I didn’t downvote, but I think it’s unclear what your proposed responses are supposed to achieve.
The first and fourth include a lie, the second and fifth come across as abrasively sarcastic, and the third seems passive-aggressive (are you implying that the unworried don’t have loved ones, or that they’re shirking their responsibility to them?).
If you’re willing to lie, there are smoother options; if you want to tell the truth, why not do it in a nicer way, and leave an opening for the cashier to learn from your reasoning if they’re interested?
Maybe 2,3, and 5 are intended to deflect the question while neither lying nor ceding status, hence the aggressive edge? I can sort of see the idea there, and although I would neither want to take that approach nor be able to pull it off, maybe it would work for some personality types. This approach might feel more appropriate if the cashier had been hostile or mocking, rather than just curious, but in any case it seems likely to escalate the tension rather than defuse it.
Or maybe 3 is not supposed to have an edge, and is only meant to imply that you’re in an unusual position of responsibility for especially vulnerable loved ones. I guess I can see the point, but it still seems like that response would fall somewhere between dishonest (if the implication gets through clearly) and insulting (if it doesn’t). And it does require willingness to admit that you’re taking the virus seriously.
I didn’t downvote, but I think it’s unclear what your proposed responses are supposed to achieve.
The first and fourth include a lie, the second and fifth come across as abrasively sarcastic, and the third seems passive-aggressive (are you implying that the unworried don’t have loved ones, or that they’re shirking their responsibility to them?).
If you’re willing to lie, there are smoother options; if you want to tell the truth, why not do it in a nicer way, and leave an opening for the cashier to learn from your reasoning if they’re interested?
Maybe 2,3, and 5 are intended to deflect the question while neither lying nor ceding status, hence the aggressive edge? I can sort of see the idea there, and although I would neither want to take that approach nor be able to pull it off, maybe it would work for some personality types. This approach might feel more appropriate if the cashier had been hostile or mocking, rather than just curious, but in any case it seems likely to escalate the tension rather than defuse it.
Or maybe 3 is not supposed to have an edge, and is only meant to imply that you’re in an unusual position of responsibility for especially vulnerable loved ones. I guess I can see the point, but it still seems like that response would fall somewhere between dishonest (if the implication gets through clearly) and insulting (if it doesn’t). And it does require willingness to admit that you’re taking the virus seriously.