Summary Of Let Them Eat Dog By Jonathan Safran Foer

Around the world it is acceptable to eat certain animals depending on one’s culture. “The French, who love their dogs, sometimes eat their horses. The Spanish, who loves their horses, sometimes eat their cows. The Indians, who love their cows, sometimes eat their dogs” (Foer 604). “Let Them Eat Dog” is an excerpt from Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer. The excerpt explains the many benefits to eating dogs and the taboo behind it. The author also uses humor, imagery and emotional appeal to get across to the reader the logic of eating dogs. One chooses to eat meat based on what the culture deems acceptable. Foer questions why culture deems certain animals acceptable to be eaten, and illustrates why it should be acceptable to eat dogs. The

author argues that it should be acceptable to eat dogs because it’s acceptable in other cultures, millions of dogs are euthanized annually already, and it is an efficient and environmental source of meat. He uses various strategies including humor and emotions to show this.
Cultures around the world find it acceptable to eat dogs but Americans believe eating dogs is taboo and that it is cruel.

It is true that dogs have a high mental capacity but “such a definition would also include the pig, cow and chicken. And it would exclude severely impaired humans” (Foer 604). Foer effectively uses humor to explain why dogs are no more intelligent than many of the animals Americans find acceptable to eat. He also compares animals to severely impaired humans to allow the reader to analyze why he or she chooses to eat certain animals. Likewise, Foer questions if it’s not acceptable to eat dogs because they are companion animals, “but dog eating isn’t a taboo in many places, and it isn’t in anyway bad for [people]. Properly cooked, dog meat poses no greater health risks than any other meat” (Foer 604). Similarly, humor is used to demonstrate how it is acceptable to eat dog in other cultures and why it should be acceptable in the United States. Humor draws the reader in and makes the writing more lighthearted. This shows that with the wide variety of cultures in the United States, Americans can move to accepting dog eating customs. Thus, the author shows why it should be acceptable to eat dogs in the United States because it is acceptable in other

cultures.
Furthermore, the excess amount of dogs in the United States is an ecological and economic problem that has a simple solution. The amount of dogs that go without homes is overwhelming, “but unlike all farmed meat, which requires the creation and maintenance of animals, dogs are practically begging to be eaten. Three to four million dogs and cats are euthanized annually”(Foer 604). To clarify, dogs are already being put down because they have no home. Meat is being wasted while it could be being used for human consumption. Foer suggests that eating dogs is no more cruel than eating any other animal. He also mentions how people are aware of the cruelty of factory farms and slaughterhouses, but continue to eat the meat anyway. In a sense, the practice would only help control the amount of dogs in the United States. Eating dogs would prevent the wasteful euthanization of dogs and allow the meat to be used as food. Foer amplifies the reader’s emotions with the imagery of slaughterhouses and explains to the reader the reality of what is happening to dogs. This emotional appeal keeps the reader engaged. To illustrate, the practice of eating dogs would help control the overwhelming population of dogs in animal shelters.
In addition, Foer suggests there are environmental and economic reasons Americans should be eating dogs.

For instance, Americans know about the horror stories of factory farmed meat and how cruel the slaughterhouses are. Factory farmed meat is the “number one cause of global warming, it systematically forces tens of billions of animals to suffer in ways that would be illegal if they were dogs, it is a decisive factor in the development of swine and avian flues, and so on” (Foer 606). The author suggests that Americans are already willing to eat animals that had already been abused, so Americans should be willing to eat dogs. Yet Americans still find the idea of eating dogs repulsive, but dogs would go through no more torture than any other animal in a slaughterhouse. Foer plays on the reader’s emotions to show how cruel slaughterhouses are. These emotions make the reader question if he or she should consider eating dog meat. Economically “if [people] let dogs be dogs, and breed without interference, [one] would create a sustainable, local meat supply with low energy inputs” (Foer 606). With population growth, finding enough sustainable food is a worldwide problem. Foer effectively uses emotional appeal to make the reader consider the current situation of how the world struggles to produce enough food to feed everyone. In other words, dogs should be eaten to help the environment and help feed the

world.
Moreover, the author successfully uses the strategies emotion and humor to explain to the reader why Americans should be eating dog meat. The practice of eating dogs should be acceptable in America because around the world it is reasonable to eat dog. Dog meat is already being wasted because there are too many dogs, so millions have to be put down annually. Also, eating dogs would be environmentally economical, which would benefit the world. Before one should judge if eating dog is unreasonable, he or she should think about the reasoning behind it. “The instinct comes before [one’s] reason, and is more important” (Foer 606). Before one jumps to conclusions, he or she should use reason and logic to decide if something is justifiable.