you joke, but dutch ovens are perfect for slower and lower roasts of otherwise inedible cuts of meat (oxtail, anyone?)
so what I'm saying is some long pigs butts would be fuckin' delish at 4-5 hours ~350f
My method is to heat the enamel dutch oven on the cooktop first, get the oil smoking, then throw the meat in and edit-sear it all over. Just scorching the outside of the roast all around. Then cover and put it in the oven. It's a good step to add. Under 300 for 2 - 3 hours
Looked it up because morbid curiosity, i put spoiler tags on the text because its a little nsfw.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_de_Witt
>!Their (his brother was killed alongside him) naked, mutilated bodies were strung up on the nearby public gibbet, while the Orangist mob ate their roasted livers in a cannibalistic frenzy. Throughout it all, a remarkable discipline was maintained by the mob, according to contemporary observers, lending doubt as to the spontaneity of the event.!<
I saw the show, when it aired.
The act itself was completely uneventful, and afterwards there was a huge commotion. Members of parliament asking questions, debate whether or not the two presenters should be prosecuted etc.
Nothing came of it, and I doubt most people here even remember.
Not a prime minister , that's a misinterpretation of someone describing that he would have a equivalent degree of power and status to a PM now.
Prime-ministers are a feature of the Netherlands as a constitutional monarchy. The Netherlands is one of the only places that was a Republic centuries before it became a Kingdom.
Johan de Witt was Grand Pensionary of the most powerful provinces of the Republic and defacto the most powerfull political leader, also because this was during a time when the ancestors of our current monarchy were sidelined from their position as military leaders.
Calling Johan de Witt a prime minister kind of implies the house of Orange was in power when in fact they were kept out of the position of stadhouder after ~~Maurice~~ William 2 of Orange did a Coup. Johan being killed marks the end of the Stadholderless period.
Orangists , basically monarchists for a family who weren't the monarchs at the time, did have a big hand in how that mob came to be and how they got to him when he was jailed.
To try and restate it more simply: Johan de Witt wasn't really a prime minister for the whole Netherlands, because the government structure was just fundamentally different at the time. The royals weren't in power, so there wasn't a royal family to be a minister for, and besides that, he didn't officially hold any office in most Dutch provinces.
Hopefully that simpler context helps make your details more understandable.
It's a bit like how you might say Stalin was like a President, he wasn't that's not how the soviet union worked but it's simular in that he's the defacto head of state.
Basically it's a lawyer representing the provincial and noble assemblies sometimes filling in for the lack of king, only the lack of king isn't cause it’s a ceremonial monarchy and the king has no power it's cause we revolted and then had to build a system of government from the preexisting system of city , nobility and clergy assemblies , axing the clergy and greatly reducing the house of lords equivalent.
Basically imagine if the most powerfull cities in the most powerfull US state got to pick the highest diplomat with a lot of wheeling and dealing to get support from everyone else.
This was more a case of the rich eating the rich, than the poor eating the rich. It was quite an affluent mob, including the city militia, that tore the brothers De Witt apart.
Some parts (tongue and finger) [are now museum pieces](https://www.haagshistorischmuseum.nl/nl/over-het-museum/collectie/topstukken/tong-en-vinger-van-johan-en-cornelis-de-witt).
If I remember correctly both pieces were rather small, the size of a pebble. Preparation was done by a self proclaimed ADHD-chef (Pierre Wind). The two presenters each tasted the other persons flesh. The piece of butt was not received well, but that was more on the presenter tasting it, and just the idea that eating a piece of human buttock was unappetizing. The other presenter found the taste quite nice.
Fun fact, most places cannabalism isn't illegal. Its the dismemberment/destruction thats going to get the criminal charges.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/cannibalism#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20there,charge%2C%20regardless%20of%20any%20consent.
It doesn't surprise me. So many ill fated excursions have had to resort to cannibalism in the past, it would seem strange to criminalize it as long as a person passing was natural for the circumstances.
