Why are dogfags so easily triggered?

Why are dogfags so easily triggered?

Because chances are backwoods hillbilly equivalent 40 year old year old Chinese people or Korean don't browse here, and since they're the only people who really eat Dog you wont find many people here eager to discuss it.

That doesn't really answer the question fully though. Why would someone be afraid or unwilling to discuss something simply because they don't eat it themselves? And it goes beyond simply not wanting to discuss it, some people get hardcore triggered when discussing eating dog. Or horse, for that matter.

I'm not sure why it makes a difference at all. If it's OK to kill a cow or a chicken to eat it then why is it not OK to kill a dog or a horse to eat it? Either way it's killing an animal.

What is there to discuss? The concept of eating dog disgusts anybody who isn't, again

> backwoods hillbilly equivalent 40 year old year old Chinese people or Korean

and again, that type of demographic most certainly doesn't even use the internet. So the only people you will get in this thread are the rest of the world who aren't that demographic, who, again, are disgusted by the concept of eating dog, and will most likely view this thread as trollbait.

Because people usually have dogs as pets. It's not that hard to understand.

I love dogs but I have no problem with people raising them for food.
I do have a problem with people spending ten minutes killing them with a fucking blowtorch.

I haven't really got a problem with people eating dog, it's not for me but whatever. I just don't appreciate chinks blowtorching them to death, you know?

Honestly, I'd try dog at least once in my life if given the chance.

I am ethnic Chinese but not a Chinese citizen, so maybe that's part of the reason. I'll eat anything at least once, if it's something people eat.

>chink

Thank god those are Koreans in that picture and not Chinese, you might have offended him.

because dogs are people

Yeah, the problem isn't the actual eating of dogmeat, it's that the people who eat dogs also treat them like absolute shit

Because dogs, unlike cattle and poultry, were not bred for meat historically. Unless you count those dogs that pacific Islanders ate. But they tattoo themselves with sharp sticks and ink made from ash and piss.

People care about dogs. That's the only reason. If you have emotional investment or connection to something, you don't want to see it butchered. I doubt cannibals would eat their most beloved child or parent, outside of some ritual.

We're not autistic computers or chinks who can only think in Wargames-esque modes of thought. Emotion will always be a factor.

I fucking hate cats, for example, but I would still never eat cat meat. It probably tastes like shit anyway.

But if you can't understand that, I suggest going to a psychiatrist and figuring out what part of your brain never properly formed, turning you into a brainlet. Also, stop posting in fluffy threads on /b/.

>A border line changes the characteristics of a race
All chinks, gooks, and zipperheads are the same. The nips are almost no better, but something in the radiation sparked a semi-positive change in their rabid nature.

I've had dog, it's nothing spectacular. It's poorfag meat for a reason.

...

Can you describe the taste?

...

>The concept of eating dog disgusts anybody who isn't, again

You can't just say that without explaining why. Especially given how illogical that view is when most people consider it perfectly OK to slaughter other types of animals for food. It's some kind of strange cognitive dissonance going on here.

>cooking board
>chinks nips zipperheads otaku gays bahaha

really gets the noggin joggin

>Especially given how illogical that view is

See

>We're not autistic computers or chinks who can only think in Wargames-esque modes of thought. Emotion will always be a factor.

>Veeky Forums
>Whoa there guy did you just post an racial slur on an anonymous comment in a thread about eating dogs???? I am going to have to ask you to leave!
Really fires up the old neurons.

>Emotion will always be a factor.
But why be emotionally attached to one living thing but not another? The inconsistency makes no sense.

I could see the difference if were were discussing killing a pet as opposed to "livestock", but I don't think anyone is discussing eating pets here.

Most people, in the West especially, have a strong emotional and cultural connection to dogs. They consider them part of the family. In fact in the last few decades it's gotten a bit ridiculous, with people turning their dogs into surrogate receptacles for their parental instincts (I love dogs, but I would never throw a birthday for one).
Most people don't have that kind of connection to livestock. They haven't been raised in a culture where a cow is an essential part of the family unit.
It's not entirely logical, but humans are not purely logical entities.

Mostly bland, slightly gamey red meat. I've only ever had it once, but it definitely strikes me as the kind of meat you have to season the hell out of to eat on a regular basis.

>an racial slur
there are chinks who english better than you, ya dirty /pol/ runoff

See What you wrote makes perfect sense if someone was suggesting killing the family pet dog. I can totally understand how that would be offensive to most people, myself included.

But when discussing the concept of eating a dog in general, how is that any different than other livestock like pigs and chickens and cows. It's a nameless animal that is being raised for food, not Spot the loyal household pet.

Because dogs are "pet animals". People don't just care about pets. They care about the animals that are typically pets. That's generally how those connections work. A collar doesn't automatically change the worth of the animal, the perception of that animal as a "pet animal" does.

That's why people who raise dogs to eat are also the same people who don't mind eating dogs, typically. They don't have that same connection. It's all learned behavior.

I'd say that only finding it disgusting to eat an animal just because it's a pet but finding it okay to eat it otherwise is more along the lines of cognitive dissonance than not eating an entire species because you care for it.

And yet I'm still lucky enough to not be a chink.

>Because dogs are "pet animals".
Sure, some people have dogs as pets. But there are also non-pet dogs. Are you suggesting that people consider all dogs the same rather than distinguishing between pet dogs and non-pet dogs?

Some people have pet cows or chickens as well, yet they're still OK with eating beef or poultry.

>> is more along the lines of cognitive dissonance
How so? A pet has obvious emotional attachments with its owners/family. There is a bond there. That bond isn't present with nameless livestock--especially nameless livestock that the diner has never seen or met.

>Are you suggesting that people consider all dogs the same rather than distinguishing between pet dogs and non-pet dogs?

Yeah, generally.

>Some people have pet cows or chickens as well, yet they're still OK with eating beef or poultry.

Because the view is that chickens and cows are not "pet animals", they fall under the archetype of livestock. That's really it. Again, it's not logical, but it is what it is.

>How so? A pet has obvious emotional attachments with its owners/family. There is a bond there. That bond isn't present with nameless livestock--especially nameless livestock that the diner has never seen or met.

To clarify, I mean disgusting as in gut-instinct-I-won't-eat-that. Not a moralistic evil that deals specifically with the interference of the individual bonds of those who care for that animal.

Japan was a mistake.

I'm not the guy who's been responding to you, but it's really not hard to understand. I agree that it's hypocritical and a bit illogical, but humans are not inherently rational beings, and we have kept dogs as companions for several thousand years. It's deeply ingrained in most of us that dogs are friends and not food. Using logic doesn't work when it's an emotional connection, especially such a strong one.

Again it's not just about your pet specifically. It's a cultural thing. Another user mentioned cats, most people probably wouldn't eat a cat either even if it wasn't their cat. They've been raised with the idea that dogs and cats are part of the human social world and cows and chickens are part of the culinary world. It's not 100% logical, it's big parts emotional and social.