For those who aren't familiar with it, FX recently announced a new direct-to-streaming series on Hulu, titled "Y: The Last Man". It's based on the 2000s-era Brian K. Vaughan-written Vertigo comic book of the same name, where an incident occurs that kills every mammal with a Y-chromosome on the planet - except for one dude named Yorick Brown, and his pet male capuchin monkey. With half the population instantly dead, you can imagine that chaos ensues, especially when you factor in that a good majority of infrastructure support jobs are handled by - you guessed it - men. (And that's not even taking into account the death of uncountable species across the world as they will no longer be able to procreate, the destruction of food supply, etc).
You can see the trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EEQ5Lj-cXM
Obviously this series was written back before the huge push for inclusivity started, so its comic book iteration is not as horribly woke as it could be, but I'm just waiting for the shoe to drop on the TV version. Obviously, nature and genetics don't give two shits about your fee-fees and what you identify as, so that means if they go the full nine yards on this they're either going to have to:
-
Ignore the existence of trans people entirely,
-
Break the narrative and have it do something stupid like leave M-to-F trans alive but sterilize them,
-
Downplay the whole event by claiming it killed "trans-women" as well, or
-
Accept that M-to-F transgendered people genetically aren't women and lean into it and just show them as dead as well.
Somehow I think it's probably going to be option 2 or 3, but if it catches traction then the amount of salt this show is going to generate could season the world's popcorn for decades to come.
Even then. Most women will meekly accept their fate and starve instead of doing whatever it takes to survive. Do you think that your average basic bitch suburban woman is capable of shooting a deer in order to eat, let alone kill another woman to take their food supply?
I think most would have an easier time with the latter than the former. People get maimed the day after Thanksgiving for far less.
Unintentionally so.
But it reminds me of a story a female reporter once wrote when she spent a week in Syria, trapped behind enemy lines with a small group of rebels trying to fight for survival.
I should have bookmarked the article, but anyway, with only a few of them huddled in the building with constant, non-stop gunfire and explosives going off, do you know what this brave and stunning female reporter did?
Did she pick up a gun and help the rebels fend off the attacks so they could make a daring escape? No.
Did she try to grab some grenades and lob them at the enemies in order to provide cover for the rebels? No.
Did she help plot out an escape and help lead the group out of the city to higher or safer ground where less shelling and mortar fire and shooting was taking place? No.
What she did, the entire time, as she admitted herself, was huddled in a corner and cried. She cried. She screamed. She covered her eyes and ears; and wrote of the experience that "war is hell, for everybody".
Had the enemy breached the building they were in, she would have died. She wouldn't have fought back, she wouldn't have bitten into an enemy's neck or gone female-Rambo. She couldn't even handle the gunfire; she admitted as much herself. And after she saw the dead bodies and people being blown to bits around her, she shut down completely.
In that regard, Elleand is right. A few women MIGHT muster some courage to hunt and kill, but majority will go through an emotional breakdown, and starve to death. They just don't have the killer instinct to fight to survive, even for the sake of themselves.
All of that feminist empowerment in movies and TV where the woman fights back or picks up a gun and shoots at the enemy is just that, a power fantasy nowhere near indicative of real women.