The Preytriarchy!

[TaurenDevourer]

I'm going to chew when I get you down my gullet~ Cease your lies - You cowards merely want to avoid a proper fate as fat on a predators belly.

[Scrumptious]

I'm going to chew when I get you down my gullet~

How very ruminant of you.

Cease your lies - You cowards merely want to avoid a proper fate as fat on a predators belly.

And so we shall! My preds need to be in tip-top condition. As a members of the preytriarchy, we require you to exercise so effectively that most of me is transformed into energy, just a minimal amount as waste product, and nothing is turned fat. We did not engineer our society's beauty standards to require near-anorexic slenderness just so that you would let your bodies (or ours) go to waste. It was already quite the concession on our part to allow you to use our protein for muscle tissue. You should thank us more for that allowance.

[TaurenDevourer]

Watch your back. Change is stirring. Do you not see the political view shifting back in our favour?

[Scrumptious]

Watch your back. Change is stirring. Do you not see the political view shifting back in our favour?

The fact that you need us will uphold the proper structure of society. You will be undone by your own hunger and lack of solidarity. By offering select individual preds little treats from our bountiful table, the bulk of you will be kept in your places.

[TaurenDevourer]

Our place is at the top of the food chain - which means your place is in our bellies. Now why don't you come get in mine? I need an extra layer or two for my trip north.

[MeTheMe]

I think a side predators fail to see is what is going to happen to their food supply without these so called "Preyrtiarchy" laws in place. Prey species as well as omnivores and even some predators following their 'food' will leave for provinces that still uphold these laws to feel safer, or keep their meals close. We could lose a huge percent of our work force, not only to migration but to newly unrestricted predators. Removing these laws could tank our economy, and either the laws will be back shortly, or, we suffer and drop off as one the lowest populations around. A lawless mess of predators trying to eat each other since they'll be the only ones left.

[TaurenDevourer]

Have you not seen some of the nations without these restrictions? Their economies are far greater than ours, and their population remains in growth! The weak are devoured and culled, yet the strong, speedy and smart thrive in a country without oppression of either side!

...Actually, perhaps I should move their instead.

[MeTheMe]

The average life span in those places with population growth is like, 23, and that includes predators and omnivores. Every single one of them has to breed early and often to keep up, because no one is safe in those places. Life itself is an expendable resource there. Yes, we could see the growth they see, but we're just as likely to eat ourselves into oblivion before the populace adapts to that kind of vicious life style, I don't think the odds are in our favor.

[Marrickmiddler]

Wow, putting up this much of a tantrum because of the apparently revolutionary idea that people shouldn't have to live in constant fear of a violent death. Preds really are a bunch of glass-house dwellers, jeez.

And for the record, I emphatically *don't* want to help pad out some ravenous whore's features. That's why I moved to the middle of nowhere and have my yard walled off, after all.

Beside, if we just gave individuals free rein to eat, the supply of prey would probably run out in about a week or two, given the appetites of some of them. I already think our present permissions are too loose.

[RedBoggle]

A purely vegetarian society is willing to let everyone starve to death in the name of moral consumption.

While they may claim that nutritional supplements and artificial meat will be the revolutionary push towards veganism, the vegans have shown more concern establishing their model society now than waiting for these innovations to meet their standards or become a staple of modern living. They're so fearful of the predators in this preytriarchal society making demands and necessary changes to have both their needs and themselves better accommodated, they're attempting to meet such action with something greater than an equal and opposite reaction. They're using the fear of the ravenous, all-consuming predator taking control of the world one morsel at a time to push their own ideology and attract support with Utopian dreams that they give to the prey without detailing how they plan to accomplish these dreams or ignoring their logical failings.

If no one was allowed to eat anyone and the state took the power to enforce the golden rule away from their citizens and gave it entirely to themselves, then how are the carnivores supposed to get by? Even if artificial sustenance was the answer, then who'll be there to cull the herbivores and omnivores? While it's not a pleasant thought for those demographics to consider, the necessity of the natural relationship between predator and prey can't be ignored. Without reliable population control, the prey will overpopulate, consume exponentially more resources each following generation, and provide diminishing returns to their society due to the difference made between both former factors. With shrinking resources, it'll be harder to make the materials necessary to keep the predators complacent and satiated. When that happens, you can count on either an insurrection, a massive famine, forced emigration, involuntary and indefinite detention for innocent predators, or even competitive sport hunting that only the prey can partake in.

