Ok, discuss. This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while. Also, I think it was Pikabeau who first said it (I can’t find the post though) that one fertile female would be enough diversity - ie, she could have sex with one of the males, and then try to have at least 5 female babies, who could then when mature mate with 5 of the original males (not their male siblings) and that would be enough genetic diversity along the line, but if I’ve got it wrong, then change it to X number all females required, all of whom refuse to have sex or bear children. Basically, what I’m saying is if the female absolutely point blank refused, and you (as one of the ten males) tried to reason with her that the human race would end if she didn’t have children, and talk it out, and give her some time to think, and she said no, would you accept it, or would you and the other males overpower her and rape her “for the greater good”?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Like, my own personal opinion is that the end of the human race would be preferable to a society funded on rape (especially when you consider that the female children would probably have to start having kids right after they started menstruating – at about 13). But, most of human history has been filled with rape and murder and other horrible things (if you’re from the United States or Australia or something, then your county’s history includes the attempted genocide of the native people) – is a few more horrible acts justifiable if it kickstarts humanity again? (Also, I knoe she could get pregnant without sex – just get one of the men to wank off and then put the cum on the opening of her vagina really fast – but I would consider forcing a woman to get pregnant against her will as much as a body violation as having sex against her will.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I remember saying something like that. I was talking to someone who thought that only having one female to repopulate the earth would result in a bunch of retarded babies.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I would let humanity end. I feel we've out stayed our welcome (especially if we wound up with only 11 people left on Earth) and the woman refusing to reproduce must be a sign for humanity to go extinct.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

i think it was my post. she said it would take 22000 people to repopulate the earth

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Maximum moral dilemma. That's future me's problem.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The second generation would all be born of incest. They'd be half siblings

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, I think I've got it worked out - like, 1 female, 10 males. If she mated with 2 of the males, and had at least 5 female children, then those 5 females could mate with the other original males, and then if they have female children, then those could mate with the last of the original males, and by that time there would be just enough diversity. Or something. Like I said, if I've fucked it up, then just change it to whatever number of females or males required, it doesn't really change the moral question that much.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How do you guarantee that she has all females? She has nothing but sons and the population is screwed.. Having only one female is a slow and silly way to start a population. And the chances of most of the ten males being eaten by a lion or something are high. Guys are morons and they'll have to show off for the girl and that's just asking for trouble. Honestly, I think I'd rather let the species die.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I didn't say she'd have all females - I said that she has to have at least 5 or so - obviously there's gonna be some male children among that, which is why I specificed "original males". Basically, this woman's "purpose" would be to keep having babies til menopause or death.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So the women would just be baby having tools? How degrading..

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Things like degrading someone don't really matter when your entire species is about to go extinct.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's the moral question - is it worth it. Would you rape this woman to save the human race? Is it worth continueing society if for the first few generations, it's going to be built on rape and exploiting women?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, I would let humans die out.. We've been at the top for a long time and it would be better to just let some other animal take our place... Like bears. Bearpocolypse has been coming for a long time and I've prepared myself for that inevitability.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

In vitro could be used. She wouldn't exactly be //bearing// a child, per se.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

:/ But don't you usually have to get the foetus/embryo into a womb pretty fast? Like, at some point, she'd be forced to gestate, and if she didn't want to/refuses to, it would still be a violation of her body.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It'd still be better than going through 9 months of pregnancy. Actually, this argument isn't thought out at all. idk, today my mind is just off. :S

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Is there even any point in TRYING to repopulate the Earth at that point? This is too much of a gray area. This sounds like a human mill. Ya know, like puppy mills, but with humans...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I wouldn't rape her because humans suck at life and Earth is fine without us

by Anonymous 12 years ago

word

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Okay, I read all the comments on this post and there are a few just like this one. My reply to all of you is, stop being so fucking superstitious. The Earth did not "welcome" us to its surface, and so it would be impossible for us to "out stay its welcome." The planet would not somehow be "better off" without us; the Earth is a tiny speck of a rock that's destined to revolve around a tiny speck of a star for the next billions of years, and we have no power over that. Humans do not "suck at life"; we would only suck at life if we ever allowed ourselves to go extinct. And there is no such thing as a "sign" that we need to let ourselves die.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I guess I could have worded that differently, but what I mean is that the Earth would be better off without humans. Before we invented all of our faggy ass technology all the other animals were fine and so was the whole environment.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well first of all, species have been going extinct since the dawn of life on Earth. I will grant you that humans have sped up the rate of extinction, but guess what, we also have the power to slow down the rate of extinction. Just as we have the capacity to harm the planet, we have the capacity to help heal it. The solution, then, is not to give up and say that the planet would be better off without us. Second, who cares if the planet would be better off without us? ...That's not a rhetorical question: humans are literally the only entity in the universe that actually care about the Earth (barring the possibility that there are some aliens out there watching us right now). If humans die out, the Earth will just continue revolving around the sun until it gets consumed by its expanding mass. Seriously, the Earth is doomed to a terrible fate. Whatever happens in the interim is inconsequential. If humans are harming the planet, then so be it, but I don't think that's relevant to the discussion of what we would do if we were threatened with extinction.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well..... no means no, so no rape.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

She doesnt need to bear my children, but she best be putting out :p

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I knew it! I knew someone was thinking this way

by Anonymous 12 years ago

On one hand, it would be a violation of her body, and any repopulated humans would be descended from some sick act. She could also kill any foetus that forms if shes a big enough asshole. On the other hand, in this kind of situation, the female would be just plain selfish to refuse. If the species is going to die out, the remaining humans should do all they can to repopulate. Also, instinct would take over, and the woman would be unable to resist, for the sake of continuity of species, no matter how much she doesn't want to. Bottom line: I would not force her because her subconscious would do it for me, but if not, I would, and make sure all the descendants know what a bitch their great great great... grandmother was.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yea she could totally throw herself to the ground front side first

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Also how could she have descendants if she doesn't reproduce

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How would she ever be able to refuse sex from me? Hmmm.. makes you wonder. What if you had one woman and ten men, but all of the men were homosexual and had no desire to reproduce with her? Wait.. then we can just do the whole artificial insemination thing. Never mind!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it takes about 22000 people to repopulate the earth

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The self importance we humans have lies in the distinction we see between ourselves and other animals, with the conclusion being that we are better. To act "humanely" is to exhibit compassion, kindness, and sympathy, does it not? We (mostly we) live our lives exalting the concept of our morality, and build societies kept in order by establishing a set of rules regarding ethical behavior. The fact that this post is in the negatives illustrates beautifully just how fickle our "morality" really is, and how much we are compelled by arrogance. We really are animals. :(

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Okay, people are smarter than I thought....

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not sure I would force the woman to try and copulate. While 10 men and 1 woman may theoretically be enough to continue the species, in practice, those 11 people would run into so many problems that it would probably be extremely difficult for them to successfully continue the species, and if they did manage to birth children without them dying during labor, the burden would just continue to spread onto them. If the 11 people were all experts on survival, then maybe there'd be a chance in hell. I find it highly improbable, though, that the woman wouldn't eventually give in and have sex with the men. All 11 of those people would have to live with each other if they wanted to survive, and I'm almost sure the biological instinct to reproduce would eventually kick in.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What happens if someone gets an STD?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Why is this negative? A big chunk of people say women should be able to get abortions if they were raped, but here we have over a hundred people saying rape and unwilling childbearing is good? Besides, at this point, the population is doomed and everyone would be half-siblings anyway and there would be family civil war because of all the resentment in the familyand the woman might just off herself to get away from it all.

by Anonymous 12 years ago