Well, there’s quite the headline.
Billions of animals murdered for food every year: 😊
Celebrity doggo eaten: 🤬😤😡“We eat large mammalian quadrupeds, so we’re civilised. They eat large mammalian quadrupeds, so they’re barbaric”
Being mad they eat bugs is basically chauvanism too, but at least it’s taxonomically coherent.
Honestly dog meat is on it’s way out just from Western influence anyway.
What the actual …… 😕
Yet another Chinese certified L
Maybe china should focus its governmental might on stopping illegal meat butchers instead of stopping gay people from using public spaces.
A) It’s not illegal. It’s a dog, it’s a valid meat source in most regions of the world.
B) You’re severely misunderstanding (or were made to misunderstand) China’s LGBT stance. You can be gay in public (hell Chongqing would be under martial law if that were illegal), you cannot make pornography. That’s the only rule, and that also applies to straight content. The only LGBT crackdowns that have happened have been porn crack downs that happened to include, not specifically target just include, LGBT content creators.
There’s more openly gay people in China than there are gay people in the entire Western world bro.
China treats LGBT folks equally to cishets.
Looks inside
No gay marriage
So the definition of systemic homophobia. Not even the bare minimum.
No, they can just legally join in partnership and have all of the same government incentives as married people… They just don’t call it marriage since marriage is for incentivizing procreation.
People would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?
https://legalclarity.org/is-gay-marriage-legal-in-china-rights-and-options/
And let’s live in the alternate reality you’re talking about for a minute. Can two straight people get married in China with no intention of procreation? Can two gay people get married if they’re planning to adopt? Can they even adopt? Come on man, I get being wrong, but don’t double down on it.
And let’s live in the alternate reality you’re talking about for a minute
We’ve been in reality for quite a bit.
Can two straight people get married in China with no intention of procreation?
It’d be really, really weird culturally and a huge risk most aren’t willing to take. Also if you’re a straight foreigner marrying a chinese national your application will almost certainly be denied if you state you’re not willing to have kids, since that’ll be seen as a fake marriage trying to gain Chinese spousal residency.
Can two gay people get married if they’re planning to adopt?
Since they can enter into a mutual guardianship and adopt yes? You people get tripped up on the word ‘Marriage’ way too much. A rephrasing would be can two gay people cohabitate, share full financial resources, get tax breaks, and adopt? Sure. Can they get ‘married’? No. The difference is entirely without substance at this point, but because Stalin was so incredibly anti-gay, we’re still suffering through the lasting ‘but that’s not the right way’ nonsense cultural war he started so you can’t call it marriage.
Can they even adopt?
Yes.
Come on man, I get being wrong, but don’t double down on it.
I live here half the year, dumbass. You are objectively the incorrect one, in anything you say about China.
Would two gay men in guardianship refer to each other as their ‘husband’ (i.e. the word that a heterosexual couple would use), or is there a different word for it? Not trying to be argumentative just curious how closely guardianship is culturally associated with marriage.
I had thougt that was limited to certain cities?
Nope Guardianship is available country-wide (I can’t find an english language document that goes into more recent updates which allow property and tax breaks.) Beijing, Hong Kong, and the entire province of Taiwan all recognize marriages from outside of china though, which is where that gets confused.
Unfortunately the overall chinese public isn’t really up to voting for more explicitly stated parity of rights due to a lack of educational push in that direction, which is compounded by the general public’s lack of interest, and so on.
the entire province of Taiwan all recognize marriages from outside of china though
Chinese propaganda detected
Ah yes, the chinese propaganda of 209 countries and the UN all being in agreement.
you cannot make pornography. That’s the only rule
Nope, that’s categorically false in every possible way, even if we’re being pedantic. For the sake of informing those who might have been misled by this (since I have little doubt you’re being intentionally disingenuous
as campists often are) Here’s a couple relevant excerpts from the Wikipedia article on LGBTQ rights in China:[LGBTQ] people in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) face legal and social challenges that are not experienced by non-LGBTQ residents. While both male and female same-sex sexual activity are legal, same-sex couples are currently unable to marry or adopt, and households headed by such couples are ineligible for the same legal protections available to heterosexual couples. No explicit anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people are present in its legal system, nor do hate crime laws cover sexual orientation or gender identity.
Under Chinese Communist Party (CCP) general secretary Xi Jinping, LGBTQ venues and events have been forced to shut and LGBTQ rights activists have become subject to greater scrutiny by the country’s system of mass surveillance. The CCP increasingly considers LGBTQ advocacy the work of "foreign forces”. LGBTQ content is censored. Authors of boys’ love works are routinely arrested and criminally prosecuted.
