Interrogation Tuesday Results:
And in list form:
|Yes, but I would eat it anyway||21%|
|Depends on timing-- has the human been digested already? Have the nutrients been used up?||26%|
I feel like the "other" responses deserve special mention. They are truly a testament to the twisted readership of CrusteaceanSingles.com.
"Depends on who the bear ate-- did the human deserve it? Was there anything nutritious about the human?"In conclusion, I'm kind of shocked by how many people think it would be secondhand cannibalism, but are open to being secondhand cannibals (21% of respondents). Kind of seems like a slippery slope.
"I would find that un-bear-able"
"If I could kill a bear, I'd consider myself awesome."
"No, I would consider it second-hand cannibalism to eat the doo-doo (for lack of a more appropriate term) of a bear that had eaten a human"
"Only if the human is still being digested, and I consume the parts of the bear which are currently housing the human parts, like the colon. Straight-up flesh of the bear, not an issue."
"What do you think koala tastes like?"
"what if it was a bear that had eaten a human because the human had eaten his secret lover (also a bear)? It's like a never ending chain of cannibalism if you think about it..."
"Yes, but I don't think I'd ever eat a bear anyway"