Our Responsibility
As with any apocalyptic scenario, conversation routinely turns to defensive and offensive measure against the particular threat in question be it human, zombie or otherwise. Anyone who knows me understands how much I enjoy weighing in on such discussion but I would like to pose another question.
One thing that I tend to bristle at is a concept I have heard many times in which women become the unfortunate thralls of whatever stronger, gun toting male happens to “rescue” them from whatever unfortunate fate they would have been privy to without our heroic intervention. I would posit that this is nonsense in its most legitimate form. To that end, I would like to provide some of my own hypotheses on how human behavior must change in order that humanity as a whole survive this, or any other apocalyptic scenario.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that all of our preparation, combined with a convergence of fortunate circumstances allows us to survive what I often refer to as the “First Wave” of the Zombie Apocalypse (heretofore referred to as the “ZA”). The First Wave of the ZA can be defined as the period following which the virus becomes exponentially prevalent in the major population centers. By this time, most prepared survivors will either be in the process of or already have, executed their survival scenarios.
I feel that as men, the only way for us to ensure the continued survival of the human species is to sacrifice everything we have to ensure that our fellow female survivors continue to grace the world with their presence. Some of you may attempt to construe this as some misogynist statement but that is not it’s intention, it is simple math. Two men and twenty women can repopulate a small town, two women and twenty men cannot. Before I go on, let me make sure that anyone who reads this understands that the intention of this statement is NOT to insinuate that women are little more than baby making machines…if that is all you get from that statement, please stop reading now since any of you who know me understand that I am not so narrow minded as that. Instead, I mean that Women, for MANY reasons, are more important than men are in the grand scheme of things.
Men, by and large, have a tendency to be preoccupied with physicality in some aspect or another. We like our big guns and our shiny toys and we love to brag to each other about how big and tough we are. We are essentially doing this because intrinsically we understand that such violent tendencies will ultimately make us more valuable to members of the opposite sex because we also understand that women are not as steped in physicality as we are. In fact, it is an arguable position that women, as a generality, are far more adept socially than men are and therefore less preoccupied with the male held belief of physical security. In the general collective opinion of most men this makes women less likely to be able to defend themselves from physical threat.
However human beings were designed, whether it be some Omnipotent intelligence or simple evolution, the greatest strength of the human design was the separation of one sex from the other. In nature, many of the principles that I speak about here can be observed in the animal kingdom. While many may wish to look at this as “Well they are animals, it’s instinct” I would argue that many of the complex emotions that humans use to separate themselves from their animals brothers and sisters can be traced back to simple genetic and instinctual imperatives that are literally built into us. As we evolved more complex social skills, these instincts were modified and incorporated into modern behavior. Speaking from a general scientific perspective, it ensures that the species continues to carry genetic traits across a greater variety of individuals from generation to generation. It has been my experience that Men and Women are NOT equal in all things but that the sum of their strengths makes up for the sum of their inequalities.
It is my belief that men have subjugated women through history because they have failed to respect this balance in favor of psychological politics which, as I have already stated, spring from instinctual behaviors. As we observe in nature, the male counterpart in most animal relationships fill one of two basic roles.
1.) Sperm Donor
2.) Leader of the Pack
As we all know, I am a fan of Bears. In Nature, Male Bears have been known to eat the young whether it is theirs or not. Females are therefore naturally more aggressive to deal with the constant threat. In fact, Mother Bears are known to be some of the most aggressive and dangerous animals in nature when protecting their young from a threat. What this means to me is that nature has a way of balancing itself. If one side gets to heavy in one aspect, the other side must increase its own weight to compensate. Human beings are the only animal on the planet that disregard this balance and the result is that we have upset the equilibrium of almost everything around us.
In a post apocalyptic society, can we really afford to make the same mistakes that our forefathers have? I would say “No”. When working with equals, it takes both sides to pull in order to reach equilibrium. When once side is pushed and the other pulled, everything goes in one direction.
If you are still reading this, I commend you. This is not the usual fare for a Zombie website in which gore, cracked skulls, guns, swords and battle axes tend to rule the day. In truth, I suspect that this post will be largely ignored and that is okay. My goal here is to foster some thought on a subject which I think is largely ignored by many people and I feel that there are some very intelligent people on this site.
That said, let’s open the discussion. What do you feel are our responsibilities beyond simple survival in a post apocalypse? What changes do you think will be necessary?
I ask only two things, please be respectful of others opinions. Considering the subject matter and the assertions I have made, I can see the possibility of some smaller minded individuals posting something that is simply egregious and offensive. This is for honest discourse and intelligent conversation, if you can’t handle that, please do not post.
The other thing is that you speak honestly. I am legitimately interested in what other people feel about this concept, what things they think our society fails at and what ways they think it can be fixed. Let’s face it, the Zombie Apocalypse is a reset button scenario!
