Mantoids and Sexual Cannibalism

At AJ's request to keep this discussion separate from the character discussion...



Since the wiki doesn't go into detail, and they don't have their own subforum as a minor race, it'll have to go in just regular old ideas discussion.




Brought up by Bael's new character sheet. Personally, I am against sexual cannibalism by Mantoids in Felarya. I'm a huge preying mantis fan, and its a severe pet peeve of mine to see the establishment of sexual cannibalism rear its ugly head with mantids. A great deal of studies have shown that most sub species when left alone do not engage in this behavior at all. Many of them will even undertake elaborate courtship dances, as mantids tend to be very visual simulation bound creatures.


Regardless though of whether or not it can be definitively announced either way regarding Earth mantid species, lets talk about Felarya. Because that's what matters anyway. I could not forsee any real circumstance where a female predator would gain any advantage slaying her mate during or after a sexual act. For one thing, it would really hurt population numbers in the long run, and for another, the preds of Felarya tend to be of a higher evolutionary thought process than the primitive beasts they're derived from on Earth. What are your opinions of this? I'll try my best to keep my pet peeve under control for the discussion.


Poll included for the lazy, but written opinions definitely warranted.

Sexual cannibalism in mantises is like camoflauge in chameleons. Chameleons are incapable of blending into the background, changing colour to express emotion. But even though it isn't true, it's a very iconic misconception, so when someone says chameleon you always think colour-changing.

Also, the creator of mantoids (Kikijonson IIRC) has stated and written about them eating their men before, and judging from one of the pictures on his pictures of Mantoids, Karbo's accepted the cannibilism thing too.

Jew wrote:

Sexual cannibalism in mantises is like camoflauge in chameleons. Chameleons are incapable of blending into the background, changing colour to express emotion. But even though it isn't true, it's a very iconic misconception, so when someone says chameleon you always think colour-changing.

Also, the creator of mantoids (Kikijonson IIRC) has stated and written about them eating their men before, and judging from one of the pictures on his pictures of Mantoids, Karbo's accepted the cannibilism thing too.

Things can change.

Jew wrote:

Sexual cannibalism in mantises is like camoflauge in chameleons. Chameleons are incapable of blending into the background, changing colour to express emotion. But even though it isn't true, it's a very iconic misconception, so when someone says chameleon you always think colour-changing.

Also, the creator of mantoids (Kikijonson IIRC) has stated and written about them eating their men before, and judging from one of the pictures on his pictures of Mantoids, Karbo's accepted the cannibilism thing too.

This article may help

It's the case of the black widow too even if this is common to many spiders, scorpions, arachnids, and insects too. Sexual cannibalism is very rare and exceptional behaviour, it happen when the female is very hungry and the males in overall tend to get cautious about it. It's not really sexual cannibalism but sexual conflict. For the case of the praying mantis it has been noticed than female in reality is hunting male mainly as food source than for mating. Sexual cannibalism is very controverted. If Mantoids is known to eat their male it can be true for dridders, scorpisais too because the case are happen more often.

And about the iconic misconception of the chameleon is in fact the propriety of the octopus but they are more known for their tentacles they can regrow and spiting ink to evade their predators

In the case of spiders and scorpions, sexual cannibalism is much more prevalent. With mantids, it is a lot more rare. If it were to come up as a problem, it would more likely be with dridders or scorpisals, not with mantoids. There are some sub species of mantis that do engage in sexual cannibalism regardless of circumstance, but it is not the widespread phenomenon that people associate with it. As you stated, it is more an example of sexual conflict in the case of the mantis. The number of genus that are complicit with this model is few and far between, with redbacks being the most common example. In most cases, the male approaches the female with caution and retreats rapidly.


Of course, even in the dridder/spider model you find that this is not necessarily a majority rule. Just as you have the spiders that prey on one another, you also have several species that form large colonies or will even co-habitate with members of different species. I'm not as familiar with scorpions so I can't really comment on them.



