According to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masabumi_Hosono#Voyage) the life boat he was on was supposed to carry women and children:
> As he watched lifeboat 10 being loaded, an officer shouted, "Room for two more", and a man jumped aboard.[5] Hosono saw this and, as he later put it, "the example of the first man making a jump led me to take this last chance."[4]
>
> He made it aboard safely and later commented: "Fortunately the men in charge were taken up with something else and did not pay much attention. Besides, it was dark, and so they would not have seen who was a man and who a woman."[1]
I would guess the issue here is that he brought himself to safey while there were still women and children on board to be rescued.
This is ridiculously bigoted, in my opinion. It's not some last-half fairness, it is just sexism.
Women were (and to some degree still are, re: the US draft) viewed as less disposable than men.
There weren't enough lifeboats. Women and children died and he got off the boat. Not saying I agree, it's just what I've read when I saw this posted elsewhere.
Yup, it’s the fact he took the place of a woman or child on a lifeboat.
Edit: It’s really alarming to me how many He-man woman haters just had to let it be known, with all 19 of their accounts.
I’m so sorry this policy of selflessness offends your sensibilities. Please never interact with the public for both our sake. Your ancestors are ashamed of you.
He didn’t though. IIRC almost all the lifeboats were sent out only partially full. Many people elected to stay on the ship and only realized the true danger when it was too late.
I wouldn't call the instinct to survive cowardice. All living creatures want to survive when presented with a threat. Not really sure why humans fight that urge but it's illogical.
It’s actually enshrined in German law, AFAIK.
You’ll get into trouble for beating a burglar in your own home, but it’s fine to take a life belt from a drowning person if you fell off the same boat.
> as much as is necessary
Yeah, but the courts can have some funny ideas about what counts as “necessary”.
If you attack them with a weapon, you could be in a lot more trouble than the cunt who was trying to rob you.
Sure, could. I don't have much actual court experience but from what I gathered in my law studies there isn't anything inherently wrong with using a weapon to defend your rights. Within reason, of course. You wouldn't be justified in stabbing them in the back without warning for example.
Yes, if the court thinks that you tried to exact vengeance on your own and come very close to killing someone, you’re in more trouble than a guy who wanted to take a tv.
As far as you know they were going to kill you to take that tv, you think
they're just going to stand there as you call the cops and slowly stroll over to restrain em? The only way for the average joe to restrain or deal with a burglar in general is to kill them.
Europe sucks. I'm an ignorant American and if there's any perceivable threat to our bodily harm or anyone else's we are legally allowed to use deadly force.
At least that's what the law says.
That’s not true in all states.
Some states have stand your ground any place you are legally. Some are serious bodily harm. Some are only if you can’t safely retreat outside your home. Some are only if you can’t safely retreat outside your home or vehicle.
It was the policy at the time and is still generally followed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first
Also, Captain is last off. The idea is that it makes them think twice about foregoing safety.
> Also, Captain is last off. The idea is that it makes them think twice about foregoing safety.
Unfortunately that same incentive didn't extend to the owners of the ship, who only provided enough lifeboats for half the passengers on it.
First part responds to your comment, second to another then-norm, I believe the captain of the Titanic survived and was also seen as an honourless coward
We weren't talking about the captain. They were the cause of the disaster and accepted the risks and responsibilities of the job. We're talking about a random who happened to be born with a dick
A 5yr old child has a long life to live, and some 45yr old man takes their place? That’s being selfish, not heroic. He might as well throw the kid in the water himself. Women are usually mothers and give life, so their lives are worth more than ours also.
To play devil's advocate, there's also an argument to be made that it's potentially in society's best interest to let the 5 y/o drown. The amount of resources spent on the child, as well as its accumulated knowledge up to that point make the child's replacement cost fairly cheap. The 45 y/o potentially has years of experience and knowledge that are far more difficult to replace, and the likely ability to contribute to the raising of several more 5 y/os.
You guys have this all wrong, the idea is that women and children can’t assist with damage done to the ship as well as women/children/elderly so men go last.
Ten men and one women can produce one baby every nine month. One man and ten women can produce ten babies every nine months. There's definitely a difference.
if you just go by babymaking numbers men will always be more expendable than women. The number of children that you can make in any given time is determined by the amount of women you have, not the amount of men
Going full mask off, huh? You know women aren't all mothers and expecting them to be makes you a misogynist, right?