Yup this underlines what i meant very well, especially the excerpt from wikipedia.
I already addressed this but good try little buddy. I hope they’re giving you overtime pay.
You didn’t, silly. You said being gay isn’t illegal, which sure, is conditionally true, but neither was being a free black person in post-slavery America, and yet we hopefully both know how that demographic was treated then, if not even now.
Besides, my goal isn’t to address something you did before me, but to point out how, intentionally or not, you’re leaving out very important info that lays out the mis-or-disinformative nature of your point. You can’t talk about the quality of a book if you’ve only read a single chapter.
Anyway, feel free to continue implying something along the lines of me being on the payroll of the all-powerful capitalist oligarchs of the world or something. It’ll really help your point.
Removed by mod
Feel free to engage with the conversation if you believe that any of my counter claims are wrong. Breaking community and lemmy.world global rules isn’t a smart way to do that.
Claims made:
Dog meat isn’t illegal, except in some provinces.
Being LGBT publicly isn’t illegal.
Which also includes linked to the claims about Chongqing, since it’s incredibly well known (along with Chengdu, of course.)
-
you didn’t say “except in some provinces”, therefore your first little white lie
-
North Korea allows voting, and in the USA it’s legal to criticize Trump in front of ICE. Most people will get the point I’m making with that, but I’m sure it’ll go over your head.
-
“except in some regions of the world” covers that in my opinion, and honestly I forgot that foreigners pressured the local governments in a couple of places to ban dog meat after covid. This covers less than 10% of the Chinese population, and isn’t relevant to the story, but at least this is an actual criticism this time. Congrats.
-
Except unlike your Trump example, I’ve actually provided evidence the propaganda your masters told you to believe is wrong. The ban is on pornography. Yes China had an anti-lgbt period that it’s still getting over in the public consciousness, which is a serious topic that needs actual nuance and good faith attempts at understanding to discuss, and I’m happy to go into that to educate you if you would like as it’s actually super interesting. What does not happen is the boogeyman tracking down gay people in their own homes doing gay things.
The official stance held by the central government and all city and province governments is “gay people are people, why discriminate like the west does”
Lol I like how you completely ignored I mentioned North Korea too. Guess it’s because it’s also Tankie land
Because it’s not relevant to this or any other discussion and we’ll never agree on anything related to North Korea if you cannot even accept easily verifiable facts that go against your owners’ narrative on China.
-
-
Facts. Hmm… no getting around them sometimes?
Makes me wonder if there is some kind of food shortage we’re not hearing about. Eating dogs is one thing, but the stealing of pets to use as meat sounds like a form of desperation.
Nah, I don’t think people on a bike stealing a dog care if it was a pet or not.
Our dog is a rescue from South Korea and seemed to be from a dog farm, as well as our friends dog was for sure rescued from a dog meat producer.
They have a different view of what is acceptable eating animals in the East compared to West.
So a random dog in a field seems like easy prey.
Not really from China, they produce around 1.5x the rice they need per year and that’s guaranteed for the domestic market; export market rice is taxed and measured differently. That plus the pig towers really covers most the common nutritional needs. They’re also one of the richest countries on Earth and tend to import plenty of superfluent foods, which isn’t an earmark of a starving nation. Somalia isn’t importing billions of tonnes of soybeans.
Wealth inequality in China is rapidly approaching levels found in America. The bottom 50% of Chinese people collectively hold 6% of the wealth, with the top 10% holding 68% of the wealth. Which leads to some extreme regional poverty.
The regional poverty has dropped. Drastically. Unlike the US, a rising tide lifts all boats.
Does more work need to be done? Sure. But food insecurity isn’t a thing in China. Ever. You are guaranteed income, land, food, and farming supplies if you live in a rural area. Is it a lot compared to the top of the top? No, not really. But it’s infinitely better to be poor in China than in the US. Every poor rural Chinese person is either a land holder or is in the household of a land holder. Tax free as well under specific income thresh holds.
Remember they are taking a society that 35 years ago was the poorest and most populated country on Earth and have so far raised median living standards above all of their neighbors. There is of course more to go, because most of the country has yet to be industrialized. Hence the ‘Ghost Cities’
Doesn’t mean the food is reaching more rural areas, like where this dog was butchered. If an area is seeing pets being kidnapped to use as meat, that is not a good sign of food stability.
The rural areas where the food is grown and subsidized by the government so they don’t even really pay for food staples and only pay for what needs to be imported into the region (note: imported, not given by the government)?
This isn’t the 1950s li’l bro. China has a agriculture first economy. There’s a reason there has been no famine in China since the great leap forward despite a complete lack of foreign food aid even during the poorest periods in modern Chinese history.