However, all of this is Earth talk. That's not my point or my goal here, this is Felarya talk. IF sexual cannibalism were to exist, what reasons would be given for it to exist? Why would that path be chosen? When/if it were to develop, what species would it be dominant for and would the partners be complicit? While they are taurian and share a commonality with other creatures, you can't really say that a majority of the predators that have human halves are low in the brain matter department. They've developed quite a bit in several examples with general higher thinking prerogatives. So, what reasons would drive them to such an end? Sexual dimorphism is definitely an acceptable answer here, and would fit with Felarya - but there would need to be more to it than just that, I would think. Additionally, while the majority of cases involves the Female eating the Male, this is not always the case either. Felarya does tend to side with the female persuasion more often than not, but there is room for discussion here.

The problem about Felarya tauric creatures have their behaviours mainly justified more by their animal counterpart than their humans one. as Jew pointed the popular iconic association female praying mantis eat the male play even in fact it's more complicated and it's proven it happen in some circumstance. The popular belief will prevail. To the common of the mortal praying mantis based creature have to have their males eaten by the female.

Quote :

And about the iconic misconception of the chameleon is in fact the propriety of the octopus but they are more known for their tentacles they can regrow and spiting ink to evade their predators Razz

Please explain more about this, for I am interested. The chameleon misconception I mean.

Quote :

The problem about Felarya tauric creatures have their behaviours mainly justified more by their animal counterpart than their humans one. as Jew pointed the popular iconic association female praying mantis eat the male play even in fact it's more complicated and it's proven it happen in some circumstance. The popular belief will prevail. To the common of the mortal praying mantis based creature have to have their males eaten by the female.

I can state another reason for such: Not everyone knows what you do, so stop assuming that everyone knows that a popular belief is a misconception and is much more complicated. We are not born with science fused in our brain!

Sean Okotami wrote:

Please explain more about this, for I am interested. The chameleon misconception I mean.

It's widespread that all chameleon use their change of colour as camouflage is not common to all species of chameleon. It's mainly a social signalling. But it's mainly associated to the common definition of the chameleon. The misconception is to assume is common to all the specie as for all female praying mantis eat their mate as it's the black widows, it's more common to less widespread to spiders and scorpion. It happen but not how often people may believe, it's not a cliché it's just there is an exaggeration about the fact. It happen but it's not an obligation.

Sean Okotami wrote:

I can state another reason for such: Not everyone knows what you do, so stop assuming that everyone knows that a popular belief is a misconception and is much more complicated. We are not born with science fused in our brain!

Commons misconception are born from fact related by media or folklore that have been considered as truth by most of the people when scientist and many people who do documentary or write article about the wild life few people ignore them and find them boring.
I don't know more things than people it's just I did some research in my free time and watch some documentaries and Internet is a useful tools not only for porn and play video games online

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

Commons misconception are born from fact related by media or folklore that have been considered as truth by most of the people when scientist and many people who do documentary or write article about the wild life few people ignore them and find them boring.
I don't know more things than people it's just I did some research in my free time and watch some documentaries and Internet is a useful tools not only for porn and play video games online

That's kind of my point. People here just love shoehorning realism in fiction that not everyone had the time or the need to research about when in reality it's unnecessary and distracting. Fiction is made to be BELIEVABLE, not REALISTIC! I apologize being agressive right now, but it's a peeve of mine how people here have this habit of picking on unnecessary real concepts that, yes, would add more depth, claiming it's unrealistic. Why is nobody bitching about Superman's flight and super strength when real life would dictate that human shape has terrible aerodynamics and lifting two tons would snap his spine like a twig? Why does nobody bitch about that and would rather bitch about the minor details of Earth's life not being properly translated in fiction?

Sean Okotami wrote:

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

Commons misconception are born from fact related by media or folklore that have been considered as truth by most of the people when scientist and many people who do documentary or write article about the wild life few people ignore them and find them boring.
I don't know more things than people it's just I did some research in my free time and watch some documentaries and Internet is a useful tools not only for porn and play video games online

That's kind of my point. People here just love shoehorning realism in fiction that not everyone had the time or the need to research about when in reality it's unnecessary and distracting. Fiction is made to be BELIEVABLE, not REALISTIC! I apologize being agressive right now, but it's a peeve of mine how people here have this habit of picking on unnecessary real concepts that, yes, would add more depth, claiming it's unrealistic. Why is nobody bitching about Superman's flight and super strength when real life would dictate that human shape has terrible aerodynamics and lifting two tons would snap his spine like a twig? Why does nobody bitch about that and would rather bitch about the minor details of Earth's life not being properly translated in fiction?