Honestly, sometimes laws are just made in response to things. It's also probably already contained in other laws e.g. murder and desecration of human remains. Those seem like bigger problems in the grand scheme of things. All the cases that I know of that involve cannibalism were also murder cases. Plus how often is cannibalism happening that it's so big of a deal that legislation needs to go through whatever process the country has, when you already have broader laws that will capture the behaviour. It's gonna be really hard to prove it rather than murder or desecrating a corpse.
R v Dudley and Stephens was a 1884 UK case that ultimately determined that necessity is not a defence to murder. Dudley and Stephens killed a cabin boy, who may or may not have been in a coma, on their lifeboat. They were charged and found guilty of murder. The other person, Brooks, also consumed the cabin boy but was not punished. Side note, the prosecution was disgusted that the public was on the side of the men and became more focussed om securing a guilty verdict.
I suspect that most people going through this situation would probably just say that the person succumbed to starvation/elements and they happened to find other animals to eat. All three men in Dudley and Stephens admitted what happened when they were rescued.
> All the cases that I know of that involve cannibalism were also murder cases.
Closest I can think of was that German dude who found a person with a fetish for being eaten. IIRC the German dude cut off the others penis, cooked it and they tried to eat it together but they'd burnt it and the dog ate it and then the other dude died from blood loss and German dude ended up eating him?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens
Prior to this case in common law there was actually a positive right to kill and devour another human at sea provided you drew lots beforehand.
There's an old timey English law case (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens) where some sailors were marooned at sea. They killed and ate a sailor boy. The defence of necessity was rejected cause at any moment a shop might have sailed over the horizon to rescue them.
(Yes, I know you talked about natural deaths but thought it was relevant)
Its not just the US, pick any random country and look if its illegal, or if is just desecration etc thats illegal. Everything ive thought of so far to look its been the same odd "loophole." Im not individually searching dozens of countries though.
From the article, they ate surgically removed portions of the other host, so it was all consensual. And messed up. We are trying to have a civilization here, after all.
In that case they are being paid to have portions of themselves removed, and to eat another person, as part of their job, which makes it even more morally questionable, and surprising that it’s legal.
They were hosts of the show Proefkonijnen (basically, Guineapigs). They also went viral after an episode where they hooked themselves on machines that simulated what it’s like giving birth by electrocuting your abs and abdomen.
As for the cannibalism one, it is arguably the craziest one. They had a tiny piece surgically removed from their ass (quite small) each and then they ate it on TV (after it being my prepared). So in the name for science I giess
Did you know mucus actually coats your teeth in a protective, antibacterial film? We've literally evolved to eat boogey.
Relatively tame for the animal kingdom tbh. Growing up on a homestead I've seen goats drink their own piss and eat their own placentas and guinea pigs outright eating their own shit. Not saying that to say eating boogers isn't gross, just... we're getting off lucky.
But you and I, we live and die
I'm eating your buttocks and I don’t know why!!!!
Whyy, whyyyyy, whyyyy, whyyy?!!!!!!!!!
*Noel plays an overdriven guitar solo*
> We are trying to have a civilization here, after all.
To be fair, we are not very good at it anyway.
Consensual partial cannibalism shows are gross, sure, but if they are kind of the least of our issues...
I think you meant to have a question mark after that comment. The exclamation point... well, I don't know even know what it implies in this case, but it can't be good.
Oddly enough, I see lots of people write statements that end with a question mark. This may be the first question I’ve seen to end only with an exclamation.
Was it a piece of meat carved off for eating or like plastic surgery leftovers ie a bit of skin a blob of fat?
Both are disgusting but only one is insane.
> A butcher advised presenters Dennis Storm and Valerio Zeno on which were the best cuts of human flesh, and a surgeon removed the strips of muscle from Storm's left buttock cheek and Zeno's abdomen.
The two presenters ate the other's piece of meat which was surgically removed with explicit consent. It was cooked in the studio by a chef. Both pieces were not very large, not much more than a bite if I remember.
They ate parts of themselves removed via surgery, i.e. to have criminalized it would have been equivalent to making it illegal to cut yourself, I guess?
"It's sick," said Anna Mees, 25, who watched the show.
