Family Food Chain | TheaterFire

[-]

Chodor101@reddit

Because they just are stupid. Hamster will eat babies if they don't smell like her, because she can't comprehend them having their own scent.

There are smart hamster though, however noone breeds them for intelligence and most pet shops sell inbred hamsters.

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

They are not stupid. They are just not human . Lots of animal eat their kids, the logic is making a lot of kids allow you to prioritize the strongest, so you eat the weakest.

[-]

Spot on. If ants tried to run an experiment on us to see if we had intelligence they’d like assume we were idiots because we wouldn’t follow the pheromone trails they laid out for us. Assuming species aren’t intelligent because they don’t follow our concept of logic is a dangerous stance to take.

[-]

Aphrodites1995@reddit

Animals: why dont they eat this free meat just because they gave birth to it? Are they stupid?

[-]

No_Oddjob@reddit

I disagree!

::cries while carried off by ants::

[-]

usoap141@reddit

gif
Did someone say kidnapped by Chimera Ants?

[-]

Geno_Warlord@reddit

I follow their pheromones trails!

Right back to their base of operation and nuke the site from orbit with a little white cloud of death.

[-]

skaliton@reddit

ok but some are literally stupid. The koala being the prime example. Not only are Eucalyptus leaves poisonous to them (and that is what they eat) they are so dumb that if you hand them a twig with leaves on them they know what to do. If you take the leaves off of the twig RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM and hand them the leaves they do not eat it because they no longer recognize it as the food that they eat

it is literally like a toddler not understanding that butter melts when you put it on toast but they normally chug arsenic but if you put it in a glass they don't recognize the container and just stare at it

[-]

Dont_Touch_My_Nachos@reddit

My nations pride and joy is an animal that lives like a narcoleptic toddler prior to gaining an understanding of continuity

[-]

SyntheticDuckFlavour@reddit

Eucalyptus leaves are so low in nutrient value that Koalas evolved to be optimised to expend the very bare minimum energy for just about any activity they do. That is probably also true for pattern recognition in their brain. Why have expensive generalised circuits for recognising food in various forms, when the food they see is on branches nearly 100% of their entire lifetime?

[-]

snizarsnarfsnarf@reddit

Not only are Eucalyptus leaves poisonous to them

You'll never get what substance is poisonous to humans that many consume every week, some even every day

[-]

kunell@reddit

Maybe its something like how people dont eat food thats on the ground even though that burger was perfectly fine 10 sec ago but now that its on the ground we humans wont eat it?

But yeah koalas have a whole host of issues

[-]

aVarangian@reddit

yeah if a human touches my food then I no longer want it

[-]

IrregularrAF@reddit

You’re in for a doozy when you realize that food has been handled by multiple hands before it ended up on your plate. “Hurr durr, I wash it first” the germs are in that mf and ain’t nothing stopping it. Lmfao

[-]

sassaire@reddit

It was a joke

[-]

sassaire@reddit

Oh some animals are dumb as rocks absolutely. But it’s a perspective of “are they smart” vs “are they smart like us?” Because our measurement of intelligence is limited by our concepts of how an intelligent creature would behave or react. Once you realize that animals are smart in ways we haven’t considered, it opens up a whole new realm of possibilities.

Koalas probably not though. Idk if there’s any vindication for them.

[-]

JustChillin3456@reddit

“Dangerous”

Hardly

[-]

sassaire@reddit

“Dangerous” yes. We have incorrectly assumed and underestimated the intelligence of animals for hundreds if not thousands of years. Thinking we’re superior to them because they think different than us has led to us actively destroying ecosystems before realizing “oh shit, that pollinator was actually doing x for a reason we brushed off and didn’t look into, and now our crops are dying” or, “this dog wasn’t whining and pawing at his owner because he’s hungry, it’s because they can smell a spike in blood sugar and is trying to warn them”

[-]

HadesSmiles@reddit

More dangerous than eating your babies?

[-]

sassaire@reddit

I mean hamsters aren’t actively collapsing the ecosystem, so yeah

[-]

HadesSmiles@reddit

Neither is calling an animal stupid on Reddit for eating its young.

[-]

Shlafenflarst@reddit

they’d like assume we were idiots

And they'd be right af

[-]

Shawer@reddit

If ants tried to run an experiment on us, we'd think ants are smart as fuck. If an ant just developed a null-hypothesis I'd call that one damn intelligent ant.