Because I believe that is possible. I realize there are bounds that would be easily broken in that case. Just as I'm willing to forgo debating on just how dridder anatomy works, since it can't be exactly like a spiders at the size they are. No issues there. I'll just imagine they work similar to large mechanical power plants in bio/organic form.


I do however take issue and find it difficult to imagine a Felaryan mantoid decapitating her mate during copulation and then eating him in order to increase nutrient intake and prolong the intercourse to ensure more eggs are fertilized. Sorry if that's bitchy for you.

aethernavale wrote:

Because I believe that is possible. I realize there are bounds that would be easily broken in that case. Just as I'm willing to forgo debating on just how dridder anatomy works, since it can't be exactly like a spiders at the size they are. No issues there. I'll just imagine they work similar to large mechanical power plants in bio/organic form.


I do however take issue and find it difficult to imagine a Felaryan mantoid decapitating her mate during copulation and then eating him in order to increase nutrient intake and prolong the intercourse to ensure more eggs are fertilized. Sorry if that's bitchy for you.

Don't worry, I wasn't aiming anyone in particular, I was aiming at a trend where smug people have to shoehorn every details of real life in the place. That's probably the quickest way for me to lose all enthusiasm in anything.

Which is why I'm trying to differentiate between Felarya and Earth and maintain my own bias in check.



There are some good artists here capable of writing up ideas that are both thought-provoking and intimidating. Which is why this is not a statement of intent, but a question of content.




This is not my world, I'm only going to participate in it. That being said, I personally can't see any reason why mantoids, or any race for that matter, would need to undergo sexual cannibalism. I'm fully aware however that members of the predator races do eat each other, and some of them will eat their own kind without a second thought. However, the current theories for earth speculation on why the evolutionary progress chose to develop sexual cannibalism I do not believe to work in Felarya. Seriously, can you realistically imagine a female mantoid doing that just to increase copulation time and fertilization? Colour me skeptical here, but it seems to me that most of them (female predators in Felarya in general) are capable of doing that through other methods. And quite proud of their abilities in doing so.


So, if Felarya does have this tendency, why? That is what I'm asking. And why my first post in this thread stated discussion was encouraged. So far though its really turned into a debate over idea vs ideal, which was not the intent.

I guess that's a good point. I mean, they have human-level of intelligence, what would kill them to just find a big enough animal and eat it?

It should also be more clearly defined that for the intent of this conversation, we're talking about same race sexual cannibalism. IE, a female mantoid eating her partner during sex (male or female - take that into account as well, as a lot of the predators will take either, which would further blow out the argument based on Earth sciences).

One could easily argue that Felarya already has sexual cannibalism with predators like Vivan and Malika, who tend to satiate multiple appetites at the same time. I tend to think of this from the perspective of using edible toys rather than feeding on mates. That's not what this is about. Of course, a perceptive one could still put forth a debate here as well, so long as the predator in question actually thought of them as mates, not just food. For example, would Relina or Malika ever eat Kaz or Eon?

The parallel with the real animal is explained the difference of behaviour or moral issue some hybrids don't have contrary to humans. From a human point view eating your mate is a crime but contrary to dridders, scorpisai or mantoids it doesn't matter. A female can or cannot depending on their behaviour to eat or not her mate. A female mantoids can develop a normal relation as another one can decide to eat him why because she's voracious or just for the fun or any reasons the authors can give.

So sexual cannibalism or cannibalism may happen but it's not an obligation because as they are part human at the level of intelligence they can have the choice or not. The cannibalism in overall can be a particular or personal behaviour of the hybrids characters but not a rule the whole specie has to follow. It can be explained and state in the race description.

