cannibalism, when is it okay?

Post Reply New Topic

i'm sure many people find the notion of cannibalism to be appalling on a gut-level.

however, it has been a well known mortuary practice in certain indigenous south american tribes (a historically manipulated truth, turned into propaganda about the supposed savagery of these people).

from consuming grief: compassionate cannibalism in an amazonian society by beth a. conklin

was it right to put an end to this practice?

is there something inherently wrong with cannibalism?



thoughts?

All I know is that it's better to sleep with a sober cannibal than a drunken Christian.

^^^^
Lol!

Is that from Moby Dick?

I dunno. "Mortuary cannibalism' (my own term for what you describe -eating your own relatives after they have already passed on) is one thing.

Killing living people in a neighboring tribe say, and eating them like they are game is something else.

Cannibalism has health risks too. In fact eating critters that are even of a species related to your species is dangerous because you're suseptible to that specie's diseases. AIDs may have been the result of African humans eating monkeys.

The Fore tribe of New Guinea had a strange disease called "laughing sickness". A degenerative neurological and brain condition. After extensive sleuthing outside western researchers determined that the cause was their custom of cannibalism, and eating human brains.Laughing sickness is essentially the human version of "mad cow disease".

This reminds me, BiteLabs is apparently working on making this karma-free the way Mephis Meats is growing steak and chicken muscle in vats:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti ... 00-serious

Cannibalism is okay when the other person is delicious or when the other person is a Nazi.

Not sure, but wasn't cannibalism of the conquered quite common in some tribal warfare. I seem to recall reading that in some historical novels.
I think taboos are created by each culture and are not genetic nor instinctual. They do seem to stem from the connection, when and if the connection can be deduced, between a practice and a negative result such as incest and genetic disease.
I'm sure if we had all been raised to eat our dead relatives we would think it's dandy too. It is a bad idea though to let a practice like that continue unless there are tests done to determine the safety of the "food" prior to consumption.
"Shiver" - creepy topic but interesting discussion!

This topic leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

If one is trapped and starving to death and the person they eat has just recently died and had not been murdered, then I think it can be forgiven, for example, in the cases of people who have crashed in the Andes and began to starve waiting to be rescued, but if it can be helped, cannibalism should be avoided. The problem with cannibalism even when murder isn't a factor in it is communicable pathogens. Humans cannot contract all pathogens that traditional livestock carry, but can contract 100% of the pathogens that humans carry. The last cannibals....the inhabitants of Papua/New Guinea, were plagued by a prion disease called Kuru, spread by their practice of cannibalism.

As stated, it'll probably kill you. But if you're already starving, it's worth the gamble!

It's just dead material. If some religious groups eat their dead, that's a risk they're willing to take. Go for it!

To answer the question, there's nothing inherently wrong with it IMO unless the person is being harmed (slaughtered unwillingly) specifically for the cannibalism.



I don't know much about it, but now I want to. Were they feeding the dead to children? That might be crossing the line, otherwise I think consent to the practice while knowing the risks is perfectly fine. Gross for me, maybe, but fine for them.

I also eat animals because it fits in well with our DNA and microbiomes to do so, so I can't judge.

Never. It is never okay.

Good thing I don't drink then.

only to save one's life.

most animals are not cannibalistic because in most animals, there are plenty of undesirable products introduced into their blood stream when digesting other animals of their own species. there are many exceptions on the lower scales of life.

so carnivores are not known to prey or scavenge on other carnivores. so lions will not eat other lions that they kill in territorial disputes.
also lions will not eat hyenas that they kill. they find it unpalatable for some reason which i suspect is that they can not strip any more basic nutrition from other members of their species that they already have in their own bodies.

but there are different grades of carnivore.
a top level carnivore will eat a lower grade carnivore. like bears eat salmon.

i can't be bothered thinking about this topic much longer because i am not really that interested.

but why would the digestive system of an animal with the contents of another animal of their species be unable to extract much life giving force, and more importantly, what accumulations of poisons are introduced into their systems by eating their own species or other equivalent species (lions and hyenas for example).

there must be an element of diminishing returns at play.

anyway, as to the societal judgement of cannibalism, i learned when i was 12 that most of society is appalled at the idea of cannibalism.
the way i learned this was someone (an adult) asked me if i would like to go on a holiday in the australian outback when i get older, and i said "no way", and when i was questioned as to why, i said "because i don't want to get eaten by aborigines"
the response was one of worry that i would be so ignorant as to "accuse" aborigines of cannibalism and therefore equate them to savages.

but i always heard of head of head hunters and "bone through nose" cannibals and i never gave it much thought so i was innocent of their judgement of me.

i used to think "don't go walking alone in the outback, or you will wind up as aborigine s**t"

anyway i will close by saying that if the otherwise disposal of nutrition that may save the lives of the rest of the starving "diners" for a time necessary to be properly rescued may be quite a stupid idea, but it is certainly not advisable as a staple part of the diet.

It wouldn't bother me if eating people after they die was an option and something that happened. However it would be a worry that some people would develop a craving for human flesh and thus begin killing to get more. Cannibal killers are very rare, but I think we'd see many more of them if it became socially acceptable eating people after they died. So probably better all round that it stays reviled.

There was a case of a rugby team crashing in the Andes. As they died, some of them ate from the corpses and they survived. There was a movie made about the event called "Alive."

yes in fact the tribe i have used as an example practiced both mortuary and warfare cannibalism.

freaky. but then again don't we leave piles of dead bodies to rot in the wake of our wars.

although the author claims that the Wari''s flesh eating is a more rare form of cannibalism, and bone eating was much more pervasive.
i doubt bone eating is as dangerous pathogen-wise as flesh eating...

but i wonder how strange it all really is in comparison. idk how real this as i don't know anyone personally who has done this, but there is buzz about the benefits of eating placenta. and medicinal cannibalism has long been documented in european contexts, like, drinking human blood was considered a cure for epilepsy. it was thought to be the most potent right after the person had died and especially if they had died a violent death.
the paraclesian school of medical philosophy promoted dry powder human fleshy products and mummified products to treat a wide range of diseases and conditions.

not saying these treatments have any medical validity. just that they existed.

this is an interesting phenomenon, but i am not sure cannibalism is so rare if we are only looking within the serial killer population. complete consumption may be rare but there are many documented cases of serial killers consuming pieces of their victims.

i remember reading about andrei chikatilo enjoying the uterus of a female victim, saying something to the effect of, "it was delightfully smooth and rubbery".

there is also ed gein, who fashioned furniture-type items out of his victims' bones and skin. while this isn't direct cannibalism, i see a connection.