Guest guest Posted July 27, 2002 Report Share Posted July 27, 2002 How do you reason with someone who insists on calling themselves a vegetarian and they still eat animals? Implicit in the definition of " vegetarian " is not eating animals! I was just having this same friendly, but frustrating, discussion with a friend at work who is trying to be vegetarian but still eats fish and calls his diet " vegetarian " . Tammy amy lynn (veggie grrrl) [amy] Saturday, July 27, 2002 9:16 AM [sFBAVeg] vegetarians who eat fish FISH IS NOT A VEGETABLE. xoxo amy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2002 Report Share Posted July 27, 2002 Ditto. Fish is not a vegetable. That is something that always irked me too. " I'm a vegetarian... but I eat seafood. " What is that about? Strange. I would just kindly correct him by saying that fish is not a vegetable (good answer, btw) and that he should just tell people he doesn't eat red meat. My analogy is, " I'm totally sober from all intoxicants, but I drink beer. " Caitanya --- Tammy <govegan wrote: > How do you reason with someone who insists on > calling themselves a > vegetarian and they still eat animals? Implicit in > the definition of > " vegetarian " is not eating animals! > > I was just having this same friendly, but > frustrating, discussion with a > friend at work who is trying to be vegetarian but > still eats fish and calls > his diet " vegetarian " . > > Tammy > > > amy lynn (veggie grrrl) > [amy] > Saturday, July 27, 2002 9:16 AM > > [sFBAVeg] vegetarians who eat fish > > > FISH IS NOT A VEGETABLE. > xoxo amy > > > Health - Feel better, live better http://health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2002 Report Share Posted July 28, 2002 Great question!!! I spoke to someone once, saying " so you are vegetarian, great, me too! " They said " yeah, I only eat fish or chicken once in awhile, how often do you eat it? I said, none, zero, zippo, the big goose e** with a hole completely through it. If anyone living in the Bay area feels challenged about others receiving the veg message, I can relate with you. Imagine, living in the Dairy State, telling the farmer, I don't eat meat. That was a " coming out party " if I ever experienced one. But now everybody knows it. By the way, I worked for a cheese processing factory here, and couldn't help but notice how much of the " Real Wisconsin Cheese " really originates from Minnesota, Washington, and yes, California (which I believe is actually the largest cheese producer in the country, only because of numbers differential, 5X population of Wis). Steve " Tammy " <govegan " amy lynn (veggie grrrl) " <amy, " SF-Be-A-Veg " Sat Jul 27 09:51:48 PDT 2002 Re: [sFBAVeg] " vegetarians " who eat fish >How do you reason with someone who insists on calling themselves a >vegetarian and they still eat animals? Implicit in the definition of > " vegetarian " is not eating animals! > >I was just having this same friendly, but frustrating, discussion with a >friend at work who is trying to be vegetarian but still eats fish and calls >his diet " vegetarian " . > >Tammy > > >amy lynn (veggie grrrl) [amy] >Saturday, July 27, 2002 9:16 AM > >[sFBAVeg] vegetarians who eat fish > > >FISH IS NOT A VEGETABLE. >xoxo amy > > > > >*Tell your friends to Be-A-Veg with SFBAVeg! To , send an e-mail to: - >*To share a message with the group: >*Manage your SFBAVeg list subscription: >-Switch to no-mail: -nomail >-Switch to daily digest: -digest >-Switch to individual messages: -normal >-Leave the group: - >*If you have questions about the list, please contact Tammy and Chris, list admins, at -owner >*/ > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2002 Report Share Posted July 30, 2002 > When we walk on > the ground, hundreds of insects we don't see get destroyed. I'm hoping that insects, or most insects, don't have the capacity to suffer like most vertebrates do. But even if they do, they aren't factory farmed (at least the ones I'm killing aren't) so they probably live pretty good lives until they get killed. Jack - " krsna_shaelaja " <krsna_shaelaja Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:03 PM [sFBAVeg] Vegetarians who eat fish > >>the vast majority of people who define themselves as vegetarians >> > >>actually eat animals such as chicken and fish. > > This is very interesting. It raises serious questions for > self-analysis as to why we're vegetarian. > > Are we vegetarian because we're animal lovers ? Well, > by just existing, we kill a lot animals. When we walk on > the ground, hundreds of insects we don't see get destroyed. > Ditto by driving cars and by using almost every modern > convenience I can think of, we destroy some animal > one way or the other, directly or indirectly. > > Are we vegetarian for purely religious or spiritual > reasons ? well, if that's so, by living and participating in > an economic system, directly or indirectly, which > disparages poor vs rich, being vegetarian, though > very good hardly makes a dent - at least not yet. > > Being a vegetarian