There are, of course as in all societies, criminals. Criminals steal things that will sell. I don’t suggest that the methheads selling their food stamps via buying food and selling it to strangers for half price suggest a food shortage in the US. I don’t even suggest the multiple hundreds of livestock mutilations with clearly man-made wounds that have been such an incredible staple in the American culture that they’ve inspired countless jokes and even documentaries about how ‘aliens’ are doing it are a sign of food shortage.
I don’t suggest that the methheads selling their food stamps via buying food and selling it to strangers for half price suggest a food shortage in the US.
I mean you should suggest that, because thats exactly what it is. People can’t afford food, so they are seeking out lower cost alternatives. It is a sign of a food crisis. Just like people kidnapping pets to sell for food is a sign of a food crisis.
Except it’s not. The reason the methheads do it is because they know they can still get food and they get meth instead. If they just used the food stamps for food they’d have an incredible excess. The reason people buy the half priced food is because that frees up money for the other bills imposed on them by private companies. That’s not a food crisis, there’s not a lack of food.
In this story not only is there not a lack of food, people are paying MORE MONEY in order to eat dog than other meats. Pork is cheaper than dog everywhere both are sold, which for pork is the entire country. The dog was sold to a restaurant, which brings UP THE PRICE OF FOOD. The dog wasn’t stolen to be eaten out of need, which the thief would have just done themselves.
Alternative story with the same cause and effect without the western attachment to a specific livestock as a pet: Celebrity pet Ayam Cemani Chicken stolen and sold to restaruant.
Wtf
Am I missing something?
Nothing in the article itself suggests that we know what happened to the dog after it was stolen other than the headline.
The article just ends after this part:
Guo cut short his trip and rushed back to China to search for him.
Checking the archive didn’t turn up any more of the article.
Same for me with noscript
I think the rest of the article is locked behind javascript, there was a fade and a button to load the rest of the article.
Yes to this, foreign dogs are worth more money as pets. Local common breeds are the only ones that get used for meat.
Maybe just stop eating dogs eh?
Just as valid as eating a pig.
(However valid you think that is)
expand that to all animals and you’re really on to something
You say that like plants don’t die when we eat them too
get real
There’s a massive difference of plants growing in fields and being cut down to animals being kept in their own shit where they can’t even turn around for years.
Oh and you know what kills more plants? It being grown for animal feed.
- yeah, plants can’t run or cry.
- i’m not tryna save anything. Fuck this planet. Stop trying to moralize killing to eat, it’s a fraught endeavour. Precisely the sort of first error that lets you generalize to inter human exploitation.
So if they’re kept in an open field with plenty of space to roam about it’s fine right?
Not to mention how much agriculture itself kills wildlife
What’s the majority of agricultural land used for again? Oh right, cattle feed and grazing.
Actually yea, I forgot that
While not getting into whether we should eat meat at all, if we are eating meat, I don’t see how eating dog meat is any more or less immoral than eating most other meats. Eating someone’s pet, whether it be a dog or a pot belly pig is a shit move, but I doubt the restaurant was told they were buying someone’s pet.
I can’t think of any animal that has such an innate empathetic connection to humans as dogs. Dogs can read us, and we can read them.
I find it strange how you’re getting downvoted, since there’s so much evidence to back up your point. There’s literally a whole page on Wikipedia that goes over the human-canine bond and how it’s unique.
Some points it brings up:
studies have demonstrated that both dogs and humans release oxytocin while spending quality time together.
Canines are capable of distinguishing between positive and negative human facial expressions and will react accordingly.
Psychologists believe that the relationship between human and canine is a bidirectional attachment bond, which resembles that of the typical human caretaker/infant relationship, and shows all of the usual hallmarks of a typical bond.
Canines are capable of assessing humans’ emotional states, as well as discriminating humans by levels of familiarity.
Studies have demonstrated that shelter dogs benefit from interacting with complete strangers…These results demonstrate the canines’ innate desire to form an attachment with a human
A study can find practically find any correlation it wants based on its premises. Studies have also found that sugar based diets are better than fat based ones. But neither are very convincing on telling about how to proceed on a specific issue.
I started on 8 upvotes it’s been a tremendous journey
No, you anthromorphize and project on them, but you don’t read them. They are an animal and we have no way of knowing what they think. What we have is a cultivated relationship through years of selective breeding, same as could be done with plenty of animals given the reason and time.
I’m glad you love your pet, but you don’t know if they love you. You assume based on human projection, forgetting they are not human.
You’ve never had a friend chicken. God damn are chickens cute, friendly animals if you keep one as a pet. Almost makes me feel bad eating them, all animals are empathetic if you spend some time with them.
