They'd surely be dead from cholesterol poisoning or the Pox long before they scrape their way that far down the barrel.
Joking aside, and I'd be the first to agree that while TV is an extremely poor vehicle for the argument it does in a small way serve underscore the thinking behind my earlier response to Jovial; while contemporary western culture (to which I assume he was referring?) has
much to offer, it's hardly a hop skip and a jump onward to nirvana.
There's certainly many (often conflicting) measures, but it seems to me that 'civilisation' isn't so easily defined by 'modern conveniences' (wonderful though many are), urban sprawl and the incessant race with fellow Muroidea. Far too many are today unhappy with a perceived erosion of 'society' and many are seeking remedy or even escape. So it occurs to me; why would we wish to unilaterally 'inflict' this on others, it seems rather unfair to me.
Comments made in ignorance of these people's social structures are mere speculation (and I include my own here of course), yet some have (evidently) formed firm conclusions about the
correct course of action already, how does
that work?
My primary argument was that the choice to interact (or not) should be theirs
not ours. But I live in the 'real' world and fully accept a free choice may not be possible, and that seems a shame.