Dog Pause: Cultural Culinary Conundrums

The French organization One Voice has called for the banning of dog meat (pictured: cooked dog paws), in China before the Summer Olympics. According to them, dogs are killed in "slow and brutal methods in which the animal is beaten to death, boiled alive or hung up to bleed while still breathing." (I assume then that One Voice is no friend of Halal meat either - I can't access their website to find out) They also claim that stolen pets are being used as food, some still wearing collars.

I have no problem with the argument that raising and/or killing animals unhumanely is bad practice. I respect animals, and think that they should be kept in as natural conditions as possible. I also think that their slaughter should be as quick and painless as possible. That's why the majority of my meat comes from local farmers who raise pastured animals. More expensive, yes - but I am happy to pay a premium. The animals are, to anthropomorphize for a moment, happier, not to mention healthier (no hormones, antibiotics, etc), and local farmers (practicing sustainable, ecologically sound farming methods) stay in business.

What I do have a problem with is enforcing one culture's taboo upon another, as if one is more "right" than the other.

Why does our taboo on eating dogs exist? Obviously, it's because we view dogs as companions. We keep dogs as pets, and we do not, as a rule, eat our pets. That's perfectly fine. I have no intention of chowing down on any of my three pusses, even though they are rather plump and juicy looking (despite being raw fed - where's all that weight loss?) For most of us here in the West, the very idea of eating a companion animal fills us with horror. Ask anyone you know if they'd eat a St. Bernard - their immediate response will likely be one of revulsion and disgust.

But do our views, purely a product of the culture in which we were raised, give us the right to impose our standards on another culture? Is that, as Martha would say, a "good thing?" Are there sound reasons that dog meat, as opposed to cow, sheep and pig meat, is not suitable as a food source?

In 2003, Tha Rae, a district in Thailand's impoverished northeast, rallied against a move to ban the dog meat trade. Why the proposed ban? Because many people considered dogs pets, and found the practice repugnant. The Dept. of Livestock Development said "We would prefer people saw dogs as cute animals rather than a type of consumable meat." The ban didn't happen, and the poor folk in Tha Rae were allowed to continue using stray dogs for food.

Dog meat did not escape banishment in Taiwan. In 2003 new rules were passed under Taiwan's Animal Protection Law to ban the selling of dogs and other companion animals as food. Animal rights activists believed as many as one-third of the stray dogs in public shelters ended up being sold to restaurants to be served to diners. Why is euthanasia and disposal is a better alternative, then, than "recycling" these animals - who, if not adopted, still end up dead - as food?

The FIFA World Cup in Seoul, Korea prompted a cry for a ban. European and North American letter writers and animal rights groups piled the pressure on the South Korean government, who responded by taking steps to legalize, license and regulate the industry, steps that would resolve the complaints of inhumane treatment and slaughter. That wasn't good enough - activists wanted nothing less than a total ban. As a spokesman for the Korea Animal Protection Society put it, "South Korean officials misunderstand the situation. They think it would be okay as long as dogs are not killed in a cruel manner." FIFA supported the ban as well - at least until after the World Cup - it's okay to eat dogs, as long as we don't have to see it.

Basically, there are no solid reasons not to eat dog meat. It's meat. It's our OPINION of dogs - what they represent to us - that initiates these outcries. We love our doggies, after all. We share our homes and our lives with them. We buy them toys, Prada sweaters, and carry them around in Fendi purses. Some people even call them children. We anthropomorphize them, attributing our feelings to them while ignoring the fact they they are, even the teeny weeny ones, domesticated and neotenized wolves.

Case in point - crate training. I know several people who refuse to crate train their dog because, according to them, it's mean. They wouldn't like being put in a cage, because to humans that idea has negative connotations (jail, imprisonment, loss of freedom, etc) They fail to realize that, to a dog, a crate is nothing more than a den, a den that, in the wild, they would make for themselves and curl up in quite happily. Ever watch the Dog Whisperer? This guy doesn't train dogs - he trains people to stop treating their dogs like people, and start treating them like dogs. Why? Because dogs are HAPPIER when they are treated in ways they understand and are adapted to. It is more respectful of dog nature to communicate with your dog in a way that the dog understands than to treat your dog as if it were human, effectively imposing your nature upon it.

But perhaps it is our nature to impose our beliefs and customs upon those who do not share them. Argue all you want - there is no scientific reason not to consume dog meat. It's a question of ethics, and ethics are different everywhere. We all have different beliefs, different views as to what's "right" and "wrong". We've aggregated certain beliefs, ones that we generally all agree on, into laws, and in most cases that's a good thing. But regardless, there is no Right or Wrong floating around out there in the Universe. Right and wrong are personal decisions, and what's right to me (eating animals, for example) is wrong to others.

Let's put our imagination caps on for a second. Your town is hosting the Olympics. An overwhelming and very vocal majority of the participants come from countries where eating grubs is common. They do not approve of your lack of grubs. They require grubs. So they petition your government for grubs to be made available in all grocery stores and restaurants. They create websites and pamphlets listing the reasons that eating grubs is right, and why your town (or state/province, or country) is wrong for not eating them. The government, not wanting to tarnish it's image in front of the whole world, capitulates. Suddenly, grubs appear next to the Italian sausage in your local grocer. Tanks of live grubs, in all their wriggly grubby glory, sit next to the lobster and the trout at your market. And the people sitting next to you at Montana's Grillhouse, people who don't live in your country, don't speak your language and don't understand your culture, are scarfing down a huge plate of grub kabobs.

Okay, this would never, ever happen. But it's the same situation, really, just in reverse. Plus I wanted to use that grub picture. God, those things creep me out.

Interesting to note, though, that no-one is campaigning to ban the consumption of these ugly things. We in the West are pretty hierarchal in our defense of animals. We're okay with other cultures eating all form of insect. Pigeons, last time I checked, aren't high on the list of Animals It's Wrong To Eat. Rodents? Go for it. But dogs? Good lord - what are you, a barbarian? I'd hazard a guess that in most cases, culinary differences are regarded as exotic, if also kinda gross, as long as the creature at the end of the fork isn't too cute. In this way, I'll give the PETA folks a break - they, at least, would absolutely defend the lowly grub, and are only hierarchal when it comes to humans, in my opinion, in that the lives of animals (aren't humans animals?) are placed over and above the lives of people.

In case you're interested, here's some more information on the use of dog meat. It's interesting to note that it isn't just Asian countries who use it; Germany, Switzerland and Canada have a history of eating canines. And while I love dogs, and have no desire to start eating them (though I would try it if I were travelling), I don't agree with banning dog meat anywhere in the world.

The issue raises a lot of questions: for example, if I support allowing another culture to eat whatever they want, would that include humans? What about other cultural practices, like female circumcision - just because my culture views it as barbaric, does that mean it should be banned in cultures who don't? How do we pick and choose what is okay, and what isn't okay? Hard questions, and I don't know that there are any clear-cut answers. Thoughts?