Cannibalism: Why Not?

[H.H. Holmes]

Why does western culture harbor a revulsion for eating human flesh? I think that most of us in modern society find cannibalism as something that is inherently evil or wrong. From a moral standpoint, there are several reasons that could be brought forth as to why the consumption of one's own kind is "wrong", but this is only by OUR moral standards, not those of other cultures. Many tribes and, indeed, civilizations have not shared the west's view that cannibalism is an unspeakable evil.

The maoris, a tribe in New Zealand, had regularly eaten their enemies after battles. This is a rather common form of cannibalism and the remains of enemies were routinely thought to be a part of the spoils of war, just like women and other food stocks. The Mambila tribe of Nigeria also ate the bodies of their enemies after battle, right on the spot, then brought back the leftovers for the older members of the tribe. Meat is meat to them. Why waste a perfectly good source of protein? This is the outlook shared by several tribes that lived in Africa and South America. The Mambila would even sell their own dead to other tribes for consumption. Some tribes even sold slaves or prisoners for the expressed purpose of food to other tribes. In the congo, captives were lined up and their bodies marked with paint to show the different cuts of meat which could be chosen by customers. A quote from the Reverend W. Holman Bentley describes one such instance of cannibalism for profit:

They would paddle down the Lulongo, cross the main river when the wind was not blowing, make up [capture] the Mobangi and sell their freight in some towns for ivory. The purchasers would then feed up their starvlings until they were fat enough for market, then butcher them and sell the meat in small joints'.

Some tribes even made war for the sole purpose of obtaining human flesh for their own consumption, like the Amazonian Cobeus tribe.

Revenge has also been a motivator for cannibalism throughout history. What better revenge could there be than to consume your enemy? I can't think of one more personal and complete. Confucius even said that if one's parents were killed, then the revenge should exceed mere killing and the perpetrator should be consumed completely. There have been ongoing blood feuds between the people of Easter Island for centuries where two clans would go back and forth killing and consuming members of the other. New Guinea was much the same, as well as other locales.

Cannibalism as a form of punishment or a showing of dominance has also been prevalent, even into the modern day. As recently as the Cultural Revolution in China, people were eaten as a political statement and a warning against enemies. Those who were accused of opposing the Maoist regime were regularly killed and eaten. In some provinces, the local people were forced to eat the flesh of traitors as a showing of their loyalty to the new government. Those who refused risked being meals themselves. Livers were cut out of still living victims and eaten. One female official developed a taste for male gentalia. (Look into the book called "Scarlet Memorial" by Zheng Yi for more accounts of cannibalism from a first-hand perspective.) Even more recently, cannibalism was committed during civil wars in Africa, notably in Liberia.

Of course, there has been more understanding when cannibalism is performed as a means of survival, like the Donner party and the Franklin expedition.

My question, in short, is if there is any non-ethical reason not to consume human flesh?

(Btw, most the information in this post can be found in "A History of Cannibalism" and "A Criminal History of Mankind". Both are good reads.)

Edited January 6, 2011 by H.H. Holmes

[Mr.United_Nations]

The question anyone should by asking is: Why would you eat a human being?

[H.H. Holmes]

The question anyone should by asking is: Why would you eat a human being?

Why not? That is the question I am asking.

However, to answer you question, I can think of a few off the top of my head.

-Revenge

-Religion i.e. Aztecs

-As a means of sustenance, whether for survival or for human flesh's easy availability.

-Profit, as outlined in the original post.

-Pleasure, many tribes actually like the taste of human flesh.

Edited January 6, 2011 by H.H. Holmes

[~TheBigK~]

It's quite hard for me to think of any non-ethical reasons, actually. The only thing that I can come up with is the possibility of disease, such as kuru which is essentially the human form of mad cow disease. I think it's quite rare though outside of Africa.

Aside from that, I can't think of much.

[Coffey]

Doesn't it make you ill or mentally messed up or something? I remember reading that somewhere.

The thing is in your post you are using backwards cultures as a comparison, in this modern day and age there is no need to eat another person. Also it is rather disrespectful unless the person who had died wanted that, then it is hard to prove and also brings up the "did somebody murder him becuase he wanted to be eaten when he was dead".

Personally I couldn't eat another human being and would be VERY angry if someone at somebody I knew when they passed away. We are civilised now and respect other people compared to the tribes you are using as a comparison.

[Fluffybunny]

I find it more than a tad disturbing that a person would argue •in favor of• cannibalism.

Most societies have moved beyond such caveman practices, and that is for the best. Having your brain turned into Swiss cheese aside, there is no need for it. Our food supply is pretty secure and our societies have a ritual in which the dead are respected, not turned into a buffet.

