Boyfriend said something disturbing

[spottedpjs]

I changed name for this and would love responses especially from people who watches / likes movies showing an apocalyptic world

We were talking about The Walking Dead. He watched a few years ago and I’m just watching now.

So I asked him if he was leaving in a word like TWD:

• Would he kill any zombies? He said yes
• Would he lie, cheat, deceive, kill any humans so he can get their supplies? He said yes if he wanted to keep / thought it was worth keep surviving

• Would he kill a baby? He said yes because they are easy to kill and are just there doing nothing
• Would he eat the baby? He said yes, it would taste like veal

If you don’t know, there is a baby in TWD and people go to great lenghts to protect her and help her survive so his answers were very shocking and disturbing to me even though we were talking about something that is totally not real and will never ever happen

What does it say about his personality?

And to ask some questions in advance: he has no children, doesn’t show any signs of violence, has his life together and a good job, good social life, comes from a normal family and as far as I know has never been involved in anything bad, unlawful.
He seemed well adjusted until now.

I know him for nearly 2 years and live separately.

I think I'd probably be the moral booster. Maybe the person the leader looked to when they were struggling for a dose of 'get it together man! Its not that bad, look, the sun's out'. I'm not shagging him though, last thing we need during an apocalypse is a pregnancy scare xD

Welcome to the tribe! Rule 1, no baby consuming of any kind. Rule 2, no spoilers (later rule added because we've had problems of that nature before and now there won't be any new TV series for a while, we must protect endings like we do eachother).

I completely agree with you, and personally think it was totally irresponsible to have a baby so soon after the initial invasion. The threat was still very much there, and they'd only just started realising possible ways to start neutralising the threat.

And although having babies is obviously needed if they want to avoid extinction, the baby situation had an egregious impact that left the family with less chance of surviving in the longer term (trying not to do a spoiler).

I was literally just coming back to this thread to reference that. A good friend of mine was in Montevideo last year and met two of the survivors in a bar when he went there to watch some of the Rugby World Cup. He wasn’t so crass as to ask them any details but said they were as normal as anyone else - in extremis and all that. And for people who don’t know what we are referencing: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayan_Air_Force_Flight_571

Thank you for accepting me into your tribe, I am happy to adhere to your rules.

You are such a Claire through and through btw! If you were able to get medical books from abandoned library, you could also become the in-house doctor/nurse/healer. Or assign that role to one of your other tribe members. Such an incredibly important role that one.

I applaud his honesty. I'd probably answer the same.

But what makes him think the baby would taste like veal?
I've read that humans are called "long pigs" in some societies because we taste like pork, so a baby would taste like suckling pig.

In reality, we probably do, but the whole "tastes just like chicken" is way funnier. Possibly with the exception of "tastes just like swan" 😮

Realistically the threat should be somewhat neutralised and a safe complex established before anyone starts thinking about having kids. Even then I'd be inclined to argue it was an unnecessary risk and encourage people to wait until a cure had been developed.

I would prefer we all prioritise existing people rather than making more snacks for the zombies (and apparently, sometimes, people). Personally, if our group was female only I think I would prefer it...but realistically, the muscle of men may have its uses.

Perhaps we should add rule 3, no breeding, at this current time- indefinitely. And, because we might need it, 4. Any man attempting to coerce, assault or otherwise harm a woman to be thrown fourthwith to the zombies.

What does it say about his personality?
And to ask some questions in advance: he has no children, doesn’t show any signs of violence, has his life together and a good job, good social life, comes from a normal family and as far as I know has never been involved in anything bad, unlawful.
He seemed well adjusted until now

It makes him seem practical and pragmatic, and looking for the survival of the fittest in extreme situations.

You asked him a hypothetical question and don't like the answer. I think it shows more red flags about you that you're taking it seriously than for him.

Fwiw history shows that more recent cannibalism cases were not viewed well by peers even in times of extreme circumstances.

If caught you were likely to be tried for it. If you were lucky. That's if you escaped being lynched.

You should factor that into your hypothetical actions.

