297

South Korea aims to ban dog meat consumption (www.channelnewsasia.com)

submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/world@lemmy.world

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 92 points 11 months ago

I've never understood thy people are so obsessed telling others that they should not eat dog meat while mjnching on a burger with crispy bacon and chicken nuggets.

If a vegan does it then I get it, but you are not a better person because you arbitrarily chose not to eat some specific meat, but have no problem with cruelty when it comes to other species.

[-] whenigrowup356@lemmy.world 77 points 11 months ago

I'm a vegan, but one argument specifically against allowing dog meat trade is that it often encourages stealing companion animals (aka pets) to make a quick buck. Sometimes they're held ransom and people have to pay the thieves to keep a member of their family from being killed and eaten. Wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Also, dogs were bred specifically to live alongside humans, to form bonds with us. To do that to any organism and then treat it like livestock is a special kind of monstrous.

So I'm in favor of drawing as many lines as possible when it comes to animal consumption of any kind. And then, if the situation makes you uncomfortable about some of the other lines you've drawn around cows, pigs, or chickens, then you analyzing those in more depth too is also a win in my book.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Nuanced take. 👍

[-] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 2 points 11 months ago

This is what I was talking about a vegan will have coherent arguments because they have been thinking about it.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] sederx@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sometimes they’re held ransom and people have to pay the thieves to keep a member of their family from being killed and eaten.

thats just blackmail it has nothing to do with commercializing dog meat... that stuff is already illegal

[-] whenigrowup356@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

My point is that it happens more frequently in places where dog meat is frequently consumed.

[-] Natha@discuss.online 1 points 11 months ago

It makes no sense to ban the consumption of dogs simply because you are afraid of dog thieves. Do you ban driving a car because some people steal a car?

Nothing in this world is completely beneficial, but you can't ban everything.

[-] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Stealing a car takes way more effort than kidnapping a pet. I'd also bet that people have way more personal attachment to pets than cars because pets are beings with emotions and cars are not.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

No, but I did actually see a used bike store get shut down because too many stolen bikes were finding their way there. Sometimes to end a practice you have to go downstream and destroy the market for that thing. There’s no market for vehicular deaths - they just happen.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] whenigrowup356@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

If you banned driving cars, there just wouldn't be any cars around. That analogy has little to do with dogs. What is it about a ban that makes no sense to you?

[-] Natha@discuss.online 1 points 11 months ago

You can replace cars with anything else and it still makes no sense. It's no one else but the thieves who should take the consequences.

[-] whenigrowup356@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

We ban things we want less of. More eating dogs means a bigger market for all dog meat, which means a bigger market for theft. I want less of that.

People don't steal things that no one wants to buy.

I'm talking about the side effects of fostering a culture where eating a non-livestock animal is ok. My argument is that this kind of culture is pointlessly cruel to an animal that we've explicitly bred to be a companion.

One element of discouraging a culture is government action, a ban (coercion). I argue this is a necessary step in ending a cruel practice.

The other is cultural compliance (people behaving in a certain way regardless of the presence of law enforcement officials). I argue this is a necessary step as well, by way of education and improving access to alternatives.

[-] poopkins@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

The analogy would not be to ban driving cars, but ban the resale of cars. The incentive for theft is the value; if you remove the value, then there is less incentive to steal it.

So to answer this hypothetical question, should we ban the resale of cars? No, because the owner can be insured for the monetary value of their stolen vehicle. What is the monetary value of a pet? I don't believe this can be quantified.

[-] Natha@discuss.online 1 points 11 months ago

Many people like their cars just like the way you like your pets. They should be treated equally.

[-] poopkins@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

This debate sure took an unexpected turn.

[-] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 29 points 11 months ago

Yeah I personally wouldn't be comfortable eating dog meat but I do eat meat so I realise I have no moral high ground. In reality if you have a problem with this as a meat eater it should make you question your own choices if anything.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

When I asked a vegan about her choice she asked me if I would eat my pet. I must admit the biggest thought in my mind was that it wouldn’t taste good, so no. I’m not sure if I could raise a livestock animal and then eat it. Possibly, but probably not since they get slaughtered early in their lives. So I guess I’m a hypocrite just like most people, taking shelter in out-of-sight, out-of-mind.

