Should tinies get to choose who swallows them?

by **GastricAztec** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 12:53 am

In a future world when miniaturization technology is achieved, if criminals were shrunk down and sold as toys and the United States constitution was modified so people could kill their captives in any way they see fit, how plausible would it be if shrunken captives chose who they wanted to be owned by? They could choose from looking at photos of prospective buyers.

The idea behind this is that captives who get purchased by people of their own choosing would be less likely to make an escape attempt or cause problems for their owners. I’m asking this as research for future stories I plan on writing and turning into comics.

by **Ray** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:01 am

I don't see why they'd be given a choice. Of-course if I were a tiny I'd want to choose.

by **cranberryknights1** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:03 am

I think both ways are quite appealing.On one hand they could be purchased and end up inside the last person they would wanna be swallowed by or on the flip side they choose who it was and be more willing to cooperate at least when they had the option of picking.In the case of them being criminals it seems more practical to not let them pick and just be eaten by whoever buys them with the criminals having no say in the matter at all.So I think I side with the choice being completely up to the customer.

by **GastricAztec** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:09 am

So, at this point, most of you don’t think it’s plausible that the shrunken criminals could have any say in who owns them?

by **Houyo** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:01 am

Realistic answer: Slavery is always bad.

Vore answer: Tiny deserve rights. That way eating them is way more satisfying. Breaking the law, breaking the law, breaking the law.

Silky answer: I would become a vigilante to save the tinies.

by **blergle** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:38 am

In your scenario, if actually owning another sapient living being is a thing, then that society is morally bankrupt anyway and of course they would not care to allow any choice to someone who was mere fodder in the first place. If they're evil enough to eat people they are evil enough to not have such a thing as the concept of "cruel and unusual punishment". If you don't want to be eaten by whoever you happen to end up with regardless of your own wishes, don't commit crimes, right?

by **Birichino** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:37 am

Well, as much nicer as the choice would be, with this being a deadly punishment system for criminals, it seems more likely that allowing criminals to choose their predators would encourage vorarephiles to commit crimes more than discourage escape attempts.
Plus, there's already a pretty immense cruelty exerted on these people, so stopping now just seems strange.

by **Wolfsage** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:19 am

SamuelOrona wrote:In a future world when miniaturization technology is achieved, if criminals were shrunk down and sold as toys and the United States constitution was modified so people could kill their captives in any way they see fit, how plausible would it be if shrunken captives chose who they wanted to be owned by? They could choose from looking at photos of prospective buyers.

The idea behind this is that captives who get purchased by people of their own choosing would be less likely to make an escape attempt or cause problems for their owners. I’m asking this as research for future stories I plan on writing and turning into comics.

Why the United States specifically?
Pretty sure there are other countries in the world.

by **Willing_prey94** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:52 am

I think they could be given the option, but not the guarantee that it'll be the one they chose who will eventually purchase them

by **Kitsouille** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:08 am

Hmm it really depends on mood and preferences, both are good. Like if someone has committed crimes that are bad enough that society doesn't mind if they get shrunk and killed, do they really deserve to have a say in the matter? But also this could be a cruel bittersweet fate where you would die but "at least" they are "generous" enough to let you choose.

story gallery · by **Borealis** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 4:33 pm

It depends on what you want to see

But I must go along with some of the consensus on here, it feels like this scenario of the condemned choosing their predator would be a subversion of the situation that would be expected.

Based on standard pred/prey interactions, as well as the general situation, you'd expect there to be a market for the "tinies"- with the regular people bidding/buying/having all the power. (Going out on a limb, I think the idea of there being a public auction where the most desirable "tinies" fetch huge prices would be a rather fun concept...)

by **GastricAztec** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:54 pm

Yin/Yang wrote:
SamuelOrona wrote:In a future world when miniaturization technology is achieved, if criminals were shrunk down and sold as toys and the United States constitution was modified so people could kill their captives in any way they see fit, how plausible would it be if shrunken captives chose who they wanted to be owned by? They could choose from looking at photos of prospective buyers.

The idea behind this is that captives who get purchased by people of their own choosing would be less likely to make an escape attempt or cause problems for their owners. I’m asking this as research for future stories I plan on writing and turning into comics.

Why the United States specifically?
Pretty sure there are other countries in the world.

I live in the United States, and I know next to nothing about other countries.

by **Vorepun** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 7:32 pm

I'm pretty against the death penalty and all forms of torture so...yeah. xD Logically though, if criminals were being sold, then I doubt they'd have a choice. If we're at a place where shrinking and selling people is okay then I doubt they'd have any rights.

by **GastricAztec** » Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:17 pm

Erratic wrote:I'm pretty against the death penalty and all forms of torture so...yeah. xD Logically though, if criminals were being sold, then I doubt they'd have a choice. If we're at a place where shrinking and selling people is okay then I doubt they'd have any rights.

That makes the most sense, sometimes I get weird ideas and I need you guys to set me straight. Sometimes I can’t see the forest for the trees. Thank you for your input.

by **MechaSharkZilla** » Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:19 am

Other, because slavery and capital punishment is bad, and we should be replacing prisons with rehabilitation, not making prisoners into food. .-.

by **Eznam** » Tue Jan 15, 2019 10:26 pm

Realistically, in the scenario of convicts, they wouldn't get a choice, because you'd just get people being released to people who were complicit to their acts before they were caught.

In a vore scenario, if the tinies were specifically sold to face a death penalty for fetishists, I'd say the tinies also don't get much choice, logically.
I'd let them pick the hole though. I'll gladly take a sex toy who willingly doesn't scratch my insides at the bottom.

In a personal scenario... As the largo, I'd also rather not get stuck with whatever allowed me to pick them. As a tiny... I mean from what I've seen on this website, the best I can hope for is like, a 5/10 slightly overweight person, so I don't think I'd get good choices if I even got a choice. From fantasy, there's just practically no odds of getting a disgusting one, because no one draws digusting preds. Really there's just no reason for a tiny to get a pick.