The cultural hegemony of fasting dog meat

Last month, i travelled to mainland China with my friends. One of my friend have a pet and it was a mongrel(唐狗). At night, we went to have dinner and i ordered one of my favorite home dishes------spiced dog meat pot. However, my friend who have a mongrel felt disdusting when we enjoyed the dishes. After this meal, i wondered if the reaction from my friend is caused by cultural difference or the identity of a dog owner.

The culture of eating dog meat has a long history among Chinese society. Historical cultural records in China have shown chinese treat dog as one of the “six livestock”. Li Shizhen in "Compendium of Materia Medica" records that eating dog meat is good to Qi, kidney, stomach, blood and  virility. Dog meat and bone have even used as one the of Chinese herbal medicines.

But in British,  the people treat dog as a pet and never put them on the table. And now most of the of Hong Kong people are generally considered eating dog meat as a very cruel culture. The fasted for dog meat seems to be the disciplinary under British cultural hegemony.

Since long time ago, eating dog meat is traditional for Hong Kong people, but in the 1950s, due to the introduced of the Dogs and Cats Ordinance by the colonial government, people cannot eat dog meat anymore. The reason of introduced the Dogs and Cats Ordinance in 1950 was the spread of rabies, the colonial government  prohibited members of the public from eating dog meat for protecting public health. Later, the 1992 Act amendments abolished most of the provisions in the old version. However, the colonial government reserved one provision--- “prohibit the slaughter of a dog or cat for food". This

reservation of fasted for dog meat is solely based on the culture of British that treat cats and dogs as  'forbidden meats'. This legal provision in Hong Kong is the most demanding one on  fasted for dog meat among all of the the non-religious legislation around the world.

"Eating dog meat", in fact, is full of contradictions, strict Jews, Christians and Muslims refused to eat  pigs and dogs because they are dirty omnivores ; Hindus refused to eat cow because they think cow is sacred. However, the British refused to eat dogs just because they are pet but they still eat wild rabbit although some rabbits are treat as pet.

British claimed that dogs are loyalty friends of human beings. In fact, apart from the skilled dogs such as guide-dog, anti-drug dogs, others are just pet or livestock. What conditions can we use to distinguish between the pets for feed and the livestocks for food? In my opinion, it is just a cultural differences about the matter of  history, religion, geography. Hong Kong’s culture is influenced by the British during the colonial period, thus,  the hegemony of fasted for dog meat is formed.

Nowadays, Hong Kong people imperceptibly absorb the British food taboos as our own food taboos. As a Hakkas(客家人), i have tasted the hometown dishes---spiced dog meat pot in the Mainland. I also raised a dog when i was young. And I think the fasting for dog meat is much about the culture hegemony built by the colonial government. Despite the morality of the cooking to killing process, it seems that the majority of Hong Kong people have draw a consensus under the colonial hegemony : “dog is the most loyal friend.”

Due to this cultural hegemony, i can only taste the hometown dishes in Hong Kong until the Laws of "Dogs and Cats Ordinance" modify or delete, but i am strongly confirmed this day will not come.