[-] MagneticFusion@lemm.ee 23 points 11 months ago

People especially in western cultures have a severe favoritism towards dogs compared to any other living creature

[-] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 11 months ago

Including humans.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

It keeps some people from having children who really shouldn’t have children. So it has its uses.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

It’s because most people don’t know a cow or chicken. If they did, things might be different. In fact I remember seeing Ira Glass speak and he recounted how he spent some time at a retreat where chickens roamed free, and after having the time and opportunity to observe that they think and feel and have different personalities, he became a vegetarian.

[-] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 6 points 11 months ago

I think you are probably right. For me it's kind of the opposite but still consistent. When I was a child we had many different animals and I had names for many of them including the sheep Bartek which me and my sister would ride often. In the end we would eat all those animals (but not the dogs or cats). So I've been friends with other animals than dogs, I'd even say they were better friends then the dogs I had because I have a hard time remembering the dogs names.

load more comments (5 replies)

[-] SkippingRelax@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Doubt it. people had chicken roaming free in their backyard for millennia and never had an issue. One bloke observing chicken free and turning vegetarian is hardly an explanation.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

factory farms play a large role in people's unease to buy meat from an industrial supplier.

I think its less about empathizing with animals and more about understanding the casual brutality of guys in suits.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Agreed, I was actually having a discussion where I mentioned certain parts of China and Korea eating dog- and a girl got mad at me saying it was a myth and I was being racist. 1. It's not a myth, I've seen it. 2. I wasn't condemning it, you're the one saying it's bad not me.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 4 points 11 months ago

I'm not a dog person, but I gave a cat. The idea of cats being farmed and eaten isn't pleasant for me. I don't think that makes me morally superior to someone who eats cats, but it does mean I'd prefer it not happen anywhere near me.

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Hypocrisy and racism.

[-] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Do you mean racism against cows or chickens?

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 25 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Aw dang. They should eat as much dog as they like.

As long as we're eating everything else, I don't see the point in drawing the line at dogs.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] veganpizza69@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago

I don't think this will affect this dog farm: https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/

[-] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

Dogs on Elwood’s Organic Dog Meat farm were bred for food.

Eating dogs is a personal choice.

Some people prefer the taste of dog.

Yeah ok, you convinced me. Go ahead and keep eating dog.

[-] ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I mean, yes? Other than most people thinking of dogs as pets what's the moral difference between eating dog and eating cattle or poultry? It's pretty hypocritical to ban one and not the other.

And no, I'd never eat a dog. But I have eaten horse.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 20 points 11 months ago

I'm glad there's no such ban in the US. Elwood's Organic Dog Meat is my favorite source of protein, I don't know how I'd survive without it

[-] capital@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

That’s all I eat!

Personally, I’m on an all dog meat diet. Science has proven it’s the healthiest diet.

[-] sederx@programming.dev 12 points 11 months ago

cows,pigs and chickens : "am i joke to you"

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] jacktherippah@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

I hope my country follows suit. The law that banned dog and cat meat consumption was repealed in the early 2000s. Since then, the dog and cat meat trade has flourished. Pet dogs and cats are snatched from people's homes, and brought to slaughterhouses to be force fed, hosed down, and slaughtered. The neighborhood I grew up in has had so many dogs snatched. Every time I see people eating dog meat, it saddens me to think that it was someone's pet that they loved so so much, just to have it be killed in such a horrible way. And as a pet owner, it scares me, because it could've been my cat.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 11 months ago

I don't know about dog meat, but I only buy chicken from Gentle Farms, Because nobody knows chickens like chickens.™

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

why?

load more comments

this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023

297 points (97.1% liked)

World News

38955 readers

2146 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.