Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred

Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Printable Version

+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Culture (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-49.html)
+--- Forum: Religions & Spirituality (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-124.html)
+--- Thread: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred (/thread-3536.html)

Pages: 1 2

Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - C C - Apr 6, 2017

https://aeon.co/ideas/eating-people-is-wrong-but-its-also-widespread-and-sacred

EXCERPT: Cannibalism is not uncommon. Humans have long enshrined the consumption of human flesh in sacred ritual – not just a few times, but again and again, in almost every corner of the globe. Evidence for cannibalistic practices has been found in South America, on many Pacific Islands, among some ancient Native American tribes, and in many other regions of the world.

Nor is cannibalism a distant historical fact. In the 1980s, Médecins Sans Frontières, the international medical charity, documented ‘ritualised cannibal feasts’ among soldiers in Liberia. Since then, the ritual has become more common. By the early 2000s, sacred cannibalism was a common practice in this near-anarchic country, where violence, rape and drug-abuse are widespread. Cannibalism has also been documented in the Congo, in Sierra Leone and in Uganda, where it was infamously practised among the child soldiers of Joseph Kony’s army.

In such war-torn areas, participants in ritual cannibalism are often happy to make their motivations clear. They draw spiritual and physical power from the consumption of human flesh. The practice serves an obvious propagandistic value as well, striking fear into the hearts of enemies. And in child armies, cannibalism is an initiation ritual, an ordeal that transforms a boy into a man, and makes him feel sanctified, empowered and safe under the hails of bullets.

Cannibalism has no single, ubiquitous meaning. Rather, it is adapted to suit the spiritual framework of each culture in which it’s practised. For ancient Egyptian pharaohs, it guaranteed an eternal afterlife. For Druids, it might have been connected with agriculture and fertility. For others, cannibalism has served as a tool of empowerment, intimidation, and a way to honour the beloved dead. But most of all, cannibalism deals in taboo. We often think of taboo in terms of proscribed action: it’s taboo to marry your brother; or, in certain cultures, to eat pork. But in a much deeper sense, the word ‘taboo’ denotes the very points where the sacred and profane converge...

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Zinjanthropos - Apr 7, 2017

CC: We are of little caloric value. Take a look....just in:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/cannibalism-research-nutrition-1.4058932

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - C C - Apr 7, 2017

(Apr 7, 2017 03:38 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: CC: We are of little caloric value. Take a look....just in http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/cannibalism-research-nutrition-1.4058932

Yeah, but don't tell the survivors of Uruguayan Flight 571 that the practice is purely ritualistic because human flesh isn't "terribly sustaining". They might suddenly become decades-old remains atop a frozen Andean wasteland; along with a pardoned Lindy Chamberlain still residing in an Australian prison ("Michael, Michael, the dingo's got my baby!"). Sorry, folks, the ensuing years of your lives have all been an An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge type dream.

Other primates somehow manage to be choice bushmeat. I do vaguely recollect an old documentary showing the Huaorani tribe eagerly feasting on two week old, formerly maggot infested strips of monkey after such had been cooked. With the visiting film-crew vomiting in the background from the still potent stench.

Across the ocean, one could understand it (due to their heavier bulk) if gorillas were more popular than monkeys as comestibles. But ironically they might be incidental cuisine rather than "in demand" for that purpose: "There is little to no direct targeting of mountain gorillas for bushmeat or pet trade, but they can be caught and harmed by snares set for other animals. [...] The trade of gorillas and other threatened species as bushmeat is a problem throughout the Congo Basin. While recognizing the need for affordable protein for the growing human population, WWF works to eliminate hunting in protected areas." https://www.worldwildlife.org/species/mountain-gorilla

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Zinjanthropos - Apr 7, 2017

Quote:Yeah, but don't tell the survivors of Uruguayan Flight 571 that the practice is purely ritualistic because human flesh isn't "terribly sustaining".

"Alive" was a good read. Although the surviving Catholics ritually ate and drank Christ several times during their lives prior to crashing, they still needed the church to tell them it was ok to eat human flesh in extremis. Seems the biggest health hazard is psychological in nature although New Guinea cannibals might think differently.

Just remembering a Simpson's episode with a slight chuckle.

May I suggest CC, a couple of bbq'd Franks and a Caesar?

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - C C - Apr 7, 2017

(Apr 7, 2017 04:23 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: May I suggest CC, a couple of bbq'd Franks and a Caesar?

LOL. Hey, waitron, I'll also take some head cheese on a stud muffin, if the Vorarephilia Cafe's menu is finally trending that much away from gynophagia.

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Zinjanthropos - Apr 8, 2017

(Apr 7, 2017 06:35 PM)C C Wrote:
(Apr 7, 2017 04:23 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: May I suggest CC, a couple of bbq'd Franks and a Caesar?