What does it say about his personality? No idea. Perhaps that he likes escapist nonsense on the telly and has a sense of humour.

Rule 5 - all women to be on the pill in case of potential attacks. When existing supplies of the pill become too out-of-date to be effective that could cause an issue. But hopefully the new society would be more established by then.

I like the feed any disobeying men to the zombies rule. I do wonder whether that is enough of a deterrant to deter men and the effects of testostorone though. I think history suggests that it might not be enough.

Sorry to anyone thinking I'm derailing the thread btw, I am having fun thinking about these hypothetical situations and can't resist.

The question was asked as a thought exercise. It's not about what's real. It's about what you could do in a fictional world.

I'm well aware the human race do and have done horrible things to each other, but isn't the point of the show really about trying to hold onto your ethics and civilisation?

It's not particularly interesting or edifying to go "yeah I'd just revert to the worst possible version of humanity". Not really a world worth surviving in, if there's no compassion or idealism.

Haha I did think of that therapist woman on startreck as I remeber doing one of those big quizzes online that pulls in a bunch of different TV shows and films to tell you who you are most like and she was my number 1.

I don't think I'd have the brains for the medical stuff though. Outsourcing that! Know anything about dentistry or setting bones? We need someone to get the books out on those things.

I could see myself going down the John locke route from 'Lost' and developing some side obsession that I hyperfixate on too though. Hopefully without the god complex xD I think I'm too lazy for a god complex. We can outsource that too.

Why is it a question about holding onto your ethics?

Honest question.

It could be interpreted in numerous ways in complete good faith.

The answer given could be about prioritising the survival of loved ones.

I thought that but then I thought how about we give the men who want to stay vascetomies instead? xD But then I suppose we'd still be at risk of invading men.

I think I'd go with the pill being optional but if pregnancy occurs, both the woman and the man who knocked her up, are to leave before the baby arrives if we are in a living situation where the noises of the child could put us all at risk.
Sound agreeable? Maybe its too wishy washy.

Rule 6 - everyone to maintain excellent dental hygeine, with the goal of prevention rather than cure.

I completely relate to the hyperfixation thing. I'm not sure my interests could be turned towards medical-related stuff as I have never been drawn to it before. I would hyperfixate on building a beautiful village. Starting with tents, then basic structures and improving/learning as I go. Building sanitation infrastructure like compost toilets and running water from a nearby fresh water source. I would need someone to pick up DIY books from the library.

What you would do and what you would justify, in the direst of straits is a question of ethics and compassion.

🤣

This is watching crap leads to: even more crap
relax and come back into focus onto this reality. Some people in Ukraine might have seen similar not exact but...

I do not think your ethics would allow you to actually implement your rule about banishing the couple.

I have a solution though. I would build a proper soundproof hut for them. There are excellent sound proofing stuff available. And we'd have time to source that before baby born. Actually, my plan wouldn't work would it. I think we need to just take out the sound risk scenario from our hypothetical apocolypse.

Well it’s survival of the fittest isn’t it. Eat baby to stay alive or let baby live and you both die. Anyway no it wouldn’t raise any issues for me.

You can't justify anything if you are dead.

In a fictional world, I'd rather be Seok-woo than Yon-suk.

I think what we say we would do and what we would actually do are often two very different things.
I like to think I’d be in some kind of resistance and go out of my way to protect others. Maybe that cold tough version of me would kill the useless baby for the survival of the group. But in reality I actually find violence horrible, I’d probably get PTSD from killing one zombie and I cry at the thought of babies or children dying even though I’m childless

Interesting question. I'm vegan. I b3lieve we should avoid harming any creature. A big part of that for me is not being speciesist. Eating a lamb or a chicken is no different from eating a cat or a dog. By extension, I don't know that eating a human is especially worse than eating any other animal.

But ultimately I will choose to save myself first and foremost. I have incurable cancer. My life-extending drugs are not vegan.

In a life or death situation would I eat another creature? Of course. A human? Quite possibly. A baby or child? That's where it becomes really uncomfortable but I can't say categorically that I wouldn't.