If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Uproxx)   A Wall Street Journal columnist wonders if the women who were saved by men in the Aurora shootings were worth the sacrifice. Sounds like this guy would make for an AWESOME boyfriend   (uproxx.com) divider line 330
    More: Sick, Wall Street Journal, morning, George Costanza, shootings, James Taranto  
•       •       •

17366 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jul 2012 at 11:34 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



330 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-25 12:12:04 PM

Latinwolf: Marine1: You know, I'd like to say the sacrifice by those men proves that chivalry isn't dead... but... they sacrificed themselves and died.

Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?

So by asking this you are claiming that if your girlfriend died on your behalf, you'd never again get involved with another woman.


No, I'm just wondering. I have no idea what I'd do, actually. Just sort of a deeper question I thought of.
 
2012-07-25 12:13:06 PM

Latinwolf: Marine1: You know, I'd like to say the sacrifice by those men proves that chivalry isn't dead... but... they sacrificed themselves and died.

Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?

So by asking this you are claiming that if your girlfriend died on your behalf, you'd never again get involved with another woman.


Well, not that weekend.
 
2012-07-25 12:13:28 PM

A Fark Handle: equal rights, equal shiat. ladies save yourselves. i'm getting the fark out of there.


Not for the woman I love. She means something.
 
2012-07-25 12:13:40 PM
OK, this is what he said.

"I hope the girls whose boyfriends died to save them were worthy of the sacrifice."

Had not seen the actual quote in the thread. Repulsive, but not exactly the worst thing ever on Twitter, which seems to be what people are saying it is.
 
2012-07-25 12:14:51 PM

KiwDaWabbit: Like his article or dislike his article, it's all the same because now you know of him.


Eh, not really. Most of us will forget about him tomorrow when the next race thread gets greened.
 
2012-07-25 12:15:05 PM
Magorn
I read this at an impressionable age. and while I've grown up to disagree with
much that the author held sacred, this bit has become somehow integral to my own moral code:

... "Patriotism" is a way of saying "Women and children first." And that no one can force a man to feel this way. Instead he must embrace it freely. I want to tell about one such man. He wore no uniform and no one knows his name, or where he came from; all we know is what he did.

In my home town 60 years ago when I was a child, my mother and father used to take me and my brothers and sisters out to Swope Park on Sunday afternoons. It was a wonderful place for kids, with picnic grounds and lakes and a zoo. But a railroad line cut straight through it.

One Sunday afternoon a young married couple were crossing these tracks. She apparently did not watch her step, for she managed to catch her foot in the frog of a switch to a siding and could not pull it free. Her husband stopped to help her.

But try as they might they could not get her foot loose. While they were working at it, a tramp showed up, walking the ties. He joined the husband in trying to pull the young woman's foot loose. No luck.

Out of sight around the curve a train whistled. Perhaps there would have been time to run and flag it down, perhaps not. In any case both men went right ahead trying to pull her free - and the train hit them.

The wife was killed, the husband was mortally injured and died later, the tramp was killed − and testimony showed that neither man made the slightest effort to save himself.

The husband's behavior was heroic − but what we expect of a husband toward his wife: his right, and his proud privilege, to die for his woman. But what of this nameless stranger? Up to the very last second he could have jumped clear. He did not. He was still trying to save this woman he had never seen before in his life, right up to the very instant the train killed him. And that's all we'll ever know about him.

THIS is how a man dies.

This is how a MAN...lives!


Since you didn't attribute it,I will,that's Robert Heinlein.
 
2012-07-25 12:15:42 PM

misanthropologist: Kuroshin: A man sacrificing himself to protect a woman is such chivalric bullshiat. Just further proves how women are objectified and seen as weaker and not as capable as men. Sexism at its finest! She doesn't need your protection, Mr. He Man. At least these guys pulled themselves out of the gene pool so they can't infect future generations with their perpetuation of the Patriarchy.



/rolling

Unless you (correctly) see chivalry as a cultural practice. The fact that these guys apparently died protecting their women, and the fact that it's being widely reported, means that those ideas are being reproduced and promoted. Even though they won't pass along (any more) genetic material, they've done their part for cultural reproduction, and the perpetuation of Patriarchy.


Ooooo, neat twist! I like it!

No bites for me though, so I give myself a 0/10. I blame lack of coffee.
 
2012-07-25 12:18:51 PM
Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?