for 27 years, the only reason I can > think that makes sense to me is that being a vegetarian > is drawing the line somewhere.It's a practical compromise > between my ideals and my limits as a person living > in the material world. > > My thoughts... > > > > > > *Tell your friends to Be-A-Veg with SFBAVeg! To , send an e-mail to: - > *To share a message with the group: > *Manage your SFBAVeg list subscription: > -Switch to no-mail: -nomail > -Switch to daily digest: -digest > -Switch to individual messages: -normal > -Leave the group: - > *If you have questions about the list, please contact Tammy and Chris, list admins, at -owner > */ > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Well, that reminds me of when Mr. Spock (a fictional vegan from another planet) in one Star Trek episode pointed out that even vegetarians kill on one level. It all depends on where you draw the line. Personally I try to save insects stuck in my home if I can, but if hoards of ants invade my room, then it¹s war! Yep, I kill ants on occasion... tony On 7/30/02 4:03 PM, " krsna_shaelaja " <krsna_shaelaja wrote: > This is very interesting. It raises serious questions for > self-analysis as to why we're vegetarian. > > Are we vegetarian because we're animal lovers ? Well, > by just existing, we kill a lot animals. When we walk on > the ground, hundreds of insects we don't see get destroyed. > Ditto by driving cars and by using almost every modern > convenience I can think of, we destroy some animal > one way or the other, directly or indirectly. > > Are we vegetarian for purely religious or spiritual > reasons ? well, if that's so, by living and participating in > an economic system, directly or indirectly, which > disparages poor vs rich, being vegetarian, though > very good hardly makes a dent - at least not yet. > > Being a vegetarian for 27 years, the only reason I can > think that makes sense to me is that being a vegetarian > is drawing the line somewhere.It's a practical compromise > between my ideals and my limits as a person living > in the material world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Hi, I have yet to introduce myself as I recently joined this list in hopes of meeting like minded folks and I am compelled to write on this issue. I am one of those people who is a vegetarian for ecological and resource issues. As this kind of veggie I feel that I can still stick strongly to my beliefs while on occasion dining on sustainably harvested wild fish. I also believe that there may be some good in purchasing organic free-range meats in the hopes of supporting farmers who are trying their best, in a hard market, to raise animals sustainably. I call myself a vegetarian because 99% of what I eat is animal free, but more importantly I identify with the issues that I think an ecological vegetarian believes in. I also call myself a vegetarian because when eating out, or at friends, it would be rare to encounter an organic meat product or alaska sustainable wild salmon (I have a good friend who works for the AK state conservation department and the Alaska fishery is the only in the world that is actually doing extremely great things to maintain a healthy population- and I am glad to pay more knowing that and help them keep up the good work) that I might partake of and it is a lot easier to say that I am vegetarian. I have a friend who eats mostly veggie- but also eats road kill. Is that not ok? I also know a vegan who drives an SUV and doesn't try to buy organic. To me the former is a much more informed and respectable person than the latter. I am constantly tortured by the consumer and wasteful society that we live in. I feel intense responsibility when someone I am with uses a plastic spoon and throws it out. I buy almost all organic foods, I try to buy only organic cotton clothing, I commute by train or bike, I strongly believe in consumer consiousness- to the degree that I angered some of the parents at the elemetary school where I teach. By signing up for this listserv I wanted to find support not antagonism for those who are trying to make conscientious consumer decisions. I need friends not people trying to alienate those who are not making the exact same decisions as others. I really just needed to get this off my chest. I hope I have not offended anyone. -g _______________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 i always save insects wherever i am & if i pass a dead animal on a street or sidewalk i pick it up & move it to a grassy location, find some bushes to put it in then i do a chant to send it on its way. it sounds perhaps bizarre, but it's a few minutes out of the day to give a fellow being a better resting place & a decent send off to the next world. about ants- just ask them politely to leave. send them that please leave vibe looking directly at them for several minutes and you watch, they'll veer off course & go elsewhere. if they prove themselves hellions, just get some baby powder and make a line where you don't want them to cross. they'll