Vegan coming for dinner

330 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, zwiebelfisch said:

This isnt, as MAM previously tried to claim, about shaming vegetarians who are Not True Vegetarians, but rather it is ambiguity in the term.  People can argue as much as they like but the word as commonly used simply has fuzzy edges and people pick and chose how they identify themselves and each other. 

 

Saying someone who sometimes eats fish is not a vegetarian is just as pointless as saying someone who uses condoms isnt a catholic.

 

I wasn't aware I tried to shame Not True Vegetarians. I just tried to point out that they're setting up vegetarians for the fish debate, and am misappropriating an accepted and useful definition. 

 

BTW I've heard in Australia: I'm a vegetarian; I only eat chicken and fish. I think that's using vegetarian to say red meat avoiding. Is that correct?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Joanie said:

The analogy of Vegetarian to Doctor isn't appropriate because a doctor has a legal paper to call him/herself that.  There are a number of titles that you can't use legally unless you have a licence to do so (i.e. an Engineer in canada, a notary in Germany)

Interestingly enough according to §132 StGb(3) it's even a crime to call oneself a priest: https://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/132a.html

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MadAxeMurderer said:

 

 

 

 Although frankly I don't get how misusing the vegetarian label is more accommodating to hosts. Saying you don't mind fish or meat stock is being accommodating. You don't have to misuse a label for that.

 

 

 

But this is exactly what I do. I use (not misuse, thank you!) the term vegetarian to describe what I eat- I am (occasionally) accommodating to hosts when they ask by saying yes, thank you, I don't mind fish. I DO mind meat stock, very much.

 

1 hour ago, MadAxeMurderer said:

 

I wasn't aware I tried to shame Not True Vegetarians. I just tried to point out that they're setting up vegetarians for the fish debate, and am misappropriating an accepted and useful definition. 

 

 

IMO you have to be complicit in order to be shamed ie, feel ashamed. I can never be shamed by anything somebody else says. I cna only be ashamed by knowing myself that I did something wrong/something against my own principles. 

So, you are right, I am not shamed by anything you said.

I just disagree with your definition of Vegetarian. In my opinion the term does not come with a rule book. Thank goodness.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MadAxeMurderer said:

I've heard in Australia: I'm a vegetarian; I only eat chicken and fish.

 

 

I think that is one of the most clear and easy to understand descriptions of a diet I have ever heard.  Based on that I know my roast chicken, mashed potato and peas will be acceptable but a leg of lamb wouldnt be. 

 

Of course for an idealogue it doesnt comply so is unacceptable but to Joe Average in the kitchen it is a helpful bit of info that will avoid embarassment or disappointment at the weekend BBQ. 

 

Look get over it, the term just isnt well defined.  If you want to be clear just tell people you are a strict vegetarian, no eggs or dairy, nor things like stock or gelatin.  It adds about 2 seconds to your statement and lays it all out clearly so everyone knows where you stand.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, zwiebelfisch said:

If you want to be clear just tell people you are a strict vegetarian, no eggs or dairy, nor things like stock or gelatin. 

 

Isn't that vegan ?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JonnyThat is indeed vegan which I'm not. I love cheese. however I often go to a vegan potluck, and scrupulously avoid honey, cheese, and sour milk in what I bring to avoid upsetting my vegan friends.

 

This page expresses it far more eloqunetly than I could

 

Quote

Let me repeat that to be 100% clear: If you are a flexitarian, a semi-vegetarian or a pescetarian, you are not vegetarian.

See also: Is fish vegetarian?

Many vegetarians strongly resent the use of the term flexitarian, because headlines such as “Meat-eating vegetarian” confuse and dilute the definition of a true vegetarian diet. Most vegetarians are not big fans of the flexitarian diet, because, well, it's not vegetarian, yet somehow causes plenty of confusion!

Many vegetarians have been told that "some vegetarians eat meat..." as they are being served a plate of chicken, having requested a vegetarian meal. This is a problem, because vegetarians, again, do not eat meat. Sorry, flexitarians. Us vegetarians are glad you're reducing your meat consumption - the animals and the earth and your children thank you - but every time we're brought a dish of pasta with shrimp or told that "my vegetarian friend eats chicken, why don't you?", we blame you just a little bit, flexitarians of the world.

What, exactly, does flexitarian mean?

So, what is a flexitarian diet? "Flexitarian" is used to describe a diet or a person who eats a "mostly" vegetarian diet, occasionally including meat. But what exactly does this mean? Does it mean once a week? Once a day? It's really up to you, as there is no standard agreement or definition, though perhaps someday there will be.

The word "flexitarian" has been around for a while, but hit the mainstream with the publication of the book, The Flexitarian Diet in 2008. CNN, MSNBC and Newsweek have all covered the flexitarian trend. But in true 21st century fashion, the real signifier that flexitarians are here to stay, is that they have their own Facebook group.

