I remember our local TV station having a “report” on that. A local kindergarten class or some such stumpled on the horrible thing on the internet. I LMAO.
So what? What is the purpose of these food taboos? Some cultures find some foods icky while others don’t. That doesn’t make one culture morally superior to another.
For what it’s worth, I’ve never heard of mouse fetus anything, and the diet of most Koreans is pretty mundane (although things like chicken feet and pork intestines can also be found). Dog isn’t a common dish, and there are plenty of Koreans who would never consider eating dog (although they wouldn’t mind other people eat it). Oddly enough eating cat would be considered barbaric in Korea, and Koreans don’t even like cats.
Just because we’ve accepted Starbucks and McDonalds doesn’t meant we’re going to swallow Western cultural standards wholesale. A lot of the standards are changing, but it’s only been a few decades since we’ve been completely open to Western culture.
Look, I get that a lot of the stuff we eat here is weird. It’s perfectly fine to think it’s gross (I think a lot of it is gross). But your arbitrary “some animals are for playing, some animals are for eating, and some are for avoiding” standards sound awfully smug. Who gets to decide which animals fall into each category? For a lot of Koreans, dogs were never for playing and they think it’s bizarre that some people treat dogs like their own children.
I agree that I’m bringing some level of judgment to it that is probably unfair. But more than that I just find it interesting that these cultures don’t seem to have any taboos whereas almost all other cultures (at least that I am familiar with) do have food taboos. When I say that animals fall into categories of eating, playing, avoiding for different peoples, I’m not saying that all animals fall into the same categories worldwide, it’s just that in most places there are animals in every category. Whereas as far I as can tell in East Asia there are no animals that are not for eating.
Except for cats in Korea, which is a new one to me, and interesting. Are there any other animals that are considered barbaric to eat?
Well, there’s at least one scientific study showing evidence that decapod crustaceans feel pain, and as far as I know, none proving they don’t (just a bunch of suppositions and assertions).
Most animals, believe it or not, are considered pretty much off limits as food in Korea. Dog is obviously an exception, and Koreans eat a far more diverse array of seafood than Westerners do. But you’re not going to find many Koreans that don’t think it’s weird to eat a snake or a horse or a hamster.
Taboos exist when cultures start establishing some kind of hierarchy when it comes to animals. You consider one animal to be “nobler” or more sacred than another, so it disturbs you to eat it. (Or the opposite - you consider an animal disgusting or unclean.) For the most part, Asian cultures simply think of animals as a food or labor source (until recently). Unless you’re Buddhist - then you’re just going to be a vegetarian anyway.
Even if true, I was under the impression that they were killed quite humanely by the boiling water.
Taboos also exist when animals in some cultures are taught to lead the blind, assist humans in multiple ways, and have also proven and established themselves as trusted, loyal family companions.
Damn straight.
My “depression chicken” has been invaluable in allowing me to continue my career as a jet setting nationwide salesperson.
~whooshed again by the billfish~
Koreans don’t eat guide dogs or family pet dogs, and they would think it disgusting to do so. What, you think because some dogs help humans, the entire species becomes sacred?
Um. Yeah.
Why don’t you eat humans too? Some are arguably worse than the worst dogs. Or is it that Koreans simply don’t find human flesh “tasty”?
As a vegetarian, I am an animal lover and don’t like to see animals suffering…but I find it hard to imagine getting people in China to care much about animal rights until there is more respect for human rights there first.
I keep hoping that someone will reveal the goldfish/turtle keychain thing as a hoax.
And when it comes to eating “weird food”, I’m perfectly fine with that. But frying up part of a fish and eating it when it is still alive is not “weird food”. It’s not right IMHO.
And any culture that can look at dog “A” and think of it as a trained service animal who should be treated well, and then look at dog “B” and think of it as tonights dinner is more than a little mixed up. These two animals are essentially the same - but one is trained and the other is eaten. This just squicks me out.
I don’t know if these things are necessarily correlated. Nazi Germany, for instance, was very pro-animal-rights and Hitler was a big animal lover.
You know who else was a big animal lover? …oh, nevermind.
I said it squicks me out. I did not offer 100% correlation on a double blind test. It’s just creepy on a visceral level that a guide dog or pet can exist in the same culture as a dog in a market sold for food. The folks must be able to compartmentalize their feelings about dogs to a great degree.
I don’t eat dog. It’s just a personal preference, though, and I recognize it as such.
I don’t see how eating a dog bred for eating is the same as eating Fido. And if you are equating dogs to humans you are nuts.
Let me reiterate for you - MOST Koreans don’t eat dog. It’s not this common dish that you can order at the local restaurant. It’s a delicacy that you have to actively seek out. And for the record, I am against dog eating the way it is practiced in Korea - traditionally, you chase the dog around the village until it’s exhausted, then beat it to death. (I think nowadays they skip the chasing around the village part.) It’s eaten by men because it’s supposed to restore male virility, which is pretty much a good example of what’s wrong with neo-Confucian patriarchy - chasing and beating a helpless animal is somehow considered a manly thing to do. It’s medieval and cruel and should be abolished for good.
That said, I have no problem with eating dog per se.
Cultures that eat dog originally never considered dogs as pets the same way Westerners do. It’s not the same culture. As Korean becomes more Westernized, the practice of eating dog is slowly disappearing, but it will probably still exist for a while in the more rural areas of the country.
Crayfish die before they hit the water. FWIW. 
I imagine most people’s impulse is to cut those packets open and attempt to care for the creature. It’s pretty common to see small turtles and reptiles for sale at Chinese markets- this just seems like a novel way of packaging them. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of people buy the animals just to set them free, and that is part of the vedor’s plan.
I think having a lot of concern for animal rights is something that doesn’t come until a society has had a couple generations of not being farmers.
There’s the kind of fuzzy PETA-style animal rights consciousness that requires a cultural divorce from the practical use of animals in farming, that’s true.
But there’s also an old-fashioned farming relationship to animals–relatively unsentimental, but very aware of their reality as living creatures. Distinctly inferior and subordinate living creatures, but still. The overall divorce from farming, and the application of industrial models to agricultural production, have tended to destroy this traditional relationship too (it survives among some hunters, but usually only in relation to animals they hunt).
“Factory” production of meat by a culture that imagines itself concerned with animal rights strikes me as a deeper perversion than the frank exploitation of animals here.
I think we and animals would be better off if we reconciled with and reembraced farming.