Cannibalism discussion

Is cannibalism wrong if the people eaten consent to be eaten?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 28.6%

  • No

    Votes: 13 61.9%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 9.5%
  • Total voters
    21
Lucysnow said:
You want to know what was the most strange detail? 80 people advertised to willingly go to slaughter. 80! I mean the cannibal got to pick and choose his victim from all the 'me please, ooooh please pick me' freaks.

It must be something about computer geeks. I mean the victim was a successful computer chip developer and the predator is a systems expert.
Click to expand...

I think this is a faulty assumption. You could be right, but I am far more willing to bet it is a symptom of the isolation and insanity of modern society. From reading the article, I got the real feeling that there was something in cannibalism that appeals deeply, in a psychological way to the nature of humans, as a way to bond and become one, spiritually with one another.

Our society, has become soulless, and as a community, very spiritually unconnected to each other. I am willingly to likewise bet, that the apparent, "desire" to participate in cannibalism is probable higher in societies that are highly secular, cerebral, intellectual, atheistic, etc. and have been told the material third dimensional existence is all that there is of man's being. In America, the case is much different. The population has a much different view of it place in the cosmos. Although it's populations are spiritually used by the religious institutions for it's belief, it none the less doesn't hold with it's European counterparts.

I think if the same add were run in America, the same amount of response would not be garnered. I could be wrong here.

It is instructive that the book "Stranger in a Strange Land" was written by a scientist and a futurist, and therefor, in all probability, an atheist, also a communitarian. Have you read it? I recommend it for some insights into the psychology of this subject. In many ways it bears some resemblance to Richard Bach's "Illusions." But salvation is not found in the individual through uniting with the higher "consciousness", but is more of a communitarian principle, a bonding principle. The end result is the same. Where Bach present mankind's consciousness as part of a universal consciousness, Heinlein presents consciousness as part of a group consciousness, and to be "eaten" is to just physically rejoin what is in spirit, always a reality. It is holy and sacred.

So, in the final analysis, when people in today's society are feeling "empty and alone" inside, spiritually, after our highly atheistic and impersonal society has told them there is no such thing as god or any other dimensional consciousness, is it any wonder they think. . . hmmm, maybe I should eat or be eaten?
 
What's a faulty assumption that they are freaks? Or the computer geek part? For the latter I was just being glib, in the former I stand by my claim that they are freaks.

I disagree with what you say about isolation. The guy who offered himself up had a girlfriend and a room-mate. He wasn't isolated from society.

I think its off-the-cuff psychology to simply blame society for their fetish as if it was somehow widespread or to blame isolation. The psychologists who interviewed the eater didn't come to the conclusion that he was insane which is true for most psychopaths. He didn't hunt people turning them into victims, he did something much more difficult which was to ASK who wanted to engage in such a practice with him and offer themselves for dinner.

To say society is 'souless' or some spiritually devoid to to forget that this kind of aberrant behaviour has always existed in society not just 'modern' society. Hell even during Jane Goodall's investigation of chimps she discovered that a small number of chimps killed for pleasure and ate its victims, they were also shunned from the social network of their tribe. What are you saying that chimps have become souless and are alienated spiritually? I think its your own bias that leads you to blame this on atheism etc

Human's don't feel the need to 'bond' with others through eating them Eso, no, its a common theme though with serial killers, you know the freaks.
 
Lucysnow, you've prevented me from adding to this discussion because I agree wholeheartedly with everything you've said. Damn you... !

Barbie said:
What bothers me about debates over cannibalism is how pointless and irrelevant they are to each and every one of our lives. Arguing whether it should be legalized or not overlooks the fact that nobody wants to eat humans, and the extremely small population which does will do it whether or not it's legal as they are sick, dirty sociopaths in all likelihood.
Click to expand...

Hear hear.

Although I'm less in agreement with the rest of your post. Cannibalism is racist? Since when?
 
Cellar_Door said:
Although I'm less in agreement with the rest of your post. Cannibalism is racist? Since when?
Click to expand...

