I don't know much about art, but I torture animals
But is it art?
Even asking the question is idiotic. Yes, yes, we know–anything that you decide to call art is art. I'm art; you're art; that shark in a tank is art; the toilet is art; pissing into the art toilet is art; etc., ad nauseum.
But, it can also be something else. Crass. Stupid. Derivative. Pointless. Cruel. Unethical. Just plain wrong. Labeling it art does not absolve it from having other adjectives affixed.
Wait…did I say wrong? How can something be wrong, you ask? In multicultural, post-societal Ireland all attitudes, worldviews and cultures are equally valid, aren't they? That is the true legacy of leftist socialism.
Well, here's a newsflash: this 'art' is wrong. Starving a dog to death in a gallery is wrong. Starving a dog to death anywhere is wrong. It is inhumane to a psychopathic degree. If you cannot empathise with an animal in fatal distress, you are lacking in whatever that undefinable thing is that makes us human.
Of course, we're more likely to get upset when a poor defenseless animal is tortured for art, than when a member of our own species is tortured for religion.
The Nigerian society is free to mutilate female genitalia; the Jewish religion is free to mutilate male genitalia; the Saudi Arabians are free to oppress women; sure, it's all part of their 'culture,' isn't it.
And here's a guy with a better post title than mine: