Do you think that the virulent form of feminism that now infects western culture was spawned in the late 1960’s with the likes of Steinem, Dworkin, et al? Was the first wave about suffrage and equal opportunity, and a handful of other things that most people would embrace in the name of human rights?
Think again.
Ninety eight years ago today, the Titanic sank into the cold Atlantic depths, taking down most of the passengers and crew, and mostly the male ones at that. Women and children first was the final law of the sea enforced by the officers of the doomed vessel, just before the captain went down with the ship.
One week later, the feminists of the time gave their take on the situation, as reported by the New York Times.
SUFFRAGETTES DENY CHIVALRY ON TITANIC
___________________________________________
“Women First†is the Universal Rule says
Sylvia Pankhurst- and This is no Exception
____________________________________________
SACRIFICE IS SCOFFED AT
_____________________________________________
Jangling Note Disgusts English Nation, Proud of Way Men Died
On Sinking Steamship
______________________________________________
Special cable to the New York Times
London. April 20
These verses, by a ready poet, appeared in a London paper Wednesday.
Women and children first
That is the law of the sea
The law that holds unwritten
Should ever the need arise
The laborers wife in steerage
The lady of high degree
Go down to the boats together
Wherever the old flag flies
That is the privilege granted
To man that he stand aside
For thus he may prove his manhood
By looking death in the face.
It has been a matter of profound contentment that the records of the Titanic disaster show that the officers and crew did their duty in the manner of the best traditions of the British Merchant Marine Service.
That the male passengers, among whom the greatest portion were Americans would prove equal to the strain was also never doubted here. And while it was held possible that here and there a man may have momentarily lost his self control, it is noted that the male passengers magnificently supported the officers and crew, and the general opinion here, based on details so far in hand, is that no woman would seem to have been left aboard the sinking ship except by her own deliberate resolve to share the fate of those she loved.
To this story of epic grandeur and infinite pathos, of human courage confronting shattering disaster with the serenity of a man’s unselfishness triumphing over fear of death, there has been added one jangling note, that by the militant suffragettes of England.
Mis [sic] Sylvia Pankhurst, sister of Cristabel, was asked how the remarkable proportion of women saved accorded with the suffragette theory that chivalry was dead. She said she did not want to minimize in any way the gallantry displayed, but it must be born in mind that it was the universal rule in the cases of shipwreck that women and children should be saved first and that the instance of the Titanic was not the only one in which that was carried out. It was merely a matter of rule. There was no special chivalry attached to it.
Other suffragette leaders expressed views of a similar nature. Mrs. Mansel said the new woman “would rather be without exceptional treatment.†Mrs. Cecil Chapman declared that a suffragist would have preferred to meet her fate alongside her husband. She added, “I would a thousand times rather go down with the ship under similar circumstances.â€Â
Another said that women, though saved through the noble sacrifice of men, were in the equally hard position of watching the ship go down. Mrs. Drummond said that each boatload of persons taken off a sinking would consist of half men and half women.
So much feelings were aroused by these and other kindred declarations that the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies deemed it incumbent to issue a notice profoundly regretting that certain Suffragists should have made the Titanic disaster a matte of controversy.
That the women of England are far from sharing the views of some suffragette leaders is amply proved by the response they have made to the Daily Mail’s appeal to them for contributions on behalf of the Titanic’s dead.
Thirty five thousand dollars has been sent to this paper by the women of England, to whom it appealed. The subscribers include Queen Alexandra and four princesses.
(List of contributors followed)
One could write a volume on the parallels between what we call modern gender feminism and the first wave. Primary among those comparisons would be the assumed insignificance of male life, and the hysterically over inflated notion of the woman’s experience as compared to men’s.
After all, if we can endure hearing modern politicians like Hillary Clinton utter depraved remarks like “Women are the real victims of war,†should we be less shocked to hear someone say that watching a ship go down is worse than aspirating icy saltwater till the life is snuffed out of you?
It appears that the only real difference between the suffragettes and modern feminists is that there was dissent from their hateful leaders that was publicly expressed.
Perhaps that was in a time that the women’s movement was finding it’s identity and going through a small battle between the voices of reason and the voices of malice and contempt.
But that was then, and as we all know, the latter won that one in a shut out.
Sign the Titanic Day Petition here.
Paul Elam is the Editor-in-Chief for Men’s News Daily and the publisher of A Voice for Men