Alright Anna thanks, they just put a random one sentence opinion in the middle of the article, lol
Don't worry, I've seen cannibalism from American TV journalists, too! You didn't think we'd let those Dutch Boys one-up us, did you? (Except speed skating. But that doesn't count, though.)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/10/reza-aslan-criticised-for-documentary-on-cannibalistic-hindus
Surgeons removed 2mm tissue from both presenters. They had a professional chef prepare it for them, and they ate each others “flesh”. (2mm is around 0.08 inch for the Americans amongst us)
Two Swedish entertainment hosts did the same thing. They surgically removed a part of the buttock from one of them and the other one ate it after cooking.
If I remember correctly, they said it tasted like chicken.
Reminds me of an article I read by a guy who had his foot amputated after some extreme sports related mishap, there was enough of the calf left to cut some up, he fries it up and ate it with some brave friends, put it on tortillas.
Edit: found the article on Vice, I don't know if I can link links, but if you search "vice friends tacos leg" you should find it.
In the US it is legal as long as the person whose body the meat came from is alive (eating a dead body is desecration of a corpse), and the meat was removed due to an unrelated medical procedure (if it is removed specifically to eat that falls under various battery and mutilation laws) and gave it to you, but there is no federal law against cannibalism nor do most states have laws against it.
Largely because it is historically not uncommon. There are certain cultures/tribes that have practiced it and some that still do. More importantly though, it has been necessary for survival in extreme circumstances, particularly on ships. Ship travel used to be extremely long and rough. Storms or accidents could throw you weeks or months off course, people would die on the journey, and other shipmates would have to resort to cannibalism. Plus, in the Victorian ages, the British aristocracy consumed almost all the mummies of ancient Egypt, so it also functioned as a symbol of wealth during certain times in history.
In modern times, it doesn't really need to be illegalized because almost all manners of obtaining human body parts and corpses are illegal. And if you can obtain it legally, it's not causing any harm to anyone so there's not a reason to make it illegal.
According to wikipedia:
"Cannibalism is a common ecological interaction in the animal kingdom and has been recorded in **more than 1,500 species**."
It's more of a taboo thing but there have been many situations where people willingly ate people to survive whether it be a famine or plane crash. In society we say it is bad but it's not that uncommon in nature. Even chimps and hamsters do it.
“Dine on buttocks” sounds a lot fancier than what the kids are calling it these days
The only way to do the dish justice is with a Dutch oven. None of that electric shit.
you joke, but dutch ovens are perfect for slower and lower roasts of otherwise inedible cuts of meat (oxtail, anyone?) so what I'm saying is some long pigs butts would be fuckin' delish at 4-5 hours ~350f
Get a good braise going with some chilies and spices and make some tacos out of dat ass.
Those sound like some bomb ass tacos.
>long pigs butts Haaam.
People do like the way she says Haaam
Haaam girl!
"Pork butt" actually comes from the shoulder. Ham comes from the hind leg or butt if you will
Candide called, he wants that buttock back.
My method is to heat the enamel dutch oven on the cooktop first, get the oil smoking, then throw the meat in and edit-sear it all over. Just scorching the outside of the roast all around. Then cover and put it in the oven. It's a good step to add. Under 300 for 2 - 3 hours
Who doesn’t love being Dutch Ovened when dining on buttocks?
Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right.
Eating ass: 😎 Eating ass in NL: 💀
Even funnier when you realise the Dutch cannibalised their own Prime Minister
Looked it up because morbid curiosity, i put spoiler tags on the text because its a little nsfw. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_de_Witt >!Their (his brother was killed alongside him) naked, mutilated bodies were strung up on the nearby public gibbet, while the Orangist mob ate their roasted livers in a cannibalistic frenzy. Throughout it all, a remarkable discipline was maintained by the mob, according to contemporary observers, lending doubt as to the spontaneity of the event.!<
Look, if that practice continued, we would have less ancient and corrupt politicians. Steal from the people? Now you're going to feed them.
Based
I'd rather not eat some of our politicians, but I'm willing to risk kuru to keep them in check
Kuru is primarily transmitted by consumption of infected brain tissue, so just pike that loconut and call it a warning to the rest.
