Posted on 06/30/2002 5:51:46 AM PDT by csvset
Dog meat hot among Korea and China's trendy young
Animal-rights activists say it is a food fad fuelled in part by a desire to rebel against Western criticism
By Ng Hui Hui
CANINE cuisine is becoming a fad among the young in South Korea and China, much to the dismay of animal-rights activists.
|
| The cruelty in the handling of dogs during their slaughter has raised the ire of animal-rights activists. Strung by their necks, the dogs are beaten to death. |
Restaurant owners and dog-meat watchers confirm that youngsters are now taking dog meat as part of their regular diet - much like beef or chicken - as food joints dish out trendy new recipes to whet appetites.
According to one estimate, 92 per cent of men and 68 per cent of women above 20 in South Korea have tasted dog meat recently.
In China, dog breeders are saying that in a few years, there will be as many Saint Bernard dogs on the mainland as cows and sheep.(?)
Although past data on dog-meat consumption is not available, those concerned say the numbers would have been low earlier - since dog meat was considered a type of tonic for the older generation, eaten to increase libido and treat illnesses.
Catering to the fad, on sale now are hotdogs with real dog meat, dog cookies and sandwiches and even dog noodles as restaurants come up with fast-food variations.
Traditional recipes such as kimchi, a spicy fermented vegetable dish, are being given a make- over and are now prepared with dog meat extracts.
Dog meat chefs hope to add more varieties soon.
South Korean nutritionist Ahn Young Geun, who wrote a book titled Koreans and Dogmeat, has come up with more than 350 new recipes.
The professor, who is often referred to as Dr Dogmeat, believes dog-meat consumption should be increased because it offers three times more calcium than other types of meat.
Besides the nutritional value, nationalistic pride seems to be playing a part, said Ms Kyenan Kum, founder of the animal-rights group International Aid for Korean Animals.
About 2.6 million dogs are killed yearly for food in South Korea, Mr Louis Ng, president of Singapore-based Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres), told The Sunday Times.
This is a 30 per cent increase over the 1993 figures.
'Eating dog meat is a show of defiance, especially among rebellious young people. They feel that the West has no right to criticise their culture,' he said.
Reflecting this sentiment, a group of students from Seoul University set up a website recently to promote the virtues of dog meat and secured 11,000 signatures in support of its campaign.
But it is the cruelty in the handling of dogs - man's best friend in the West - that is raising hackles among animal-rights activists.
Dogs are usually strung up by their necks and beaten repeatedly to increase the flow of adrenaline in their flesh. Consumers believe the more pain the animals suffer, the more tender the meat becomes.
The dogs would struggle, howl, urinate and bleed till they become unconscious. Finally, they are chopped into pieces. All these are done in front of other dogs awaiting the same fate.
Now, for the first time, an Asian grouping called Asia Link - made up of 14 animal welfare societies from 12 nations - has decided to join the protest and has sent a letter to the South Korean government urging a ban on dog meat.
Said Mr Ng of Acres, an Asia Link member: 'The Koreans say eating dog meat is part of their culture, but one cannot use culture to justify violence.'
Mounting criticisms made South Korea and China ban the trade for short periods in 1988 and 1999 respectively. But that has not kept South Koreans and Chinese from hankering for their dog burgers and dog noodles.
KOREAN CUISINE: Dog dishes
New dishes:
Actually you dont have to be that nervus. "Mistreatment" (in the eyes of westeners) of dogs are common all over Asia. During the cultural revolution 1,500 million highschool graduates (Red Guards) were sent to countryside by Mao for reeducation in China. One of the ways for them to kill time was to steal the dogs of the local peasants to make delicious dishes. They brought a female dog to attract male dogs and let them mate. In the middle of the process they literally cut off the dog's penis and let it bleed to death. Others might simply beat the dog to death because the dog could get his organ out in order to escape.
I admit there is some backwards part in the Asian culture, but things are changing. Anyway, they beat dogs not because they like to see dogs suffering but because they don't think it's wrong. Asian people are not cruel people. The are tender-hearted, compared with westeners.
Anyway, they beat dogs not because they like to see dogs suffering but because they don't think it's wrong. Asian people are not cruel people. The are tender-hearted, compared with westeners.
