Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Right on sister, first up against the wall come the ʁƏvolution!! ;-)


It really was a long time ago and probably not worth getting all class war hot under the collar about.


It is in any case rather a trite truism to point out that the poor died in greater numbers, but it wasn't some conspiracy.


Poor immigrants had to go through Ellis Island because they were a)immigrants and b)far more likely to be carrying communicable diseases, lice, mangy pets and spoilt meat etc, hence the partitioning of the ship.

The rich folk would have had their papers and health documents in order, but would have, at any rate, been more likley to be tourists rather than migrants anyway.

It's the same reason it takes you half an hour to get through JFK airport, with your tourist visa and prebooked hotel and it takes Pyotr Probotkin from Moldova with nothing sorted out, the best part of a day (if he's not turned back).


As it happen I seem to share the name of some dodgy Colombian carel type and inevitably spend a couple of hours being grilled if I travel on my Spanish passport :(

EVERYBODY forgets the Goldfish.


An admittedly small bowl of Goldfish in the Upper Class Bar (just behind the Tanqueray), whilst hundred of people drowned around them, those Goldfish had a glimpse of impending freedom.


The bowl slipped along the shelf, scattering bottles and cocktail umbrellas, easing the Goldfish toward liberation.


Finally, their too confined prison slipped into the infinite ocean and the Goldfish swam free, free, free.


Free into the salty sea-water, not good for Goldfish. Not good at all.


A tragedy.

LOL Michael. That isn't in Walter Lords book.....an oversight perhaps?


I agree El Pipe that class was incidental rather than a conscious conspiracy....and simply a reflection of the times. Far more true to say would be that there was no practised evacuation plan in place. No lifeboat drill had been practised and what is evident from Walter Lord's book is that many of the crew were playing it by ear. The first lifeboats lowered were full of men because there were no women on the upper deck. That is because in an effort to prevent panic...no sense of urgency was communicated to the passengers, even if they were told the true gravity of the situation. Basically everything that could have gone wrong for the Titanic did.


But we saw this recently too with the Costa Concordia. Passengers were not assembled on deck or lifeboats lowered until it was too late to do so. When a ship takes on water, passengers should be sent onto deck immediately....it's the safest place to be. But on the Costa they were initially told to stay in their cabins. Time that could have been spent getting passengers methodically and calmly into lifeboats was wasted.


And I once wrote a letter of complaint after travelling on a P&O ferry in a force 7 gale at night. I saw that the fire doors (which by law should be easy to open) to the life boat decks had chains and padlocks on them! It was quite soon after the Estonia tragedy so ferry safety was high profile. It's this kind of complacency, because passenger ships rarely sink, that lead to unecessary death and poor procedure when something does go wrong.

Yes it is true. Most first class women went to the port side. On the starboard side mostly first class male passengers were gathered. Hence the first boats on the starboard side containing men. There were only 16 lifeboats plus four collapsables. First class passengers had easy access to the lifeboat decks which is why so the majority of those lowered in the lifeboats were first class. In fact, two thirds of the first class passengers survived compared to only a quarter of third class passengers.


I can thoroughly recommend Walter Lord's book. It is thorough and was written at a time when the writer could still collate witness accounts to build what is considered the most thorough and best researched account of the sinking.

Those numbers in full.


file.php?20,file=48653


DJKQ, just as an observation, like, but you seem to be very motivated by this topic?


Do you see it as a case study of the oppression of women and the working class?


I think that would be a valid observation, but it genuinely has little relevance to modern society. There are lots of things that society believed in then that are now only believed by the intellectually challenged.


There's no point in hauling up the stone age as a case study of the challenges facing the British manufacturing industry!

On the subject of the oppression of women on the titanic:


Almost 75% of women passengers on the Titanic were saved, compared with barely 17% of men - and you want to argue about class war? It's a sideshow.


I should also add that only 50% of children were saved - so that means that women were trampling of the bodies of children to save their own arse, whilst the men stood by humming and haaaing about how righteous that was.


To me that's bloody ridiculous.


I don't think you have a better right to survive because you're a woman. What pillock decided that?


So to paraphrase El Pibe - come the revolution let's hope the first against the wall are not the bourgeoisie, but women: just to even up the score a bit.

I was reading a book at the moment which is my only reason for engaging with this thread....stop over reacting!


Here's the breakdown of passengers dead and survived submitted after the disaster....as illustrated in the book I referenced.


First class passengers


Men survived 58

Men died 115

Women survived 139

Women died 5

Children survived 5

Children Died none


Second class passengers


Men survived 13

Men died 147

Women survived 78

Women died 15

Children survived 24

Children Died none


Third class passengers


Men survived 55

Men died 399

Women survived 98

Women died 81

Children survived 25

Children Died 53


Crew


Men survived 189

Men died 686

Women survived 21

Women died 2



I think those figures speak for themselves. That's why I find them interesting. You might want to try reading some research in depth H just once instead of relying on five minute internet searches ;)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-17756036


Assuming that whoever commissioned it had no idea about the anniversary when they did so, this can best be described as ironic and perhaps a little unfortunate.

If it was the 25th anniversary of the Herald of Free Enterprise more sensitivity might be deemed appropriate (in fact that was a month ago, did anyone notice, was it up then?).


But...


Offensive.


Really?


It does beggar belief what offends people these days.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Almost 75% of women passengers on the Titanic were saved, compared with barely 17% of men - and you

> want to argue about class war? It's a sideshow.


Ah... thank you Hugo. All very well to waffle on about class forever, but the rank sexism of 'women first' should be tackled.

To play devils advocate, the first part of the equation in "women and children first" is down to an outmoded view that women are lesser/weaker creatures in need of protection and men are chivalrous and noble.


Thanks to feminism such ludicous stone age thinking has gone for good.


Surely now in such a situation it should be "children first" or at least "pregnant women and children first" shouldn't it?


I'm not sure why Claire form marketing should be automatically assumed to be more worthy and deserving of life than I?

Oh she wins hands down on that one for sure!!!


Here she is, honest guv, celebrating getting our company another filler mention in Your Money Are Belong To Us Weekly.

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/17815065/2/stock-photo-17815065-your-business-victory.jpg

If we were on a sinking ship and it was sinking slowly enough for people to nominate who they'd like to have saved, I would be doomed.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To play devils advocate, the first part of the equation in "women and children first" is down to

> an outmoded view that women are lesser/weaker creatures in need of protection and men are

> chivalrous and noble.


But surely the class structure that DJKQ is talking about is also part of a now outmoded view. You can bet that, on the ship that sank in Italy last year, the first class passengers had no priority for the lifeboats.


You can't argue one outmoded view without the other, else you should argue neither.


> Thanks to feminism such ludicous stone age thinking has gone for good.


Going. But not gone. It still hangs around like a bad smell in too many places. Though I have to say, usually the fault of feeble-minded men, rather than women.

The idea of Women and Children First was only to get them out of the way as they were deemed less (un)able to look after themselves and certainly of absolutely no use in helping anyone else. It was a given, though, that there was plenty of time for all to abandon a vessel and that men would be next and not that 'first' meant only.


Not so much 'chivalry' as "Get the bloody women and kids out of the way so we can abandon this ship in a proper and dignified manner!" (before posing in a windswept manner at the railing for heroic photo- or lithographic prints).


These days I suspect Claire from Marketing would be loudly extolling the virtues of the (overcrowded) aft lifeboats whilst sidling casually towards the (empty) ones at the pointy end.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...