[Mac E]

Because you don't taste good!

[Mac E]

This reminds me of a recent article I read about eating Horses on CNN. Poll

It's not exactly the same, but there is still the stigma around it just like eating human.

Edited January 6, 2011 by Mac E

[Bracket]

So, who chooses who gets eaten?

[H.H. Holmes]

I find it more than a tad disturbing that a person would argue in favor of cannibalism.

Most societies have moved beyond such caveman practices, and that is for the best. Having your brain turned into Swiss cheese aside, there is no need for it. Our food supply is pretty secure and our societies have a ritual in which the dead are respected, not turned into a buffet.

I am not arguing in favor of cannibalism, I was just asking whether anyone could think of a purely pragmatic reason that eating humans would be harmful or detrimental.

Respecting the dead is a matter of pure opinion. In some cultures, the family members of the dead eat them to have some kind of closure and to feel better connected to them after their demise. Who is to say that their tradition is any less valid than ours? If you think about it, stuffing someone into a box and burying them underground in the hopes of preserving them for a "judgement day" some time in the future would seem just as bizzarre to many people. I think there is alot of cultural bias in saying that our society is respectful of the dead, yet other people who might treat their dead in a different way are not. To a few cultures eating the dead is showing the utmost respect for them.

Edited January 6, 2011 by H.H. Holmes

[S2F]

It depends on the scenario I suppose. Survival, in which consuming human flesh to survive would be (conditionally) acceptable in my opinion as opposed to going to the local grocer and choosing between beef, chicken or human meat, which would seem distasteful to me (no pun intended). That is solely based on my own ethical upbringing though and I'm sure that those raised with cannibalism would see things differently and could justify the practice for themselves.

[Emma_Acid]

I am not arguing in favor of cannibalism, I was just asking whether anyone could think of a purely pragmatic reason that eating humans would be harmful or detrimental.

Its a very good way of spreading CJD, the human form of mad cow disease, something which otherwise you can't catch from another human. (edit - I think)

Edited January 6, 2011 by Emma_Acid

[thedutchiedutch]

This reminds me of a recent article I read about eating Horses on CNN. Poll

It's not exactly the same, but there is still the stigma around it just like eating human.

Horse steak is the best

Edited January 6, 2011 by thedutchiedutch

[pallidin]

I don't think I could handle eating a human.

Even in special circumstances, such as a plane crash in a remote location, where eating the dead humans are the only viable source of survival nutrition, I don't think i could do it without puking on the first bite.

[Bracket]

I don't think I could handle eating a human.

Even in special circumstances, such as a plane crash in a remote location, where eating the dead humans are the only viable source of survival nutrition, I don't think i could do it without puking on the first bite.

I could. As long as i didn't know them anyway. Just don't forget, the best meat is in the rump.

[H.H. Holmes]

Its a very good way of spreading CJD, the human form of mad cow disease, something which otherwise you can't catch from another human. (edit - I think)

Yet, there has been no similar reports (I believe), either from colonial sources or from accounts of more modern cases of cannibalism, of other individuals outside the Fore people to have exhibited similar symptoms. Also, kuru is thought to of originated from the consumption of an individual who happened to of spontaneously developed CJD. Eating a regular person's flesh is no more dangerous than eating any other animal. I suppose you could make an argument for contracting those infectious illnesses that uniquely affect the human population, but the same could be said of almost any type of sexual activity.

My link

Edited January 7, 2011 by H.H. Holmes

[Sevastiel]

Why not? Social conditioning & pragmatism.

The social construct will turn on its rebellious pieces and parts.

The whole structure of laws, rules & regulations is created by the construct to ensure the constructs continued survival against it's own infections and diseases (extreme objectivity, I know).

To those others you post who have/do practice cannibalism, it is merely a part of their own construct and, in many cases, did/does promote the continued survival of said construct; as they had little to nothing to lose by doing so against their dead, dying and enemies under the circumstances they found themselves in.

That we do not condone it likely has more to do with the past patterns of our own constructs. Circumstances were such that man-power was needed to match the scale of conflict, and the resultant spread of sickness and disease due to elevated and recurrent war and famine made cannibalism a dangerous prospect. A slave to tend fields and mines and work construction was more valuable since it meant more of one's own loyal men would be available to fight the enemy. Harvesting large battlefields of the dead would have been strategically inhibiting, and the dead are only good as a food source for so long.