Can you read a cat, does a cat read you?
You should not justify animals rights not to be slaughtered by their connection to humans.
Pigs are deeply empathic, horses read humans very well, and whales have complex family systems. The division “cute animals” and “edible ones” is just a cultural construct to avoid the moral atrocity.
EDIT: typos
this is absolutely it, people feel they have deep connections to their pets and that the experience of other animals must be shallow and meaningless by comparison, its a sample issue and a cultural bias.
Wild dogs don’t, and some people don’t have any interest in an empath9c connection with dogs. After that, most animals are deeply interested in their own survival.
Wild dogs are very scary
Some “domestics” are scary too
Now add human into that sentence
Which one? They wrote two sentences.
it’s a safety concern. Cannibalism spreads diseases easier.
Human meat, much like rabbit meat, can cause “rabbit starvation” so I suppose that’s another reason. Plus people get their panties in a wad if you start talking about eating other people for some reason. I personally think there’s plenty of fat billionaires I would not mind eating.
Nah cannibalism is cringe
Kill the billionaires and turn them into corpse fertilizer instead!
So does the gigantic animal industry we have today.
technically everything has a consciousness including plants, beans etc so you lose high ground if youre going to play a moral card in any of this. plants just can run away or scream.
it can still be tragic to eat an animal companion.
let’s just not pretend someone holds sll the moral cards for not eating consciousness to stay alive. nobody in these fleshbags holds any of the high ground there.
If you believe plants experience suffering, and would like to reduce suffering, you should go vegan. The reason is that by eating meat, you kill or harm way more plants — the plants that have been eaten by the animals you eat.
I think the point is that we all eat food, and at some point in it’s production, some suffering happened. and that’s alright
edit:
this has nothing to do with privilege. it’s talking about the democracy of food.
this is the peak of privilege
why won’t you leave me alone
I tend to respond to bad takes.
To be clear: I am not disagreeing about introducing more plants to replace meats and other unhealthy stuff on a health and economic perspective. That path of awareness is not what im having a problem with.
What i am disagreeing with is that you or anyone who is eating plant based is using the reasoning that you’ve absolved suffering overall somehow by going vegan. this path of thinking creates a problem for everyone you cannot possibly solve. including yourself.
This is suggesting we must only ever hold an awareness that to live is to suffer and continue imposing suffering on others. And it doesnt matter what you subsitute. It is all suffering from the consciousness perspective if everything is made of consciousness in order to exist(create and distribute). everything you ever consume will have held conscious and will have affected consciousnrss in order to exist and be available to you.
you will never find a solution to that while you exist as a human that requires to consume consiousness to continue to exist. at least in this form as a human. there is no altruistic answer in this kind of an argument.
plants cant scream. they cannot run. they might not have a fluffy tail and do not lick your face but they are still conscious. And that does not make you any less of a monster in this vilifying moralistic scenario you’ve manifested to shove towards all of humanity.
Can you cite the scientific study that or the philosopher who says with so much confidence that plants (or even animals, for that matter) have consciousness? Don’t get me wrong, my personal belief is closer to your statement, but I have always held that as belief, not fact.
Sure, but not all dogs are pets.Edit: Yep, wrong comment.
i not sure nor can i imagine what that answers in anything ive said here. so im just going to assume you’ve misread and misposted and are lost or just a shitposter.
This hits close to home since my dog actually escaped the Chinese meat market. As far as I’m aware it’s actually a big problem over there. They were owned by an (assuming) wealthy family then stolen and sold. They were part of the batch that were seized / stolen back (tbh I’m fuzzy on the details). We’ve since given her a happy life and a family, but I feel a little morbid that fate could’ve swayed the other way and they would’ve been someone’s dinner.
do you eat any other animals?
I’m sorry but this line is so absurd i can’t stop laughing
Anyway, this is a matter on the levels of disable someone
That’s just Doomslayer.
Should have sold the dog as a pet. Previous owner paid $300USD for him.
Welcome to China’s huge gap between cities and some rural areas. Where the parents (from where the dog was stolen) live, there may not have been a market for a pet.
But restaurants have needs all the time.
The article title and body don’t match in the amount of the sale:
sold for US$25
He was later told that Chutou had been sold to a dog meat restaurant for 180 yuan (US$27) and the pet had been eaten.
I mean, not that it’s that far off, but seems odd to have an article where the two don’t match.
180 yuan right now is $26.59. Given the headline only reports the conversion which changes, it’s arguably better to round it as they did to convey a general point rather than the exact specific amount of dollars.
Edit: Looking at it now, the conversion rate seems reasonably stable, so I wonder if they still rounded it just for simplicity’s sake.
