I
have just been labeled a non-conformist. No, I did not take offense. No umbrage
at all, in fact, I just laughed.
The
person who called me that must have been at a loss for words, literally. That
did not surprise me at all. He has, in the past, described me as: “mabulaklak
magsalita, ayaw gumamit nang ordinaryong kataga para mas maintindihan” (flowery
speaker who will not use simple words to be better understood).
The
words I use convey my thoughts with as much precision as I can muster. I will
not call you dense when you are a dimwit. I will not admit to being lonely when
I am just bored. I know the difference between hard and difficult. Why should I
abuse the word beautiful to refer to a woman, a flower, or a sunset when I have
an idiolect for an arsenal?
Oh
but I digress.
Now,
why was I called a non-conformist? I was quiet amidst the brouhaha over a dog
meat festival. To me, the controversy had to do with one plain and simple fact:
dogs are the most popular pets worldwide, bar none, unless of course you happen
to be Chavit Singson who can afford to literally house more exotic animals.
I
love dogs, too, but I do not have a problem with people who eat dog meat. It is
a cultural thing; hence I do not find it repugnant.
Unfortunately,
the controversy was heightened by gruesome, perturbing pictures that agitated a
lot of people once they were posted online. Dogs in cages that are not really
different from our overcrowded city jails, just like other animals in
industrial farms, living in cramped spaces, suffering until they reach
maturity, and then killed with swift, merciless precision.
Come
to think of it, what are 10,000 dogs butchered for a dog meat festival in one
hemisphere compared to 1.2 million dogs euthanised on an annual basis in
another hemisphere?
In
retrospect, it probably was not the dog meat itself, but the manner by which
the dogs were killed (the dogs are hit on the head and torched) that became
controversial.
Those
who raised a howl must not have heard of the Pinikpikan.
