Since the early stages of civilization, meat has been a staple in the dietary consumption known to humankind. The meat paradox is to like eating meat, but at the same time to dislike the act of killing and harming animals. This meat paradox challenges the morality and ethics of humans. Some vegetarians could have trouble with understanding this concept, where it is okay to eat meat from an animal, yet harming an animal is morally incorrect. The act of slaughtering an animal would seem cruel enough, no? 90 percent of our population consumes meat are aware of the fact that it comes from an animal that has short lived their lives due to our dietary practices. Vegetarians are not victims to this meat paradox because of their moral concern for animals. …show more content…
As civilization progressed humans became alpha predators. In nearly every culture eating meat has become socially acceptable. Nonetheless what type of meat varies in different societal settings. In North America dogs are our pets and in some case a member of people’s family. Generally North Americans frown upon the consumption of dog meat. Whereas “In Asia, dog meat is part of the culture. It 's accepted and enjoyed by many. The Humane Society International says an estimated 30 million dogs are killed each year for their meat`` (Kaye, 2018) According to the reading “The psychology of eating animals," the two ideologies that make meat consumption acceptable amongst many people and cultures is social dominance orientation (SDO) and self-identity. Omnivores who value inequality and hierarchy have a higher consumption of meat then those who do not. Meateaters believe that because we are on top of the food chain we are typically more dominant then animals and thus it is permissible to eat them. Another social ideology is that meat consumption articulates self-identity; Particularly with masculinity. Meat has become a gender-based food in many societies. Males eating meat has been correlated to them being manlier than vegetarians. Meat eaters are perceived as more masculine in