The solutions proposed to deal with the problem of population control in a vegetarian society are lacking in forethought. One of them is to simply ask the prey to reproduce less, which is immediately laughable to anyone who has ever known the feeling of lust. The more excessive version of this solution is to make population control a government mandate, which has failed in its varying implementations for various reasons. Firstly, isn't making the prey the target of this mandate discriminatory? While reality and necessity may justify it, the point of establishing equal fairness between the species is contradicted when the government has to place special restrictions that only apply to certain biological groups of animals and not others. At least with the prohibition on predation, that law can be claimed to apply to the prey too. If they were to apply pc across the board, then the ratio of population between demographics remains unchanged and all that has been done is stagnate generational growth, which is it's own bag of economic problems we won't get into here. If the prey are forced to not procreate by process of some selective measure (ex. a lottery), then there will be large gaps in the prey populations because the biggest cause of exponential population growth in herbivores and some kinds of omnivores is the number of spawn produced in labor compared to the number for more carnivorous animals. Nature has made it so that prey species will be as fruitful as they can as part of a simple numbers game; the more kids they have, the more likely at least one of them will live long enough to continue the family genome. You can't prevent families from forming in prey without the process being either ineffective or overkill. This leads to the terrifyingly logical conclusion to this line of thought, and that's artificial selection. To enforce artificial selection, the state either has to make itself dangerously unaccommodating to the unwanted breeders, or act as the predator themselves.

When such actions are necessary to keep a society alive without predation, has the ideal of a guiltless world really been met? If anything, it's a roundabout way for animals in positions of power to expand their abilities to act as predators without really eating anyone (that is, if they even restrain from that). It's a governance as monstrous as the other extreme, a wasteful-hunting society where most of the prey that are killed are never eaten and are considered lucky if they're ever used to make something useful. What a pure veggie society has over them is longevity because a civil society where hunters hunt just to hunt and are uncaring of the need for prey to exist will die quickly. But longevity isn't a good enough justification for this way of life. No matter how enticing it may be to think of ourselves as evolved and civilized beyond nature, we can't ignore the callings of billions of years of evolution if we are to remain as civil as we can.

All of this is assuming that everyone can be neatly categorized as Predator, Prey, and maybe Omnivore. The fact that there is a natural inclination shared among herbivore and carnivore alike to consume their young for reasons yet unknown shows that even species typically associated with prey can be predators in some situations, which complicates these systems even further. Omnivores also tend to be regarded as either pred or prey depending on how frequently they eat others when it would be more biologically accurate to classify them apart from those two terms, or to make clear distinctions between the predator-prey dichotomy and the different classifications of behavior within the food chain. But for simplicity's sake, this statement will conclude under the assumption that it's understanding applies to the hunters and the hunted.

As sad as it may be, the needs of both predator and prey must be met to avert ecological disaster.


(Don't take any of this as a commentary on anything. I tried to play this completely straight and ended up doing a little bit of worldbuilding by mistake.)

[Ixtili]

Personally I think having predators and prey share a society was actually a bad idea to begin with. The only place the two worlds should meet is in the wild where it's anyones game. You say prey have grown complacent but so have predators they forget that there was a time when they had to be skilled hunters rather than the gluttons of today. In fact there was a time when there was a measure of respect between those that fed on others and those that they hunted. But a merged society has led to a degredation in culture predators and prey of the past understood that everyone had a right to live but that inevitably those two rights had to be in conflict because of what they ate. It's time we got back to natures roots and prioritized our own kind instead of trying to micromanage others.

(Note: Not actually an IRL traditionalist or segregationist. )

[AllahSnackbar]

Everyone in here who has an idea and wants in it an interactive story featuring this concept, DM me! I'll start everything on the 20th, so you have time to get ideas and send them before I start. Can't wait to see what you guys come up with.

[GreenFrogH]

deleeeeeeteeeee

[GeneralUrist]

Look NORMALLY I would just tell you reactionaries to buzz off and stop trying to reverse the great gain to public safety this government has delivered...

But even I agree that the current laws either go too far or are just badly written. In particular the laws that ban any "unauthorized visible expression of predation" in public! Those do almost nothing to stop the truly hostile predators while badly screwing up life for those merely practicing endosoma or even just inflation! What happened to free love huh? Having intimate encounters shouldn't require filling out five bureaucracy forums and having a sparkling-clean criminal record!