eventually get the message. on vipassana retreats one of the precepts we take is to not kill a living being. you often see people struggling, in the outlying areas away from cities,in silence with these huge carpenter ants invading areas. some people say insects can be suicidal. i don't know. i do know that for me, a gnat is really important, as important, ultimately as a mouse or horse. my 2 cents. On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Tony Martin wrote: > Well, that reminds me of when Mr. Spock (a fictional vegan from another > planet) in one Star Trek episode pointed out that even vegetarians kill on > one level. It all depends on where you draw the line. Personally I try to > save insects stuck in my home if I can, but if hoards of ants invade my > room, then it¹s war! Yep, I kill ants on occasion... > > > tony > > > On 7/30/02 4:03 PM, " krsna_shaelaja " <krsna_shaelaja wrote: > > > This is very interesting. It raises serious questions for > > self-analysis as to why we're vegetarian. > > > > Are we vegetarian because we're animal lovers ? Well, > > by just existing, we kill a lot animals. When we walk on > > the ground, hundreds of insects we don't see get destroyed. > > Ditto by driving cars and by using almost every modern > > convenience I can think of, we destroy some animal > > one way or the other, directly or indirectly. > > > > Are we vegetarian for purely religious or spiritual > > reasons ? well, if that's so, by living and participating in > > an economic system, directly or indirectly, which > > disparages poor vs rich, being vegetarian, though > > very good hardly makes a dent - at least not yet. > > > > Being a vegetarian for 27 years, the only reason I can > > think that makes sense to me is that being a vegetarian > > is drawing the line somewhere.It's a practical compromise > > between my ideals and my limits as a person living > > in the material world. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Whether we like it or not, here is the definition from a dictionary... veg·e·tar·i·an n somebody who does not eat meat or fish but instead eats vegetables, fruits, grains, seeds, and sometimes eggs and dairy products adj not eating or including meat and fish, but sometimes eating or including dairy products and eggs Encarta® World English Dictionary © 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 According to my old Funk & Wagnalls dictionary, vegetarianism is defined as " the theory or practice of eating only vegetables and fruits. " According to Tony's much newer Encarta dictionary a " veg·e·tar·i·an n [is] somebody who does not eat meat or fish but instead eats vegetables, fruits, grains, seeds, and sometimes eggs and dairy products. " Last I heard fish (including sustainable, wild Salmon); organic, free range beef; and road kill were not fruits, vegetables, grains, seeds, eggs, or dairy products. So why do so many folks who are not veggies call themselves veggies? I once had a lunch date with a very environmentally conscious woman who claimed to be a vegetarian. When we got to the restaurant, she ordered chicken. I had a salad. We discussed the matter over lunch and it turned out that she had simply cut red meat from her diet. I left the restaurant with the feeling that she called herself a veggie, not out of ignorance, but because she thought it was cool. I've met many people since then, some at animal rights demos, who called themselves veggies while still eating fish and/or foul, usually young folks. And each one gave me the same impression: they think it's cool to be a veggie. At my age I'm flattered to find that someone thinks I'm cool, but also disappointed by the misleading use of the " vegetarian " label. It's great that some non-veggies have an interest in vegetarianism, support vegetarian restaurants, and even join this group. I welcome then into our community. But, for one to eat fish and foul and call oneself a veggie is like praying to Allah five times a day and calling oneself a Christian, Hindu, or Jew. It's not that I care so much what people call themselves. The problem is that those who are not veggies but say they are mislead others about who they really are and about the way real vegetarians live their lives. And that makes it harder for the real veggies to reach out and educate others and to find acceptance for being who they are. Regardless of the reason for becoming a veggie, (and there are many, many compelling reasons), the definition remains the same. I would prefer that non-veggies label themselves accurately, perhaps as pre-veggies or semi-veggies. Those labels are neither misleading nor uncool. They're just honest. - " Gillian Ashenfelter " <ashenfelter Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:11 PM Re: [sFBAVeg] Vegetarians who eat fish > Hi, > I have yet to introduce myself as I recently joined this list in hopes of > meeting like minded folks and I am compelled to write on this issue. > > I am one of those people who is a vegetarian for ecological and resource > issues. As