[-]

Hatchid@reddit

But since you'd never know, might as we'll give every ant the benefit of the doubt of being that damn intelligent ant.

[-]

Thin_General_8594@reddit

There's a reason we are at the top

[-]

will_xo@reddit

What's that reason?

[-]

Thin_General_8594@reddit

We don't eat our babies, and invest 15-20 years raising each child

[-]

Religionis@reddit

Well not really. At the end of the day, being “on top” by standards of biology is producing enough offspring to keep the species alive with the most efficient energy loss. Different animals evolve to achieve that by different manners, each option having many pros and cons. So their lifespans, size, age, rate of reproduction, time of reproduction, parental care all vary to best accommodate the environment they live in.

While some solutions may seem appalling to us, there are no objectively better or worse ones. Just more or less fitting to the specific case. Judging them by solely our moral and societal lens is exactly what people earlier in this thread mentioned. It’s judging other species by our very specific standards, which they don’t even attempt to achieve.

[-]

will_xo@reddit

In lots of countries it's the norm to have a lot of babies, because many die. Yes we don't eat them, but there's definitely differential treatment for kids that are strong and healthy, and weak or sick kids are often abandonded in one or another way. The years we spend raising children are pretty much proportional to how long we live, so shorter lifespan (like that of a hamster) results in less time and resources spent on raising children.

And also, sadly, "we" (some specific people) do eat babies....

[-]

JustChillin3456@reddit

Don’t forget the cultural aspect

In middle eastern countries with good healthcare people still have 6+ kids since it’s expected by their families

[-]

will_xo@reddit

I think this is a much more multi-faceted thing, that might be culture or might be a leftover from tougher times. Studies show that people who immigrate from poor countries where it's normal to have 5+ kids, to "first-world" countries, within a generation or two they're only having 1 or 2 kids aswell. Might be culture, might be biological or half-half (of course many more facets).

[-]

JustChillin3456@reddit

Also financial. It’s hard to afford to 2+ kids in the west

[-]

FloZone@reddit

Some time ago I read something about hunter-gatherer tribes in Australia. If an infant died before having a name, they'd eat them too. It might have been funerary cannibalism (which also once existed in parts of Europe even) or just reclaiming those proteins.

The years we spend raising children are pretty much proportional to how long we live, so shorter lifespan (like that of a hamster) results in less time and resources spent on raising children.

Not really. Humans have the longest childhood of all mammals, I think orang utans might come close. Even Neanderthals reached puberty earlier. Even long lived animals like whales have only a few years of childhood. Also contributes that human infants are pretty underdeveloped and helpless.

[-]

will_xo@reddit

The life-span/childhood thing was mostly between humans throughout history, when lifespan get longer we invest more time into kids before they join the workforce. You're right that humans have very long childhoods compared to other animals, (i may have worded it poorly, but) my argument was that if a hamster lived 80 years, it would obviously spend much longer raising it's offspring too.

[-]

FloZone@reddit

The life-span/childhood thing was mostly between humans throughout history

Naturally the age of lowest mortality is 10, childhood mortality decreases after the age of five and reaches a lowpoint at around ten, starting with puberty, mortality begins to increase again. Historically the whole "life expectancy of 30" thing is due to childhood mortality. Though people did reach ages of 60+ regularly, the fact that people live to be 80+ nowadays is the bigger abberration tbh.

Workforce might also not be the best term. Wage labor is a relatively new thing. Children began helping their parents basically as soon as they could walk. However the reason child labor is bad isn't because some six year old is tending to the goats, but that six year old getting crunched in some industrial machinery.

my argument was that if a hamster lived 80 years, it would obviously spend much longer raising it's offspring too.

I think the reverse is rather true. A short lived organism won't spend much time and energy on childhood at all. A long lived one however might or might not. Obviously there are the boring exceptions like clams and sponges, which live for hundreds of years, but have literally no care for their offspring. I think it boils down that mammals and birds in generally have very complicated methods of uprearing.

The stupid answer would be, if a hamster would live 80 years, it wouldn't be a hamster. With that size at maximum it would be like one of those deep sea fish that take 50 years to mature. Orange roughies I believe they were.

[-]

papayasown@reddit

Then how come some dads don’t even invest 15-20 days? Checkmate librul

[-]

Samuelwow23@reddit

WE don’t eat OUR babies but some billionaire does.