Anybody who could do what you describe is far from being "tender-hearted". One does not need to be indoctrinated by "religion" to understand basic concepts of right and wrong. To cause a living creature such horrible anguish is obscene. But, to inflict such agony on a creature that befriends man, who understands human commands, and who lavishes man with love and affection, is uncomprehensibly sinister. This ruthless act of cruelty could not come from a person with a "tender-heart", but from one whose blood runs cold through his veins like a lizard.
I'm sure MANY former POWs would also have a word to say about the "tenderness" of their Asian captors hearts.
Unfortunetely, there isn't a whole lot of items you can buy these days that are "Made in the USA". Most non-food consumable items are either made in China or Korea.
Welcome to the New World Order.
One thing you have to understand is they don't treat animals like human beings. Also they don't develop affection towards dogs as westeners do. So in their eyes, dogs, cats, pigs, cows, chicken, fish... are the same aniamls. Another reason for them to do so may be because they don't have the tools or know the methods to deliver a quick kill. They have to resort to the primitive ways, like how people were executed in ancient times.
>>I'm sure MANY former POWs would also have a word to say about the "tenderness" of their Asian captors hearts.
As for POWs, there was politics involved.
AK-47s and handguns are plentiful I would think. If not, there is always a machete or similar instrument that could be used to chop off the head.
Slicing off a dog's penis and letting him bleed to death is one of the most horrendous tales I've ever heard. From accounts of POWs, Asians did not reserve that sort of treatment just for dogs.
I'm not saying that all Asians are capable of such atrocity, but there are obviously some that do and feel no shame or remorse over it.
Well, I think those people exist in all countries, including the US. They don't torture pigs or chichens before slaughtering them, which means they don't do it for fun. They do it to dogs for some specific reasons. Some people believe metal will spoil snake meat, so they use a bamboo knife to kill a snake. Others believe blood should remain within the body of a dog to make the meat tasty, so they give a blow on the nose of the dog. Different people do different things. If I don't like it, I will stay away. Anyway, they don't harm other people.
That is certainly not true. Those who see nothing wrong in the slow and ugly torture of an animal see nothing wrong in treating an enemy soldier the same way, if not worse. In fact, the "Rape of NanKing" demonstrates the level of atrocity that has been perpetrated upon innocent men, women and children. The Khamer Rouge, Pol Pot, and associated regimes have similar records of brutality.
The inhuman treatment of POWs by Asians is well documented as well, and will never be forgotten.
You obviously have a tenuous grasp on literacy when it would get in the way of your outrage. I have had two points: 1) there is nothing inherently wrong with eating dogmeat, and 2) the stuff about beating them to death is probably from people like you, and hence unreliable. What do I mean by "people like you"? You're more interesting in being outraged at people than having any clue about reality.
Since you defend these acts of cruelty with unusual zeal, I assume you would partake of such sadistic behaviour yourself.
Well now, go read my first comment on this thread.
If you can't come up with anything better than "if you don't think eating dog is bad and doubt my 'yellow' journalism, it must be because you like beating dogs!" you've got a weak mind and a disposition toward cheap outrage. Which, of course, further discounts everything you've said here.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
If I'd asked you, say, how you became a xenophobe, you might have a point. But I didn't ask a loaded question, did I? No, I made a statement of fact, namely, "The last time I saw this blend of animal rights and xenophobia, it was something someone posted from the British National Party."
No, I'd say you ran to the 'Admin Nanny' because you had lost the argument and are a sore loser.
You have two assumptions here. One is that I lost, which is pure arrogance on your part. Flinging around accusations that the other guy likes beating dogs does not constitute victory. It shows your limitations.
The other is that I trust the moderators. You should be at least warned for the stuff you've done here, but the moderators are blind, stupid, and biassed. There was a good chance I'd be banned, almost certainly for one of my more innocuous comments. I suppose it makes them feel powerful to call a non-attack an attack, and pull it so no one can see what lying snakes they are. And they leave real attacks in place, on the same thread.
I speak out against the inhuman treatment of animals, so that makes me a "klansman"?
The fact that you and 4freedom have worked yourselves into a full-fledged hatred for Asians over this is why I compare you to Klansmen. Although I'd guess that should probably be Klanswomen.
Is that what you do when you see that you're losing an argument, call people "tree huggers" and "klansmen" in order to divert the discussion into a totally unrelated direction?
This from the person who brought out the "you must like torturing dogs" stuff. At best you're a pot calling the kettle black.
And your "envirowacky" comments demonstrate your attitude towards not only our land, but our children who would be forced to ingest the poisons you would surely allow to be dumped into the environment in order for a few wealthy individuals to enhance their already astronomical wealth.
