AzurePhoenix

Awww it was an itty bitty killer kitty. At that size range it'd be pretty similar a situation to that, but you're right. In a corner, in seriousness, it would would respond more violently and effectively, even if actually outmatched.

The canine teeth are functional, they're used to crush tough plants, and are an important threat display, for intimidating rival males or potential predators.

*Shrug* without seeing it I can't comment on that particular "battle." Anyhow, kitties do very little eviscerating.

Well, Siberian tigers will sometimes get into trouble sneaking into villages to kill dogs, and there's really no doubt that a healthy one could put them down rather easily if it put itself into the fight. But the thing to remember is that most animals will avoid a fight if they can help it. A meal's not worth the effort if you get hurt going for it. In the wild, even an apparently mild injury could get you killed, so the prize of a human just isn't worth the effort or the risk of getting a few injuries while putting down a couple of over-sized jackals. Also keep in mind, while Siberian tigers are massive, weighing well over 600 pounds, and Bengals more lion-sized at around 500, the island subspecies are much smaller, the extant Sumatran and extinct Javan about 300 pounds, the extinct Bali a hundred less than those, scarcely larger than a leopard, and weighing about as much or less than a pair of full grown danes, which in that case might pose a very real threat. In a real-life imagining of the story, I would imagine that the tiger would represent one of the three island species. (all weight quotes indicate males. tigresses would be even smaller by comparison)

I tend to "feel" that incest between individuals of significant relatedness is, as stated, "icky." But I don't put much stock in my feelings. I don't see a problem with the concept in a modern society so long as long as a birth doesn't occur. My support is more tentative concerning related individuals with wide age-gaps, particularly parent/offspring pairings, not because of the increased ick factor, but because of the potential risks of psychological abuses or pressures / manipulations that might be inflicted on children to produce potential partners out of them.

Or the fifth option that does apply science and accounts for genetic predispositions and evolution.

OP has been edited for new constraints.

I know chocolate-dipped versions and marshmallow fluff/cream treat me the same, but I think I'll typically eat more of the fire-toasted versions before it sets in when camping.

Swansont's 'Mallownausea by way of Psychological Frailty is an accepted variation if the general idea. CaptainPanic's cultural barbarism is an expected and unfortunate consequence of the American loss of interest in God-approved manifest destiny and global conquest, so his act of social terrorism will be quietly ignored until such time as it becomes popular, results in violence, and we'll have to invade a neighboring nation to his that didnt have much to do with it and take their timber. Which we will use to fuel more 'mallow factories. That's what European nations have, right? Timber?

Plus extracted animal collagen. To capture and enslave the air to ensure puff.

How many marshmallows of average, non-mini-size can you ingest in one sitting before you regret it? *Let us henceforth consider only raw, untoasted, unflavored, marshmallows, not dipped in chocolate or chopped in icecream or drizzled with caramel and nuts or anything else. No caffeinated versions, no gelatin-free version, no fish-gelatin-based lies, etc and so on and what have you*

Like Skeptic points out, if homosexuality functioned to reduce an organism's fecundity, it'd be ruthlessly selected against and wiped out of populations wherever it might arise. The opposite is more likely to be true. There are at least two situations that I can think of where homosexuality advantageously helps to maximize the reproductive capacity of either the homosexual in question or their close kin, both of which Skeptic touched on. Among black swans, homosexual male pairs will sometimes fertilize a female, wait for her clutch, then drive her away to rear the young themselves, on average raising a higher number of cygnets to adulthood than heterosexual pairs do. Among humans, there's the Gay Uncle Hypothesis. It was predicted that in pre-agricultural human society, when most people lived in small bands as hunter-gatherers or in small tribal communities, in which familial ties are often much stronger than they are today, a homosexual sibling might not be as likely to have as many or any children of their own to invest in. Instead, the homosexual uncle or aunt might happily dote on any nieces or nephews they might have. As such, the siblings of homosexual individuals would benefit, being able to successfully raise a potentially greater number of children to maturity. A sibling of a homosexual would be more likely (than individuals from family lines that might not produce many or any homosexuals) to carry some of the genes that might contribute to homosexuality, and pass them on to their own greater number of children, perpetuating homosexuality and the cycle. As it turns out, when existing low-population societies of a more "archaic" pre-industrial or mass-scale agricultural makeup were examined, homosexual relatives did tend to devote more of their time and resources to the children of their close kin. The effect doesn't however carry over into large-population, industrialized, westernisish, typically "me-centric" societies.