this kind of veggie I feel that I can still stick strongly to my > beliefs while on occasion dining on sustainably harvested wild fish. I also > believe that there may be some good in purchasing organic free-range meats > in the hopes of supporting farmers who are trying their best, in a hard > market, to raise animals sustainably. I call myself a vegetarian because 99% > of what I eat is animal free, but more importantly I identify with the > issues that I think an ecological vegetarian believes in. I also call myself > a vegetarian because when eating out, or at friends, it would be rare to > encounter an organic meat product or alaska sustainable wild salmon (I have > a good friend who works for the AK state conservation department and the > Alaska fishery is the only in the world that is actually doing extremely > great things to maintain a healthy population- and I am glad to pay more > knowing that and help them keep up the good work) that I might partake of > and it is a lot easier to say that I am vegetarian. I have a friend who eats > mostly veggie- but also eats road kill. Is that not ok? I also know a vegan > who drives an SUV and doesn't try to buy organic. To me the former is a much > more informed and respectable person than the latter. > I am constantly tortured by the consumer and wasteful society that we live > in. I feel intense responsibility when someone I am with uses a plastic > spoon and throws it out. I buy almost all organic foods, I try to buy only > organic cotton clothing, I commute by train or bike, I strongly believe in > consumer consiousness- to the degree that I angered some of the parents at > the elemetary school where I teach. By signing up for this listserv I wanted > to find support not antagonism for those who are trying to make > conscientious consumer decisions. I need friends not people trying to > alienate those who are not making the exact same decisions as others. > I really just needed to get this off my chest. I hope I have not offended > anyone. > -g > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Dear Gillian & other friends, Reading your post, Gillian, I was moved by your commitment to a minimally consumptive lifestyle and a desire to tread lightly on our planet. Many years ago, I read Jeremy Rifkin's book, " Biosphere Politics, " and found the chapter entitled " Homo Consumptor " especially compelling. Rifkin's thesis was that these days, we tend to self-identify more as consumers than as citizens - we are what we own. He pointed out that historically, the word " consumption " had carried negative associations (to consume meant to annihilate, to rape, to pillage). Only in recent times has the word (in mainstream circles) carried any kind of positive connotation. Rifkin went on to consider the amount of photosynthetic energy produced on the planet, and pointed out that humans consumed 30% of the photosynthetic energy being produced on the planet, leaving a mere 60% for the other billions of species. It's not by some mystical incomprehensible phenomenon that species are going extinct at the rate of one every twenty minutes. We are forcing this annihilation through our out-of-control population (in the twenty minutes that it takes for one species to go extinct, 3,500 new humans are added to the world's population) and our out-of-control consumption. It was a really beautiful turning point for me when I realized that being an animal rights activist had to include a serious re-evaluation of how we live our lives and the extent to which we take from the planet (and by extension, from other creatures and from other people). I think it's an evolving path. I take a vanpool to work, but I do drive a car (I feel I need it to do the Vegan Video Brigade & cooking classes, where there's just so, so much stuff being schlepped around - on the other hand, I remember being totally wowed one Meatout a few years ago when Nancy Loewen's partner *bicycled* all of the veggie burgers that we were going to be passing out on a trailer attached to his bike). I buy 90% organic, I try to keep my acquisitions to a minimum, and I certainly don't shop recreationally (!!!). I think the best animal rights activists have always had minimal consumption as a central part of their philosophy. In her keynote address at the recent Animal Rights 2002 conference, Ingrid Newkirk called for cultivating a sense of awe for other beings. She pointed out that it isn't their fault that there's a hole in the ozone layer, that species are going extinct, that the rainforests are vanishing, that the oceans are becoming sterilized. And yet, she added, we humans need cars and vcrs and tape recorders and computers (gulp!) and other *stuff* just to make it through the day. We take and take and take and take and gorge ourselves on food that nature did not intend us to eat and then we torture millions of animals in laboratories to try to find a magic bullet that will undo our years of excess. (<-- this was all paraphrasing; she said it much, much more eloquently). Mahatma