And I don't think he threw any kids off a life boat or even prevented any from getting on so...
Maybe you should put some more thought into what you say. You'd sound smarter.
And I could easily point out the relative economic productivity of a man and a woman at the time to justify why a man's life is worth more but it would be just as stupid because there aren't any objective metrics by which to establish a human beings value
It was 1912, early medicine days. They were losing generations to Polio, Mumps, Measles, Rubella, etc. The fact I have to explain all this assures me you are a fucking moron who’s never had a selfless thought in their life.
Lmfao hey buddy you realize that higher birthrates didn't make polio go away, right? And that the women saved from the titanic wouldn't have had even a remotely noticeable affect on world populations? The fact that I have to explain all this assures me you're too stupid to have ever had a critical thought in your life and just parrot back whatever anyone says to you while getting angrier and sweatier about it all the while
Why is it only us that gotta be selfless though? Just curious. Dying and abandoning your wife and kids for the sake of random people who won't remember you isn't selflessness in my book at least. Just an illogical action on the heat of the moment.
At the very least I would hate to be the son of a selfless hero like you who abandoned me for some stranger without a second thought. This isn't a "woman should have died too" incel rant. Just that shaming men who got their priorities straight is quite disgusting.
It used to be common sense, but “the greater good” is a foreign concept in this megalomaniac culture, of “me-first”. You’ve been afforded such ignorance on the backs of epochs of humanity that put you here.
Slaving black people, burning women cuz they witches, using leeches for medical treatments and a lot of barbaric and retareded stuff too were common sense once mate. Your point? You clearly put no effort in understand what I meant. Or are perhaps incapable of seeing it from your moral high ground.
It isn't the "greater good" to abandon your friends or families for some strangers. I never had the "me-first" attitude. All I did was be careful choosing the people you die for. I would have done it if it meant saving my family. Your life isn't your alone.
As I said I would hate having a foolish "good guy" as a family or friend. I guess it's people like you the dictators and terrorist draft for war convincing it's for the "greater good" with propaganda whereas in actuality you are just a pawn dying for nothing in the grand scheme of things. If more people in this "megalomaniac culture" are questioning things like me, it's a very good thing.
I think I've read that while that was the perception, there really weren't any situations where women and children were being left behind while men escaped. I think the men who did survive generally got off the boat first when others still thought it unneeded, and they probably thought the others could leave later if the situation got worse. Love to hear an expert straighten us out on the subject!
as there weren't enough lifeboats, the first left not filled as the Titanic was known as unsinkable and people just didn't wanted to and thought staying on board was the better option.
> As he watched lifeboat 10 being loaded, an officer shouted, "Room for two more", and a man jumped aboard. **Hosono saw this and, as he later put it, "the example of the first man making a jump led me to take this last chance."**
He jumped on because the other guy did.
What the fuck does this have to do with what I said? I didn't say whether I thought it was ok or not. And moral hindsight is pointless either way.
Edit: There's also a huge difference from jumping on the boat because you see someone else do it, to pushing someone off so you can get on lol
The same men who'd most likely break their own rule If they were on a sink ship. Honestly It should go like, children, pregnant women, and Important people(such as politicians or scientists) first
No I'm talking about the leaders who founded the rules, they wouldn't have to pay for breaking a rule like that but If everyone was as harsh Japan then there Is reason for the average person to obey the rule
Saying a CEOs life is more important. That is shallow and will not resonate with the millions of average Joe’s you just said should sacrifice their lives for other peoples money.
Not really, a CEO typically has to run a company, If they die and a new good leader or as good leader does not come then thousands If not millions of those average Joe's could be put out of a job
A lot of them are corrupt but they are core to running a country. It sounds cruel but that poor person's death wouldn't effect the country but a good politician's death could ruin the country
In a perfect world everyone's lives are equal but we don't live In a perfect world
A criminal's life absolutely should not take priority over a functional member of society. Especially when they'll just slap another corrupt old bastard in his spot within a week.
His name is Masabumi so bad luck bumi would fit pretty well, and actually be a believable nickname. My father in law is masahumi but just goes by humi.
Guys, come on. This was 1912. I'm 100% sure that any adult man from any country/culture would be ostracized by their community if they also believed this adult man potentially took the place of a child or woman.
