MovieChat Forums > 2012 (2009) Discussion > Wouldn't repopulation require sexual sla...

Wouldn't repopulation require sexual slavery of (young and fit) women?

posted 9 years ago by al666940-3
16 replies | jump to latest

You know, the Kubrick movie Dr. Strangelove showed very well the mentality of people in power when delving into:
- how to repopulate after a world catastrophe
- whom to save to go about it

And their conclusions weren't particularly kind:
- An OVERWHELMING majority of survivors would need to be female to ensure repopulation (plenty of incubator work ahead to repopulate)
- These females would need to be: young, fit, and especially pretty to "motivate" the remaining males whom would need to "perform" to be able to constantly impregnate a ratio of about 10 females to each male (each woman would be expected to birth kids more than once).
- Whom the males would be was not discussed (for obvious reasons to not rules themselves out of the list of survivors), but they would also need to be young and fit (plenty of backbreaking hard labour ahead to rebuild and sperm to generate).

And you can imagine how girls protesting about becoming human incubators would be dealt with...

[–] projectcyclops 9 years ago

I suppose if they wanted to repopulate as fast as possible then that would be the most efficient way to do it, but the emphasis with this film seemed to be on retaining an element of human kindness and compassion, rather than survival though purely utilitarian means.

I imagine if the remaining population did implement some kind of extreme, draconian forced breeding program then human civilisation would soon become pretty twisted and unpleasant - which was the point Kubrick was attempting to make with Strangelove, I guess.

---

He left a note. He left a simple little note that said, "I've gone out the window."

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Dark_Sithlord 9 years ago

I suppose if an enforced breeding program were implemented, that would be the most direct and efficient way to repopulate civilization.

I would like to think people would be very mindful of their duty and mandate as survivors to repopulate without having to resort to some government policy to do so. People would abandon any notion of birth control or family planning and naturally have as many children as possible to expand the gene pool and rebuild civilization.

[–] creatorof2002 8 years ago

A way to avoid "sex slavery" would be to just do what the catholic church has already done, outlaw birth control and abortion. People will not stop having sex its human nature. Many 3rd world countries are run by the catholic church and are over crowded because the church would not allow birth control or abortion.

[–] Juschill (786) 5 years ago

Like ... India? Indonesia? Singapore? Hong Kong? Bangladesh? Macau? Taiwan? South Korea? Yeah, that is a virtual who’s who of countries influenced by the Christian Church .

You anti-Christians really, desperately need new cliches and talking points.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (2212087) 8 years ago

Wouldn't donor sperm be the way to go? They could use stored sperm from men that are not necessarily even still alive after the catastrophe. This would also ensure a much wider genetic pool from which to draw.

[–] Pesebrero 8 years ago

Why they should have sex? Have you heard of fertilty treatments?

However, I don't think repopulation would be an immediate objective. More humans = more resources required. If the population growth gets stalled (which is right now an issue on several developed countries), then we should talk about women being "morally forced" to have kids.

[–] al666940-3 8 years ago

Yeah, fertility treatments that require specialized clinics and equipment that may very well NOT be available anymore.

And more humans are definitely needed, for without humans to process raw resource, there are NO resources (food doesn't magically appear on the shelves or your plate you know...) at least until machine automation is re-established.

[–] sdtony42 7 years ago

If repopulation were truly the goal, then there should have been maybe 1% men and the rest be fertile women. You could store all the baby batter you need in vials. The only reason to even keep any men at all would be as insurance just in case something goals wrong with the stored sperm.

[–] JaraPT 7 years ago

And why to go to sex slavery? Can´t people be just....nice about it?
I think those guys would be surprised if the girls started to shooting them
Kubrick made Dr.Strangelove in a different time when woman was supposed to be a fragile thing, waiting in the corner for a guy to take care of her.
I think they would still understand that they need to have children because women have brains, too. Why force it? Also, if you want to repopulate, you don´t want to start a new civilisation with violence. At least make it right this time, when you have a second chance.

[–] Volley (3375) 4 years ago

This is so stupid. Mankind started with 2 people, there would be zero need to have sexual slaves and have one man to 10 “hot” women. Life uh finds a way. Period.

[–] Costumer (1791) 3 years ago

Well, two people wouldn't do it. But the numbers I've seen indicate a population of about 200, equally split between men and women, and everyone agreeing to vary birth partners, would be genetically viable. Far more than that escaped in this film. (granted a pretty stupid film in the first place.) Even given the number of older survivors, there are plenty of survivors available for re-population. There isn't any reason that the population has to grow exponentially, just continuously.