Nah, too greasy.
Since I don’t feel like picking on ivan, I’ll throw out a hijack.
I’ll eat almost anything, but I draw the line at primates, chimps, and other banana-eating entities. While I don’t have a logical argument, it feels unethical to me. Too close to home, ya know?
…
Naaaah, too easy. 
Thank you sir 
Same for me, at least regarding great apes.
For the record, I wouldn’t eat dogs, I think, but I’ve no problem with other people eating them. On the other hand, I eat horses.
I would also have no problem with people eating their dead relatives, though I would not attend such funerals.
Since when?
Given that a lot of our values and customs upset the majority of the world, should we change our ways, regarding for instance sexuality (women not dressing conservatively, tolerance of homosexuality, etc…)?
First, dog meat is not a popular dish. Jesus Christ. Can you fucking read? There are many Koreans that go through life never eating dog, just like there are many Americans who never eat rattlesnake.
Second, we respect the fact that some people think eating dog is gross. You guys think Fido is like a son to you? That’s cool. We’re not going to insult you by serving you his cousin for dinner. (And on a more practical note, there is obviously no money in this business. Why the hell would a Korean open a dog meat restaurant in the US when they already know it’s going to fail? Would you start selling burgers in a Hindi neighborhood?)
Because you are a closeminded ignorant asshole, you seem to think that the fact such a restaurant would fail means that such a restaurant is immoral. All it means is that people in the West have hangups about eating dog. There’s nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with assuming that your cultural norms are some kind of universal ethical standard, as has been pointed out to countless times in this thread.
Seoul cracked down on dog meat in 88 because of judgemental fuckwits like you, not because they felt there was anything wrong with it.
That dog? In the stew right there? It didn’t unconditionally love you. It has nothing to do with your dog. It is a dog. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Plenty of people cry after Charlotte’s Web and Babe yet will still happily eat pork chops. It’s because they are able to separate the pig on their plate from the pig in their mind. I understand this is difficult to do with dog for some people, because dogs have become a cultural icon in the West, but at the very least you should be able to see that your squeamishness is a result of cultural blinders, not because dog eaters are essentially stupid and immoral.
I don’t even know why I’m bothering.
HazelNutCoffee and others, since he doesn’t want to rationally defend his position, isn’t it clear that ivan doesn’t necessarily even believe it himself–he just enjoys seeing you get worked up over it? In other words . . .
…He’s snacking on a Schnauzer sandwich as we speak?
Overheard by me in an anthropology class way back when:
Q: What’s a Sioux picnic?
A: A six-pack and a puppy.
Seems the Sioux were dog-eaters. The Thais are not, but the Vietnamese are, and there are pockets of ethnic Vietnamese in the Northeast, and there are dog dealers who will go around to other towns and buy up unwanted dogs to sell to those communities for food. Certain of the hilltribes in the North also eat dog, such as the Akha.
Myself, I’ve not and would rather not, even though munching down on a chihuahua might be considered poetic justice.
Yeah, but as was mentioned about the Koreans upthread, you won’t find the average Vietnamese person vaguely interested in dog - it’s generally a certain cohort of working class men in their 50s and older who eat the stuff for reasons of “stamina”. I did eat weird shit like snake when I was over there, but I never even had a hunch that dog was being served. I’ve never even heard it mentioned by the local Australian Vietnamese community - which I’ve been immersed in for nearly twenty years.
The stories of Westerners in Vietnam being given dog in restaurant switcheroos are also likely urban myths. Where it is available, dog is a very expensive meat. Any substitution would likely be the other way around - you ask for dog and get something else.
Why yes, they also flip their middle finger in your general direction when they tuck in. :rolleyes:
Do you honestly think they eat what they eat for the purpose of upseting you? (or whatever majority you claim to be part of)
Perhaps, but the dog vendors in northeastern Thailand do exist for the Vietnamese communities. It’s probably as you mention, for the older folks, with the younger ones not really partaking.
On the off chance that you’re actually curious about why some cultures consider Ol’ Blue a food animal, I offer you the simplest and most obvious of practical reasons.
Consider the dog, Ivan. Consider him as a zoological entity, a living beast made of living meat, one who eats, and ages, and possibly even reproduces.
As an animal, what does such a dog have in common with a chicken or swine?
Yep, you got it --they’re all hardy, prolific animals-- and they can thrive on Man’s scraps and rubbished food. In other words they turn garbage into edible food, and pretty quickly too. That’s why chicken and pork have historically been the meat of poor folks and subsistence farmers, and domestic canids* have the same qualities to make them a desirable meat-beasty.
*Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the dogs kept by various dog-eating cultures (I’m mostly thinking of the Plains Indians and some Polynesian Islanders in this connection) usually of the generic “feist” type --little nondescript terrier-looking guys who weigh fifteen to thirty pounds and mostly have short, smooth “yaller” or spotty coats and curvy tails?
I’ve been on the SDMB for about 10 years, and this has got to be one of the most stupid things I’ve read. In fact I had to read it several times, to comprehend that anyone would voice such an ignorant sentiment.
How far should THEY respect YOUR culture, if YOU don’t respect what THEY respect?
I don’t think that neccesarily follows. It’s more likely that he has a prejudice against eating dog meat…that he thinks it’s wrong, but he doesn’t have a rational reason for believing that. Just because a belief isn’t rational doesn’t mean it isn’t sincere, though.
The culture in most places in general for respecting dogs, is based on practical and worthwhile considerations of the animal’s usefulness to society, not on their ability to give you a boner if you cook them with the right seasoning. Get your head from up your arse.
Let’s see if I’ve got this straight! It seems a dog’s fate very much depends on the luck of the draw . If it is born in the vast majority of places, it is treated with respect, dignity and kindness( with the occasional exceptions.), befitting the service or purpose it provides mankind, and if in other ever-decreasing pockets of human society, it is treated with the utmost cruelty, and is fit only to be served on a plate, and mostly for the absurd reason that “it makes you virile!”.
Yet I’m just a sentimental old fool, railing against an imperfect world, because people should be entitled to eat what they want, whenever they want it? That sounds awfully like that, “God put all animals on Earth to be eaten” bullshit, to me. Is the SD a typical meeting-place for the Christian meat-eating far-reich? Because, as I’ve already stated, I’d prefer not to muddy the waters any more than necessary, and leave religion out of this. Do try not to mistake my cynicism for bare-assed trolling. It is a very-blinkered way of looking at things, and is just as narrow-minded an attitude as I’m supposed to have.
Those of you who have replied with facts or opinions free of accusations, thanks for posting…anyone else, GFY!
What, exactly, is the dog’s “usefulness” to modern society, other than as a pet?
Look, you can rail against people being stupid enough to believe eating dogflesh will increase your virility. But then you should at least be consistent and say people who eat oyster or eel for the same reasons are just as stupid. We keep coming back to the same point: You think dogs are special, yet have failed to provide any rational justification as to why everyone else should think so as well. Do you know why? Because there is no rational justification, as numerous people have pointed out again and again in this very thread.
You may not be a troll, but you are most certainly an ass. YOU are the one bringing religion into this discussion. And taking some sort of weird smug satisfaction in your own ignorance, it seems.
Since you are so fond of invoking the majority, perhaps you should consider the fact that everyone else in this thread thinks you are an idiot.
Whatever. I’m done ramming my head against a brick wall.