Is a flexitarian/semi-vegetarian the same as a pescatarian?

Flexitarianism differs from pescatarianism, which is a diet that includes the animal flesh of fish only, along with vegetarian foods. So, while a pescatarian will only eat fish, but as much fish as they'd like, a flexitarian may eat any type of meat, but only on an occasional basis. This means that a pescatarian who occasionally eats fish may be a flexitarian, but a flexitarian is not necessarily a pescatarian, as they may be eating chicken, pork, beef, frogs legs or chocolate covered ants.

So what's the big deal?

Opponents say there's no such thing as "mostly" vegetarian, just as there's no such thing as being "mostly" pregnant. By simple definition of terms, you cannot be a meat-eating vegetarian; just likeyou cannot create a 4-sided triangle, no matter how hard you might try. Period.

Problematically, all of the arguments in favor of adopting a flexitarian diet (health, environment, reduction of resource consumption) are really arguments in favor of adopting a fully vegetarian diet.

The bottom line is this:

Flexitarianism has been popping up more and more in the media, so no longer can vegetarians just wish the word would go away. However, as long-time vegan advocate and thought-leader Bruce Friedrich says, "If people influenced by health consequently cut back on fish and meat consumption - that helps animals. If two people cut their meat in half it helps as much as one person going completely vegetarian."

In other words, as a flexitarian, one is still taking a huge positive step forward for health, the environment and the animals.

And that's a great thing

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAM, that post is another attempt to lay down rules. Who made up these rules? Who laid down this law? Why should I bow and scape to some definition that some person I never heard of made up?

I am not going to call myself a pescatarian, because that implies that fish is my main diet. It isn't.

Flexitarian is another made up term. I'm not going to use it. This is the first time I've heard it, so saying it's popping up more and more in the media is no argument. I am not a flexitarian. I don't eat meat. Have not done so for 50 years. Nothing flexible about that.

 

As I said, I'm sorry you have to deal with people asking you if you eat fish but I guess you can live with that.

I shall continue to use the term vegetarian to describe what I eat (for instance, when choosing a diet on a plane) and you will just have to accept that. The term was never and never will be pure, just as the reasons people don't eat meat is not pure. Here are some reasons:

 

-- their parents didn't eat meat so they never ate meat and don't think of it as food

-- they think it is unsteadying for the mind

-- health reasons

-- they don't want to eat dead animals/want animals to be killed for food

-- they don't like the taste or look or smell of meat 

 

Five completely different reasons! Which of these are the "good and pure" vegetarians?

If people would stop making a religion out of it all would be fine. I'm beginning to understand why we are so mocked.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, arunadasi said:

MAM, that post is another attempt to lay down rules. Who made up these rules? Who laid down this law? Why should I bow and scape to some definition that some person I never heard of made up?

 

 

That's where i am.  I'm at "who effing cares".  

 

I'm a shopaholic...no, you are not TRULY addicted to shopping so you are not. 

I'm an environmentalist...no, not really.

 

and so forth...

 

The general public asks a lot of annoying questions based on the outline that previous people they have met set forth for them.  It's part of life.    

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it's not people asking me if I eat fish that bothers me.

 

It's people telling me I'm difficult because I don't eat fish, and vegetarians do eat fish.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Joanie said:

 

That's where i am.  I'm at "who effing cares".  

 

I'm a shopaholic...no, you are not TRULY addicted to shopping so you are not. 

I'm an environmentalist...no, not really.

 

and so forth...

 

The general public asks a lot of annoying questions based on the outline that previous people they have met set forth for them.  It's part of life.    

 

I'm a chocaholic, and I don't care who knows!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the topic: dinner. Will bringing your own food do the job? I do this often because I don't have facility for hosting parties, so if someone invites me I try to bring something. I'm sure any host will be happy, after all non vegans also love vegan food, nicht wahr?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the mere definition of 'vegetarian' spawns these pages  of arguments - I'm glad we're not even going to discuss the potential benefits of a vegetarian diet vs a meat laden diet .:P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jonny said:

I'm glad we're not even going to discuss the potential benefits of a vegetarian diet vs a meat laden diet .

 

It has already been done many times.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, arunadasi said:

MAM, that post is another attempt to lay down rules. Who made up these rules? Who laid down this law? Why should I bow and scape to some definition that some person I never heard of made up?

I am not going to call myself a pescatarian, because that implies that fish is my main diet. It isn't.

 

As I said, I'm sorry you have to deal with people asking you if you eat fish but I guess you can live with that.