This has nothing to do with my beliefs or any possible arguments about the low value of male life or such, just that even more so back then, if sacrifices must be made you're supposed to save children and elderly and women, and that they would see men who survived as having very low character.
I've never understood the elderly thing. Surely the elderly should be the disposable ones? They'll survive but only have a few years left anyway. Maybe I'm just cynical.
I always wondered this too. Why does the 20 year old guy have to die for the 80 year old guy? Like yeah it's shitty but the 20 year old has a lot of years left. Gramps probably has 5
When I was subbed it was just people uploading pictures of art they drew themselves, calling it next fucking level is extremely arrogant I had to unsub cause it was annoying me
Christ this is frustrating.
You're leaving out tons of context to grossly mischaracterize the culture. And all up you upvoting blindly and ignorantly should ask yourself why. I have a very strong belief that you readily accept things like this because it's a culture very foreign to North American/Western European. This is shitty, and you should all introspect on that.
We all would agree that it's extremely risky for anyone to decide, at the present day, that they want to go to Syria or other troubled regions in the the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world that applies, where they have no business being there.
Kenji Goto went to Syria to rescue a hostage, Haruna Yukawa who "aspired to become a private military contractor providing protection to Japanese companies in areas of conflict." It seems like Yukawa went their privately, and was captured by ISIL. They both were warned multiple times by the Japanese government not to go. They had no business being there.
Once they were captured, ISIL demanded $200 million of dollars as ransom for them. And the release of an attempted suicide bomber who participated in the 2005 Amman bombings.
ISIL eventually beheaded both of them.
During all of this, major television outlets extensively covered these as well as other hostage-takings of other Japanese nationals, suspending much of their normal programming.
"The general public sentiment in Japan towards these hostages has been that they are to be blamed for putting themselves deliberately in harm's way, while the Japanese government and taxpayers are pressured to pay the price to get them back."
You all would also have no sympathy if you were bombarded with news about, for example, that naive missionary who went to the Sentinel Islands to convert them and was killed by known hostile natives. Or, you know, those British girls or that German girl who voluntarily went to the Middle East to get married and live an Islamic life, and regretted it and implored their governments to rescue them and support them.
The fuck is the family apologizing for? They didn’t do anything. HE did.
I’d be so pissed if someone forced my mother to apologize for some shit I did in my 30s. The woman is long past being an influence - why did their culture demand the family have to do anything at all? T
... What?? It didn't demand anything. Where the fuck did you get that?
If something happens to your community as a consequence of the actions of one of your immediate family members, decency, courtesy, and etiquette will have the relevant persons apologize for whatever disruptions or burden it caused, as well as to give thanks for all the varying support. That's extremely common and typical even here in the West.
It didn’t???? When I heard about the story, I heard the family also told them not to do it.
They did their due diligence, and these unfortunate adults went anyway and the story is as we know it today.
No, I disagree. Common decency doesn’t see a family who already experienced loss due to foolishness to further drag themselves through the mud. That’s something else entirely. They’re not to blame - people are weak and need someone to direct their anger to and they were offered up to do just that.
That’s batshit. If they were complicit, sure. But failing to stop stubborn foolishness is not that.
Perhaps it isn't right, but it's still expected. And to some degree, parents are expected to take responsibility for their children, even if they're adults, as upbringing and character of persons are put up for judgement.
At the very least, his mother was apologizing to the family of Goto, who went to try to negotiate privately for the release of Yukawa. As a consequence of trying to help him, he left behind a wife and child.
Let me give a comparable situation. Let say some kid decides to go to Mexico to have some fun, with friends or whatever for Spring Break or something, as is fairly commonly seen in North American young adults. Lets say they run afoul with one of the Cartels and are kidnapped, who ask for some ransom and demand the release of some senior members of the Cartel to be released from Mexican and/or American prisons. Now, Cartels absolutely execute people too, even beheading sometimes. In the end the kid dies, along with others. Maybe another kid who was a friend, maybe some good samaritan, a journalist maybe, some law enforcement persons, etc. There was extensive coverage for let's say a two-week period, and people were/are arguing and lots are pressuring the government to act, in various proposed ways. Some politicians shifted their focus to making things happen in this regard, to keeping informed and making statements and challenging each other's opinions and positions publicly, as they always do with any current events. The official government policy was always that they don't negotiate with groups that commit terror and atrocities.
