Posted by:
oldherper
at Sat Jun 7 06:29:02 2003 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by oldherper ]
I agree completely. My point is that most of these unusual "delicacies" are borne out of someone eating something not normally on the Human menu because of extreme hunger, and saying "Hey, this is pretty good!" Then it's no longer eaten out of necessity, but becomes a delicacy and sticks around. When people are truly hungry, nothing that could be a source of protien and sustenance is wasted. When I was in China, I often was invited to people's houses for dinner. When there was fish for dinner, the whole fish was served head, eyes and all. The eyes were considered the "best" part of the fish and either the mother or the father of the house ate those. The idea was that there were only two small eyes on the fish, but lots of meat.
Most of us in America are not really familiar with the concept of actually starving to death. We've seen it on T.V., and we've read about it, but never really seen it. Sure, we've been hungry..like if we missed lunch and are feeling particularly "famished" at dinner time..stomach grumbling...maybe aching a little..but not truly starving. Believe me, if you are really starving you will eat your pet dog. The survival instinct will put a whole different set of priorities in place.
People like PETA will put forth the idea that animals have the same rights as people and animals should never be used for food, yadayadayada...but I think it's safe to say that those people have never been truly hungry (actually starving) either. I may be wrong about that...maybe they would actually starve to death before they would eat an animal. In my opinion, that would only serve to show that Darwin was right, there is a natural selection process where only the smartest survive.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
That's exactly what I was trying to get across.... - oldherper, Sat Jun 7 06:29:02 2003