The stigma of witchcraft and other superstitions would also have had tremendous influence, placing value on the non-corporeal aspects of things or attaching simple, every day occurances with recent disrespect shown to the dead. As we all know, belief alone has tremendous power. That would be all that was needed to put an end to it. (Smith the smith did something to dead beat Dan the other day and this morning he smashed his hand into pudding. Must have been because of what he did to Dan. We better start contemplating ways not to p*** the spirits off then...Smith was pretty important in our warrior society until he smashed his hand. Now he can't fight or make swords. Worse, if we eat him, he'll come mess us up and there's nothing we can do about it.)

There's also the concept of what to do when not at war? Do you farm human cattle? What do you do about all the revolts when they realize that they're going to be killed and eaten? A man who has nothing to lose and everything to gain by fighting and rebelling under those circumstances is going to make you earn your food; you might even have to do so when it's not convenient to do so because of this. There would be a severe shortage of meat when the wars die down and eventually one would have to start cutting into their own populace at ever-increasing rates given the life-cycle of a human-being versus the needs of the metabolism of same.

It simply makes more sense to raise other life-stock with more efficient life-cycles and birth rates, which won't fight back or cause trouble due to an enhanced ability to think & put those opposable thumbs to good use...well, good for themselves in any case. In smaller instances perhaps that would be feasible, such as at the tribal/inter-tribal level. But in mass-civilization, relying on cannibalism itself would only be something that would gain momentum on it's own.

It's just ineffecient once you get to a certain number of mouths to feed.

But as for the off-hand, casual human flesh eater? Strictly conditioning.

Conform to society, or at least play along convincingly, or you'll become acquainted with Bobo and Bubba, close friends with your own voice in a tiny non-descript place all your own, or put out of society's misery by their long arm.

Pretty convincing reasons for why not.

As what we learn to know as right & wrong is determined by society, it all depends on society.

[Placater]

So, who chooses who gets eaten?

The Cook.

[Hurrikane]

Understanding the roots to a tradition are imperative in understanding it's impact in modern societies and practices. Different cultures have often develpped similar practices from similar environmental impacts that has been introduced into different religions.

It has been proposed that many ancient civilizations that practiced Cannibalism often lacked an adequate and a sustainable source of protein. The necessity for protein was eventually enveloped into a religious practice. One of the most popular cultures that practiced ritualistic human sacrifice and cannibalism were theAztecgroup of central Mexico. It has been explained to me, and made sense at first, that human sacrifice and cannibalism can best be explained as a response to population pressure, economic fatigue and long widespread famine. Unfortunately, if you do the research you find contradicting theories as to whether the lack of protein could be a cause of cultural cannibalism.

I for one am not convinced that the Aztecs ever experienced a lack of protein. The people consumed various animals, fish, and insects that would probably have contained sufficient amounts of protein to keep the general population healthy . The increase in the amount of protein from cannibalism would not have made a large increase in protein count. Perhaps, human remains were seen as a rich food for the wealthy and powerful people in the time?

Here is an article that contributes to this discussion on cannibalism and on the Aztec theory of Cannibalism...make your own conclusions!

Perhaps this theory could be used however in identifying why western societies find Cannibalism to be disgusting and immoral. We are surrounded by food and have no necessity to eat human beings as a source of nutrition.

[Habitat]

" Long Pig " is reputed to have a lengthy culinary history. The concern is whether you become part of the menu by having died naturally or were a victim of predation. The latter would be obviously unacceptable within any functional social group.

[Alladar]

I think we all would turn to Cannibalism in a very short time if there was no food. In Australia we had escaped prisoners turn into cannibals to survive. (recently made into a movie)

see:

A journey through hell's gate = My link

October 29 2002 - Alexander Pearce fled one of Tasmania's worst penal hellholes, only to find himself living another nightmare, writes Paul Collins.

Also:

Egyptians turned to canniblism after 7 days of drought eatinmg babies and young children.

CANNIBALISM IN EGYPT DURING THE FAMINE OF 1201 = My link

p.s - If the food runs out, i will be one of the first to eat human flesh.

Also see:My link

The survivors had little food and no source of heat in the harsh conditions, at over 3,600 metres (11,800 ft) altitude. Faced with starvation and radio news reports that the search for them had been abandoned, the survivors fed on the dead passengers who had been preserved in the snow.

[+susieice]

Eeeewwwww. I guess we all taste like chicken in the long run.

[Drev]

One day the Earth will be overcrowded, foodsupplies will run scarce, then lets see about all these ethics and social behaviour.

[Chronii]

Because it's disgusting, morally wrong and possibly dangerous (disease).

One day the Earth will be overcrowded, foodsupplies will run scarce, then lets see about all these ethics and social behaviour.

Zombie Apocalypse

Edited January 7, 2011 by Chronii

[Drev]

Much like it yea, but with less limb tearing. ^^