Here in south-east Asia, the food for pets is kibble. I had thought it had something to do with the fact that kibble doesn’t spoil in this equatorial heat and people just don’t have time for the previous tried-and-true pet food, home-cooked stew in rice.
But I think I also just stumbled across another reason.
It was bad enough when J mentioned at work that we have bull terriers and was told in horrified tones that they “kill children”. I’ll cover that topic in another post. J’s co-workers started to get really agitated when they asked what we feed our pets and he replied, “raw meat”.
“Raw meat?” they repeated. “Aren’t you afraid they’ll…attack you as a result?”
Now, isn’t that interesting? There was an implicit assumption here (for both dogs and cats) that if we feed our domestic animals a raw food diet (as we have done for the past 6+ years), the animals will start to look at us as potential food.
It got me wondering if this kind of thinking melds very well with the choice of kibble as a food. Kibble doesn’t resemble raw meat in any shape or form. It looks and smells processed. Or, to use another term, it appears more “civilised” than a plate of raw meat with bones.
It occurs to me that we constantly try to distance ourselves from our biological heritage. Say to someone, “you and I are both animals”, and there’s a frozen moment of disbelief and outrage. I know this because I’ve done it. And while people have had to agree in the end that, yes, they are animals, there is always a “BUT” floating around at the end of the admission.

So therefore, if we deem ourselves to be “civilised”, then the animals who inhabit our personal space (with the exception of those who yearn for “exotic” pets for ego or vanity reasons) must be “civilised” as well. Which means we don’t feed them anything raw. We feed them the kind of cooked, civilised meals that we eat ourselves. Roast Lamb with Vegetables. Seafood Platter. Beef With Gravy. Calamari in Prawn Jelly.
Admit it. You’ve seen those labels too, haven’t you? Who do you think those words are meant to appeal to? Illiterate domesticated animals? Or human sensibilities?
I’m thinking this out as I write this post so I’m not sure if I’m hitting everything clearly, but it could be that one reason people choose to feed their pets kibble to show they’re “civilised” pets and therefore promoted above the rest of the animal pantheon into a rarefied human circle. Which might also make sense of the horror when one of these so-called domesticated animals dares to attack us. We’re just not expecting it.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments






I use a little kibble as a base. My plan is to one day raise enough chickens and goats to feed the pack off what we grow.
I’ve never been a fan of dog food. I have no definitive proof, but since WWll when packaged dog food became commonplace, it seems dogs get sicker more often with cancer and diseases of organs. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
Maybe there are more pets than before. Maybe sickness is reported more. But I can’t shake off the feeling that it’s the food.
Personally, I think people choose kibble because it’s easy. The descriptions of the foods are to appease the minds of owners, assuring them that this food is just as ‘good’ as human food.
I still can’t bring myself to feed mine raw food. I’ll give them chunks of raw beef occasionally, but not chicken or pork.
Ref: …and was told in horrified tones that they “kill children”.
Oh, for the love of Pete. Ignorance knows no bounds.
Personally, I find that it depends on the brand. Some kibble tastes absolutely disgusting, while other kibble is pretty good. For example, Marshall’s ferret food tastes terrible, having an intensely bitter bile-flavor, whereas Zupreem is rather yummy. Zupreem also has less of a sandy texture than Marshall’s.
Tom, I’m not sure what to think. It sounds like…you’ve actually…TRIED the kibble?! Talk about going above and beyond!