Gandhi, a lacto-vegetarian who often commented that one of his failings was *not* being able to give up dairy, championed the rights of other animals and advised humanity to, " Live Simply that Others mights Simply Live. " In philosopher Peter Singer's latest book on how to lead an ethical life, his utilitarian analysis applied to the global poor necessitates a frugal existence (60 Minutes' recent profile of Peter Singer dramatized this part of Singer's philosophy - they took us to a railway track and asked us to imagine that we had recently purchased a very expensive automobile that we had coveted for many years. They asked us to imagine a scenario in which we saw a young child stranded on the tracks. A train was hurtling down the tracks and we only had enough time to save either the baby or our car. Singer points out that while most people in the affluent world say they would save the baby, through our actions we in reality choose to save our possessions. It's a sobering thought.) I think the philosophy of animal rights and where it would lead us in terms of ecological and consumptive issues is very, very clear. I hold myself up as an example of the failings that can keep us from being fully consistent. In the end, we do what we can but we remain honest about what we're doing. I think the points you identify in evaluating the relative merits of what people do, Gillian, are interesting, even if I don't agree with your conclusions. I think there are many vegans (people I know and people whom I'd like to emulate) who do tread very lightly on the planet. Many choose a life of voluntary poverty to avoid giving money to the government that would be used to conduct animal experiments or build weapons of mass destruction. I think these are ideals in the question of whether the life we're leading is one that embodies our values. I would find it very difficult to imagine including any kind of animal product in my diet and feeling that such a choice resonated with my values. I hear people talking about organic meat and dairy, assuming that these products are somehow more humane than conventionally produced meat and dairy. But I know that when the national organics standards were being drafted in the U.S. and one of the original defining points - there were about seven - was that organic animal products should come from animals raised with certain minimum humane considerations, Horizon Dairy was the entity that fought tooth and nail (and won) to have that platform eliminated from the definition. They argued that they wouldn't be able to produce " organic " dairy to the levels being demanded if they were required to treat the animals better. This past year there were front-page articles in The Washington Post ( " They Die Piece by Piece " ) documenting the flagrant violations of the Humane Slaughter Act. Contrary to the act, cows and pigs (the act doesn't cover chickens, turkeys, and fish, although these animals - it is recognized in scientific circles and not even debated - suffer and feel physical pain just as much as we humans do) are going through slaughter being skinned and dismembered while they are still fully conscious. Do animals raised on organic farms go through different slaughterhouses, where slaughter line speeds do not operate at a rate 4 to 7 times the maximum speed allowed in the EU? No. Do animals raised in so-called " free range " operations (where the legal definition in the U.S. is so flimsy as to mean very little in terms of true animal welfare) go through different slaughterhouses? No. I've heard people speak about organic and free-range meat, dairy, and eggs as somehow being better for the environment, and I think that the biggest reason these products are ecologically destructive has to do with pure biological inefficiency. It takes a certain number of pounds of feed to produce a pound of flesh - that the feed must first be produced in some manner, using up the earth's photosynthetic reserves and taking that energy from other beings - is why animal products at the core are ecologically poor choices. The other stuff - factory farming, runoff, lagoons, antibiotics, hormones - is just window-dressing. When a choice is made to consume any animal product, the heart of this choice is that many pounds of plant matter will be used to produce one pound of the animal matter. It's simple biology. Regarding road kill, I read an interesting article once in an eco-magazine in which the author talked about having made the choice to go veggie to step lightly on the planet, but how she then decided that she would eat road kill. She described some of her feasts and then described how one day, as she was pulling over to the side of the road after seeing a dead animal and as she was walking back to the animal corpse, she noticed that two large birds had beat her to the kill. She reflected on how she hadn't thought about how her choice to eat road kill was taking away food for wild animals, whose habitats we've destroyed and who should have first claim to road kill. I was reminded, reading the article, that a good friend had taught me not to eat wild berries when hiking because while we could bring our trail mix, the wild animals living in the areas we were hiking needed the berries and other vegetation for their survival. We humans had already forced these beings onto such tiny spaces and their existence was already made difficult enough. I think at its base, the problem of excessive consumption is one of assumed right. The average American assumes that they are within their rights to consume to the level that their income will permit. There's a sense of *entitlement.