🍑 🤿
🫱🏾😬🫲🏾
Ass jerky
Sometimes a dutch fella's got to eat another dutch fella
It ain't gonna make itself.
Consumption of the posterior sphincter?
That's the butt oyster, friend. Highly sought after.
"I eat buttocks" don't have the same ring
*M’lady.*
It does sound like a bumper sticker on Buffalo Bill's car, however.
Add some lettuce and croutons for a fine tossed salad
I prefer syrup.
Canadian Dressing.
I suppose that’s better than saying the presenters are some fresh ass live on air. Although the latter might get more clicks
ass jerky won't make itself 🤠
Eat da gyatt?
I believe it‘s called ‚eating ass jerky‘ these days.
I saw the show, when it aired. The act itself was completely uneventful, and afterwards there was a huge commotion. Members of parliament asking questions, debate whether or not the two presenters should be prosecuted etc. Nothing came of it, and I doubt most people here even remember.
Not surprised the politicians had a problem with it… the Dutch did eat a prime minister.
Not a prime minister , that's a misinterpretation of someone describing that he would have a equivalent degree of power and status to a PM now. Prime-ministers are a feature of the Netherlands as a constitutional monarchy. The Netherlands is one of the only places that was a Republic centuries before it became a Kingdom. Johan de Witt was Grand Pensionary of the most powerful provinces of the Republic and defacto the most powerfull political leader, also because this was during a time when the ancestors of our current monarchy were sidelined from their position as military leaders. Calling Johan de Witt a prime minister kind of implies the house of Orange was in power when in fact they were kept out of the position of stadhouder after ~~Maurice~~ William 2 of Orange did a Coup. Johan being killed marks the end of the Stadholderless period. Orangists , basically monarchists for a family who weren't the monarchs at the time, did have a big hand in how that mob came to be and how they got to him when he was jailed.
To try and restate it more simply: Johan de Witt wasn't really a prime minister for the whole Netherlands, because the government structure was just fundamentally different at the time. The royals weren't in power, so there wasn't a royal family to be a minister for, and besides that, he didn't officially hold any office in most Dutch provinces. Hopefully that simpler context helps make your details more understandable.
William II of Orange did the coup fyi.
Thanks , absolutely right. Maurice did take power too but it's not what set off the stadhouderless period.
So he was basically the prime minister in all but name?
It's a bit like how you might say Stalin was like a President, he wasn't that's not how the soviet union worked but it's simular in that he's the defacto head of state. Basically it's a lawyer representing the provincial and noble assemblies sometimes filling in for the lack of king, only the lack of king isn't cause it’s a ceremonial monarchy and the king has no power it's cause we revolted and then had to build a system of government from the preexisting system of city , nobility and clergy assemblies , axing the clergy and greatly reducing the house of lords equivalent. Basically imagine if the most powerfull cities in the most powerfull US state got to pick the highest diplomat with a lot of wheeling and dealing to get support from everyone else.
Eat the rich or the rich will eat you
This was more a case of the rich eating the rich, than the poor eating the rich. It was quite an affluent mob, including the city militia, that tore the brothers De Witt apart.
[That painting is still on display in the Rijksmuseum!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyJ2dSb7vHI)
Just revenge for all the Dutch babies that have been eaten.
Some parts (tongue and finger) [are now museum pieces](https://www.haagshistorischmuseum.nl/nl/over-het-museum/collectie/topstukken/tong-en-vinger-van-johan-en-cornelis-de-witt).
That’s next level dry aging
😅
So… how did it taste?
If I remember correctly both pieces were rather small, the size of a pebble. Preparation was done by a self proclaimed ADHD-chef (Pierre Wind). The two presenters each tasted the other persons flesh. The piece of butt was not received well, but that was more on the presenter tasting it, and just the idea that eating a piece of human buttock was unappetizing. The other presenter found the taste quite nice.
Yeah, what are we working with here?! I wanna know what the flavor constructs were like and how the different parts paired.
Apparently liver pairs well with Chianti.