Did you even read the rest of my post?

"Imagine walking into a super market and seeing "Lean Negro" next to prime chicken, there's something terribly wrong with that scenario. Cannibalism is also racist when you think about it, everybody would prefer lean African meat, whereas Eastern European meat would never make it off the shelves and would grow maggots and continuously drop in price, as customers would walk by it visibly disturbed and say "wtf is that rancid smell?" and the store owners would discuss in meetings "we gotta get that shit off our shelves, let's give it to stray dogs and cats", but even the stray dogs and cats would leave the meat be until the weather finally disposed of it."

You can't tell me that wouldn't create racist attitudes in the long run ...
 
It wouldn't be a 'racist' attitude it would be a food option. We don't think preferring bbq chicken to beef teriyaki an act of discrimination against the rights of beef.

But anyway there was no discrimination, if you look at some of the worlds famous serial killers or cannibals from the West they decidedly eat 'white' meat.
 
Lucysnow said:
It wouldn't be a 'racist' attitude it would be a food option. We don't think preferring bbq chicken to beef teriyaki an act of discrimination against the rights of beef.
Click to expand...

Eastern european kids would be harassed at schools, it'd be like "Joseph's meat probably tastes like shit, what a maggot-carrying dirtbag".

But anyway there was no discrimination, if you look at some of the worlds famous serial killers or cannibals from the West they decidedly eat 'white' meat.
Click to expand...

Serial killers account for a marginal percentage of cannibalism worldwide, most cases as I've said are Chinese peasants eating fellow farmers' testicles or deep frying their buttocks after they're dead, or Congo tribes hunting pygmies like they would any other game. Oh, and just because serial killers eat whites doesn't mean they taste better, it just means most serial killers are white people with stubbles and dirty blond hair with ugly scars on their backs who unnecessarily chew on toothpicks and obsessively check their wrist watch for what time it is and carry a bus schedule in their back pocket living in majority white nations, basic statistics here.
 
Barbie said:
Did you even read the rest of my post?

"Imagine walking into a super market and seeing "Lean Negro" next to prime chicken, there's something terribly wrong with that scenario. Cannibalism is also racist when you think about it, everybody would prefer lean African meat, whereas Eastern European meat would never make it off the shelves and would grow maggots and continuously drop in price, as customers would walk by it visibly disturbed and say "wtf is that rancid smell?" and the store owners would discuss in meetings "we gotta get that shit off our shelves, let's give it to stray dogs and cats", but even the stray dogs and cats would leave the meat be until the weather finally disposed of it."

You can't tell me that wouldn't create racist attitudes in the long run ...
Click to expand...

Au contraire, that is exactly what I am about to tell you - mainly because your central premise is ridiculous to say the least.

'Lean Negro'?! 'Eastern European meat would never make it off the shelves'? What are you basing this all on?
The only cannibal I have ever heard of who has specifically sought out black people to eat is Albert Fish. However, Fish himself admitted that this was not out of preference but because he believed that they 'would not be missed'.
 
Cellar_Door said:
'Lean Negro'?! 'Eastern European meat would never make it off the shelves'? What are you basing this all on?
Click to expand...

I'm basing it on this concept called "science", it was a really popular fad in Europe 200 years ago but people have kind of forgotten about it, I shouldn't expect you to understand referrences to "science". I mean, seriously, how do you come off comparing maggoty Eastern European meat which is full of fat and has a rubber-like texture with a pale lifeless hue that takes twelve hours on a good bbq just to scold past the polar bear fat to lean Negro meat? It's obvious the latter would outsell Eastern European meat, and Eastern Europeans would face subsequent harassment for tasting so awful. If this isn't racism, I don't know what is ...

Oh, and I think you have the wrong serial killer, Albert Fish mainly went after like white kids with illiterate parents and ate their bums and sent their parents letters describing how he killed and cooked their children, of course this sounds absolutely disgusting but it's also very true, Albert Fish was a dirtbag, I'd love to headbutt him personally. But he was a fag, no doubt, he stuck roses full of thorns up his urethra and put pins and needles in that soft tissue located between one's scrotum and anus, a weird guy to be sure. I swear I'm not joking about any of this, look him up on google.
 
