MovieChat Forums > Titanic (1997) Discussion > Men had it rougher. Sorry

Men had it rougher. Sorry


Movie tries to to make you feel sorry for the poor women who have to get married to a guy she might not like, and glosses over how men have to stay behind on the ship and die

reply

If you could pull your head out of your ass for one moment, you'd realize that the people who had it really rough were the poor who were locked below deck to drown!

They all faced horrible deaths, whether they were men, women, or children, knowing that their deaths were deliberate, and that the ship's officers thought it was perfectly okay to kill the poor to save the rich.

reply

Far more men died on the Titanic Than women

reply

There were a lot more men than women on the Titannic, because the crew was all or almost all male. Ten seconds of googling tells me that there were 2200-odd people on the Titannic, 900-odd of whom were crew, and about 700 out of the 900 crew members died... presumably because they were like the steerage passengers and not rich enough to be granted a place in the lifeboats.

Now among the men who were considered worthy of a seat in the lifeboats, yes, there was a bit of social pressure to stay behind and let the women and children have the lifeboat seats, but what would happen to a man who flouted that explanation and took a seat? Diddly-squat, that's what! The odd dirty look or talk behind his back, that's all. And if he claimed to be in one of those boats that left the ship without every seat taken, not even that.

reply


All true, but social convention of that time (and probably still today) would be women and children first, so as long as there were women and children not yet seated, no man would get a lifeboat seat.

reply

I've heard that male passengers blithely took seats, that the legend that all the men honored convention and stayed behind so the women and children could have the lifeboat seats was a myth. If you would care to do some real research, or look up the statistics re the first-class and second-class passengers, you might have some real answers. How many of the 1st/2nd class passengers were adult men, how many were adult women? What percentage of adult 1st/2nd-class male passengers died, as opposed to adult women in the same cohort? If you look up those numbers, you'd know whether male passengers rich enough to be saved really had it worse than the women in the same group.

But I cant be arsed, and I'd bet my 401K that you can't either. Because you're the kind of person who'd rather complain than do any research, because doing research might take away one of your favorite complaints!

So to end my interaction with you, I'm again going to point out that about 75% of the nearly-all-male crew died, and about 100% of the steerage/3rd class passengers died, regardless of age or sex. They died because they weren't rich enough to be considered worth saving.

reply

Wow, having a bad day? I stated a simple fact, and you go off on some tangent about things I didn't even say or believe for that matter.

Okay, so web searching (I assume it's correct - I'm not going to England to check the passenger manifest and compare it to death certificates issued) says that by percentage - 80% of the male passengers who boarded Titanic died while 25% of female passengers died that night. That stat excludes the crew which, like you say, is probably almost exclusively male and would skew the total numbers.

The percentage of men to women were probably the same in first and second class and probably skewed somewhat towards men in third, it still shows a significantly higher proportion of men (less crew) died than women.

It might have been even higher if they didn't manage to screw up the whole lifeboat loading procedure.

reply

Since you came up with statistics that supported your troll hypothesis in a few minutes and didn't provide a link, I'm calling bullshit.

And bugger off troll as well.

reply

Good challenge Otter. I'll endeavour to do the research and come back to you.

But before I do that, please bear in mind that one can highlight TWO things at the same time:

Socioeconomic privilege *and* gender privilege (in this case 'ironically' in favour of women...)

Highlighting that 'women and children' first is innately sexist *against* men, doesn't mitigate one's class anger, Otter.

Unfortunately, today, there's this fucked-up idea that one can't be a socialist/a class justice warrior *without* simping for RICH WHITE women...But NOTHING could be FURTHER from the truth...

reply

So, how many rich men survived in relation to rich women/children, Otter?

And, assuming I'm *right* and hardly any men survived in relation to women, that means one of two things: that there *was* pressure on those men to stay behind in favour of their privileged wives and spoiled daughters, OR, *you're* right, and, thus, those men were *heroic* and did the honourable 'feminist' thing (admittedly, not *my* *egalitarian* feminism, but the *supremacist* 'women first' feminism that is the order of the day), by putting their precious princesses on a pedestal whilst *they* went down with the ship. Either way, surely feminists should be *celebrating* these men... 🤷‍♂️ Or does the 'problematic narrative' supersede any fair-minded praise for their actual heroism?

reply

"Now among the men who were considered worthy of a seat in the lifeboats, yes, there was a bit of social pressure to stay behind and let the women and children have the lifeboat seats, but what would happen to a man who flouted that explanation and took a seat? Diddly-squat, that's what!"

I suggest you educate yourself before you form opinions out of thin air and assumptions.
There was a lot of social pressure and these rules were also enforced by the officers.
One officer, Lightoller, even went so far as to go for women and children ONLY, which he even stated during the inquiries.

We also know there have been gun shots fired as warning shots to keep the crowd under control during a moment where things escalated a little before people came to their senses again. So go tell me more about "diddly-squat" consequences when so many men deliberately refused a seat as long as women and children are on board.

The most famous example of these consequences is Ismay himself, who faced life-long repressions for taking a literally empty, unused seat not even taking that from anyone else, so go figure what people would think or perhaps even do when caught to men taking seats from women and children.

Long story short, the social pressure was immense, and so was the code of honor hundreds of men decided to follow that night, knowing it will mean their death.

reply

In order of who had it worse:

The Poor [women and men] >>> Rich men >>> Rich Women

To the film's credit, and contrary to the OP, the film does address the privileges of the wealthy white women who survived during the scene where Molly Brown chides them for not returning to their drowning husbands (even if I could have done without the implicit pro-Aryan subtext, where dark and red-haired women, i.e. those more likely to be Jewish/ethnic, were portrayed as the 'bad' rich women, and the blonde women were portrayed as the good/innocent 'poor' women, but James Cameron, as brilliant a filmmaker as he is, is a blond white man of Celtic heritage, so it probably stands to reason that he's going to imply that his fellow *Aryans*, including blond, blue-eyed Leo, are the 'victims', whilst *dark* Greek-American Billy Zane is the 'villain' *sigh*... 🙄🤦‍♂️).

Still, like I say, credit to the film for exposing the REAL privilege in the world: RICH WHITE WOMAN privilege. I just wish he'd gone that one step further, and emphasised that it's blond, blue-eyed RICH WHITE WOMEN, who are the MOST privileged of the lot (but, like I say, I can only imagine that Celtic/Scottish-American James Cameron didn't want to offend his blond(e) blue-eyed forebearers... 🙄)

reply

You realize this is pure fiction and none of that happened, right?
No one was locked below decks, that's one of many misconceptions and myths about the sinking but has been debunked a long time ago.

Also, not even in the movie any officer was "perfectly okay to kill poor to save the rich", none of that happened, neither in the real event, nor the movie. The steward(!) shown who refused to unlock the gate was not an officer and aside from that whole thing being made up anyways, his actions hardly speak for the officers and considering the real events that unfolded it is clear that the officers did not differentiate between poor and rich at all during the sinking and the list of survivors proves this further. They did all they could to save as many people as possible, class did not matter one bit during the sinking.

The fact that most people who died were from third class stems solely from the fact that the absolute majority of passengers were third class.

reply

[deleted]

This movie highlighted the social inequities everyone faced, including the rich. Weird way to tell everyone you didn't get it.

reply

Correction, the movie dramatized the events of that night and did not even shy away from fabricating something as nasty as the "locked in poor people" scene, which never happened.

reply

Of course the movie dramatized events, it's a movie. It's kinda redundant to say a movie dramatized real life events. However, over 60% of first class passengers survived, whereas around 40% of second class passengers and under 25% of third class passengers survived. So, despite the fabrication of the locked in scene, the wealthy were still treated to safety above the poor, those are still the facts.

I don't see how this corrects my original statement regardless though.

reply

No, these are not the facts, this is you jumping to conclusions without any deeper subject matter expertise which leads to exactly these kind of nasty accusations and claims that only keep these dumb myths alive.

Ask yourself:
Where were the lifeboats located?
Where were first and second classes located?
And where was third class...?
And where were access points (stairs)?

It was simply a situation of who comes first, gets a seat and is lucky and simply due to location, first and second classes were in luck with basically direct access to lifeboats... and I hope I do not have to point out that this wasn't "on purpose".

Do you seriously believe any officer actively selected the passengers and told some presumed third class woman with a child in her arms to fuck off while he rolls out a red carpet for one of the first class ladies? Do you realize how incredibly dumb that idea is?

What would be their motivation even in a life and death situation where THEY know the ship is doomed and half the people will die due to a lack of boats?

Stop it with this unhinged classism nonsense, it's absurd!
There's not a single piece of evidence that anything like you claimed or implied took place, on the contrary with many first class men refusing seats so anyone else can have it. These men made the ultimate sacrifice and they knew what they were doing. And here you are, 111 years later, shitting on their memory by making shit up.

Just because it's been over a century, doesn't mean you shouldn't treat the topic with respect.

reply

You're being a bit too emotional for me to take anything you say as factual, plus you made no statements of fact based on any available data. But numbers don't lie, and yes I do believe that classism existed 111 years ago, even more than it does now. To pretend otherwise is to ignore history, that's what I would call dumb. Classism isn't stupid, it's cruel, but it does and did exist.

Enough with this fake outrage over men who died over a century ago. You don't care that they died or made any kind of sacrifice, how did this even turn into a "the poor men of the times" spiel when I originally pointed out that everyone in the film suffered, men included? And again, nothing I've stated up to this point has singled out anyone as bad, men or women - I'm just pointing out that, numerically speaking, the first class passengers were saved at higher rates than those who were in second and third class.

reply

"You're being a bit too emotional for me to take anything you say as factual, plus you made no statements of fact based on any available data."

I am not emotional, I am passionate.

Contrary to you, and others here, I keep fabrications and wishful thinking out of my posts and stick to what I know because I research Titanic's history since the 90s. In fact, it's one of my main hobbies and topics of interest.
Everything I said is based on facts.

We KNOW third class passengers had a lower survival rate mainly because they had less fortunate access to life boats. On top of that, many third class passengers realized only later what was happening and thus, they were simply late too get a place in the boats. Read On a Sea of Glass.