* I think this is woven in very strongly with how mainstream society views other animals. We assume a right, an entitlement to take the lives of these beings - really - only because we can. As much as we teach our children that might does not make right, this morally bankrupt philosophy is exactly what we employ when we sit down to a meal of animal products - we are saying that might makes right. I think this is problematic. I hope all of this doesn't sound preachy or holier-than-thou. I feel very fortunate to have stumbled upon animal rights, and to have embraced the philosophy as one of my core philosophies (into which the deep ecology & ecofeminist sensibilities which are also dear to me are interwoven). I know that as a society we are struggling very hard to understand the trajectory that we've taken in our relations with the other species. As we learn more about them, and try to understand more about who we think we are, I think we will all come around to seeing that the animal rights philosophy allows us to step outside our squirrel cage of separate ego and embrace a larger understanding of self that unlocks our capital C compassion and realizes the true meaning of peaceful coexistence. In peace, Alka Gillian Ashenfelter [ashenfelter] Tuesday, July 30, 2002 8:12 PM Re: [sFBAVeg] Vegetarians who eat fish Hi, I have yet to introduce myself as I recently joined this list in hopes of meeting like minded folks and I am compelled to write on this issue. I am one of those people who is a vegetarian for ecological and resource issues. As this kind of veggie I feel that I can still stick strongly to my beliefs while on occasion dining on sustainably harvested wild fish. I also believe that there may be some good in purchasing organic free-range meats in the hopes of supporting farmers who are trying their best, in a hard market, to raise animals sustainably. I call myself a vegetarian because 99% of what I eat is animal free, but more importantly I identify with the issues that I think an ecological vegetarian believes in. I also call myself a vegetarian because when eating out, or at friends, it would be rare to encounter an organic meat product or alaska sustainable wild salmon (I have a good friend who works for the AK state conservation department and the Alaska fishery is the only in the world that is actually doing extremely great things to maintain a healthy population- and I am glad to pay more knowing that and help them keep up the good work) that I might partake of and it is a lot easier to say that I am vegetarian. I have a friend who eats mostly veggie- but also eats road kill. Is that not ok? I also know a vegan who drives an SUV and doesn't try to buy organic. To me the former is a much more informed and respectable person than the latter. I am constantly tortured by the consumer and wasteful society that we live in. I feel intense responsibility when someone I am with uses a plastic spoon and throws it out. I buy almost all organic foods, I try to buy only organic cotton clothing, I commute by train or bike, I strongly believe in consumer consiousness- to the degree that I angered some of the parents at the elemetary school where I teach. By signing up for this listserv I wanted to find support not antagonism for those who are trying to make conscientious consumer decisions. I need friends not people trying to alienate those who are not making the exact same decisions as others. I really just needed to get this off my chest. I hope I have not offended anyone. -g _______________ Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com *Tell your friends to Be-A-Veg with SFBAVeg! To , send an e-mail to: - *To share a message with the group: *Manage your SFBAVeg list subscription: -Switch to no-mail: -nomail -Switch to daily digest: -digest -Switch to individual messages: -normal -Leave the group: - *If you have questions about the list, please contact Tammy and Chris, list admins, at -owner */ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2002 Report Share Posted August 1, 2002 Hi Gillian and all: your statement expressed exactly what I have been wanting to write to the group. I was feeling really uncomfortable and alienated with the continued discussions re: why folks who eat fish don't have the right to call themselves vegetarian. why do we have to point fingers at one another? can't we have the same compassion for each other that we have for