See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301759777 Controversial cuisine: A global account of the demand, supply and acceptance of “unconventional” and “exotic” meats Article in Meat Science · April 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.017 CITATIONS READS 0 155 2 authors: Donna-Mareè Cawthorn Louwrens C Hoffman University of Salford Stellenbosch University 28 PUBLICATIONS 335 CITATIONS 276 PUBLICATIONS 2,476 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Donna-Mareè Cawthorn letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 17 September 2016 MESC-06976; No of Pages 18 Meat Science xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Meat Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci Controversial cuisine: A global account of the demand, supply and acceptance of “unconventional” and “exotic” meats Donna-Mareè Cawthorn, Louwrens C. Hoffman ⁎,1 Department of Animal Sciences, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7600, South Africa article info abstract Article history: In most societies, meat is more highly prized, yet more frequently tabooed, than any other food. The reasons for Received 18 January 2016 these taboos are complex and their origins have been the focus of considerable research. In this paper, we illus- Received in revised form 6 April 2016 trate this complexity by deliberating on several “unconventional” or “exotic” animals that are eaten around the Accepted 11 April 2016 world, but whose consumption evokes strong emotions, controversy and even national discourse: dogs, equids, Available online xxxx kangaroos, marine mammals, primates, rodents and reptiles. We take a systematic approach, reflecting on the Keywords: historical and current demand for the meat, the manner in which this demand is met, and how individual and Aversion societal attitudes towards these species shape their approval as food. What emerges from this synthesis is that Meat conflicting views on the aforementioned species exist not only between Western societies and elsewhere, but Proscription also in nations where these animals are readily consumed. Moreover, such taboos are seldom based on function- Religion alist explanations alone, but rather have overwhelming symbolic and psychological groundings. Taboo © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Traditional belief 1. Introduction perspective and the “symbolic” perspective (DeMello, 2012; Fessler & Navarrete, 2003). Throughout history, meat has appeared in different contexts and Functionalist explanations are articulated in terms of their utility, in cultures as a supreme food, a quintessential package of complete nutri- that restrictions on eating certain animals serve one or more practical, ents, and the core around which a meal is arranged (Fonseca, 2015). Red health-related or ecological purposes (Serpell, 2011). For instance, ani- meat, in particular, occupies the top hierarchal echelon of foods associ- mals known to harbour parasites, microorganisms or other contami- ated with power, prestige, virility and masculinity, whereas vegetables nants may be rejected in order to prevent human illness, with a have little status and serve mainly as supplements (Fiddes, 2004; frequently cited example being the Jewish taboo on pork as a means Sobal, 2005). In both literal and figurative senses, meat is omnipresent, of avoiding trichinosis (Douglas, 2003; Simoons, 1994). Prominent evocative and a symbol of culture and shared identity. Yet, there is little among functionalist views is that specific meat taboos indirectly pro- that is neutral about meat, and it is certainly not chosen randomly. In mote the sustainable and/or efficient use of natural resources, particu- fact, despite its highly-prized nature, meat is vastly more likely to be larly by preventing overexploitation of some facet of the local ecology the target of food taboos (prohibitions) than any other edible substance (Fessler & Navarrete, 2003). However, the purported ecological benefits (Fessler & Navarrete, 2003). of these taboos have not always held up under close examination People throughout the world exhibit strong aversions to killing and (Alvard, 1995; Nietschmann, 1978; Simoons, 1994). consuming certain animals, and the choice of which species to proscribe Turning from the functionalist to the symbolic, extensive cross- varies widely and unpredictably from place to place, and from culture to cultural evidence indicates that specific animals are not consumed as culture. Why these taboos arise and persist has perplexed researchers they have acquired various emblematic connotations that render their for over a century, with debates often splintering into opposing factions. meat unacceptable. Whether underpinned