Another Facebook friend posted an interesting Fallout Scenario on his page. Of course the equal rights, feminist, womanist in me is irk’d the hell out of the fact that it’s even implied that anyone should automatically be thrown into something like this without regard for their wants, needs, or desires but that’s just me.
Who will survive?
Your group is part of the War Department. World War III has broken out, and eight people have sought safety in a fallout shelter. Thus, four people must leave the shelter and face almost certain death. Rather than fight among themselves, they have radioed the War Department for help, and the matter has been referred to your group. You must decide who will stay and who will leave. Remember, very few people will survive the holocaust, so the four survivors will be an essential part of any new civilization. This is all you know about the eight people: You have fifteen minutes to reach a decision
1) an accountant, age 25
2) his 22 year old wife, who is six months pregnant
3) a U.S. senator, age 68
4) a high school football coach, age 36
5) an unemployed waitress, age 30
6) a Protestant minister, age 50
7) a female college student majoring in psychology
8) a third-year medical student
Post comments with your decision and explain your logic… I’m curious to know what you would do and why.
This was my [long] response.
The accountant, his wife [and child], the waitress, and the medical student.
The accountant and his wife are both of childbearing potential [obviously, since she’s presumably pregnant with his child]. They’re also both young enough to have a large number of offspring prior to her no longer being able to have children. They’re also carrying a child into the shelter with them that will be born, hopefully, once the immediate danger has passed.
The unemployed waitress is also of childbearing potential and is a good candidate for repopulation should the need arise.
Last, but not least [regardless of sex or age] the medical student. That person has medical training which, if needed, would be vital to an isolated population in a fallout scenario. While the psychology student has, undoubtedly, the same training via medical rotation, the medical student specialized in physical body treatment rather than mental health. That same medical student would have taken a rotation in psych and thus would have some level of qualification, with the aid of [hopefully] libraries [don’t get me started on the necessity of well stocked libraries…], to aid in the mental health treatment of all parties in the group.
As creepy as it sounds, it’s actually not necessary to have the ‘two men, two women’ civil dynamic. Humanity is actually believed to be the product of more than one series of massive population bottlenecks where genetic variation was limited to a [believed] number of as few as fifty to one hundred people [or less] in some instances with the obvious implication of severe inbreeding at several intervals in history.
There is, also, in evidence the case of the Española Tortoise of the Galapagos which was brought back from the brink of extinction by breeding three males with eleven females of the species. Eww…
The academic level of the accountant and medical student [at the least] would also allow for the education of any progeny produced in this scenario. That way, when the progenitors do eventually die, the offspring can effectively manage their own affairs and continue society via [hopefully] well stocked libraries and other literary resources.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to put down Spence Reid from Criminal Minds and pick up a big BIG bottle of Brain Bleach. Cheers.
Mind you, this is not taking into account the free intellectual right of anyone in this to tell anyone else to go stuff themselves rather than be used in a captive breeding program as well.
It’s also not taking into account the sexual orientation of anyone other than the husband and wifes presumed heterosexuality or the lack of knowledge of fertility level of anyone in this other than the pregnant woman. Its also assuming that the father of the womans child is the accountant. If he’s not the father, it would further genetic variation should there be very few survivors.
Personally, I would have suggested everyone go in and survive on 1/3 rationing and allow the pregnant woman slightly more due to her unborn child, but that’s just me.
I do have one question though. The child would count as a person in this making the number of people nine rather than eight. Would that limit the choices even further or is that an accepted incidental in the scenario?
Thanks for this. I love intellectual exercises like this.