animals? I applaud efforts to educate folks re: the effects fish have on the environment, but next time you encounter a " vegetarian " who eats fish-- please ask them why they eat fish before launching into tirades meant to make them feel guilty, because believe me, if they're anything like me, they probably make themselves feel guilty enough already. I became vegan when I was 17 and living in Texas. . . . I was vegan for 4 years, and did not thrive on a vegan diet, no matter what my convictions were (I became vegan for ecological reasons at first, but all the other reasons grew on me as I learned more about them). I have never owned a car, and for similar reasons made the decision then that I never wanted to (I'm 22 now, and am still car-free!). After I became vegan, I gained 15 lbs in the first year and a half (despite maintaining same levels of exercise). I always had low energy levels and was not the vibrant lively person I thought being vegan would make me be (the person who inspired me to become vegan was the most vibrant person I had ever met in my life, I credit her veganism for it). I took expensive liquid iron supplements for awhile that helped, but they were too expensive for me to take regularly. my body doesn't digest soy well at all (tofu, tempeh, all soy basically) and lentils are also problematic unfortunately (especially since I love Indian food so much!). I kept feeding myself stuff that was making me feel sick and sluggish for years because of my convictions, but I reached a breaking point a few months ago. I agree with (most) all the arguments that have been made on this list against eating fish (and have made them all before myself), but after major frustrations with persistent low energy levels (despite eating lots of veggie protein, and a generally healthy vegan diet)-- I started adding a little bit of fish to my diet ~ 4 months ago. I have huge issues with it personally, and it is difficult for me to do (my first impression of the taste was that it tasted like death in my mouth. it sounds awful to say, but I guess I have gotten used to it now, because now I don't taste death anymore. . .. it still doesn't taste great though). But it does make me feel better physically, and that is why I eat it. I am conscious about where I buy my fish (although not as informed as Gillian I realized when reading his message), and eat mostly salmon, occasionally some halibut. I personally think it is more effective to educate others re: the ecological devastation caused by the average American diet, and to support animal rights efforts both financially and/or with volunteer time than to be 100% vegetarian all of the time. For me personally, it is even more important for me to work to create more sustainable cities where people aren't forced to drive everywhere, and where community gardens abound. For work, I coordinate the Safe Routes to Schools Program of the Bicycle-Friendly Berkeley Coalition, which works in local elementary and middle schools to improve routes to school for children who walk and bike, and to create a culture that supports students walking and biking to school-- through the organization of parent-led walking and biking pools and events and incentive programs to encourage these modes of transport. In the 1960s, 60% of all children in the U.S. walked or biked to school-- today less than 10% do (Center for Disease Control figures). Studies have shown that ~25% of all morning traffic is school-traffic in some communities (acutally Marin County is the only area where I've seen detailed survey results); and this obviously has profound affects on our environment, quality of life, children's independence, etc. Intellectually and emotionally, I'd prefer to be vegan, but I've learned through difficult personal experiences that complete vegetarianism is not an option for me. I am a more effective advocate for the things I care about most when I'm physically healthy than when I'm sluggish and weak. So why do I still call myself vegetarian? Is it like one guy said because I think vegetarians are cool, and aspire for folks to think I'm cool by being a poser vegetarian? Nope. Sometimes I do say I'm vegetarian and then quickly follow up with that statement that I'm more of a pesca-vegetarian. But honestly I call myself a vegetarian because I strongly identify as one, despite my occasional intake of fish. People call themselves environmentalists and still drive cars everywhere (and eat lots of meat too), don't they? Labels are just labels, and mean different things to everyone. I could never imagine eating any other animal protein besides fish, so don't fear that soon I'll be ordering chicken burritos every day and call myself vegetarian still!) Almost all my friends are vegetarian or vegan. It has become an important part of my identity in the past 5 years, and it was hard enough for me to give up calling myself vegan. Besides fish I now eat yogurt made with non-hormone treated milk a few times a week. . . . .so I can't even call myself a " Seagan " which I would