No really, please do come up with an argument for why eating chicken/goats/pigs/cows is totally fine but eating cats & dogs is not. It is a dreary day outside so I would like a laugh.
conformity. The acts are more or less equal in actual objective ethical value, but a person going against the grain to do something cruel that isn’t even commonplace is going to be viewed as more cruel than a person who does a similar thing that’s overwhelmingly more normalized.
The hamburgoid brain pan, of course, is not capable of judging acts done by individuals in other cultures and contexts, and can instead only judge any person by their own culture as if it were absolute truth.
It is racist in a way. There is no country in which everyone eats cats or dogs. There are also probably not many countries where not a single person has ever eaten a cat or a dog.
“People from China eat cats and dogs” is no more true than “People from the US eat cats and dogs” Sure, the amount of people in China that have eaten cat or dog meat is likely higher than the corresponding amount in the US, but that’s not what these statements mean.
If someone says “People from China eat cats and dogs”, they are very likely to have some racist intent.
“People from China eat cats and dogs” is no more true than “People from the US eat cats and dogs”
Factcheck, sweaty
People from the US eat roadkill and alligator
[CW: Mentions of Homophobia/Misogyny/FGM]
Whenever I ask carnists this question, I actually get tons of them saying “Eating dogs and cats is moral in places where it’s culturally acceptable, but where I’m from, it’s wrong because they’re pets and not food.”
To this, I always respond by saying “Okay, so in countries where homophobic violence is unfortunately a norm, is it socially acceptable? What about female genital mutilation? What about treating women as second-class citizens?” and despite me literally just taking their logic to its conclusion, I get some baseless “That’s different tho!” as a response.
smh my head