I think I'd feel like I owed it to him to mourn and move on. What point would it have served for him to sacrifice his life for mine if I refuse to live it, and being in a loving, committed relationship is part of living, IMO.
 
2012-07-25 12:19:37 PM

Marine1: You know, I'd like to say the sacrifice by those men proves that chivalry isn't dead... but... they sacrificed themselves and died.

Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?


It would take me a VERY long time to consider loving another man if Mr. Exeter did that. I think I'd feel too guilty and I probably would never take my wedding ring off. So, no. I don't think I could love again but I can't say that with any certainty. Folks used to re marry out of necessity all the time.
/Mr. Exter is the type of man to give that very sacrifice.
//we'd probably both die or get hurt trying to save the other.
 
2012-07-25 12:19:52 PM

Marine1: Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?


I would imagine that if my significant other sacrificed himself he would want me to live my life to the fullest and be happy. Living your life to the fullest means that the option for falling in love again is a possibility.

I know if I sacrificed my life for a partner I wouldn't want him to spend the rest of his life alone and unhappy just because he felt he 'owed' me something.
 
2012-07-25 12:21:27 PM
Well, to be fair, Twitter does have TWIT right in the name, so you pretty much know what you're getting...
 
2012-07-25 12:21:39 PM

Marine1: A Fark Handle: equal rights, equal shiat. ladies save yourselves. i'm getting the fark out of there.

Not for the woman I love. She means something.


well, there's your problem right there...
 
2012-07-25 12:22:13 PM
Well if it was the first date... she's taking the bullet.

/or first year
/douche
 
2012-07-25 12:25:40 PM

Marine1: You know, I'd like to say the sacrifice by those men proves that chivalry isn't dead... but... they sacrificed themselves and died.

Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?


I think honestly, I could eventually move on to love again. If my boyfriend were to sacrifice his life for me, that is an unbelievable display of love that sticks with a gal forever. But comparing all future men to that one act just isn't feasible in my mind. I believe I could find a new love that understands that no matter what happens I will always carry that special connection to my dead boyfriend with whom I owe my life.

But that's just me.
 
2012-07-25 12:25:50 PM

A Fark Handle: Marine1: A Fark Handle: equal rights, equal shiat. ladies save yourselves. i'm getting the fark out of there.

Not for the woman I love. She means something.

well, there's your problem right there...


I'm... well... I'm not seeing the problem.
 
2012-07-25 12:25:57 PM

Marine1: You know, I'd like to say the sacrifice by those men proves that chivalry isn't dead... but... they sacrificed themselves and died.

Honest question for the Farkettes here: if your boyfriend/husband sacrificed himself like that, would you be open to the idea of loving again someday? Or would that sacrifice create a bar that just couldn't be reached by other men?


Oh there is already a bar, it would just shove it up another 30 feet.

I already know that if anything happened to my husband I would only marry a guy that would respect the memory of my first husband. That means give me space on my original wedding anniversary and the anniversary of his death and expect me to wear my original rings on those days in his honor.
 
2012-07-25 12:26:03 PM
Well, he's not getting laid for a while, not that he was in the first place.
 
2012-07-25 12:26:33 PM

Mr. Titanium: They were clearly worth it to the men who made the sacrifice. And that's all that really matters, isn't it?


In before

"Took a bullet for her, still friendzoned."

/Forever Alone
//aisle seat
 
2012-07-25 12:26:57 PM

ArkAngel: Private_Citizen: Well, the GOP has achieved their holy grail: A moral justification for Greed.

He's just going for the brass ring: A moral justification for being a misogynist and a coward.

I would think he would be a feminist. How dare these men think their women need them for protection?!


Indeed, and even if men feel the need to do stupid stuff, what happened to women and children first?

Let us not forget that protecting women over men only makes sense in small communities. With thousands of people living in a single small town there is no danger of extinction if 12 women doe instead of 12 men.

Saving someone you love is okay
Don't go expecting me to die so some unknown women can live just cause she can pop out babies.
 
2012-07-25 12:28:30 PM

KrustyKitten: I wonder what his FARK handle is.


Obviously below his standards. Sharp knees.
 
2012-07-25 12:28:32 PM
Reminds me of the time when Fark got into a shiatstorm about a father of 2 risking his life saving a stranger in the subway.

