Well, I personally don’t see the appeal, but as long as you aren’t hurting anyone, I wish you the best of luck.
I will say, though, just as an aside, that it’s odd to me to say “cannibalistic humanoid”, because cannibalism can only be committed against the same species, but the term humanoid seems to describe something up to a range of species.
So it’s as if we are saying, I don’t know what species a CHUDS is, but whatever it is, it is humanoid and that’s also the species it preys on.
But surely we must determine the species of both the predator and the prey to determine that they are both the same species, in which case why the generalized term?
Well, I personally don’t see the appeal, but as long as you aren’t hurting anyone, I wish you the best of luck.
I will say, though, just as an aside, that it’s odd to me to say “cannibalistic humanoid”, because cannibalism can only be committed against the same species, but the term humanoid seems to describe something up to a range of species.
So it’s as if we are saying, I don’t know what species a CHUDS is, but whatever it is, it is humanoid and that’s also the species it preys on.
But surely we must determine the species of both the predator and the prey to determine that they are both the same species, in which case why the generalized term?
It is quite a vexing problem. This is great weed.