To conclude it's a choice the author are free to decide or not for their hybrid characters.

Sean Okotami wrote:

That's kind of my point. People here just love shoehorning realism in fiction that not everyone had the time or the need to research about when in reality it's unnecessary and distracting. Fiction is made to be BELIEVABLE, not REALISTIC! I apologize being agressive right now, but it's a peeve of mine how people here have this habit of picking on unnecessary real concepts that, yes, would add more depth, claiming it's unrealistic. Why is nobody bitching about Superman's flight and super strength when real life would dictate that human shape has terrible aerodynamics and lifting two tons would snap his spine like a twig? Why does nobody bitch about that and would rather bitch about the minor details of Earth's life not being properly translated in fiction?

Realism in fiction is to emulate reality more or less or give the fiction an internal consistency even if they are unrealistic in real life they are BELIEVABLE because the fictional universe has its own logic and try to follow more ore less. And contrary to what you think many people have bitched about Superman strenght (see Quantum theory). The unnecessary real concept in somehow necessary when people start to confuse reality and fiction for example many people believed car exploded after an accident consequence many people suffers from different complications because their friends removed thinking the car will explode, or when it tend to become an obligation standards in fictions, if someone depicted super strenght in a different way than superman people will say "Ah, it sucks!" because the super strenght to be believable has to be like superman. What makes a fiction BELIEVABLE it's the internal logic of the fiction and it doesn't reach a ridiculous level except it's a comedy or satirical fiction.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

The parallel with the real animal is explained the difference of behaviour or moral issue some hybrids don't have contrary to humans. From a human point view eating your mate is a crime but contrary to dridders, scorpisai or mantoids it doesn't matter. A female can or cannot depending on their behaviour to eat or not her mate. A female mantoids can develop a normal relation as another one can decide to eat him why because she's voracious or just for the fun or any reasons the authors can give.

No, from a current society point of view it is a crime. In past societies this is not so true. That is a differentiation between civility, debating morals. That's not what this is about. I'm not going to argue whether or not eating one's mate is right or wrong. Just the reasons behind why they would choose to do so. Also, note earlier how I stated it need not just be a hetero thing - many of the predators are either physically hermaphrodites or practice bisexuality. Would they have reason to consume their mates? Why or why not - copulation and fertilization doesn't even play a part when you take it from that perspective. Sure, singularly the author could choose to have their character do that, and provide a reason for doing so, but this is for a racial epithet. What evolutionary process would dictate the need to do so? An individual could develop the idea when left to their own devices, but unless they're in a position to spread this behaviour to others it stops with them.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

So sexual cannibalism or cannibalism may happen but it's not an obligation because as they are part human at the level of intelligence they can have the choice or not. The cannibalism in overall can be a particular or personal behaviour of the hybrids characters but not a rule the whole specie has to follow. It can be explained and state in the race description.

To conclude it's a choice the author are free to decide or not for their hybrid characters.

I agree with this bit, but once again author's choice in creating characters isn't what this is about. Its the notion that was implied that this was a common practice, so much so that an individual would fear their own race and the process of maturation because of it.

aethernavale wrote:

No, from a current society point of view it is a crime. In past societies this is not so true. That is a differentiation between civility, debating morals. That's not what this is about. I'm not going to argue whether or not eating one's mate is right or wrong. Just the reasons behind why they would choose to do so. Also, note earlier how I stated it need not just be a hetero thing - many of the predators are either physically hermaphrodites or practice bisexuality. Would they have reason to consume their mates? Why or why not - copulation and fertilization doesn't even play a part when you take it from that perspective. Sure, singularly the author could choose to have their character do that, and provide a reason for doing so, but this is for a racial epithet. What evolutionary process would dictate the need to do so? An individual could develop the idea when left to their own devices, but unless they're in a position to spread this behaviour to others it stops with them.

Ethics vary among the individuals and society. The hybrids creatures have an unnatural origins which make difficult why they do this practice why it's not necessary.

aethernavale wrote:

I agree with this bit, but once again author's choice in creating characters isn't what this is about. Its the notion that was implied that this was a common practice, so much so that an individual would fear their own race and the process of maturation because of it.

