Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Hyzenthlay
At the same time, although it would have been the chivalrous thing for the men (aside from the pilot, and maybe farm boy) to stand aside, once the ship landed it would have been quite useful to have men on the planet itself.

Which is why I suggested a roughly even split in my original suggestion.

So, since the attempt to make some kind of settlement on the planet would function best with both genders, IMO the only fair way to go would have been to make it completely gender-neutral.

The settlement would not function very well with 13-14 guys and 3-4 women, one of whom is a lesbian, either, unless they are all completely, uh, "gender neutral" and just don't think about or have sex.

First of all, I and many other women would probably rather die in a star than die from complications with childbirth on a desolate planet with a minimum of medical supplies.

So are you expecting celibacy, because unless one of those supply boxes contains condoms or birth control pills, a pregnancy is certainly likely? As for dying from the complications of childbirth, much of that gets mitigated by basic surgical tools and antibiotics, which the team hopefully has, or even simple infections and injuries can quickly become deadly. And let's not forget that there are plenty of other nasty and brutish ways to die in such circumstances, including everyone getting old and slowly less able to take care of themselves.

Second of all, that brings up the rather awkward point that after a couple generations, the family tree wouldn’t have any branches... even with 8 men and 8 women for maximum genetic diversity that probably wouldn’t be enough.

You can keep the family trees apart pretty well with 8 men and 8 women, even if they stay reasonably monogamous, as long as they all have quite a few children. That's not to say that there wouldn't be genetic issues at all, just that they wouldn't necessarily grind everything to a halt.

I understand your point that not every woman would want to have a half-dozen or more children and possibly die doing it, and that again leads back to the narcissism point. What's survival all about? Individually living a few more days?

50 posted on 10/26/2009 7:46:37 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: Question_Assumptions

“So are you expecting celibacy, because unless one of those supply boxes contains condoms or birth control pills, a pregnancy is certainly likely?”

Well, in my experience, celibacy is not that difficult, especially when pregnancy is a possible outcome, or if you know that you wouldn’t be able to avoid your ex if you break up. Plus, guys who live in their mother’s basement and can’t get laid still don’t seem to die or anything from lack of sex...

But, I think when it comes down to it, survival isn’t about some noble, abstract desire to continue the human race, it’s just a really basic instinct that says “Don’t die!” People just naturally don’t want to die, and that’s good, because otherwise our ancestors would have just given up and bemoaned how fast animals could run instead of running or hiding or fighting back when chased by predators, or people today wouldn’t try to get out of burning buildings, and so on.


52 posted on 10/27/2009 9:46:02 AM PDT by Hyzenthlay (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson