In response to yesterday’s post, one of my readers said it was no more possible for people to voluntarily change religions than for me to change from being a vegetarian. My first reaction to that argument is “Dude, I could eat YOU if I were hungry enough.” And yes, this is one of those times when “Dude” is proper usage.
This got me to thinking about being in one of those crashed airplane situations where you have to eat one of the other survivors or else starve. Let’s say you are the only one with a gun, so you get to pick who gets eaten. Who do you pick?
1. Someone you like the least.
2. Someone who has already lived the longest.
3. Someone who looks like he/she will taste good.
4. Someone randomly chosen.
For the sake of this question, let’s say quantity isn’t an issue, so you don’t have to pick the largest person.
This is a tough question because I tend to like people based on how good I think they would taste. It’s probably a subconscious thing, but there’s a strong correlation.
I would rule out old people because I think they would taste like medicine and have too much gristle. Cannibalism would be hard enough without that extra challenge.
I wouldn’t want to choose someone randomly because that opens the possibility of eating someone I least want to eat. If I have to eat a person, I want to squeeze the melons myself, so to speak. It’s only fair.
I think I’d pick out the most delicious looking person, relatively speaking, and have a conversation until I heard a reason to hate. That wouldn’t take more than a few minutes. For example, if someone washes dishes before putting them in the dishwasher, that would be enough to get on my short list. I could tell myself I wasn’t eating a person so much as saving water.
Who would you pick?