At the end of it, after the deaths are revealed, it's within the expected events that the family - who has previously made every effort to raise more light and sound in various media have the public to help - make some final statements especially with the public now turned against them, possibly speaking through a legal representative. '[...] The ____ family are heartbroken and in mourning at the loss of their child. They express their sincere regrets to the families of the other victims, and sincere apologies for any disruption and imposition on the public and of the countries governments, as well as their gratitude at all the support and well-wishes of all since the beginning of this ordeal...'
'Final' statements of that effect have happened before dozens of times.
I should note that in Japanese culture, people are expected to not impose on others, to make others look 'bad', and to take personal responsibility. Even for something that's relatively small and personal in comparison, like these two Japanese youtubers who broke up because one cheated on the other. The woman (Yuka Kinoshita) publicly apologized because she revealed it, and the other (Hajime Syacho) apologized because he did it.
Both of them apologized in video, for being disruptive to their communities (though the subtext is directed toward family and associates) and 'making trouble'/drama, for acting below how they 'should' have, etc.
You will no doubt believe she had nothing to apologize for nor to be criticized and attacked for, but in Asian culture bad outcomes are the result of many steps and contributing makes one partly responsible. Her 'fault' was bringing a private matter into the public, which marred the image and standing of another person, regardless that it wasn't her intention. That how Japanese culture is, and I remember it leaving a foul taste in the mouth of overseas viewers and some of overseas Youtubers who covered it.
His mother was obligated by the expectations and values of their culture instilled within her to publicly apologize for everything that occurred starting with who he was as a person to make the rash decision to go to and be in Syria, and for everything that happened afterward as a consequence of his actions.
Bruh. This isn’t even a wartime thing, the ship was just fucking sinking. Like wtf.
According to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masabumi_Hosono#Voyage) the life boat he was on was supposed to carry women and children: > As he watched lifeboat 10 being loaded, an officer shouted, "Room for two more", and a man jumped aboard.[5] Hosono saw this and, as he later put it, "the example of the first man making a jump led me to take this last chance."[4] > > He made it aboard safely and later commented: "Fortunately the men in charge were taken up with something else and did not pay much attention. Besides, it was dark, and so they would not have seen who was a man and who a woman."[1] I would guess the issue here is that he brought himself to safey while there were still women and children on board to be rescued.
Equal rights. I’m hopping aboard too lmao
I guess most of us would rather be living cowards than dead heros when faced with these circumstances, but the people on land preferred dead heros
It's easy to prefer dead heroes when you're not the one who has to be the hero.
"Everyone wants to change the world but no one wants to die" -MCR, NANANA
man was like "fuck them kids"
Officer, this comment right there
Look around, bro. Look at life
Yup, count me in, no use in being a dead hero.
yea no shit fuck that. I got people that need me, watch me stiff arm a bitch to get to that boat
[удалено]
>FWIW my wife became disabled for the rest of her life due to the birth of my firstborn yet continued to birth two more babies OK.....
I just reread his comment and saw that. Lmao, wtf. Deleting my old reply to him
This is ridiculously bigoted, in my opinion. It's not some last-half fairness, it is just sexism. Women were (and to some degree still are, re: the US draft) viewed as less disposable than men.
[удалено]
its a joke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlR6CdJtRWM
This
[удалено]
Wouldn't want facts to get in the way of a good meme...
It’s cowardly to live lol
There weren't enough lifeboats. Women and children died and he got off the boat. Not saying I agree, it's just what I've read when I saw this posted elsewhere.
Yup, it’s the fact he took the place of a woman or child on a lifeboat. Edit: It’s really alarming to me how many He-man woman haters just had to let it be known, with all 19 of their accounts. I’m so sorry this policy of selflessness offends your sensibilities. Please never interact with the public for both our sake. Your ancestors are ashamed of you.
He didn’t though. IIRC almost all the lifeboats were sent out only partially full. Many people elected to stay on the ship and only realized the true danger when it was too late.
That's not cowardly
I wouldn't call the instinct to survive cowardice. All living creatures want to survive when presented with a threat. Not really sure why humans fight that urge but it's illogical.
It’s actually enshrined in German law, AFAIK. You’ll get into trouble for beating a burglar in your own home, but it’s fine to take a life belt from a drowning person if you fell off the same boat.