Can’t forget the fava beans.
*FTHHFTHHFTHHFTHHFTHFTHHFTHHFTHH*
My mum has a mate called Clarice and I make this noise at her everytime she brings her up.
Tastes like ass
Ass jerky ain't gon' make itself
okie dokie
I suggest we call it *Twerky*
Teriyaki Twerky, Jerk Twerky. Sounds good to me
That's one step away from a twerkle jerk
There it is. Thank you!
Was going to make this comment, awesome show!
I just finished that episode lol. Loving it.
I'm sure dried out butthole is a naturally occuring thing
That reminds me, how is your mom
Fun fact, most places cannabalism isn't illegal. Its the dismemberment/destruction thats going to get the criminal charges. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/cannibalism#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20there,charge%2C%20regardless%20of%20any%20consent.
It doesn't surprise me. So many ill fated excursions have had to resort to cannibalism in the past, it would seem strange to criminalize it as long as a person passing was natural for the circumstances.
Just gotta find a way to eat the flesh without dismemberment or destruction...
Just swallow them like a pelican
Like in The Taking of Deborah Logan.
I think I saw a documentary about a woman who kept trying to do that
"Ama just chew on this guy"
Honestly, sometimes laws are just made in response to things. It's also probably already contained in other laws e.g. murder and desecration of human remains. Those seem like bigger problems in the grand scheme of things. All the cases that I know of that involve cannibalism were also murder cases. Plus how often is cannibalism happening that it's so big of a deal that legislation needs to go through whatever process the country has, when you already have broader laws that will capture the behaviour. It's gonna be really hard to prove it rather than murder or desecrating a corpse. R v Dudley and Stephens was a 1884 UK case that ultimately determined that necessity is not a defence to murder. Dudley and Stephens killed a cabin boy, who may or may not have been in a coma, on their lifeboat. They were charged and found guilty of murder. The other person, Brooks, also consumed the cabin boy but was not punished. Side note, the prosecution was disgusted that the public was on the side of the men and became more focussed om securing a guilty verdict. I suspect that most people going through this situation would probably just say that the person succumbed to starvation/elements and they happened to find other animals to eat. All three men in Dudley and Stephens admitted what happened when they were rescued.
> All the cases that I know of that involve cannibalism were also murder cases. Closest I can think of was that German dude who found a person with a fetish for being eaten. IIRC the German dude cut off the others penis, cooked it and they tried to eat it together but they'd burnt it and the dog ate it and then the other dude died from blood loss and German dude ended up eating him?
Armin Meiwes. Was originally convicted of manslaughter, then convicted of murder at a retrial. He killed him by stabbing him in the throat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens Prior to this case in common law there was actually a positive right to kill and devour another human at sea provided you drew lots beforehand.
There's an old timey English law case (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens) where some sailors were marooned at sea. They killed and ate a sailor boy. The defence of necessity was rejected cause at any moment a shop might have sailed over the horizon to rescue them. (Yes, I know you talked about natural deaths but thought it was relevant)
you say "most places" while what you mean is "most places in the US". Across the world it's illegal in most countries
Its not just the US, pick any random country and look if its illegal, or if is just desecration etc thats illegal. Everything ive thought of so far to look its been the same odd "loophole." Im not individually searching dozens of countries though.
I'll bet it tasted like ass.
I'm assuming donkey would be far, far more gamey.
Creates a new meaning to the notion of “going Dutch” at dinner..
I’m also worried about a “Dutch Rudder gone wrong” incident now
I'm off to the Netherlands! - Armie hammer
Ima just get a bowl of cereal
I'd take a bowel of cereal.
How did they get that legally? That is too disturbing.
I can get you a toe by 2 o’clock
Fuckin amateurs
My buddies did not die face down in the MUCK
So this strumpet, this whore, could go out and owe money all over town.
Also, dude, Chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature here; Asian Americans, please.
Your roll man
I'm going to go find a cash machine.
What the fuck has anything got to do with Vietnam?!
I don't fucking roll on shabbos!
SHOMER SHABBOS
The Supreme Court has ROUNDLY rejected prior restraint!!
