I would sustain your objection

I completely understand and agree with your declaration. However, I don't think that is the intent rainbowloom. It is that intent I wish to address.

How would you define a serial killer? He does not feed on his victims (well, of course, there are exceptions. But that's not my point.)

How would you define a serial rapist? The power rapist gets his jollies by experiencing his victim's distress.

How would you describe me if I were to (hypothetically) go hunting pretty little girls just to get into their pants and then leave?

In all three examples of my point, the perpetrator is, in a way, feeding. They satiate their lust and solve (temporarily) their emotional needs. Would that not be a good description of a predator, as well?

Mostly, it's a study in semantics. When I go to the grocery store, do I prey on chickens, pigs, and cattle? I feed on them. Am I a predator, then?

Finally, thank you for a good post. We need more people challenging points of views in an rational way.