A good chunk of Farkers said that the father show not have risked his life for a stranger when there are two daughters who could have grown up without a father had he failed. Obviously, this is different, but it shows that even people here make value judgments over life-or-death situations. Although it's always after the fact.
 
2012-07-25 12:28:45 PM

keypusher: It was a great paper before he bought it, it's a great paper now.

It was a derpy paper before he bought it, it's a derpy paper now.


That could be, I suppose. I rarely read the editorial section when I had the dead tree version, I just read the news and the business and economics articles.
 
2012-07-25 12:29:27 PM
He's only pissed because no one sacrifced themselves to save the "hot" hockey chick.
 
2012-07-25 12:31:25 PM
I risked my life to save my wife's life this weekend, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies . . .

/actually true
 
2012-07-25 12:31:37 PM
This "tough question" is one that should have never been asked. Misogynist jokes, sexism, and feminism aside. These men, acted like men. Regardless of whether they were boyfriend/girlfriend, husband/wife, fark buddies, casual acquaintances, or didn't even know each other, they did what men are supposed to do and protected the women and children near them.

Sure their girlfriends COULD have been cheating. Sure they COULD have intended to break up with them after the movie. Who knows? That's not for us to ask. These men were probably under the assumption that those girls liked/loved them as much as they liked/loved their girls. They did what any real man would do in the same situation, and protected those they cared about.

So Mr. Wallstreet Journal can kindly take his "tough question" head back to his moms basement(where he lives), write it down on a piece of paper, and shove that "tough question" right up his own ass. And I hope that paper cuts his anus the hell up.
 
2012-07-25 12:32:50 PM
fark the cure for cancer and the light bulb. Those ladies need to kick off there shoes and get back in the kitchen. Those samiches aren't going to make themselves.

See, arent outdated gender roles fun?
 
2012-07-25 12:33:26 PM

Private_Citizen: Well, the GOP has achieved their holy grail: A moral justification for Greed.

He's just going for the brass ring: A moral justification for being a misogynist and a coward.


3.bp.blogspot.com

You wrote to me once, listing the four chief virtues: Wisdom, justice, fortitude and temperance. As I read the list, I knew I had none of them. But I have other virtues, father. Ambition. That can be a virtue when it drives us to excel. Resourcefulness, courage, perhaps not on the battlefield, but... there are many forms of courage. Devotion, to my family and to you. But none of my virtues were on your list. Even then it was as if you didn't want me for your son.
 
2012-07-25 12:33:35 PM

miniflea: What matters is doing the right thing when push comes to shove, and that's what a lot of those guys did. Except that one that abandoned his pregnant girlfriend or whatever.


You mean the one who got shot in the eye? He's still in grave condition.
 
2012-07-25 12:33:41 PM
How come women don't do this for their men?
 
2012-07-25 12:35:11 PM

inglixthemad: Coolfusis: As much as the dude is a douche for saying that, it makes me wonder what it'd be like for one of those girls were they cheating on their boyfriend at the time. Can you imagine having to live with that?

If they lack the conscience enough to cheat, they don't have the conscience to care after the fact.


Was trying to say this.
 
2012-07-25 12:35:17 PM

A Fark Handle: equal rights, equal shiat. ladies save yourselves. i'm getting the fark out of there.


Jamie, is that you? Congrats on the engagement.
 
2012-07-25 12:35:17 PM

doubled99: How come women don't do this for their men?


Well we do have a habit of being shorter and having less body mass. It's a little more difficult to for women to be a body shield. Maybe men should now make sure they always take two women on a date so they can have better coverage?
 
2012-07-25 12:35:50 PM

Virtue: TheGreenMonkey [TotalFark]


Smartest
Funniest

2012-07-25 12:01:30 PM

LeGnome: Every woman's a feminist until the shooting starts.


I like this comment because from what I've seen it's at least partially true. Not in a literal sense however, but in little everyday things, like opening a door for a woman.

In my experience women want respect, validation, and equal treatment. Yet in much of the time they still want to be treated as inferior - like having a man open a door for them. Chivalry is an out-dated concept in that it demeans women into thinking they must have a protector to handle the dangers of society that one encounters every day in life.

I am glad these women were saved as a result of the sacrifice of their boyfriends, but I do wonder if they really understand what it means. I don't expect them to be celibate for the rest of their lives or to never have another relationship but I do think they should honor the sacrifice, And they certainly should not hold it as a standard for any future mates.