You sick [deleted] who the [deleted] voted that cannibalism not wrong? This cannibalism should stop if they keep doing they all are going to hell none of those [deleted] going to heaven when they die. They dont deserve to live why would they eat people or steal parts are they [deleted]? They should be sentence to death by law. No person should be eaten I feel sorry for those people who get killed by them they want to live like everyone else. If i were the goverment i would tell every police to capture those cannibalism bastards and killed. I heard one of those cannibalism said they would they eat thier own child what the [deleted] hes just a baby when born. Those [deleted] killers muderers. I hope all you cannibalism have [deleted] good time in hell.:mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm so glad you could add a touch of your own personal intellect and eloquence to this discussion. :D
 
I agree with Lucy on this.

Dead is dead. Muscle is meat. On every other species it's meat and it's acceptable in most cultures.

Is cannibalism repugnant because we are "civilized" and "sentient"?

Or is it because of religion?

What if part of your spirituality in practice was to consume your passed family members to retain them as part of you? To honor them? What if it could feed your family for an entire winter and their bellies would be full and they would be happier? Would you want to save your children from starving a winter? Circumstance is important, but not always the only moral point. What is a body? Are you a sum of your thoughts, or the contents of your brain? Are you for cryogenics and think that you have so much to give society that someone should revive you later? Why didn't you do it all while you were alive?

I don't care what you do to my body when I'm dead. Burn me to ashes, bury me six feet under, crush my carbon into a diamond... I don't care. Hell, if you want to hack me up and toss bits of me at passing cars, or pop out my eyeballs and have your way with my skull, I don't care much because I'm dead. You'll be a sick person, but I still don't care. Because... I'm dead.

What we are as a person is what we do as a person, not our body. We are human for our humanity, not for our flesh.

Cannibalism? Sure, why not.

I also believe that people say the meat is awful only because we haven't practiced enough recipes yet.
 
Norsefire said:
Do you think cannibalism is wrong? Do you think cannibalism is acceptable if the people eaten consented to being eaten? Discuss.
Click to expand...

It is impossible to consent to being eaten and that ruins the fun of the hunt.

Human, aka "long pig," is either a difficult meat to pick a wine for or a meat with which any wine will do. Red, rose or white each has its advocates, but as an in between meet like pork I would suggest basing you selection on the spicing you choose.

If your spicing is heavy I would choose a heavier wine to balance. The exception would be a roast. You'd definitely want a good red or even, dare I say it? A stout beer.
 
swarm said:
On May 10 2006, a court in Frankfurt convicted Meiwes of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes
Click to expand...

But he wasn't convicted for cannibalism, and the guy he killed also ate some of his own flesh willingly. They have him on video giving consent.

If you will your body to someone to eat should you die, that would be giving consent albeit post mortem consent. It would be like requesting your remains be distributed or taken care of any other way.

Killing or murder of humans is wrong, but we do all sorts of odd things to corpses these days. Why couldn't cannibalism be one of those things? Why is it illegal in some countries? Because you might get a taste for it and you might like it? I personally don't think I'd try human meat, but I rarely eat any meat as is. Fish or chicken no more than 3 times a week, if that.
 
Liebling said:
But he wasn't convicted for cannibalism
Click to expand...

Murder is the worse offense. Find some one who only ate people.

the guy he killed also ate some of his own flesh willingly.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

They have him on video giving consent.
Click to expand...

Also not relevant. He was not competent to give that consent.

If you will your body to someone to eat should you die, that would be giving consent albeit post mortem consent. It would be like requesting your remains be distributed or taken care of any other way.
Click to expand...

You can't give consent for some one else to commit a crime.

Why couldn't cannibalism be one of those things?
Click to expand...

Because it is illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top