@ekdysiast and @luuk

I am not giving a preferential seat and a free pass to dogs within western civilization just because they are dogs. My criteria is not that dogs are special and because of that we let them in the house. My criteria is that we already let them in the house, and that makes them special. Sure, with enough time and patience you can build similar bonds with other animals (though I would consider a cow as a bedwarmer a bit overwhelming), and you can go all the way back to try and explain why we can unleash a dog and not a cow inside a house, or why we put dogs to take care of sheeps and not the other way around. But that is for me a bit irrelevant to the point. Thing is, for whatever reason, a big chunk of humanity built this bond with dogs, and that loads the discussion with a cultural and moral context.

The question of eating/not eating dogs or any other animal is really about what we have come to consider acceptable or not acceptable within our respective cultural and moral practices, and not about protein sources. Now, of course you might consider this or that cultural/moral constraints as ridiculous/anachronic/nonsensi­cal, but that doesn't make them less present (though I don't say valid).

And yes, talking about cultural practices implies some broad generalizations -but in any case, sorry for using the word "man" so freely.

tedward:

In the highlands of West Papua, pigs are used as currency, pets, and food. Women will even allow the pigs to suckle human milk, according to the Travel Channel show "Living with the Mek."

I've read somewhere that in the ld days, the wet nurses will also nurse piglets when they can't find a human baby to nurse, in order to keep their milk supply going.

One thing that hasn't been brought up is that dogs are carnivores, therefore higher on the food chain than herbivores, which makes them not so good for you anyway. I've heard it said that if you're not going to be a vegetarian, then you should eat a vegetarian! After not eating meat for many years, the thought of eating dog meat is no more repulsive to me than eating farm animals.

obduliojacinto,

I have no problem with the cultural revulsion against eating dogs, nor any problem with cultural or societal restraints perse. I'm just imagining myself being exposed to the dilemma in a different culture, or whether or not that culture is doing something wrong.

I just don't see why the criteria you adopt should be the one I personally have to, to decide whether or not to eat dog meat. I only have a problem with the idea that your criteria would somehow make dog the only animal morally wrong to eat: it seems arbitrary. Don't get me wrong, I don't think you're implying that. I think we just have a difference of opinion, and I can only thank you for the talk.