I see your point, but if we look the wiki it didn't state as a common practice and in Karbo's picture it was more comical scene than a statement. If an author stated it it's his/her own statement but indeed the fact there is no clear statement about this practice can become problematic. I understand why you worry about it. The fact the young male is scared about it can make funny situation. I remember the French comedy 9 mois there is an American remake. In the French version the main character has a discussion with a friend about the fact female mantis eat her mate he makes a parallel with his situation about how he feels the change due to the pregnancy of his girlfriend to the point he did a nightmare where his pregnant lover was human size mantis which was going to eat him. But of course it was just to show how he was stressed and scared to be father. Of course an author can play with that and show it was only the fear of the male and not the reality or play straight on it.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

aethernavale wrote:

No, from a current society point of view it is a crime. In past societies this is not so true. That is a differentiation between civility, debating morals. That's not what this is about. I'm not going to argue whether or not eating one's mate is right or wrong. Just the reasons behind why they would choose to do so. Also, note earlier how I stated it need not just be a hetero thing - many of the predators are either physically hermaphrodites or practice bisexuality. Would they have reason to consume their mates? Why or why not - copulation and fertilization doesn't even play a part when you take it from that perspective. Sure, singularly the author could choose to have their character do that, and provide a reason for doing so, but this is for a racial epithet. What evolutionary process would dictate the need to do so? An individual could develop the idea when left to their own devices, but unless they're in a position to spread this behaviour to others it stops with them.

Ethics vary among the individuals and society. The hybrids creatures have an unnatural origins which make difficult why they do this practice why it's not necessary.

I'll go with you and agree that they have unnatural origins (I believe they do anyway but I don't know about everyone else). That still doesn't explain why they do it. What you're saying there looks like a handwave. I apologise if you aren't finished at that statement but it would be very easy to just leave it at that, creating a handwave.
Still, even if their biological origins were not evolutionary it does not mean that they did not undergo evolution. Society is constantly changing in a way like evolution. Mindsets and morals change. Even with their unnatural origins I still think that they would develop a lot of their behaviour themselves. They are sentient after all. To say otherwise is to reduce them into fetish objects. We've moved past that stage, I hope.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

I see your point, but if we look the wiki it didn't state as a common practice and in Karbo's picture it was more comical scene than a statement..

The wiki doesn't state anything about it at all. Which is not necessarily a good thing because it seems that everyone has drawn their own conclusions about it, most of which are "The female eats the male as a general guideline or rule." Karbo's sketch just reinforces that.

Anime-Junkie wrote:

I'll go with you and agree that they have unnatural origins (I believe they do anyway but I don't know about everyone else). That still doesn't explain why they do it. What you're saying there looks like a handwave. I apologise if you aren't finished at that statement but it would be very easy to just leave it at that, creating a handwave.
Still, even if their biological origins were not evolutionary it does not mean that they did not undergo evolution. Society is constantly changing in a way like evolution. Mindsets and morals change. Even with their unnatural origins I still think that they would develop a lot of their behaviour themselves. They are sentient after all. To say otherwise is to reduce them into fetish objects. We've moved past that stage, I hope.

I never say they don't evolve. But the fact they are unnatural means this behavior is not necessary the result of the natural evolution of the animal counterpart, the fact they are sentient give them the ability to choose and develop more personal preference. Why a predator prefer to hunt a particular prey or its gender as she can eat other, you can justify by the taste but because something taste good it doesn't mean it will feed you correctly. Some predators decide to spare a prey they judge worthy, it doesn't mean the others are not. Why someone who can manipulate water doesn't take the control of the blood of their opponent or their body which are made of water instead trying to crush them or drown them with tons of water. The rule of a society apply only inside the society outside they are no particular value. A hybrid predator can become cannibal or not and decide on the modus operandi. A choice is not necessary rational. The fact they are sentient and have unnatural origins make some of their actions are more dictate by their personal opinion and behaviour than their natural instinct because their conditions give them more possibilities and flexibilities than their animal counterpart. Of course they can be influenced by their instincts it doesn't mean they cannot control themselves.