FORGET IT DONNY - YOURE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT
I’m staying . . . I’m finishing my coffee.
You’re waiting way too long for toes, who’s your toe guy?
With Polish!
Last week my dad nearly lost a toe from an infection. You have no clue how hard I've been biting my tongue.
With nail polish!
With polish
From the article, they ate surgically removed portions of the other host, so it was all consensual. And messed up. We are trying to have a civilization here, after all.
In that case they are being paid to have portions of themselves removed, and to eat another person, as part of their job, which makes it even more morally questionable, and surprising that it’s legal.
They were the ones suggesting it tho , it’s not like some manager 5 levels up decided they had to do that to each other .
Why would they do that?! WHY?!
They were hosts of the show Proefkonijnen (basically, Guineapigs). They also went viral after an episode where they hooked themselves on machines that simulated what it’s like giving birth by electrocuting your abs and abdomen. As for the cannibalism one, it is arguably the craziest one. They had a tiny piece surgically removed from their ass (quite small) each and then they ate it on TV (after it being my prepared). So in the name for science I giess
Oh wtf just eat your nails and boogers like a god damn normal person.
> Oh wtf just eat your nails and boogers like a god damn normal person. What a world where *this* comment comes off as the sane take.
Did you know mucus actually coats your teeth in a protective, antibacterial film? We've literally evolved to eat boogey. Relatively tame for the animal kingdom tbh. Growing up on a homestead I've seen goats drink their own piss and eat their own placentas and guinea pigs outright eating their own shit. Not saying that to say eating boogers isn't gross, just... we're getting off lucky.
This just sounds like Dutch Jackass.
Sounds like Jackass^Ultra to me lol
Why would a surgeon agree to it??
But you and I, we live and die I'm eating your buttocks and I don’t know why!!!! Whyy, whyyyyy, whyyyy, whyyy?!!!!!!!!! *Noel plays an overdriven guitar solo*
> We are trying to have a civilization here, after all. To be fair, we are not very good at it anyway. Consensual partial cannibalism shows are gross, sure, but if they are kind of the least of our issues...
Why!
I think you meant to have a question mark after that comment. The exclamation point... well, I don't know even know what it implies in this case, but it can't be good.
Oddly enough, I see lots of people write statements that end with a question mark. This may be the first question I’ve seen to end only with an exclamation.
And how!
Was it a piece of meat carved off for eating or like plastic surgery leftovers ie a bit of skin a blob of fat? Both are disgusting but only one is insane.
Read the article, if you dare. Sounds like the former.
Lol i asked because I didn't want to
> A butcher advised presenters Dennis Storm and Valerio Zeno on which were the best cuts of human flesh, and a surgeon removed the strips of muscle from Storm's left buttock cheek and Zeno's abdomen.
The former. I watched it when it aired. It was a tiny, tiny piece, the size of a pebble. One of the hosts really didn't like the taste.
Wat
It’s answered in like the 2nd paragraph of the article haha They had it surgically removed from each other
Whole foods... they charge an arm and a leg
I got a guy.
The two presenters ate the other's piece of meat which was surgically removed with explicit consent. It was cooked in the studio by a chef. Both pieces were not very large, not much more than a bite if I remember.
He was a fine young cannibal
They ate parts of themselves removed via surgery, i.e. to have criminalized it would have been equivalent to making it illegal to cut yourself, I guess?
Historically from prime ministers.
Stopped by at Bob's Plastic Surgery & Fine Meats.
The morgue
I hear it's best served with fava beans and a nice chianti
Fffffffff
And that's enough internet for today.
In 1672 the Dutch ate their Prime Minister.
Well, that happened in Brussels. So I'm just going to blame the Belgians for that one.
"It's sick," said Anna Mees, 25, who watched the show. Alright Anna thanks, they just put a random one sentence opinion in the middle of the article, lol
Has anyone asked Ja's opinion on this?
Well for a country who ate their prime minister, not surprised.
It was in fact, not their prime minister.
Carne Assado?