What I mentioned about men giving up seats in a boat so others can take it is also completely factual and multiple eye witnesses reported these incidents independently from each another. I was of course referring to the most famous example, Benjamin Guggenheim, one of the richest, most privileged people to ever walk the face of the earth who alas insisted that others, anyone, take his place and not only said so, but helped people into the boats and personally ensured that his servants are safe. His friend did the same. Both perished. And they knew it.
Eva Hart spoke of similar events, of men giving up their chance in a boat so others can take it.

The reason for this was a different understanding of rights, dignity, honor and responsibility compared to today.

Of course classism existed, I never said it didn't. My point is you're applying it wrongly and misunderstand it.
You clearly think of classism as "evil rich people vs. good poor people", but that's a oversimplification of classism that leaves important details and facts about society of the 1900s out that paint a very different picture.

reply

"You don't care that they died or made any kind of sacrifice"
Why do you keep making up lies and such nasty accusations?
I do care indeed, and I do so for 25 years. If you have nothing of value to say, at least skip the lies and slander.

"how did this even turn into a "the poor men of the times" spiel"
The moment you said: "the wealthy were still treated to safety above the poor, those are still the facts."
I mean what else can I say here...

"And again, nothing I've stated up to this point has singled out anyone as bad, men or women - I'm just pointing out that, numerically speaking, the first class passengers were saved at higher rates than those who were in second and third class."
Ah, nice attempt to backpaddle!

Yes, you did single people out. While not men or women - poor and rich.
You can't casually claim the poor where deliberately left to die so the rich can live and then complain and pretend you're outraged over my comments. So much for "fake outrage".

Also, you're leaving out context.
You did not just say "oh hey, first class passengers were saved at higher rates.", you made it clear that they survived at higher rates because of classism and that is simply wrong and why I am so adamant.

Be a better man than you have been so far and just stop. Or continue, what do I care... it's not my conscience.

reply

Kendricks wins by utterly devastating KO

reply


Women had it both easier and harder, depending on her philosophical bent. If a woman wanted to be pilot, or explorer, or build a business into an empire, she would face all sorts of obstacles simply because she was a woman. I don't know if a woman could even take a out a loan without a man signing for her.

She also had the option to raise a family and let the man go out and earn the living for both, and that would be fine as long as her husband respected her as a person and supported her thoroughly. If he didn't, there wasn't a lot a woman could do about an abusive husband.

Men of course had societal pressure to be the breadwinner and provide a home for his wife and children.

reply

"Women had it both easier and harder, depending on her philosophical bent. If a woman wanted to be pilot, or explorer, or build a business into an empire, she would face all sorts of obstacles simply because she was a woman. I don't know if a woman could even take a out a loan without a man signing for her."

100% agreed. *Smart* women. *Black* women. And *poor* women have always had it worse.

To quote Cassandra from a brilliant *feminist* movie: "Who needs brains? They never did a girl any good."

In other words, women with smarts and ambition have it rough, but any dim-witted, spoiled little white girl princess happy to live off daddy's money will ALWAYS have it better than the rest of us. They will always be the golden princess that the rest of us are obliged to simp for, living the life of riley, whilst the rest of us *work*, *die*, and are forced to go to *war*.

"I did not watch my buddies die face down in the muck so that this fucking strumpet, this fucking whore, could waltz around."

reply

" They will always be the golden princess that the rest of us are obliged to simp for, living the life of riley, whilst the rest of us *work*, *die*, and are forced to go to *war*."

Are smart, black and poor women forced to go to war?

reply

Depends on the country - I know some hundreds of thousands of women served in Russia for WWII. But in many other countries, no because for the longest time, women were viewed as incapable and thus weren't allowed to go to war and had no power to change that if they wanted to, which many did want and did fight against - women actively chose to go undercover and fight in both world wars. So technically yes, men were forced to go to war while women weren't - by other men, because they held all the power.

Nowadays, women aren't forced to go to war, but they certainly choose to despite the inbuilt sexism they face in the field.

reply

I love how you still managed to turn women's single greatest perk into "women are being oppressed".

No wonder we are all fucked.

reply

This very short video does the subject great justice:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eaDqJohZM_A

reply

yes this is correct today if titanic happen then we tell all feminist woketard on ship to stay behind with man just to see reaction on there stupid face hahahahhaah

i think all man-hate feminists on titanic suddenly stop becoming feminist when boat start to sinks hahahhahaahha

reply

i think all man-hate feminists on titanic suddenly stop becoming feminist when boat start to sinks hahahhahaahha

^^^
THIS

To date there are no women petitioning the Gov to start the Selective Service for Women.

reply

yes and there are also no fugly feminist woman who want there to be more woman representation in job like collection of sanitarium, sewer job and cleaning keelai's shit stain underwear

reply

A few numbers:

72% of all adult female passengers survived.
91% of all female staff survived.
75% of all women aboard survived.

16% of all adult men survived.
21% of all male staff survived.
19% of all men aboard survived.

78% of all people aboard, where male.

reply

Let's all wait for Otter to somehow rationalise this.

reply