It's funny to bring the fetish argument just because if it doesn't make sense it's a fetish you will be surprised to see many fetish have more sense than some normal actions. Having a fetish doesn't mean you are crazy.

Anime-Junkie wrote:

The wiki doesn't state anything about it at all. Which is not necessarily a good thing because it seems that everyone has drawn their own conclusions about it, most of which are "The female eats the male as a general guideline or rule." Karbo's sketch just reinforces that.

Indeed this point need some clarifications.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

It's funny to bring the fetish argument

That wasn't my intention, I was stating that to state that they were other than sentients able to develop their own behaviour was to reduce them. That's something that doesn't happen a lot in Felarya, I don't think I've seen it here, something which I am exceedingly glad about.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

just because if it doesn't make sense it's a fetish you will be surprised to see many fetish have more sense than some normal actions.

I never said that.
Also, drawing on this it could be said by way of explanation that some mantoids eat their mates because of... A fetish.
I'm not saying this is what it should be, just something that popped into my mind as I was typing this.

gwadahunter2222 wrote:

Having a fetish doesn't mean you are crazy.

I should hope not. I don't advertise the fact I am an Endosomatophile, but here I will state that I do.

mhh it's not an easy question.
Personnaly, I tend to be wary indeed about giving some traits to an hybrid race just because the animal they are derived from have it too.
In that particular case, Kikijonson wanted that trait to be in and she created them like that. However if that sexual canibalism thing is done everytime, it would impact a lot the race, which is allready rather uncommon. So in practice, I imagine it to happens sometimes, with the female mantoid being rather dominant and frenzied during the act ^^

Karbo wrote:

mhh it's not an easy question.
Personnaly, I tend to be wary indeed about giving some traits to an hybrid race just because the animal they are derived from have it too.
In that particular case, Kikijonson wanted that trait to be in and she created them like that. However if that sexual canibalism thing is done everytime, it would impact a lot the race, which is allready rather uncommon. So in practice, I imagine it to happens sometimes, with the female mantoid being rather dominant and frenzied during the act ^^

The problem is the fact this trait cannot be exclusive to the mantoids and can be found among dridders and scorpisaï which may happen more often due to the fact the females tend to be larger than the males and the act can look more shadow of colossus, in certain cases. Knowing in Felarya the size plays an important role.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the idea. Partially because its not a wholly accurate myth and would mean that some dridder species would be prone to this. Strangely enough, sexual cannibalism is most common in mantises that are held in captivity, thought to be due to less feeding and disturbing of the female mantis.

Actually, in the field many well fed mantises have been recorded performing elaborate courtship dances. It is only in more extreme circumstances that the female mantis eats the male and it would seem more just because she is hungry rather than some sort of sexual need.

Interestingly, it has been recorded that males who are more fit and stronger can have sex longer and are more likely to leave un-cannibalized. Perhaps this is natural selection? Perhaps in mantoids the females have high standards and only strong males are allowed to be loved "mates", the other getting eaten.

Now, from a totally different approach, we must remember that these are hybrid creatures, not just giant mantises. If they, like most Felaryan predators seem to, have human reproductive organs this totally changes things - they would be able to reproduce or at least fertilize roughly like humans which would make things simpler. Plus, they would have human personalities, not just a sex and hunger drive, this being the main point I think against this.

The nature of the relationship between male and female mantoids is generally for the author to decide. In general, one could say that female mantoids culturally tend to have a dominant role. Or, perhaps there is one or two species of "feral" mantoids that does stuff like sexual cannibalism.

Plus, a female mantoid would only be a little bigger than the male, so it would have to be hard vore. So... I know some people like that, but, let's go back to roots here...

But I imagine mantoids that are in love probably wouldn't cannibalize, but circumstances are always different...

Based upon what I've heard, species such as mantids and spiders don't often commit cannibalism after mating unless the female is starving or the male has some kind of detriment that makes him less physically fit than usual, such as an illness. Otherwise the two mates will go their separate ways after the act is "completed".