Is Cannibalism right?

There have been many cases of cannibalism past and present. The most recent being the imprisonment of a German cannibal who, got let off with a light sentence because he obtained his victims consent. The question is can cannibalism ever be considered right in the human race?

Many species of animal use cannibalism as a form of survival. Often the stronger of a nest of young chicks will eat the weak ones to fend off competition. The female preying mantis eats its partners head while mating and rabbits eat their young if they feel threatened. There are probably lots more examples.

In some cultures cannibalism is still accepted as part of every day life, I think the aborigines still practice it to some degree. In cultures where cannibalism is considered wrong, however, is it fair to allow those who consent to just get on with it. Then comes self cannibalism whereby one eats his own body parts and lastly cannibalism of the dead. In these both cases cannibalism is not a choice but a matter of survival, e.g. a group of people are stuck in the middle of no where with no food. Is cannibalism right in those cases?

I eat my gf all the ti- Sorry, pre-watershed and all that.

Seriously though, the acceptability of cannibalism (or anything else) is a judgement made by modern culture, where the population habitually compare things to what they think should be acceptable. It has no bearing on the potential usefulness of cannibalism.

Practically though, if an lifeform of species X dies then why not reclaim the nutients contained in the dead biomass?

Plants do it to survive, last years leaves are this year's mulch. We often confuse the soul with the body (the latter exists the former doesn't), and religion rarely helps.

Another valid question would have been "Is rape right?"

I am not belittling (sp?) the trauma that rape invariably inflics on the modern victim it is a truly devastating crime.

But modern humans are used to having their privacy, 100,000 years ago they were not. If prehistoric females were overpowered by males they would think nothing of it and give birth several months later. If they had been traumatised by rape then humanity would have died out through paranoia.

Humanity wouldn't be where it is now without the "rape instinct" as it is called. This is fact, and its equally applicable to mammals, insects, birds etc...

Now, clearly both rapists and cannibals should be strung up and burned but that only the opinion of modern man. Things were different when humans were evolving.

Humans are no longer evolving, none of the evolutionary systems are intact. Thus we can't satisfactorily answer questions such as this.

Nice topic though :yuck:

(the above is my own opinion, not necessarily that of VBF forums or anyone else. If it caused offence then tough cheddar)

Interesting reply:rolleyes:

I am not to sure about the comparison with rape. I was careful not to mention the crime aspect of cannibalism in my post becuase it is a different subject in its self.

Rape is quite unacceptable in nearly all cultures. The reason being is that we have evolved and become intelligent enough to realise that causing someone else pain for our own pleasure is not right.

Yes I know some women like to be over powered by men and some find it quite a turn on, both the pain side of it and the not being in control. Some men like being overpowered by women too. However, this is clearly different from rape as it often requires that both (all) parties have full consent - and when this is the case it is accepted by most cultures and is not considered wrong.

The question I am asking is can the same be said for cannibalism.

Yes - it is wrong to torture and kill someone, chop them up and eat them, that is a crime. But can killing someone and eating them with their consent be considered a crime.

Yes - it is wrong to get job in a moug and eat peoples insides without that persons knowledge, but is it wrong to obtain written consent from your husbend or wife for example to eat them after their death?

P.S: How many women do you know who have a gestation period of several months?:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by visualAd
P.S: How many women do you know who have a gestation period of several months?:confused:

---

Wouldn't you consider 9 to be several?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by crptcblade
Wouldn't you consider 9 to be several?

---

I consider three to be serveral. 9 is many.

I would consider three to be a few, nine to be several and 12 to be a bunch.

How about we just call it 9?

:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by crptcblade
I would consider three to be a few, nine to be several and 12 to be a bunch.

How about we just call it 9?

:)

---

Definition:

Quote:

---

Several: more than two but not many

---

I guess ones definition of several depends on their definition of many.

You know, if I used a lot of definitions and philosophical mumbo jumbo, I could make you look like the bad guy, too.

:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by crptcblade
You know, if I used a lot of definitions and philosophical mumbo jumbo, I could make you look like the bad guy, too.

:mad:

---

I looked up several becuase I'm sad and have nothing else to do and becuase I was curious. I didn't do it to show you up - not that it shows you up anyway - it shows that either of us could be correct.

Sounds like loser talk to me.

:afrog:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by crptcblade
Sounds like loser talk to me.

:afrog:

---

I like to ensure that I use my words in the right context. I know how picky other people can get when you don't.

I always thought several meant three.

If you think that is bad: I once had to prepare a speech on a hero/heroine for a histroy lesson. I did my speech on Hitler beucase I thought heroine was the oppisite of hero.

I luv the way threads turn about in ChitChat forums. :thumb:

I think we should lock Joe and Mendhak in a forum by themselves for a month and see what they've writen at the end of it. :p

There was a bloke on a TV documentary that gave permission to be killed and eaten.

To use a programming analogy the "permission to be eaten" part is out of scope in this context. I can't see that he had much choice in being eaten or not, after he's dead.

What, did he expect to have a good time afterwards?

What a dumbass.

1 = one
2 = a couple
3 to 5 = a few
6 to 10 = several
11+ = take shoes & socks off

:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by visualAd
If you think that is bad: I once had to prepare a speech on a hero/heroine for a histroy lesson. I did my speech on Hitler beucase I thought heroine was the oppisite of hero.

---

Superb! :thumb: :lol:

Right schmight, human meat and blood is a delicacy ! :)

Save the neck for me Clark.

:slurp:

Self cannibalism? :ehh:

Does munching muff count as cannabalism?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by yrwyddfa
Does munching muff count as cannabalism?

---

:rolleyes:

I ate my own cranial nerve cluster. :thumb:

There is a potential problem with cannablism. Any parasites or diseases ingested in the flesh of one's own species are definitely capable of living in the flesh of the eater. Therefore, this is an easy transmission vector.

How about cannabisabalism?;)

She was like "eat me" and I was like "it's on" and he was like "23 years in a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison" and I was like "daaaaaamn"

:cool: