminism's fault. It's not even "Grievance Feminism's" fault.

While "Grievance Feminism" has complained about things like opening doors for women being oppressive and patriarchal, in my 34 years, I have never actually run across a woman who has even so much as given me a dirty look for doing so. They just don't have that much power.

And while the treatment of women is a part of "male duty and honor" there is a helk lot more to it than just that. Commitment, honor, integrity, and sacrifice don't fly out the window because the other person also has a penis.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at January 19, 2012 04:58 PM

I think you're right, YAG. It's not so much that boys are being raised without a duty to protect women as that all children are more likely to hear "You poor baby, nothing is your fault, you just sit there while we bring you extra help." In a crisis, what should we expect people to do but fall apart and adopt, at best, a me-first attitude? (To the extent they adopt anything more constructive than freezing in the headlights, that is.)

Women used to be raised to assume they could hang back and let the guys take care of it. Now guys are being raised that way, too.

Posted by: Texan99 at January 23, 2012 04:01 PM

"You poor baby, nothing is your fault, you just sit there while we bring you extra help."

I'm not sure it's so much that as it is really just neglect.

There's an element of active effort: "Why did you confront that bully? Why didn't you just tell a teacher? Now *you're* going to get a week of detention for fighting". The message is clear. Don't get involved. Helping people is someone else's problem.

But I think most of it is that we just don't bother teaching it anymore. It's a noble idea but it's passe: just keep your nose down and stay out of other peoples business. You worry about you and let them worry about them.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at January 23, 2012 04:50 PM

There's another possible response to authorities that punish the just and righteous. It is to handle these matters out of school: to cease to rely on the government to deal with issues of justice. From what little I see of popular culture, that is an idea that is gaining in popularity.

Posted by: Grim at January 23, 2012 07:10 PM

"There's another possible response to authorities that punish the just and righteous. It is to handle these matters out of school: to cease to rely on the government to deal with issues of justice. From what little I see of popular culture, that is an idea that is gaining in popularity."

Hmmm, my observations leave me with a similar perception in trends. Must be the company I keep...

Posted by: bthun at January 23, 2012 07:58 PM

Well, yanno....the header does say, "Company...villainous company, hath been the spoil of me."

Although, personally, I'd say you aren't so much spoiled as "well-fermented"....not that that's necessarily a *baaad* thing.
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at January 23, 2012 09:21 PM

"Although, personally, I'd say you aren't so much spoiled as "well-fermented"....not that that's necessarily a *baaad* thing. 0>;~}"

Well thanks for that generous allowance DL. =;^}

*The Hun raises his glass of JD-neat in salute towards DL's virtual direction, repeats the hoist/salute as he steers the bow towards N by NE, M'lady, finally saluting the rest of the Villains what makes up said company, and then retires to a suitable bench for sleeping and fermenting*

Posted by: bthun at January 24, 2012 12:27 AM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)