One thing that I tend to bristle at is a concept I have heard many times in which women become the unfortunate thralls of whatever stronger, gun toting male happens to “rescue” them from whatever unfortunate fate they would have been privy to without our heroic intervention. I would posit that this is nonsense in its most legitimate form. To that end, I would like to provide some of my own hypotheses on how human behavior must change in order that humanity as a whole survive this, or any other apocalyptic scenario.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that all of our preparation, combined with a convergence of fortunate circumstances allows us to survive what I often refer to as the “First Wave” of the Zombie Apocalypse (heretofore referred to as the “ZA”). The First Wave of the ZA can be defined as the period following which the virus becomes exponentially prevalent in the major population centers. By this time, most prepared survivors will either be in the process of or already have, executed their survival scenarios.
I feel that as men, the only way for us to ensure the continued survival of the human species is to sacrifice everything we have to ensure that our fellow female survivors continue to grace the world with their presence. Some of you may attempt to construe this as some misogynist statement but that is not it’s intention, it is simple math. Two men and twenty women can repopulate a small town, two women and twenty men cannot. Before I go on, let me make sure that anyone who reads this understands that the intention of this statement is NOT to insinuate that women are little more than baby making machines…if that is all you get from that statement, please stop reading now since any of you who know me understand that I am not so narrow minded as that. Instead, I mean that Women, for MANY reasons, are more important than men are in the grand scheme of things.
Men, by and large, have a tendency to be preoccupied with physicality in some aspect or another. We like our big guns and our shiny toys and we love to brag to each other about how big and tough we are. We are essentially doing this because intrinsically we understand that such violent tendencies will ultimately make us more valuable to members of the opposite sex because we also understand that women are not as steped in physicality as we are. In fact, it is an arguable position that women, as a generality, are far more adept socially than men are and therefore less preoccupied with the male held belief of physical security. In the general collective opinion of most men this makes women less likely to be able to defend themselves from physical threat.
However human beings were designed, whether it be some Omnipotent intelligence or simple evolution, the greatest strength of the human design was the separation of one sex from the other. In nature, many of the principles that I speak about here can be observed in the animal kingdom. While many may wish to look at this as “Well they are animals, it’s instinct” I would argue that many of the complex emotions that humans use to separate themselves from their animals brothers and sisters can be traced back to simple genetic and instinctual imperatives that are literally built into us. As we evolved more complex social skills, these instincts were modified and incorporated into modern behavior. Speaking from a general scientific perspective, it ensures that the species continues to carry genetic traits across a greater variety of individuals from generation to generation. It has been my experience that Men and Women are NOT equal in all things but that the sum of their strengths makes up for the sum of their inequalities.
It is my belief that men have subjugated women through history because they have failed to respect this balance in favor of psychological politics which, as I have already stated, spring from instinctual behaviors. As we observe in nature, the male counterpart in most animal relationships fill one of two basic roles.
1.) Sperm Donor
2.) Leader of the Pack
As we all know, I am a fan of Bears. In Nature, Male Bears have been known to eat the young whether it is theirs or not. Females are therefore naturally more aggressive to deal with the constant threat. In fact, Mother Bears are known to be some of the most aggressive and dangerous animals in nature when protecting their young from a threat. What this means to me is that nature has a way of balancing itself. If one side gets to heavy in one aspect, the other side must increase its own weight to compensate. Human beings are the only animal on the planet that disregard this balance and the result is that we have upset the equilibrium of almost everything around us.
In a post apocalyptic society, can we really afford to make the same mistakes that our forefathers have? I would say “No”. When working with equals, it takes both sides to pull in order to reach equilibrium. When once side is pushed and the other pulled, everything goes in one direction.
If you are still reading this, I commend you. This is not the usual fare for a Zombie website in which gore, cracked skulls, guns, swords and battle axes tend to rule the day. In truth, I suspect that this post will be largely ignored and that is okay. My goal here is to foster some thought on a subject which I think is largely ignored by many people and I feel that there are some very intelligent people on this site.
That said, let’s open the discussion. What do you feel are our responsibilities beyond simple survival in a post apocalypse? What changes do you think will be necessary?
I ask only two things, please be respectful of others opinions. Considering the subject matter and the assertions I have made, I can see the possibility of some smaller minded individuals posting something that is simply egregious and offensive. This is for honest discourse and intelligent conversation, if you can’t handle that, please do not post.
The other thing is that you speak honestly. I am legitimately interested in what other people feel about this concept, what things they think our society fails at and what ways they think it can be fixed. Let’s face it, the Zombie Apocalypse is a reset button scenario!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on -
I think you need spanked.
-
Permalink Reply by The Bruin on
-
Bah! You people and your senseless displays of "noneedlessness" (self coined phrase).
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on
-
I'm glad you made that up.