So you're also into class warfare, I see. Better make that a "Marxist tree-hugging Klansman".
You sound kind of like a racist. Just because some POWs were mistreated by some Asian soldiers doesn't mean it was ASIANS as a whole who did things wrong. Also just because Jews were slaughtered by evil SS guards doesn't mean the German people is an evil people. Just because some GIs killed innocent people in My Lai, Vietman doesn't mean the American people is a blood-thirsty people.
Now you're beginning to sound like AJArmitage. Your original statement was that groups of young men would cajole a "peasant's" dog into having intercourse with a female, then slice off it's penis, allowing it to bleed to death.
You then went on to say that these people were really "tender hearted", more so than "westerners". That is a bit of a racist comment itself I'd say, in addition to being ridiculously flawed.
I simply pointed out the fact that POWs would not agree with your characterization of such "tenderness". The torture and mistreatment of US prisoners at the hand of the Japanese in WWII, the North Koreans during the Korean conflict (and the Pueblo incident), and the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war are without question the most horrendous abuses ever seen. The medical experiments performed on captured soldiers make those performed by the Nazis seem tame in comparison.
So get off your "racist" high horse and smell the coffee. It is the callous indifference to life that allows such atrocities to take place. There are MANY Asians who detest such abuses, but there are also MANY that see nothing wrong with it. That is a plain simple fact.
Atrocities have been committed by people of all races, but an enlightened society refrains from such tactics. As proven by much of the material I've linked and posted, there are quite a few people in South Korea that detest the manner in which dogs and cats are treated, and I salute them for their courage and tenacity.
As your graph shows, there are two curves: a price-demand curve and a price-supply curve. Apparently you went to do some research but your terminology is still off. It was you that said that noone would make widgets if noone wanted them but in the telecon bubble, lots of "widgets were made for people that did not want them.
You've demonstrated many times over that it is you that has a major dysfunction when it comes to reading comprehension.
I have had two points: 1) there is nothing inherently wrong with eating dogmeat,
I've stated throughout this thread that it is the manner in which they are mistreated and tortured that I have a major problem with.
and 2) the stuff about beating them to death is probably from people like you, and hence unreliable. What do I mean by "people like you"? You're more interesting in being outraged at people than having any clue about reality.
If YOU had any grasp on reality, you'd see that MANY of the links as well as much of the information I've posted comes from KOREAN websites, where the people there ARE outraged that this type of activity is taking place in THEIR OWN COUNTRY. It is apologists such as you that obfuscate and distort the facts. In fact, those who claim the Holocaust never happened utilize the same tactics you do.
Well now, go read my first comment on this thread.
Although you at first claimed to be against animal torture, you've sided time and time again with those who practice it. You've attacked any information contrary to your opinion as being "yellow journalism" ie. propaganda. You ignore the fact that these reports come from Korea and abroad, and is common knowledge to those who have visited there. There was an investigation by HSUS which resulted in a video which at one point was available on the Internet which depicted the heinous acts I've reported. This video is no longer available, apparently due to complaints from people like you who would like to conceal such activities and claim that there is no evidence proving these things actually happen.
If you can't come up with anything better than "if you don't think eating dog is bad and doubt my 'yellow' journalism, it must be because you like beating dogs!" you've got a weak mind and a disposition toward cheap outrage. Which, of course, further discounts everything you've said here.
I find mistreating an animal, regardless of species, to be contemptable. I find torturing an animal, regardless of species, for the questionable effect of enhancing virility to be outright evil. And for you to claim that it doesn't happen, that these people are simply eating meat because they're hungry, and to ignore all of the evidence pointing to the real reasons why they eat dog demonstrates your predilection for such cruelty.
Your entire approach here has been to smear and ridicule the messenger. Why are you so adament about this topic where you resort to such tactics in an effort to "win" the argument?
If I'd asked you, say, how you became a xenophobe, you might have a point. But I didn't ask a loaded question, did I? No, I made a statement of fact, namely, "The last time I saw this blend of animal rights and xenophobia, it was something someone posted from the British National Party."
So you're saying that by making that statement you weren't labeling me as a "xenophobe", ie. one who is fearful of foreigners? As I have no fear of foreigners, that is not a statement of fact, rather it is a smear tactic that you and others like you utilize when you are losing an argument.
You have two assumptions here. One is that I lost, which is pure arrogance on your part.
