the article isn't that great. It claims it turns "us" off, but in fact it's just him voicing his opinion and then backing it up with facts like how it was banned in the 1988 olympics and that britain and the US thinks it's disgusting to eat.
He gives both sides, but then sides upon the western ideals and doesn't even answer to the Korean guy's view "that is no more strange than that of countries where people enjoy eating pigeon, snail, and horse meat." Which is a good point, and he just acts like it's continually disgusting for no explicit reason. Why is it disgusting? Because it IS? that's all i get from this, that and we domesticate them...so what?
He then starts explaining it in a more positive way by stating: "Koreans have farms that raise a special breed of dogs for eating. Restaurants don't just snatch pets off the street." But then he has the audcacity to slip in the comment: "At least, that's the story." What?!? Ok, just continue antagonizing without warrant.
The article is really quite absurd if you ask me if you look at it in its entirety. It does contain some arguments but you have to look for them.
__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.
"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell
|