Crickets and Cannibals

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: This episode explores disgust as a learned, context-dependent emotion rather than a fixed instinct. Through the annual Rotten Sneaker Contest and research by psychologist Rachel Herz, it shows how culture, association, familiarity, and moral framing shape what we find revolting—or appetizing. The discussion links disgust to contamination fears, prejudice, cannibalism taboos, and changing food norms like insects.

Main Topics: The Rotten Sneaker Contest and the 'Hall of Fumes': The episode opens with an annual New York contest where children’s stinkiest sneakers are judged, using this odd spectacle to introduce how odor and disgust are evaluated socially rather than purely biologically. Disgust as a defense mechanism—and a learned response: Rachel Herz explains that disgust protects us from contamination, but our reactions are heavily shaped by learning, culture, and context, not just hardwired biology. Contamination, sympathy, and the 'once in contact, always in contact' idea: The episode explores how people believe objects can carry the essence of prior owners or contamination, from Hitler’s sweater to used wedding rings, illustrating sympathetic magic. Disgust versus anger in moral and legal settings: The transcript argues that disgust is often misused to justify violence or prejudice, such as in the gay panic defense, because true disgust should cause avoidance, not attack. Cultural variation in what counts as disgusting or edible: Examples like wintergreen flavor, skunks, lobster, and cricket consumption show that disgust is culturally constructed and can shift over time or across societies. Children learning disgust and social norms: Young children must learn disgust cues and facial expressions, which helps explain why they misread disgust and why the Rotten Sneaker Contest functions as a lesson in cultural meaning.

Key Arguments: Disgust evolved as a contamination-avoidance mechanism, but what triggers it is learned through experience and socialization. People think toilets are dirtier than frequently touched objects like cell phones or ATM buttons because disgust is driven by associations, not objective risk alone. Disgust is asymmetrical: a single roach can ruin a bowl of cherries, but one cherry cannot redeem a bowl of roaches. Objects associated with bad people or bad events can feel contaminated through 'sympathetic magic,' even when the object itself is physically clean. The gay panic defense mislabels rage as disgust; disgust leads to recoil and avoidance, while violence reflects anger or moral outrage. Disgust often maps onto social hierarchies, helping rationalize prejudice against foreigners, lower castes, or marginalized groups. Humans are not born with fully formed disgust responses; children must learn meanings, cues, and categories of contamination. Food disgust is culturally variable: lobster was once low-status 'vermin of the sea,' while crickets may become more acceptable as norms change. Remaking the meaning of a substance or food can change disgust into acceptance or even delight. Being able to be disgusted is, in many situations, a kind of privilege because people in survival situations cannot afford the luxury of rejection.

Data Points: Contest age range: 8 to 15 years old - Eligibility for the Rotten Sneaker Contest finalists Contest year/edition: 43rd Rotten Sneaker Contest - Rachel Herz judges the annual odor competition Herz’s judging tenure: 11 years - She has served as the celebrity odor judge for over a decade Hall of Fumes collection: 42 years - The museum display includes winners from the past 42 years up to the current year Andes plane crash: October 1972 - Background for the cannibalism/survival example Passengers on the Andes flight: 45 people - Most were rugby players traveling to Chile Survivors after more than two months: 16 people - Only a fraction survived the crash and harsh conditions Survival duration: More than 2 months - The Andes survivors’ ordeal Chemistry of disgust learning: Infants often show no consistent disgust response - Used to argue disgust is learned, not innate Wintergreen context difference: U.S. = candy/gum; U.K. = toilet cleaners/medicinal balms - Explains divergent cultural responses to the same smell

Pivotal Quotes: "“It’s the instinct that has to be learned.”" — Rachel Herz: Her core thesis about disgust and how people acquire disgust responses "“Good does not sanctify bad in the way that bad can sanctify good.”" — Rachel Herz: Explaining why one contaminating element can ruin an object or substance, but a positive association does not fully cleanse it "“It’s a luxury to be able to be disgusted.”" — Rachel Herz: On how disgust can be unavailable or secondary when survival is at stake

Implications: Listeners are encouraged to question gut-level revulsion and recognize how culture, hierarchy, and framing shape disgust. This matters for prejudice, food norms, public health, and how we teach children what to fear or avoid.