Editing Human cannibalism (section)

== Tropes and discourses ==

Cameroonian anthropologist [[Francis B. Nyamnjoh]] notes that accusations of cannibalism, whether justified or not, were often used to "[[other (philosophy)|other]]" non-Western peoples, thus serving to justify their colonization and exploitation.{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|p=2}} He notes that cannibalism was and is often regarded as "an evil act{{nbsp}}... associated with primitive savages living dangerously like wild animals at the margins of humanity and human civilisation, and needing to be stamped out at all costs", with even those advocating [[cultural relativism]] usually becoming "uneas[y] when it comes to making a case for tolerance and accommodation of cannibalism".{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|pp=7–8}} Finding acceptance impossible and damnation parochial, some authors have reacted by a "blanket disbelief in ritual [= not just exceptional] cannibalism", in this way "paying lip service to{{nbsp}}... cultural relativism", while refusing to cope with challenging "other ways of being human" one sometimes encounters in other societies. Nyamnjoh argues that, instead of trying to make such an implausible case, it is better to "accept and put cannibalism in perspective", which also means recognizing that there are ways of exploiting others that are hardly better than their physical consumption, even if leaving them "seemingly alive".{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|pp=8–9}}

Nyamnjoh warns that one must be careful when considering historical accounts attributing cannibalism to others, since "claims and accusations of cannibalism served as the perfect excuse for enslavement, colonisation, exploitation and forceful Christianisation and Westernisation". Whether factual, exaggerated, or imagined, such statements were used to justify "the colonising, enslaving and dispossessing{{nbsp}}... of non-Western 'Others{{'"}}.{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|p=12}} He warns, however, against throwing out the "baby" of credible evidence with the "bathwater" of exaggerated or merely rumoured "cannibal talk".{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|pp=14, 16}} He describes it as illogical that sceptics readily accept "state violence, bloody wars of genocidal proportions and violent encounters, slavery, colonialism and myriad forms of rabid imperialism" as part of the historical record, while rejecting the idea of cannibal practices that may well "have gone with or resulted from such conflicts".{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|p=18}} Nyamnjoh and others also note that Europeans were quite [[hypocritical]] when condemning the cannibalism of others, while at the same or almost the same time practising their own forms of cannibalism – especially [[medicinal cannibalism]] – at home.{{sfn|Nyamnjoh|2018|pp=29–30}}<ref name=Everts-Hypocritical>{{Cite web |last=Everts |first=Sarah |date=April 24, 2013 |title=Europe's Hypocritical History of Cannibalism |url=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/europes-hypocritical-history-of-cannibalism-42642371/ |access-date=February 10, 2025 |website=Smithsonian Magazine |language=en}}</ref>