Some pescatarians will also identify as vegetarians, even though they know it’s not strictly accurate, simply because it’s simpler. Most people don’t know the term “pescatarian”, and “no land animals but fish is OK” is wordy. A vegetarian meal, however, will be perfectly acceptable to a pescatarian, so by saying “I’m a vegetarian”, they’ll get something they’ll eat.
At the risk of a hijack, she gave up wearing leather and watching rodeos for health reasons?
I assume you mean she went on a vegan diet. There’s more to veganism than diet, despite massive confusion on the issue.
Eggs certainly aren’t common in Indian cuisine, but almost all the Indian vegetarians in my family (which, given that my family is Indian, is equivalent to “almost all the vegetarians in my family”) eat eggs.
This may be true. But that’s not how the English language works.
Oh, right. I remember that Official Handbook they issue when you become vegan. More Vegan Than Thou, wasn’t it?
I think it was a sequel to the Goth Handbook,* My Black is Blacker Than Your Black…*
From what I’ve seen and read, that’s the biggest distinction between vegans and vegetarians. I’d say that most vegetarians do it for health or other dietary reasons and most vegans do it for moral reasons.
I thought life was much simpler when vegetarians ate plants, carnivores ate animals, and omnivores ate both. I know languages drift and all that, but when did it become “vegetarian” to eat every kind of meat except cows?
I want to low-jack this thread and get it back on course a little bit. I’m trying to find information on whether or not Thai restaurants in the US regularly use shrimp paste in their curries or not.
This is not very definitive, but it comes from a wiki about the city of Davis, CA detailing vegetarian options in the city:
The implication seems to be that most Thai places either use different curries for their vegetarian dishes, or else they simply don’t inform the customers and give them shrimp paste or fish sauce anyway. Thoughts?
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:46, topic:610025”]
I know languages drift and all that, but when did it become “vegetarian” to eat every kind of meat except cows?
[/QUOTE]
It’s not, obviously. I think that if you call yourself a vegetarian, most people will expect that you, as a minimum, will eat no meat (including fish and seafood), and that if you do, you’re just using the word incorrectly. That seems reasonable to me, at least.
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:46, topic:610025”]
I thought life was much simpler when vegetarians ate plants, carnivores ate animals, and omnivores ate both. I know languages drift and all that, but when did it become “vegetarian” to eat every kind of meat except cows?
[/QUOTE]
It didn’t become “vegetarian” that’s how it started. Remember, back then we were a real “meat and potatoes’ kind of people, some dudes eating mostly veggies and some fish were rather odd. “Meat” was sliced mammal, not fish. Meatless days included fish, giving meat up for Lent did not normally include giving up fish and in fact it was argued that beaver (yeah, I know) was 'fish” not “meat”. Meat was not fish, fish was not meat. Thus if one ate only fish, one did not eat meat. Got it?
For example Hitler was considered a “vegetarian” at that time, but today we’d consider him a pescatarian.
Today yes. But even now, some factions are pushing hard for "that if you call yourself a vegetarian, most people will expect that you, as a minimum, will eat no animal products."
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:46, topic:610025”]
From what I’ve seen and read, that’s the biggest distinction between vegans and vegetarians. I’d say that most vegetarians do it for health or other dietary reasons and most vegans do it for moral reasons.
[/QUOTE]
Well, as I said above, this is different than my experience. I can honestly say that every single vegetarian (non-vegan) I know does it for moral or religious reasons. I honestly can’t think of one that does it for health or dietary reasons.
Some factions can’t really decide what most people expect, though. Language is funny that way.
Concerning Thai food, when I visited Thailand, my impression was certainly that Thais will happily eat anything that couldn’t run or swim away fast enough. Come to think of it, I’m a bit puzzled as to why Buddhist cultures, like Thailand, don’t have more dietary restrictions. If you really believe in samsara and reincarnation, you could potentially be reborn as an animal, if your karma is out of whack. That cow you’re eating could have been your reincarnated grandmother! Doesn’t seem to bother anyone, though. Anyway, I guess that’s one for the experts on religion.
Mahayana Buddhism is vegetarian (Theravada Buddhism, which is practiced in Thailand, isn’t). But even among Mahayana Buddhists, that teaching isn’t always strictly followed, and when it is, it’s mostly just monks who do.
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:46, topic:610025”]
From what I’ve seen and read, that’s the biggest distinction between vegans and vegetarians. I’d say that most vegetarians do it for health or other dietary reasons and most vegans do it for moral reasons.
I thought life was much simpler when vegetarians ate plants, carnivores ate animals, and omnivores ate both. I know languages drift and all that, but when did it become “vegetarian” to eat every kind of meat except cows?
[/QUOTE]
I’m a vegetarian who is a vegetarian for ethical reasons. All the vegetarians I know make that choice for ethical reasons, plus a few for religious reasons.
I don’t think vegetarian ever meant eating every kind of meat except cows.
I know that historically all animals of the seas were considered ‘non meat’ for the medieval ‘no fish on Wednesdays, Saturdays, Fridays and most holy days’ thing, and that included a lot of things we’d consider meat, like sea-birds and otters, but pigs? Deer? Sheep? Rabbits?
Some cultures eschew cow-meat, but they don’t call themselves vegetarian for that reason.
Was he really considered a vegetarian at the time, though? I mean, there was nothing about his diet that, even then, could be considered vegetarian. He ate tons of meat. I’ve seen a menu of the foods he ate in the bunker - I’m trying to find it again - and every meal had meat, red meat included, not just fish. He ate sausage at practically every meal. Even at the time, eating meat that often wouldn’t have been considered vegetarian.
I wonder where that myth came from?
Actually, vegetarians don’t eat fish. A lot of people confuse this because Catholics don’t eat red meat on fridays, but are allowed fish instead. So people thinks vegetarian means red meat no, fish yes, which isn’t the case for real vegetarians.
And egg and milk are not meat under usual definitions.
I guess because people who only do it for health reasons and nothing else will usually say “I’m on a special diet and need the vegetarian meal/ no meat”.
Similar to Hitler, who was put on a meatless diet for his stomach by his doctor, but had no moral problems with meat-eating.
Hitler had later in life problems with upset stomach and was told by his doctor to eat less meat. And there was the Catholic tradition of no meat on Fridays, although Hitler wobbled on the whole Catholic issue of course*.
I think it came from the “Hitler ate sugar!” way of demonizing certain groups of people, in this case, vegetarians.
- On the one hand, Hitler appeased the two major religions in Germany, Catholicism and Protestants, with the concordat treaties and allowing them to carry on their religion.
On the other hand, he also tried to push for a revival of the (mythical) true Germanic religion and turn away people from that “Jewish, softie” religion (being nice to people didn’t fit with Nazi ideology).
That’s why saying “Hitler was a Christian/ Atheist/ GermanicReligion-ist” is impossible to prove, because you can find quotes and actions proving each case and disproving each case.
Would it be too much of a hijack for me to ask why this is? I’m as open-minded as the next fellow, but i’ve never heard of any taxonomy that considers the genus allium to be meat.
I’ve come across vegetarians who eat chicken. To me, like those who eat fish, they are not vegeterians. Just fussy eaters with pretentions…
I’ve never understood the Buddhist (some branches) need to be vegetarian, to be honest. So you might be eating your reincarnated grandmother…so? If her karma lead her to be a chicken then shouldn’t she experience the life and death of a chicken? Including the “being hunted and eaten” part inherent in being born as a prey animal? Seems like *not *eating her is cheating her out of her opportunity to work off some of that karma…