LOL. Hey, waitron, I'll also take some head cheese on a stud muffin, if the Vorarephilia Cafe's menu is finally trending that much away from gynophagia.

CC, are you old enough to remember Al Capp and L'il Abner?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmoo

Excerpt: Shmoos are delicious to eat, and are eager to be eaten. If a human looks at one hungrily, it will happily immolate itself — either by jumping into a frying pan, after which they taste like chicken, or into a broiling pan, after which they taste like steak. When roasted they taste like pork, and when baked they taste like catfish. (Raw, they taste like oysters on the half-shell.)

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - C C - Apr 8, 2017

(Apr 8, 2017 03:44 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: CC, are you old enough to remember Al Capp and L'il Abner?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmoo

Excerpt: Shmoos are delicious to eat, and are eager to be eaten. If a human looks at one hungrily, it will happily immolate itself — either by jumping into a frying pan, after which they taste like chicken, or into a broiling pan, after which they taste like steak. When roasted they taste like pork, and when baked they taste like catfish. (Raw, they taste like oysters on the half-shell.)

[..."Here we have this great and good and generous thing—the Earth. It's eager to give us everything we need. [...] in my mind, I reduced the Earth... down to the size of a small critter that would fit into the Li'l Abner strip—and it came out a Shmoo... [...] When you look at one as though you'd like to eat it, it dies of sheer ecstasy."...]

International distribution, so wouldn't be completely surprising as an indirect ancestor of the two below. (Hank Williams Sr read "True Romance" comic books for ideas!)

The Pig that Wants to be Eaten
http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=176

Stephen Law: Some of the most famous arguments and problems in philosophy are based around thought experiments. [...] Not every example is taken from the world of philosophy. The story of the pig that wants to be eaten is based on Douglas Adams's talking cow in "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe," a beast that presents itself to diners as the main course before parting with "A very wise choice, sir, if I may say so ... I'll just nip off and shoot myself." Would there be anything morally wrong with killing and eating an animal genetically engineered to want to be eaten? This is certainly an intriguing question. As Baggini points out, the mere fact that most of us find the idea of killing and eating such an animal revolting doesn't establish that we would be morally wrong to do so. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/sep/03/highereducation.news

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Yazata - Apr 15, 2017

Eating people is supposed to be wrong... but they taste so good!

Especially babies!

Seriously though, there's a long tradition of ritual cannibalism. I'd guess that it extends all the way back to the stone age.

I've read that Homo erectus sometimes used to collect human skulls. I don't know what's up with that. Maybe they attributed magical properties to heads. I still like to think that there was a very early religious angle to it.

People have long believed that they can gain some of the characteristics of what they eat. (You are what you eat.) So warriors would sometimes eat enemy warriors they killed. It could be an expression of the utmost respect and regard, an expression of the belief that the eaten had qualities that eater wanted to incorporate.

I assume that even extended to animals. So eating particular animals was not only a matter of nutrition, but a matter of magic as well. Eating a bear might impart bear-like strength, eating a deer might make one fast. (One wonders how they conceived of eating giant wooly mammoths.)

I remember telling my friends years ago that I wouldn't mind if they ate my body in a big drunken feast at my wake after I died. (Again, you are what you eat.) Their reaction was "Eeewww!" But I was (somewhat) serious. Having my body eaten by friends and having a bit of its atomic substance live on in them is a better use for it than burying it in the ground or burning it.

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - Zinjanthropos - Apr 15, 2017

[quote pid='10965' dateline='1491630373']

International distribution, so wouldn't be completely surprising as an indirect ancestor of the two below. (Hank Williams Sr read "True Romance" comic books for ideas!)

The Pig that Wants to be Eaten
http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=176

[/quote]

I think evolution would take that turn if it meant prolonging the species. In some ways certain plants have evolved (ie. fruit trees) to make part of themselves delectable and digestible. Some animals sacrifice regenerative limbs also. Is there a creature besides a parasite or microbe that requires itself to be willingly consumed/eaten/digested so as to be beneficial to continuation of their species?

RE: Eating people is wrong – but it’s also widespread and sacred - C C - Apr 15, 2017

(Apr 15, 2017 03:00 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: Is there a creature besides a parasite or microbe that requires itself to be willingly consumed/eaten/digested so as to be beneficial to continuation of their species?

The black lace-weaver spider allows its newly hatched spiders to devour her.

Some animals engage in autocannibalism. A sea squirt assimilates its own "brain" when no longer needed. One rat-snake was documented as swallowing two-thirds of its body. Snakes can methodically break-down nutrients from their heart muscle and other tissues when starving, to an extent and with results greater than anything remotely resembling such in famished human bodies.