Well strictly speaking not really.

The phrase in my mind "one mans food is another mans poison" has me thinking that there are differences in opinion / action that are understood and disagreed with.

You used the term 'sickening'. Meaning a lack of understanding at how another person feels regarding the issue. So I would suggest that your stance is a little stronger than "whatever floats your boat".

Though we do get it.

I don't think instincts change just because there is no longer a need, I do agree that people blather on too much about "instincts", classic example being "oh Johnny is so much like so and so, must be because they're related" - no, it's because they've been subjected to a similar degree of socialization and therefore have responded in a similar way. I never really understand this whole genealogy thing, you only have to go back a few generations and you have so many ancestors it is pointless, the only reason to do it is if you have a genetic medical condition.

However hunting is something that has been with the human race all along, I do think it has an instinctive element that is as real as sex drive. The human genome is full of all sorts of DNA that is no longer used. The thrill you get from hunting an animal I don't think is socialized into hunters.

I note that in Japan they seem to be having a problem with younger people losing interest in sex, that's got to be because of socialization.

Look at the original article posted from The Sun, that is a tabloid urban newspaper that is designed to appeal to urbanite opinions in the UK, basically a homogenized opinion that works in the UK. You wouldn't see articles like that in Canada and the US because opinions are more diverse when it comes to subjects like hunting. Sort of a "right think" mentality, and the main reason I left to be honest, because I don't subscribe to it.

Yeah, but it was sickening to me, so only my opinion and how I feel about the whole hunting thing but it was primarlily about the op's pic of the giraffe.

But do you think really that when primitive man hunted for food there was a thrill to it?

I think thats more down to socialisation and other peoples reaction of it.

IE i'm sure that when civilisation progressed - the good hunters were the ones that went hunting - the ones that were a bit shit probably stayed home and did other guy stuff - like build cave furniture or whatever.

Subsequently the kudos that the hunters got for bringing back a decent supper led to the thrill that they got when they killed it knowing admiration wasn't far away.

Really only likeminded hunters give each other that pat on the back for a good kill / trophy.

I'm not saying I totally disagree with you but I really do believe its more to do with evolution than instinct.

Yes, I think that was a result of evolution, i.e. the need for survival, and hunting is a very basic survival instinct. If you think about sex logically it sounds pretty disgusting really, which is the reaction you get from a classroom of elementary school kids doing sex ed., but people do it because the instinct has evolved to make it enjoyable, so you want to do it.

Obviously if you're hungry that is something you feel and you want to eat, but it's too late to hunt once you start to get hungry, ergo hunting developed as a survival instinct.

I can only relate my own experiences, which is that I was never really bothered one way or the other about hunting until I started doing it and you get that rush. It's more so than say, going skiing or some other recreational activity like that. Also the size of the prey seems to matter for no logical reason, people used to hunt mammoth and if you do it for say, a million years I can see that you could evolve the instinct that bigger is better because there is more meat, etc. People always seem to think hunting elk for example is a far bigger deal than hunting deer, but deer are more challenging really.

Which is probably why people are hunting giraffe.

So you get a hard-on for killing things. I find that quite disturbing but to each his own i guess.

It would sound logical if you haven’t studied a little bit of human evolution, but Humans are primates and omnivores, and primarily described as hunter gatherers
It wasn’t hunger that drove the hunting aspect as its quite energy intensive with a risk of no gain, which the gatherer part full fills very well, but hunting supporting an ever growing brain and its desire for rich protein, that brain continued to grow and adapt such that simple hunting couldn’t support that approach and we started to farm… thousands of years ago…..

And the argument of you don’t understand until you tried is about as flawed as it gets… there are a lot of things you know that you you wouldn’t like, the human mind is well known for its ability to reason out cause effect and consequences, one of the major upsides of that big brain…

Which is what I meant, it's a separate instinct apart from hunger. Like I said, it's usually too late to hunt by the time you feel hungry, because it's energy intensive so it's logical that it would be a distinct instinctive thing to do.

Don't agree on that point, homo sapiens evolved to their current state 200,000 years ago, according to the latest research, a very long time before there was any evidence of organized farming taking place. And clearly our ascendents were also hunting prior to the evolution of the current species.

Did you like sex before you had an orgasm? We're talking instincts here. It's not about reason. Does swapping spit with another person have any logical purpose to it?

It's not a sexual reaction, and it's not the same sort of buzz you get from playing a sport for example. It's more a strong feeling that you should be doing it. Hard to explain because it's an instinct.

I think playing tag is probably the oldest game known to mankind, and that has a strong aspect of hunting to it, i.e. tracking down another person in the wilderness.

Have you seen the TV show - Dexter?

Yes Sex appealed long before I had an orgasm, just thinking about naked girls when I was in my early teens was pretty arousing in itself, the orgasm just the icing on a cake I already knew before I tasted it I was going to enjoy it… I can easily link cause and effect and consequences

Call it instinct, if you want but It’s a long way of the mark, that assumes all nature and it’s not, its a good part nurture, that’s the part that drive what is deemed to be erotic stuff thats driven by social standards, standards that have changed over time, it’s what drives the external stimulation processes and why humans can have long courtships or complicated pre sex rituals and foreplay, taking the simple instinctual drive to procreate and turning it into mutual pleasure and on to fun erotic sex games
Chimps mate using instinct; we include our instinctual drives within our much more complex erotic games

We used to hunt, not instinctually, hunting is taught or learnt it’s not programmed in, it’s something we learned, in the same way certain species of chimps teach their young to hunt meat, the big clue is we don’t think ever about hunting bare handed, its always been linked to the use of tools.

Those two points just don't logically follow each other...?

As far as eating what you hunt ....... I have been a few times to a restaurant in Kenya, near Nairobi airport, called the Carnivore, which serves meat from animals legally culled by the Government. I have eaten zebra, snake, elephant, crocodile, giraffe amongst other meats. It is a fantastic place and generates money for conservation projects. At least it did, it was a few years ago!

Sounds like you're eating the profits.

They're not supposed to follow each other, all I'm saying is that hunger should not be confused with an instinct to hunt - they're separate. Clearly if you get hungry and have no food you're going to go looking for food, which is a strong motivation. I think however hunting is a separate instinct because you're not going to wait until you're hungry to gather food, generally.