[-]

Wantitneeditgetit@reddit

Thumbs, Throwing shit (literally but also mostly metaphorically), Sweating, Complex language that allows accurate communication of abstract concepts.

Mostly the big for our body size dicks we got schlonging about though. If you ever feel intimidated by another ape, let alone a monkey, just remember they got little dicks and their massive fangs are just compensating for it.

[-]

Danny-Fr@reddit

*Laughs in cockroach

[-]

FloZone@reddit

Cockroaches produce milk and take care of their young tho.

[-]

Danny-Fr@reddit

And it's delicious

[-]

Cuck_Boy@reddit

Say what

[-]

RandomMexicanDude@reddit

My I offer you some Cock roach milk

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

Bro you dumb af comparing yourself to a fucking hamster

[-]

XchrisZ@reddit

Might also be because they're in small enclosures. Not enough room for the babies in here might as well eat them.

[-]

Glad-Tax6594@reddit

More babies = less defense necessary for survival vs. Less babies = more defense necessary for survival. I think you're misunderstanding by injecting logic into the equation, they're not figuring out which is strongest before eating.

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

Lots of animal absolutely do figure out the weakest one, the runt of the litter. And they will let it starve in favor of the more competitive brother and sister, or kill him themselve. A lot of bird do this for exemple. The animal operate on instinct, but it's evolutionnary "programmed" in them so to speak

[-]

Glad-Tax6594@reddit

But ignoring a sick or under developed does not equate using logic to prioritize the strongest, it's an attribution you are making.

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

When i say logic i mean in the evolutionnary sense, not the animal making a conscious choice

[-]

BreezyRyder@reddit

My wife and I ate our dumbest/ugliest child once it was clear things weren't getting any better.

[-]

mybuttisthesun@reddit

Viltramites are hamsters confirmed

[-]

TheMadManiac@reddit

No, they are pretty stupid.

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

Yeh but that's a pretty high bar, rats are exceptionnaly intelligent. And it's easier to detect intelligence in rat because their evolution is intertwined with mankind for so long, they ressemble us behavioraly (opportunistic omnivores ) and their intelligence is probably partly due to our cohabitation.

[-]

trustmebuddy@reddit

And it's not just animals that do that. Pretty neat, huh?

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

What thing other than animal eat their kids ? I feel like your trying to imply something but im kinda lost

[-]

izza123@reddit

Humans are undoubtedly smarter than hamsters

[-]

Strangegary@reddit

Yeah of course but that's not the point. The point is that saying that a specie is "stupid" is a dumb simplification . Hamster have been around for 5 times longer than human, the have excellent spacial memory to remember where they stored their nuts and are excellent at what they do. I'm not saying they are smart, but calling them stupid as if they just stumbled into evolutionnary success is wrong, imo.

[-]

Jexroyal@reddit

Is evolutionary instinct considered intelligence?

[-]

Op-e@reddit

They are still pretty stupid though

[-]

Q_dawgg@reddit

Inbred hampter

[-]

FloZone@reddit

Aren't that pretty much all of them, especially Syrian gold hamsters, which are extinct in the wild and all descent from a single population from the 1920s?

[-]

FloZone@reddit

Brood parasitism hardly exists in mammals because of that. Birds on the other hand, well you know what a cuckoo is, right?

[-]

Lucius-Halthier@reddit

Not all the time, my hamster when I was a kid was Houdini reincarnated, every single piece of his cage that could pop off had to be triple duct taped because he always escaped and went on adventures. When we moved to another house we had him in a little pod that was sealed in the car for hours (food and water obv) without any problems, the minute I put him in my new room and walked off to grab bags he said “my time to shine”. Fucker disappeared for three days, we thought he was gone, then just decided to pop up. Lived six years and got him for petco

[-]

SevenLuckySkulls@reddit

I'm no biologist but maybe it's like "well they're a lost cause anyway I might as well get back some of my biomass investment" ?

[-]

Chodor101@reddit

Tyranid spotted

[-]

Dracorex13@reddit

Fun fact: Tyrannids (2 ns) are a real concept in nature.

They look like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannidae

[-]

HyperWhiteChocolate@reddit

[-]

SGT_Elcor@reddit

[-]

Lucius-Halthier@reddit

[-]

MagicalMixer21@reddit

Hivefleet hampter

[-]

Humble_Permission112@reddit

[-]

AlphaMassDeBeta@reddit (OP)

[-]

Lucius-Halthier@reddit

[-]

Dont_Touch_My_Nachos@reddit

That pink edit on the I to we is fucking horrible.