I shall continue to use the term vegetarian to describe what I eat (for instance, when choosing a diet on a plane) and you will just have to accept that. The term was never and never will be pure, just as the reasons people don't eat meat is not pure. Here are some reasons:

 

This is an interesting question and I did some digging: Wikipedia

 

Quote

The word vegetarian has been in use since 1839, referring to what was previously described as "vegetable diet". It is commonly believed to be a compound of vegetable and the suffix -arian (as in agrarian). (John Davis shows that it was probably not derived from the Latin word vegetus.[13]) The term was popularised with the foundation of the Vegetarian Society in Manchester, UK in 1847.[14][15] The earliest occurrences of the term seem to be related to Alcott House, a school on the north side of Ham Common, London, opened in July 1838 by James Pierrepont Greaves. From 1841, it was known as A Concordium, or Industry Harmony College, from which time the institution began to publish its own pamphlet, "The Healthian", which provides some of the earliest occurrences of the term "vegetarian"

 

Therefore it's clear the vegetarian society coined the word vegetarian over 1.5 centuries ago. They remain active, and the obvious custodians of the word vegetarian. From their website

 

Quote

What is a vegetarian?

The Vegetarian Society defines a vegetarian as: "Someone who lives on a diet of grains, pulses, nuts, seeds, vegetables and fruits with, or without, the use of dairy products and eggs. A vegetarian does not eat any meat, poultry, game, fish, shellfish* or by-products of slaughter." 

*Shellfish are typically ‘a sea animal covered with a shell’. We take shellfish to mean;

  • Crustaceans (hard external shell) large – e.g. lobsters, crayfish, crabs, small – e.g. prawns, shrimps  
     
  • Molluscs (most are protected by a shell) e.g. mussels, oysters, winkles, limpets, clams, etc. Also includes cephalopods such as cuttlefish, squid, octopus.

There are different types of vegetarian:

  • Lacto-ovo-vegetarians eat both dairy products and eggs; this is the most common type of vegetarian diet. 
     
  • Lacto-vegetarians eat dairy products but avoid eggs. 
     
  • Ovo-vegetarian. Eats eggs but not dairy products. 
     
  • Vegans do not eat dairy products, eggs, or any other products which are derived from animals. 
     

Eggs: Many lacto-ovo vegetarians will only eat free-range eggs. This is because of welfare objections to the intensive farming of hens. Through its Vegetarian Society Approved trademark, the Vegetarian Society only endorses products containing free-range eggs.

Some people may be vegetarian for religious reasons. Jains, for example, are either lacto-vegetarian or vegan, while some Hindus and Buddhists may choose to practice a vegetarian diet.

 

I certainly have no problem with the anybody ordering a vegetarian meal on a plane when they also eat fish. It's both none of my business, and full on carnivores are welcomed to order any restricted diet they desire on a plane or anywhere. I often order Asian vegetarian and I'm not Asian. I don't feel a fraud. Asian vegetarian cuisine is often better than European.

 

My problem is with people who say: I'm a vegetarian. I eat fish.

 

Because if people encounter one of these and 100 real vegetarians, they will harass the 100 vegetarians as to why they are so difficult and don't eat fish when they know a vegetarian who eats fish. And the vegetarian society, who coined and are custodians of this word agree with me.

 

Or more correctly I agree with them.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jonny said:

If the mere definition of 'vegetarian' spawns these pages  of arguments - I'm glad we're not even going to discuss the potential benefits of a vegetarian diet vs a meat laden diet .:P

*troll mode on*

Because there is nothing to argue about: human organism requires proteins and only meat has enough of them.

*troll mode off*

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10.10.2016, 13:15:38, MadAxeMurderer said:

If a vegetarian says they don't ingest material from dead animals, then what is the threshold. Will they tolerate 0.001% dead animal. 1%? 10%?

 

 

And lets say that a lovely rotund NewZealand Lamb has a Leg sergically removed...  It still lives... Has a life limping with the lambs...

 

Would that work?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, yourkeau said:

Because there is nothing to argue about: human organism requires proteins and only meat has enough of them.

 

Try looking up people like Rich Roll, Mac Danzig, Scott Jurek, Patrik Baboumian etc. They'll prove you wrong - big time !!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jonny said:

 

Try looking up people like Rich Roll, Mac Danzig, Scott Jurek, Patrik Baboumian etc. They'll prove you wrong - big time !!

No sport star ever proves me wrong: sports is doping these days. Some people get caught, some not. Farma concerns compete to create non-detectable drugs, then they are banned and they research on new ones etc. These days good looking sporty guys are due to chemistry "diet". Which is vegan, but is it healthy? 

 

Show me an average person. I'm afraid in this regard meat wins especially in countries which have real winters. Vegan diet works in India because you don't need much energy to live there, it's warm. On the other hand, people living in extreme cold conditions (-30 or lower) eat exclusively meat, otherwise they don't survive. Germany's climate is moderate, so you can get good without meat, but moderate amount will help.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now