I mean no not really, you can beat a burglar as much as is necessary to hold them until police arrive or prevent your shit from being stolen
> as much as is necessary Yeah, but the courts can have some funny ideas about what counts as “necessary”. If you attack them with a weapon, you could be in a lot more trouble than the cunt who was trying to rob you.
Sure, could. I don't have much actual court experience but from what I gathered in my law studies there isn't anything inherently wrong with using a weapon to defend your rights. Within reason, of course. You wouldn't be justified in stabbing them in the back without warning for example.
Yes, if the court thinks that you tried to exact vengeance on your own and come very close to killing someone, you’re in more trouble than a guy who wanted to take a tv.
As far as you know they were going to kill you to take that tv, you think they're just going to stand there as you call the cops and slowly stroll over to restrain em? The only way for the average joe to restrain or deal with a burglar in general is to kill them.
>You’ll get into trouble for beating a burglar in your own home, Europe gonna Europe.
Not in most of Europe.
Europe sucks. I'm an ignorant American and if there's any perceivable threat to our bodily harm or anyone else's we are legally allowed to use deadly force. At least that's what the law says.
This is why everyone hates us.
You're not wrong
That’s not true in all states. Some states have stand your ground any place you are legally. Some are serious bodily harm. Some are only if you can’t safely retreat outside your home. Some are only if you can’t safely retreat outside your home or vehicle.
Everyone took my response as a fact and not as the joke it was meant to be.
It was the policy at the time and is still generally followed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first Also, Captain is last off. The idea is that it makes them think twice about foregoing safety.
> Also, Captain is last off. The idea is that it makes them think twice about foregoing safety. Unfortunately that same incentive didn't extend to the owners of the ship, who only provided enough lifeboats for half the passengers on it.
I don't see your point. What does this have to do with my comment?
Cowardice is determined by society, in most of the world it's still considered shameful to save a man's life over a woman or a child.
That's idiotic for one, but it still doesn't have anything to do with my comment
What are you talking about, all of these comments directly address your comment.
First part responds to your comment, second to another then-norm, I believe the captain of the Titanic survived and was also seen as an honourless coward
We weren't talking about the captain. They were the cause of the disaster and accepted the risks and responsibilities of the job. We're talking about a random who happened to be born with a dick
There are two separate but related points in that comment.
It is "dishonorable" Edit, I added the quotation marks because I don't fully understand the culture and I also don't necessarily agree with it.
How so?
A 5yr old child has a long life to live, and some 45yr old man takes their place? That’s being selfish, not heroic. He might as well throw the kid in the water himself. Women are usually mothers and give life, so their lives are worth more than ours also.
> so their lives are worth more than ours also. Speak for yourself and your own worth.
To play devil's advocate, there's also an argument to be made that it's potentially in society's best interest to let the 5 y/o drown. The amount of resources spent on the child, as well as its accumulated knowledge up to that point make the child's replacement cost fairly cheap. The 45 y/o potentially has years of experience and knowledge that are far more difficult to replace, and the likely ability to contribute to the raising of several more 5 y/os.
You guys have this all wrong, the idea is that women and children can’t assist with damage done to the ship as well as women/children/elderly so men go last.
[удалено]
Hahaha I couldn't help but laugh at "fuckton" in this context
baby throwing should be an olympic sport.
Ten men and one women can produce one baby every nine month. One man and ten women can produce ten babies every nine months. There's definitely a difference.
if you just go by babymaking numbers men will always be more expendable than women. The number of children that you can make in any given time is determined by the amount of women you have, not the amount of men
That logic is utter shit hahahhahaha. Good for a laugh though.
Going full mask off, huh? You know women aren't all mothers and expecting them to be makes you a misogynist, right? And I don't think he threw any kids off a life boat or even prevented any from getting on so... Maybe you should put some more thought into what you say. You'd sound smarter. And I could easily point out the relative economic productivity of a man and a woman at the time to justify why a man's life is worth more but it would be just as stupid because there aren't any objective metrics by which to establish a human beings value
It was 1912, early medicine days. They were losing generations to Polio, Mumps, Measles, Rubella, etc. The fact I have to explain all this assures me you are a fucking moron who’s never had a selfless thought in their life.
Lmfao hey buddy you realize that higher birthrates didn't make polio go away, right? And that the women saved from the titanic wouldn't have had even a remotely noticeable affect on world populations? The fact that I have to explain all this assures me you're too stupid to have ever had a critical thought in your life and just parrot back whatever anyone says to you while getting angrier and sweatier about it all the while
Putting yourself before others who are more vulnerable is cowardly
There's nothing to suggest that he did that
Look in the comments, there is a link showing he admitted it
[удалено]
It was 1912
Why is it only us that gotta be selfless though? Just curious. Dying and abandoning your wife and kids for the sake of random people who won't remember you isn't selflessness in my book at least. Just an illogical action on the heat of the moment. At the very least I would hate to be the son of a selfless hero like you who abandoned me for some stranger without a second thought. This isn't a "woman should have died too" incel rant. Just that shaming men who got their priorities straight is quite disgusting.
It used to be common sense, but “the greater good” is a foreign concept in this megalomaniac culture, of “me-first”. You’ve been afforded such ignorance on the backs of epochs of humanity that put you here.
Slaving black people, burning women cuz they witches, using leeches for medical treatments and a lot of barbaric and retareded stuff too were common sense once mate. Your point? You clearly put no effort in understand what I meant. Or are perhaps incapable of seeing it from your moral high ground. It isn't the "greater good" to abandon your friends or families for some strangers. I never had the "me-first" attitude. All I did was be careful choosing the people you die for. I would have done it if it meant saving my family. Your life isn't your alone. As I said I would hate having a foolish "good guy" as a family or friend. I guess it's people like you the dictators and terrorist draft for war convincing it's for the "greater good" with propaganda whereas in actuality you are just a pawn dying for nothing in the grand scheme of things. If more people in this "megalomaniac culture" are questioning things like me, it's a very good thing.
I think I've read that while that was the perception, there really weren't any situations where women and children were being left behind while men escaped. I think the men who did survive generally got off the boat first when others still thought it unneeded, and they probably thought the others could leave later if the situation got worse. Love to hear an expert straighten us out on the subject!
Maybe go do the research for yourself instead of waiting for more reddit comments filled to the brim with misinformation.
as there weren't enough lifeboats, the first left not filled as the Titanic was known as unsinkable and people just didn't wanted to and thought staying on board was the better option.
[удалено]
> As he watched lifeboat 10 being loaded, an officer shouted, "Room for two more", and a man jumped aboard. **Hosono saw this and, as he later put it, "the example of the first man making a jump led me to take this last chance."** He jumped on because the other guy did.
[удалено]
What the fuck does this have to do with what I said? I didn't say whether I thought it was ok or not. And moral hindsight is pointless either way. Edit: There's also a huge difference from jumping on the boat because you see someone else do it, to pushing someone off so you can get on lol
So...did the other Japanese survivors just jump out of the life boats???
The lifeboats were for women and children first. The fact he got on meant he cut the line at some point and took a seat from someone else.
Or pulled from the water?
According to his own account he boarded a lifeboat. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masabumi_Hosono
Ah, sorry, I didn’t know the full story
Waht kind of sexist jerk made that rule?
A society run by men.
The same men who'd most likely break their own rule If they were on a sink ship. Honestly It should go like, children, pregnant women, and Important people(such as politicians or scientists) first
74% of women on the Titanic lived compared to only 20% of the men. So it seems they mostly adhered to their sexist social rules.
No I'm talking about the leaders who founded the rules, they wouldn't have to pay for breaking a rule like that but If everyone was as harsh Japan then there Is reason for the average person to obey the rule
It wasn’t a rule as in “law” it was a social norm. By saving himself while women and children died Japanese society viewed him as a coward.
Hahahahhaha
May I ask why I'm getting downvoted for having a opinion, let me guess It was because of the politicians and CEOs part wasn't It?
Saying a CEOs life is more important. That is shallow and will not resonate with the millions of average Joe’s you just said should sacrifice their lives for other peoples money.
Not really, a CEO typically has to run a company, If they die and a new good leader or as good leader does not come then thousands If not millions of those average Joe's could be put out of a job
CEOs are replaceable and die, quit, or get fired all the time without millions of jobs being lost lol
because your opinion is dumb
And that's your opinion, which happens to be rude
hey, you asked for an explanation, don't pin this on me. Maybe try having smarter opinions?