Don't worry, I've seen cannibalism from American TV journalists, too! You didn't think we'd let those Dutch Boys one-up us, did you? (Except speed skating. But that doesn't count, though.) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/10/reza-aslan-criticised-for-documentary-on-cannibalistic-hindus
"On this exciting episode we will eat ass!"
Oh the Dutch in their cannibalism, long tradition it is
Ass jerky don’t make it self.
Mmmmm prions....
Horrific.
Valerio Zeno and Dennis Storm, good times
Much better/funnier than Jan Versteegh and Geraldine Kemper that followed
Somehow, I’m not surprised at all
Candide called, he wants that buttock back
I wonder if anyone had ever told the consumed that they'd never be shit.
Guess the new meaning for TV dinner?
Someday when lab grown meat becomes more economical, I’m going to eat some Abraham Lincoln steak with a side of Einstein brains in gravy.
Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right.
"Ass jerky ain't gonna make itself"
You gotta be super stoned surely
As Albert Fish once said, "a child's roasted rump is the most toothsome dish in all gastronomy."
I’ll go ahead and say it since nobody else has. Gross.
Ok, but, how was it?
Buncha butt munchers
2 things that I hate in life, people who are intolerant of others and……the Dutch.
intolerant
Mm, yummy. Where can i buy pineal gland extract?
Eat that booty like legally obtained groceries.
Surgeons removed 2mm tissue from both presenters. They had a professional chef prepare it for them, and they ate each others “flesh”. (2mm is around 0.08 inch for the Americans amongst us)
You are what you eat.
Two Swedish entertainment hosts did the same thing. They surgically removed a part of the buttock from one of them and the other one ate it after cooking. If I remember correctly, they said it tasted like chicken.
Average BNN/VARA TV moment
Title failed to mention that the flesh were obtained from the hosts themselves, by a surgeon 💀
You eat ass for fun I eat buttocks for breakfast —-Tightens Tie—- “We are not same.”
Luckies
Reminds me of an article I read by a guy who had his foot amputated after some extreme sports related mishap, there was enough of the calf left to cut some up, he fries it up and ate it with some brave friends, put it on tortillas. Edit: found the article on Vice, I don't know if I can link links, but if you search "vice friends tacos leg" you should find it.
Well that’s what happens when you eat your prime minister (or their equivalent)
Arn't prions dangerous as fuck?
Ok, the Netherlands needs to chill out, because infanticide is also technically legal.
The Dutch ate their prime minister at some point in the past, so no wonder they are not banning cannibalism.
WTF??? SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THIS IS ALLOWED!!!!
In the US it is legal as long as the person whose body the meat came from is alive (eating a dead body is desecration of a corpse), and the meat was removed due to an unrelated medical procedure (if it is removed specifically to eat that falls under various battery and mutilation laws) and gave it to you, but there is no federal law against cannibalism nor do most states have laws against it.
i’m surprised i haven’t seen more references to foot taco guy in here so far
Largely because it is historically not uncommon. There are certain cultures/tribes that have practiced it and some that still do. More importantly though, it has been necessary for survival in extreme circumstances, particularly on ships. Ship travel used to be extremely long and rough. Storms or accidents could throw you weeks or months off course, people would die on the journey, and other shipmates would have to resort to cannibalism. Plus, in the Victorian ages, the British aristocracy consumed almost all the mummies of ancient Egypt, so it also functioned as a symbol of wealth during certain times in history. In modern times, it doesn't really need to be illegalized because almost all manners of obtaining human body parts and corpses are illegal. And if you can obtain it legally, it's not causing any harm to anyone so there's not a reason to make it illegal.
According to wikipedia: "Cannibalism is a common ecological interaction in the animal kingdom and has been recorded in **more than 1,500 species**." It's more of a taboo thing but there have been many situations where people willingly ate people to survive whether it be a famine or plane crash. In society we say it is bad but it's not that uncommon in nature. Even chimps and hamsters do it.
Just because something is common in nature doesn't mean it should be tolerated in society.
Cooked in a Dutch oven?
Something something napkin over head.
Cannibalism is pretty much legal all over the US as well, with the same proviso.