If men and women are equal then why weren't there 3 women who died defending their boyfriends?


they will be just fine, they have shown that they can pick a good man and will do so again they will go on and have good live and a tale to tell their kids.
 
2012-07-25 12:36:03 PM
Some of the people who got killed on 9/11 were pieces of shiat and their families were glad.
 
2012-07-25 12:36:32 PM

gunga galunga: James!: His great grandfather Giuseppe Taranto was shot on the Titanic whilst throwing women and children overboard to make room for himself on a life boat.

Did that really happen? The Googles do nothng.


Let me tell you about my date with Taylor Rain...
 
2012-07-25 12:37:56 PM
OK...I'll bite. To me this really does give rise to an interesting set of questions.

Are the lives of women worth more then those of a man?

If so, by what measure?

If you answered yes and are thinking what I think you are thinking, are you reducing the value of a woman to her biological capacity?

If so, then do the biological variants of men (increased strength or something) also come into play when making comparisons for other questions?

These questions are asked as part of a strictly heuristic analysis wherein estimates of individual worth are made from a societal vs. a personal perspective.


I'm curious about what some of the farkettes might think here because, I dunno. Were I them, this entire discussion would be an uncomfortable setback in terms of gender progress.

My own instincts would be to protect a woman. It wouldn't be rational, I just would. The fact that I would says something unsettling about my view of women...that they need protecting. Would a woman looking at this feel that the men SHOULD have sacrificed themselves for those women? If so, why?

In other words, this guy is a doucher...no doubt. But it IS an interesting subject to posit, even if only to engender some self-analysis amongst those who read it.

Also, the misogyny label might be a bit off. Given the source, I doubt it, but its possible. He might argue that rather than hating women, he actually believes them to be the equal of any man and therefor do not need to be a vassal to masculine chivalry.

/yes. I'm trolling.
//but I really am interested in the conflict which this kind of thinking engenders. (le mot juste)
 
2012-07-25 12:38:05 PM

Snargi: This columnist was in the theater. He was saved when he pulled the 6-year-old in front him.

/douchebag


i117.photobucket.com

"I'm Greg Stilson and I approve this defense measure."
 
2012-07-25 12:38:21 PM
So...what if a man had saved his boyfriend? Or his brother? Or his dad? Or even his buddy? Would he be as heroic as the men who saved women?
 
2012-07-25 12:39:31 PM

midigod: miniflea: What matters is doing the right thing when push comes to shove, and that's what a lot of those guys did. Except that one that abandoned his pregnant girlfriend or whatever.

You mean the one who got shot in the eye? He's still in grave condition.


Different guy.
 
2012-07-25 12:39:47 PM
Considering his fat butt, he is going to be at the back of the pack when people start running out. Unless his girl friend stepped up and protected him he would eat a few rounds for sure. If he had been there, people might be talking about how he bravely moved between the gunman and shielded them. The truth would be he just couldn't get his round ass rolling.
 
2012-07-25 12:40:25 PM
Hmm. Ive never totally understood the "men have to die first" mentality. No one can really say how they would behave in such a situation until confronted with it. I imagine I would try to save my wife first (I think shed be trying to do the same for me), but once she was clear I may very well pull a Costanza. I realize it may be a carry over from a time when the women needed to stay alive to maintain population but those days are WAY past.

Do most of you feel that men should sacrifice themselves for women? Aren't people who believe this actually misandrists?
 
2012-07-25 12:40:30 PM
blog.cleveland.com

The highest form of patriotic
 
2012-07-25 12:41:03 PM

Crotchrocket Slim: gunga galunga: James!: His great grandfather Giuseppe Taranto was shot on the Titanic whilst throwing women and children overboard to make room for himself on a life boat.

Did that really happen? The Googles do nothng.

Let me tell you about my date with Taylor Rain...


Did you hit "add comment" too soon? What about your date with Taylor Rain?
 
2012-07-25 12:41:05 PM
Do you people even know how many injuries resulted from these heroic men falling on sharp knees?
 
2012-07-25 12:41:22 PM

A Leaf in Fall: So...what if a man had saved his boyfriend? Or his brother? Or his dad? Or even his buddy? Would he be as heroic as the men who saved women?


Anyone who sacrifices themselves for another, regardless of any individual defining characteristics, is a hero in my eyes.
 