by religious or traditional Nonetheless, two chief theoretical perspectives have so far come to belief systems, such taboos frequently revolve around issues of purity dominate discourses on why particular foods, especially animal foods, and pollution, or the perception of animals as either “sacred” or “pro- are subject to such wide-ranging interdictions: the “functionalist” fane” (Douglas, 2003). In almost all traditional African settings, different clans and tribes revere certain animals as symbols of power, guardian spirits and/or as the residence of ancestors (i.e. totems); the killing of ⁎ Corresponding author. these species is strictly prohibited and sanctions exist for violators E-mail address: [email protected] (L.C. Hoffman). (Mbotiji, 2002; Obioha et al., 2012). Of course, examples also abound 1 South African Research Chair in Meat Science hosted by the University of Stellenbosch in partnership with the University of Fort Hare, funded by the Department of Science and of magical and medicinal beliefs that may promote the consumption Technology (DST) and administered by the National Research Foundation (NRF). of certain animals. For some tribes in East Africa, the flesh of lions and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.017 0309-1740/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Please cite this article as: Cawthorn, D.-M., & Hoffman, L.C., Controversial cuisine: A global account of the demand, supply and acceptance of “unconventional” and “exotic” meats, Meat Science (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.017 2 D.-M. Cawthorn, L.C. Hoffman / Meat Science xxx (2016) xxx–xxx leopards is consumed by men in the hope that that they will be imbued whale* OR whaling OR dolphin* OR manatee* OR dugong* OR seal* OR with the courageous and fierce characteristics of these animals (Frazer, sealing) OR (primate* OR monkey* OR ape*) OR (rodent* OR rat* OR 2012), whereas a single leg of the hippopotamus is said to heal a child murine OR capybara OR nutria OR guinea pig OR cavy) OR (reptile* OR from kwashiorkor (Olupot, McNeilage, & Plumptre, 2009). Moreover, Crocodilia* OR Squamata OR Testudine OR crocodile* OR alligator* OR the meat and body parts of various rare or endangered wild species caiman* OR snake* OR lizard* OR turtle* OR tortoise*) OR (bush meat (e.g. tigers, bears, pangolins, reptiles) are in high demand in some OR bushmeat OR wild meat) AND (consumption OR eat* OR demand Asian societies due to their purported curative, aphrodisiac and/or OR nutrition* OR composition* OR production OR hunt* or harvest* status-promoting properties (Foot, 2013). With respect to particular re- OR farm* OR captive OR trade OR export OR import OR accept* OR pre- ligious injunctions, an animal may be tabooed on the basis of its anom- fer* OR aversion OR prohibit* OR proscription OR forbid* OR religion OR alous or non-prototypical features. The Jewish proscription on pork, spirit* OR taboo OR totem OR cultural OR tradition* OR ethnographic OR apart from its potential health implications, lies not in the pigs lack of belief OR magic* OR medicinal OR sustainability OR threatened OR envi- cloven hooves, but rather in its failure to chew the cud (Serpell, 2011). ronment* Or conservation OR campaign* OR protest*). The ‘grey’ litera- Scavenger animals, such as vultures, are frequently prohibited due ture was additionally investigated using similar search terms in Google, to their association with filth, disease and death, as are rodents so as to identify appropriate working papers, project documents, theses (DeMello, 2012). and other unpublished material. The Red List of the International Union While there is good support for both functionalist and symbolic ex- for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) was used to establish the conserva- planations, Fessler and Navarrete (2003) suggested that neither of these tion status or extinction risk of individual species (IUCN, 2015). The ti- fully account for the pervasive centrality of meat in proscriptions, as tles, keywords and abstracts of the captured literature sources were both theories tend to overlook the underlying logic, emotional reason- evaluated to ascertain their relevance. More meticulous review allowed ing processes and experience-near aspects of food taboos. Dwelling fur- refinement to ca. 300 key literature sources, the findings of which are ther in the emotional realm, Serpell (2011) contended that cultural incorporated throughout the present paper. proscriptions against consuming specific animals represent a type of psychological coping mechanism that allows individuals to dilute and 3. Dog displace their moral responsibility for killing and eating animals in gen- eral. Unlike other great