find amusing. Sometimes I'll meet someone new and am eating a meal with them, they'll notice that I only order vegan (99.5% of the time) when eating out. . . and they'll ask me if I'm vegan. I always answer no, but say that I have vegan tendencies, which often gets an amused reaction and sparks conversation about vegetarianism much more than when I was a militant vegan who would answer " of course I'm vegan " or something else that would sometimes make whomever I was with feel uncomfortable and not too excited to have me rake them over the coals for their diet I only buy yogurt from Brown Cow Farm, which I believe is located in Antioch, and which I fully intend to go visit sometime soon to see how they treat their cows. anyone want to join me for the trip?). Well, that's all I'm thinking for now. I've appreciated most all of the other discussions on this list, and learned a lot so far-- so thank you all for your contributions. Peace, Sarah -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2002 Report Share Posted August 1, 2002 One of the important reasons for having a standard definition is for clear communication. For example, person #1 who eats fish goes to a restaurant and educates them that vegetarians eat fish. Later that day, person #2 goes to the same restaurant and asks if a certain dish (which contains fish) is " vegetarian " . The restaurant, having been educated by person #1 says " yes, it is vegetarian " (even though it contains fish) Person #2, who wanted a vegetarian meal, now has a fish meal instead. It's because of situations like above that I think clear & consistent definitions are important... Tammy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2002 Report Share Posted August 1, 2002 I agree with Tammy, and it's not about " labels " it IS about definition. Whether you're vegan or " vegetarian " is no matter in this case, but in NO way does the word vegetarian apply to folks who eat ANY kind of animal flesh, therefore it is misleading and inappropriate for someone who does so to call themselves a vegetarian. There is no such thing and, personally, it bothers me to no end that people who eat animals (though they may align themselves with actual vegetarians for admirable reasons) would group themselves with people who truly are, i.e. real, committed (and I hope lifelong) vegetarians and vegans within this or any other veg community. Now, I personally also think that the most important (certainly not the only!) reason not to eat animals is to protect them from suffering, which they most certainly do very much, just as we do. And I absolutely do not believe that might makes right, that is that because we are bigger, stronger, whatever, it is okay for us to destroy other living beings just for food, particularly when it is not necessary to our survival. And the environmental and health reasons very much resonate with me, too - it is impossible to say I am vegan ONLY because of this or that. What can one say or do if not everyone comes to this lifestyle for the reasons that each of us believe in our hearts is righteous, other than continue to educate them - not hurt them - with truthful information? So we on this list will continue to share our knowledge with the less-informed, the misinformed, the misled or the righteously-challenged (couldn't think of the word I wanted there). I just hope more people will eventually stop excusing or justifying the harm done to our fellow (non-human) animals and make that one of their reasons, too. But that is, again, my personal wish and my two cents and you don't have to agree. No offense meant to anyone on this list. Thanks, Sue ----Original Message Follows---- " Tammy " <govegan RE: [sFBAVeg] Vegetarians who eat fish Wed, 31 Jul 2002 22:10:18 -0700 One of the important reasons for having a standard definition is for clear communication. For example, person #1 who eats fish goes to a restaurant and educates them that vegetarians eat fish. Later that day, person #2 goes to the same restaurant and asks if a certain dish (which contains fish) is " vegetarian " . The restaurant, having been educated by person #1 says " yes, it is vegetarian " (even though it contains fish) Person #2, who wanted a vegetarian meal, now has a fish meal instead. It's because of situations like above that I think clear & consistent definitions are important... Tammy *Tell your friends to Be-A-Veg with SFBAVeg! To , send an e-mail to: - *To share a message with the group: *Manage your SFBAVeg list subscription: -Switch to no-mail: -nomail -Switch to daily digest: -digest -Switch to individual messages: -normal -Leave the group: - *If you have questions about the list, please contact Tammy and Chris, list admins, at -owner */ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2002 Report Share Posted August 2, 2002 Found on another site today: The term " pescetarian " is probalby more appropriate to describe a person who has a " fish, but not beef/pork/bird/turtle/dog " type diet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.