Does this seem fair?!
Is this fair? Is it arrogant to judge but not allow themselves to be judged? What do you think?
Answers: The vegans in the V & V propose that though they don't/can't be a perfect vegan, they are still vegans. But, if a vegetarian eats fish they will be quick to tell them that they aren't a vegetarian.
Is this fair? Is it arrogant to judge but not allow themselves to be judged? What do you think?
Arrogant? Maybe... I've never seemed to like what most (most, not all) vegans have to say on the V&V forum. I've always preferred the insights of fellow vegetarians... probably because that is the crowd I belong to and identify with.
Vegetarianism is a lot easier to define, it's just a diet.
Veganism is a lifestyle... and one that's not so easy to figure out.
I'm not a vegan... but fish eating vegetarians p*** me off. Then again, my milk consumption p***es vegans off.
Here's my thoughts... It is impossible to be completely vegan unless you live in a hut waaaaay out in the boonies, and people that eat fish but call themselves vegetarians are just picky eaters.
Just eat what you want. Who cares what you call yourself.
kinda. r u veg or vegan just curious.
Someone who chooses to eat meat is not the same as a vegan who drives a car that may have old animal parts in the tires.
Vegetarianism is also pretty black & white. Veganism is more of a gray area beyond the "no wearing or eating any animal products & no animal testing". Everyone can always do more.
Personally, I think we in the veggie community should be supportive of one another. Rather than attacking the other person, just tell them "well that's not considered vegetarian you realise? And it's not healthy because you are still consuming animal fats etc" rather than say something like "YOU AREN'T VEGETARIAN!! GRRR!! *snipe, snipe, snark, snark!* "
I find that many people don't know that vegetarians are not supposed to eat fish, after telling them they look into it.
I think maybe it's because I'm vegetarian for health reasons rather than the moral issues (not eating animals is a bonus) that I feel this way. Why attack someone when they are making a concerted effort to do something good? They are just misinformed so give them the right information, but don't pull out the torches and pitchforks over it!
Is it fair? Yes because it's not vegetarian to eat fish. Period. HOWEVER, I think the usual delivery of such info sucks. We need to be more supportive and act less like ***holes.
Yes i think its perfectly fair.
if you actually look up the definition of vegan you will find it is actually quantified, most of the rubbishy 'perfect vegan' talk is far beyond the scope of the definition.
personally, i tell every single person.
to clear up the misinformation.
there was once a vegetarian type gathering in the city where i live. vegans and vegetarians where invited, but to be on the safe side and to ensure everyone got fed it was a rule to bring only vegan food.
someone who didnt know what 'vegan' actually meant made something with some kind of milk in it, which an incredibly lactose intolerant person ate and as a result, ENDED UP IN HOSPITAL.
Its not arrogant, the terms 'vegetarian' and 'vegan' where made by people, specifically quantified with exact criteria.
if you dont like the words then DONT USE THEM its as simple as that.
ive made a choice to follow what the term 'vegetarian' means, i specifically researched what it means, and i follow it exactly, or i wouldnt claim i was one.
hell my diet is 99% vegan but i still dont claim to be one, because i understand what the term means and i know i dont comply with it.
i dont want to order a vegetarian meal at a restaurant and get half way through it when i bite through a chunk of fish....
just like vegans dont want to finish a meal and find out that their personal ideals have been compromised, or end up in bloody hospital.
oh and most humans are arrogant at some point in thier life, regardless of diet or lifestyle choices. im sure you have been at least once before, and probably will be again in the future at some point : )
:headdesk:
You don't give up, do you? I don't know what your agenda is, but your harassment of veg*ans is getting really old.
The very definition of vegetarian precludes the consumption of animal flesh. Someone who eats fish is consciously choosing to do so. This is not about being perfect or imperfect, but being misinformed about what veg*ans do and do not eat.
There's a big fat difference between riding in a vehicle whose tires may have animal ingredients and choosing to eat animal flesh.
the difference is that fish is a completely avoidable food, whereas certain other animal derivatives are not. the exceptions vegans are making are things that are unavoidable. things like driving on roads that may have some animal derived product in them, or taking a necessary medication that may have an ingredient derived from an animal.
the point of veganism is to do what you can. avoid causing harm where you can. it is not hard to avoid eating meat, or using leather; but short of living in the woods growing your own food (which is maybe what youre hoping for) it is virtually impossible to live in todays culture without somehow (if only indirectly) using something that is a product of animal exploitation.
wherever possible vegans will take the vegan option, unfortunately these options arent always available. but that doesnt mean that its not worth it to do what you can. if you really have a problem with people calling themselves vegan, go ahead and judge them. but remember, it goes both ways, and if you judge people so strictly there is no reason they shouldnt judge you just as harshly.
The definition of vegan is pretty much unattainable because it includes escewing all animal products from your life. You can't do that. There will always be someone who will work through the nth degree of an action in order to find a flaw with your statements. Thats just the way it is. Happens to me as a vegetarian, but hey, I'm comfortable with my morals and I definately count as a vegetarian.
My approach to vegetarianism is pretty black and white, i know that, I treat it that way so the definition of a veggie does not get watered or corrupted. Vegans cannot achieve such a clear cut approach.
I don't know of a solution to this vegan dilemma other that to say things like "significant effort" or "where possible" or something - but then we are back to "who judges it ?".
Your question made me look in the dictionary for the definition of vegan ( thanks for that ). It says "is someone who, for various reasons, chooses to avoid using or consuming animal products".
That is not achievable in anything other than some remote individuals who have no contact with the rest of the world.
Maybe they need to re-define vegan.
Having said all that, most vegans efforts significantly reduce thier exploitation of animals, and for that achievement, they have much to offer society.
I think people worry way too much about what is on other people's plates.
So you're saying that vegetarians can't abstain from eating fish?
How hard is that?
I don't think the two are comparable at all...
I think no one should be allowed to label you other than yourself. That is if you feel comfterble with labels.
I am smart person. Not because some one told me, but because I believe it.
Same goes for vegitarians. If you say you are a vegitarian, then you are. If some one's definition of vegetarian is diffenent than your own, big deal.
You define you, and no one else can take that away from you.