If you weren't losing, why then did you resort to smear tactics and slander?
Flinging around accusations that the other guy likes beating dogs does not constitute victory. It shows your limitations.
As you demonstrate a continuing devotion to protecting this sort of activity, I can't see how you can say you don't support it. If you can't argue a topic without resorting to smear tactics such as labeling someone "envirowacky", a "klansman", or a "tree-hugger", you should examine the validity of your own misguided assertions.
The other is that I trust the moderators. You should be at least warned for the stuff you've done here, but the moderators are blind, stupid, and biassed.
So on one hand you trust the moderators, and on the other you're saying that they're "blind, stupid, and biased"? Gee, that makes a lot of sense. You say that I should be warned for what, stating facts? And you should be in the clear for calling me a "klansman"?
There was a good chance I'd be banned, almost certainly for one of my more innocuous comments.
So you called the moderator to a thread where you thought you'd be banned, simply to get me in doodoo. That seems rather childish, don't you think?
I suppose it makes them feel powerful to call a non-attack an attack, and pull it so no one can see what lying snakes they are.
But you trust them, even with that opinion of them. Now that makes sense.< /sarcasm>
And they leave real attacks in place, on the same thread.
Well, they have left yours there haven't they?
The fact that you and 4freedom have worked yourselves into a full-fledged hatred for Asians over this is why I compare you to Klansmen. Although I'd guess that should probably be Klanswomen.
A) Where have I said that I hate Asians? Is that another one of your smear tactics?
B) Where has 4Freedom ever said he or she hates Asians?
C) I'm a guy, so no, I'm not a woman. If you're trying to insinuate that I've behaved in a womanly way, without getting myself censured, let me just tell you this. You wouldn't want to say that to my face, big man...
This from the person who brought out the "you must like torturing dogs" stuff. At best you're a pot calling the kettle black.
So by questioning your motives for ridiculing the facts, smearing me, and jumping on the dog eating bandwagon, I'm guilty of steering the discussion away from the main topic? And this coming from the person who brought the environment into the discussion by coming out with the label "envirowacky"?
So you're also into class warfare, I see. Better make that a "Marxist tree-hugging Klansman".
Yeah, I find the greed motivated dumping of poison into the environment to be wrong, so now I'm a Marxist. You really are a piece of work. Do you just practice this stuff at home in your spare time, or do you slander people for a living?
At one point you say if I weren't losing, I wouldn't have resorted to "smear tactics and slander". In the same message, you say I have a "predilection" for torturing animals (otherwise, why else wouldn't I share in your emotionally over-wrought hysteria?), and imply I'm a Holocaust denier. Earlier, you implied rather strongly that FiJC in a pedophile. By your own standards (not mine, yours), you lost long ago.
Good bye, loser.
I'm not saying that I have any firsthand experience in an abbatoir, but I do believe we slaughter our meat-animals a bit more humanely than this.
Ok, so I did in fact misread that one segment. In any case, I find calling the moderator for help to be a desperate act of cowardice in a vain attempt to silence one who you had just called a "tree-hugging klansman".
Notice I called both that I lost and that I trust the moderators your assumptions and then contradicted both as soon as I stated them. This isn't rocket science.
As your writing skills are a bit deficient here, I can safely assume that you are indeed not a rocket scientist.
At one point you say if I weren't losing, I wouldn't have resorted to "smear tactics and slander". In the same message, you say I have a "predilection" for torturing animals (otherwise, why else wouldn't I share in your emotionally over-wrought hysteria?), and imply I'm a Holocaust denier.
You started with your smears well before I accused you of promoting animal torture. Why would you protect such atrocious actions if you didn't have such a predilection? One does not advocate or seek to promote something that one does not support.
As for the reference to the Holocaust, do you deny that those who portray the Holocaust as a lie use tactics that include those that you have yourself utilized?
Earlier, you implied rather strongly that FiJC in a pedophile. By your own standards (not mine, yours), you lost long ago.
FiJC kept insisting that the reason they eat dog is because of the "starving children" who have no other means of partaking in a protein rich diet. That is pure BS, as the primary reason they eat dog is for its perceived benefit as an aphrodisiac. In fact, it is more expensive than pork and chicken, both of which are plentiful in South Korea.
So I did wonder why FiJC would want to feed dog to the "starving children", when it is generally only ingested for the purpose of making one more virile.
Good bye, loser.
Adios numnuts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.