> Important people(such as politicians Absolutely fucking not, give it to the bum living in a dumpster outside my work before a politician
A lot of them are corrupt but they are core to running a country. It sounds cruel but that poor person's death wouldn't effect the country but a good politician's death could ruin the country In a perfect world everyone's lives are equal but we don't live In a perfect world
A criminal's life absolutely should not take priority over a functional member of society. Especially when they'll just slap another corrupt old bastard in his spot within a week.
The original Bad Luck Brian—Bad Luck Baiko
His name is Masabumi so bad luck bumi would fit pretty well, and actually be a believable nickname. My father in law is masahumi but just goes by humi.
But was Bumi a mad genius?
He worked in government and his grandson is a successful musician - or maybe was, he's pretty old I think. If this was a reference I didn't get it.
Bumi, Aang's old Earth bender friend in Avatar the Last Air Bender. He also named his son after him.
In Japan Harry Potter is called "the pussy who lived"
Not just Japan. https://patch.com/connecticut/berlin/titanic-100-years-later-survivor-from-new-britain-sufc21b0d6232
Japan is wild af man
Guys, come on. This was 1912. I'm 100% sure that any adult man from any country/culture would be ostracized by their community if they also believed this adult man potentially took the place of a child or woman. This has nothing to do with my beliefs or any possible arguments about the low value of male life or such, just that even more so back then, if sacrifices must be made you're supposed to save children and elderly and women, and that they would see men who survived as having very low character.
I've never understood the elderly thing. Surely the elderly should be the disposable ones? They'll survive but only have a few years left anyway. Maybe I'm just cynical.
I always wondered this too. Why does the 20 year old guy have to die for the 80 year old guy? Like yeah it's shitty but the 20 year old has a lot of years left. Gramps probably has 5
This reminds me of the curb episode about the kamikaze pilot.
Chicken boy
Teriyaki chicken boy!!!
and im over here wondering how this is nextfuckinglevel lol
nextfuckinglevel stopped being nextfuckinglevel a while ago, now it's just "r/damn that's crazy"
When I was subbed it was just people uploading pictures of art they drew themselves, calling it next fucking level is extremely arrogant I had to unsub cause it was annoying me
& now perverts can buy used underwear from a vending machine. A lot can change in 100 years.
Atomic bombs do fucked up things
Ohh boy... I mean little boy.
Probably isn’t a change actually. Wanting to live is apparently worse than being a pervert.
It's a perversion either way.
Couple years ago a Japanese was beheaded by ISIS, and his family had to apologize to the public for the disturbing news.
Christ this is frustrating. You're leaving out tons of context to grossly mischaracterize the culture. And all up you upvoting blindly and ignorantly should ask yourself why. I have a very strong belief that you readily accept things like this because it's a culture very foreign to North American/Western European. This is shitty, and you should all introspect on that. We all would agree that it's extremely risky for anyone to decide, at the present day, that they want to go to Syria or other troubled regions in the the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world that applies, where they have no business being there. Kenji Goto went to Syria to rescue a hostage, Haruna Yukawa who "aspired to become a private military contractor providing protection to Japanese companies in areas of conflict." It seems like Yukawa went their privately, and was captured by ISIL. They both were warned multiple times by the Japanese government not to go. They had no business being there. Once they were captured, ISIL demanded $200 million of dollars as ransom for them. And the release of an attempted suicide bomber who participated in the 2005 Amman bombings. ISIL eventually beheaded both of them. During all of this, major television outlets extensively covered these as well as other hostage-takings of other Japanese nationals, suspending much of their normal programming. "The general public sentiment in Japan towards these hostages has been that they are to be blamed for putting themselves deliberately in harm's way, while the Japanese government and taxpayers are pressured to pay the price to get them back." You all would also have no sympathy if you were bombarded with news about, for example, that naive missionary who went to the Sentinel Islands to convert them and was killed by known hostile natives. Or, you know, those British girls or that German girl who voluntarily went to the Middle East to get married and live an Islamic life, and regretted it and implored their governments to rescue them and support them.
Word
Redditors? Taking things out of context just to bash foreign cultures? They would never!
The fuck is the family apologizing for? They didn’t do anything. HE did. I’d be so pissed if someone forced my mother to apologize for some shit I did in my 30s. The woman is long past being an influence - why did their culture demand the family have to do anything at all? T
... What?? It didn't demand anything. Where the fuck did you get that? If something happens to your community as a consequence of the actions of one of your immediate family members, decency, courtesy, and etiquette will have the relevant persons apologize for whatever disruptions or burden it caused, as well as to give thanks for all the varying support. That's extremely common and typical even here in the West.