[-]

SomeRandomPyro@reddit

Babies will die if I die. But if I eat them, I can survive and make more babies.

[-]

ejectionejaculation6@reddit

this sounds like dialogue from cruelty squad

[-]

Evignity@reddit

Wait till you hear about the most moral species on earth resorting to cannibalism when they need to

OHWAIT

[-]

Mr_Hjort@reddit

This is it.

[-]

maggiemayfish@reddit

gif

[-]

DutchRudderShotgun@reddit

gif

[-]

outfoxingthefoxes@reddit

What if it was all a hidden camera and there was no real danger? Jail?

[-]

Nosirrah08@reddit

Hi, I’m Chris Hamster. Why don’t you take a seat over there?

[-]

Successful_Bee_1292@reddit

I feel like amster follow the Anti-Darwin law, where they only evolve to become more capable of dying.

[-]

DigbyChickenZone@reddit

they only evolve to become more capable of dying.

Are you talking about the hamsters bred to be more docile and to be pets...?

[-]

Appropriate_Cold1559@reddit

Dying means they would get buy again, and the seeler would need more... that actually makes sense. The more fragile they are, more hamsters will be born

[-]

qtquazar@reddit

"Inflation is out of control and i'm losing faith in the government!"

"Quick, elect the corrupt guy who's probably also a pedophile."

I, for one, welcome our hamster overlords.

[-]

jtheman1738@reddit

Yeah, apparently every single hamster I’ve ever owned had the personal goal to die in the most spectacular way possible. Except for the last one, Summer, who actually died of old age. Think she might’ve been an impostor, looking back on it.

[-]

wheresmychippy93@reddit

Hungy

[-]

Vent2002@reddit

“What’s 17 more years”

[-]

Wantitneeditgetit@reddit

Hamsters on that old school nobility grind set.

[-]

TheXypris@reddit

Children are a large nutrient investment

They can always make more kids, so might as well get some of that investment back first

It's not moral, it's just nature

[-]

El_Maltos_Username@reddit

They're stress eaters.

[-]

wine_coconut@reddit

The baby is an exhamster now 😞😞

[-]

AlphaMassDeBeta@reddit (OP)

Whats that? Im just a silly little goofball, and im going to google what that is brb.

[-]

WoMyNameIsTooDamnLon@reddit

Damn its been 3 hours and bro still hasnt reported back hes busy.

[-]

AlphaMassDeBeta@reddit (OP)

I'm now addicted to porn. Mummy is very very mad at me.

[-]

trustmebuddy@reddit

DM me the link plz

[-]

A_HECKIN_DOGGO@reddit

When you’re a tiny prey animal that can be eaten by virtually anything else, stress can do funny things. In this case, why risk your life for some babies when you can just escape the immediate threat and make more later?

That’s what they do.

[-]

Ninjask291@reddit

[-]

Flashlight_Inspector@reddit

Hamsters reach sexual maturity at 4 weeks but are fully grown around 4 months, and they live for 2 years on average. Assuming they don't have any kids until they're fully grown, that's 22 litters they can pump out before dying. Since the average litter is about 8 that means a female hamster can shit out up to 176 kids before dying.

They're objectively better off just eating one of the batches if the going gets rough before moving on to brood #15. They aren't like humans where we need to go all-in on every kid we make because the average human can only make half a dozen kids max before they break down like a rusted out car.

[-]

beegproblemzzz@reddit

The food chain starts and ends at yourself

[-]

AlphaMassDeBeta@reddit (OP)

Like sucking your own dick.

[-]

Supremely_Zesty@reddit

If the cum never left your body, did you really ejaculate 🤔

[-]

dominizerduck@reddit

gif

[-]

beegproblemzzz@reddit

The humble ouroboros:

[-]

Reading_username@reddit

The humble Marilyn manson

[-]

Munnin41@reddit

That's a food circle. And that's just pizza

[-]

Ycr1998@reddit

If baby lives, that's 1 baby.

If mom lives, that's dozens of babies in her lifetime.

It's a matter of quantity, the mom having the energy to flee and make more babies is more important than her current useless babies surviving at the cost of her life.

[-]

Hack_Cubit@reddit

"My babies and I are about to get eaten. But if I eat my babies, I can get a burst of energy, that might help me get away from the predator who's going to eat us."

I believe that's an oversimplified answer.

[-]