2012-07-25 12:41:43 PM

Frantic Freddie: Magorn
I read this at an impressionable age. and while I've grown up to disagree with
much that the author held sacred, this bit has become somehow integral to my own moral code:

... "Patriotism" is a way of saying "Women and children first." And that no one can force a man to feel this way. Instead he must embrace it freely. I want to tell about one such man. He wore no uniform and no one knows his name, or where he came from; all we know is what he did.

In my home town 60 years ago when I was a child, my mother and father used to take me and my brothers and sisters out to Swope Park on Sunday afternoons. It was a wonderful place for kids, with picnic grounds and lakes and a zoo. But a railroad line cut straight through it.

One Sunday afternoon a young married couple were crossing these tracks. She apparently did not watch her step, for she managed to catch her foot in the frog of a switch to a siding and could not pull it free. Her husband stopped to help her.

But try as they might they could not get her foot loose. While they were working at it, a tramp showed up, walking the ties. He joined the husband in trying to pull the young woman's foot loose. No luck.

Out of sight around the curve a train whistled. Perhaps there would have been time to run and flag it down, perhaps not. In any case both men went right ahead trying to pull her free - and the train hit them.

The wife was killed, the husband was mortally injured and died later, the tramp was killed − and testimony showed that neither man made the slightest effort to save himself.

The husband's behavior was heroic − but what we expect of a husband toward his wife: his right, and his proud privilege, to die for his woman. But what of this nameless stranger? Up to the very last second he could have jumped clear. He did not. He was still trying to save this woman he had never seen before in his life, right up to the very instant the train killed him. And that's all we'll ever know about him.

THIS is how ...


I figured on Fark recognizing RAH quotes was almost a given. But Yeah his speech tot he Naval Academy called "the Pragmatics of Patriotism"
 
2012-07-25 12:42:16 PM

Magnetar: Some of the people who got killed on 9/11 were pieces of shiat and their families were glad.


I know of one that wasn't killed.
 
2012-07-25 12:42:28 PM

gunga galunga: Snargi: This columnist was in the theater. He was saved when he pulled the 6-year-old in front him.

/douchebag

[i117.photobucket.com image 320x236]

"I'm Greg Stilson and I approve this defense measure."


Dangit! Spent too long hunting down the baby picture! Good call.
 
2012-07-25 12:43:11 PM
They could have been dating briefly, the girl could have been cheating, they could have saved a complete stranger; either way that's the most heroic thing anyone could do.
 
2012-07-25 12:43:58 PM

Prevailing Wind: OK...I'll bite. To me this really does give rise to an interesting set of questions.

Are the lives of women worth more then those of a man?

If so, by what measure?

If you answered yes and are thinking what I think you are thinking, are you reducing the value of a woman to her biological capacity?

If so, then do the biological variants of men (increased strength or something) also come into play when making comparisons for other questions?

These questions are asked as part of a strictly heuristic analysis wherein estimates of individual worth are made from a societal vs. a personal perspective.


I'm curious about what some of the farkettes might think here because, I dunno. Were I them, this entire discussion would be an uncomfortable setback in terms of gender progress.

My own instincts would be to protect a woman. It wouldn't be rational, I just would. The fact that I would says something unsettling about my view of women...that they need protecting. Would a woman looking at this feel that the men SHOULD have sacrificed themselves for those women? If so, why?

In other words, this guy is a doucher...no doubt. But it IS an interesting subject to posit, even if only to engender some self-analysis amongst those who read it.

Also, the misogyny label might be a bit off. Given the source, I doubt it, but its possible. He might argue that rather than hating women, he actually believes them to be the equal of any man and therefor do not need to be a vassal to masculine chivalry.

/yes. I'm trolling.
//but I really am interested in the conflict which this kind of thinking engenders. (le mot juste)


I don't feel women NEED protecting, but I believe protection is part of the relationship dynamic between men and women. Biologically women have the babies, and men are meant to protect them because of that. Hence, in my opinion, the physical differences(strength, height, etc) between men and women. It's the base hunter/gatherer mentality at work, and I don't believe that idea is inherently misogynistic. It's like any job, you pick the right person for the right kind of work. Women, physically, are typically built as gatherers being weaker strength wise and smaller in stature.

I'm right there with you though. Regardless of how irrational it may be, my instincts would be to protect the women and children around me. It's instinctual, which makes me think it's something that goes beyond just "being raised that way."
 
Displayed 50 of 330 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report