-
Permalink Reply by Taseko on -
Who needs eugenics in a post zac world? If you are disabled, physically unfit, or of inferior mental abilities then likely as not the Z have removed you from the gene pool. The only people left are, in order of probable survival: the smart, the strong, and the lucky. As for the ratio of male to female, it could very well be that more females survive, because they ran instead of fought. ANY contact with zombies increases your risk of infection. Sure males might be more suited to fight zombies off, but is that really the best survival trait? Smash enough zombie heads, and I imagine some undead saliva will splash onto you, and get under your skin.
In addition, I could see women banding together more readily into groups, while men prefer to go alone with no one slowing them down. If you accept this preposition then of course a group would be better able to survive, because it allows for more flexibility, with each person contributeing. What happens if a single male becomes injured, or sick? His survivability sharply decreases. If a person gets hurt in a group the group as a whole can absorb the setbacks better. In the end It could look like this: groups of people, predominantly women, ether joining up with males into larger groups or fending them off, with the solitary males dieing from things that the groups survive. This is of course not a stable society, but one that arises in the weeks after complete devastation, and I would think lasts for 6 to 18 months, before people start forming more sedentary communities.
please feel free to tear this to shreds :P
-
Permalink Reply by Caity Cat on -
Well I have to say, if a guy with an automatic rifle offers to "save" me and all I have to do is put on a torn cocktail dress and scream alot, I'd do it.
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on
-
We aren't all equal.
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on
-
Dude, we aren't equal. There are things you do better than I and things that I do better then you. As long as everyone does their part no matter how large or how small they reap the benefits. It isn't about fighting equally or dying equally. Some will always be able to do more then the other. You get what you give.
-
Permalink Reply by Courtney, zombie hunter on -
Agreed on the dying part. Everyone kicks the bucket at one point or another.
Disagree on the equality, and frankly, I love being self-sufficient and all that crud, but if a man didn't open a door for me or pull out a chair for me (as a show of gentlemanly behavior) I'd ask him if he was born in a barn. I don't want to lose the valuable and individual traits of my gender in the great wash called "equality" (probably why I don't think I'll ever turn Communist any time soon) and I sure as SHIT don't want to deal with a large population of men who have lost their fragile male self-identity because they are now expected to treat women "equally" in any given situation. Believe me, this machismo is all that most guys have going for them.
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on
-
We all die, period. You start dying from the day you're born.
When and if the shit ever hit the fan an individual will be judged by what they can accomplish. It doesn't matter who or what you are. Nothing is equal. Not the way we do things and not the way we react to things. The way we work through things is what makes us equal or not. If I can bench press 300 lbs and someone who isn't as strong can lift that same 300 pounds with a pulley system the same 300 pounds has been moved. Now if we're in a bench press contest I'm gonna win but if we're in a lever and pulley contest the other person will win. Not being equal forces people to invent ways of equalling the playing field. God made "Man". Sam Colt made them equal.
-
Permalink Reply by PRIME_Ω_PREDATOR on
-
So then equality is what you make of it.
-
-
I am glad that this thread has spurred such spirited and interesting conversation...
For the record I, believe that the symbol of Yin and Yang sums it up appropriately. Everything is about balance. By and large I am Physically stronger than most women and I am stronger than ALL of the women I have ever met. I would suggest however, that in the sum of humanity, that there are things that balance out that equation that women posses and I do not. It is not a desire to do away with gender inequality that I seek (per se) but rather a recognition that both are equal in reference to survival. What makes the female half of our species so damn important, more important than men, is the reproductive process. While it is clearly necessary that both sexes contribute to procreation, men can (I'm not talking about lost daddy syndrome) essentially be thrown away after conception. Women possess all the requisite skills to raise a child from conception to young adulthood without a single man around. Now, I understand the arguments that a male role model is necessary for the process of socialization and I do not disagree. However, I am not talking about "socialization" or "Psychology" or any of that, from the most strict conceptualization of survival...we are simply unnecessary beyond a certain point.
I always thought that one of the scariest and most important parts of WWZ was Brooks discussing the "Redeker Plan" in which the armed forces drew back to defend smaller, more manageable areas. In concept, and under such circumstances as the ZA, it is absolutely the course of action that will have the most likely positive outcome. I believe that such a concept can be applied to the sexes as well. What I envision, is the necessity to take a "fall back" position in which as a man I am prepared to sacrifice myself to ensure that any female I am protecting remains alive. That is not to say that such sacrifice should be in vain. Throwing oneself into the breach to save one person when it would mean the death of several others would be foolish at best. The situation would have a fluidity that is unbelievable in it's scope simply because we would have to make choices like this on the fly and not be able to plan them out in advance in any way...so that poses another question...provided that you agree that preparing for such self sacrifice is necessary, what are the conditions under which you would make that decision?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Now Available!
Call Us
Call the Lost Zombies hotline, toll free, and leave us a message. We may use your message in the Lost Zombies Documentary.
877-ZOMBIE0 that's
877-966-2430
877-ZOMBIE0 that's
877-966-2430
LZ Merch
If you're looking for shirts and LZ gear you can check out our Zazzle store
© 2012 Created by Skot (Lost).