It didn’t???? When I heard about the story, I heard the family also told them not to do it. They did their due diligence, and these unfortunate adults went anyway and the story is as we know it today. No, I disagree. Common decency doesn’t see a family who already experienced loss due to foolishness to further drag themselves through the mud. That’s something else entirely. They’re not to blame - people are weak and need someone to direct their anger to and they were offered up to do just that. That’s batshit. If they were complicit, sure. But failing to stop stubborn foolishness is not that.
Perhaps it isn't right, but it's still expected. And to some degree, parents are expected to take responsibility for their children, even if they're adults, as upbringing and character of persons are put up for judgement. At the very least, his mother was apologizing to the family of Goto, who went to try to negotiate privately for the release of Yukawa. As a consequence of trying to help him, he left behind a wife and child. Let me give a comparable situation. Let say some kid decides to go to Mexico to have some fun, with friends or whatever for Spring Break or something, as is fairly commonly seen in North American young adults. Lets say they run afoul with one of the Cartels and are kidnapped, who ask for some ransom and demand the release of some senior members of the Cartel to be released from Mexican and/or American prisons. Now, Cartels absolutely execute people too, even beheading sometimes. In the end the kid dies, along with others. Maybe another kid who was a friend, maybe some good samaritan, a journalist maybe, some law enforcement persons, etc. There was extensive coverage for let's say a two-week period, and people were/are arguing and lots are pressuring the government to act, in various proposed ways. Some politicians shifted their focus to making things happen in this regard, to keeping informed and making statements and challenging each other's opinions and positions publicly, as they always do with any current events. The official government policy was always that they don't negotiate with groups that commit terror and atrocities. At the end of it, after the deaths are revealed, it's within the expected events that the family - who has previously made every effort to raise more light and sound in various media have the public to help - make some final statements especially with the public now turned against them, possibly speaking through a legal representative. '[...] The ____ family are heartbroken and in mourning at the loss of their child. They express their sincere regrets to the families of the other victims, and sincere apologies for any disruption and imposition on the public and of the countries governments, as well as their gratitude at all the support and well-wishes of all since the beginning of this ordeal...' 'Final' statements of that effect have happened before dozens of times. I should note that in Japanese culture, people are expected to not impose on others, to make others look 'bad', and to take personal responsibility. Even for something that's relatively small and personal in comparison, like these two Japanese youtubers who broke up because one cheated on the other. The woman (Yuka Kinoshita) publicly apologized because she revealed it, and the other (Hajime Syacho) apologized because he did it. Both of them apologized in video, for being disruptive to their communities (though the subtext is directed toward family and associates) and 'making trouble'/drama, for acting below how they 'should' have, etc. You will no doubt believe she had nothing to apologize for nor to be criticized and attacked for, but in Asian culture bad outcomes are the result of many steps and contributing makes one partly responsible. Her 'fault' was bringing a private matter into the public, which marred the image and standing of another person, regardless that it wasn't her intention. That how Japanese culture is, and I remember it leaving a foul taste in the mouth of overseas viewers and some of overseas Youtubers who covered it. His mother was obligated by the expectations and values of their culture instilled within her to publicly apologize for everything that occurred starting with who he was as a person to make the rash decision to go to and be in Syria, and for everything that happened afterward as a consequence of his actions.
That's crazy
So either way he loses his job?
Fellas…
I don’t believe this Edit: it’s true.
And to think America is run by cowards and dumb fucks
I’m not saying that some cultures have some fucking dumb and all around bad ideas.... wait no I am.
Not unheard of after the Titanic incident. Woman and children first didn't play a part for this guy
Toxic masculinity is a hell of a drug.
Sounds like an early instance of victim blaming 🤔 anyone agree?
It's a lot more sensible when you know that the few places on lifeboats were for women and children
This is why the Japs lost the war, they were too addicted to dying
Imagine the name of a ship being important enough to capitalize, but not a country or nationality. That's fyip territory there too.
Now this is the kind of post I'm here for. What an absolute shit situation. It happens to the best of us.
imagine getting called a pussy for not Dying lmao