[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
Which would lead one to believe there were no lobsters in Babylonia or Jerusalem at the time. 
[/QUOTE]
Are monkfish kosher?
[QUOTE=Anne Neville]
Mark Bittman’s encyclopedic cookbook, How to Cook Everything, has chapters on fish, poultry, and meat. The meat chapter contains recipes for various bits of the bodies of mammals. The rabbit and hare recipes, though, are in the poultry chapter, because he says they cook very much like chicken (and says you can substitute chicken if you can’t get rabbit or hare or don’t want to cook with it). I have to take his word that it’s like chicken culinarily- I’ve never cooked or eaten rabbit or hare, and probably never will now that I keep kosher.
[/QUOTE]
He is correct. Along with reptile meat, Rabbit tastes and cooks very similar to poultry.
The distinction can be made along culinary lines that Meat refers to mammals while poultry, fish, and shellfish are kept separate due to the need for disparate cooking and preparation techniques.
Personally, to me meat means muscle tissue. So in that spirit anything vertebrate is “meat”. Anything invertebrate is “Shellfish” or called by it’s name. I generally separate fish as “fish” in usage as I bow out to the culinary definition.
So if I were to become vegetarian (HA!) for ethical reasons, and wanted to be nitpicky about not eating “meat” I would eliminate at minimum all vertebrates. You can make these type of distinctions along any arbitrary of course.
I was going to say that meat was muscle tissue, but then you reminded me about kidney and other organ meats.
Um… lemme get back to you.
[QUOTE=Acid Lamp]
He is correct. Along with reptile meat, Rabbit tastes and cooks very similar to poultry.
[/QUOTE]
Some reptile meat. Sea turtle, for example, is very dark and strong, about halfway between elk and bear.
What about scallops? The only part of the scallop we eat is the adductor muscle.
[QUOTE=Aestivalis]
Are monkfish kosher?
[/QUOTE]
Nope.
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
Some reptile meat. Sea turtle, for example, is very dark and strong, about halfway between elk and bear.What about scallops? The only part of the scallop we eat is the adductor muscle.
[/QUOTE]
hmm good point. It doesn’t have a spine though. :dubious:
I’ve never had sea turtle, only snapper, and softshell.
[QUOTE=Sunspace]
I was going to say that meat was muscle tissue, but then you reminded me about kidney and other organ meats.
Um… lemme get back to you.
[/QUOTE]
That’s why I say “body parts.”
[QUOTE=Anne Neville]
There’s a long Jewish tradition of stuff like kosher “bacon” bits.
[/QUOTE]
Name brand “Bac’n Bits” are 100% vegetarian. It’s awesome
[QUOTE=OpalCat]
Name brand “Bac’n Bits” are 100% vegetarian. It’s awesome
[/QUOTE]
What with Passover and all, she’s sold or hidden everything in the kitchen except the Matzoh. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=OpalCat]
Name brand “Bac’n Bits” are 100% vegetarian. It’s awesome
[/QUOTE]
I know. I need to get some more now that Passover has ended.
The problem is, Mr. Neville hid some of it, so I never did know where it was… We’re both too good at finding really secure hiding places, so secure that we can’t remember them later.
More for me, then.
That was a hidden benefit for me of going vegetarian–my dad could no longer force me to “try” fish every summer when I visited him. GROSS=fish.
[QUOTE=OpalCat]
GROSS=fish.
[/QUOTE]
We found some seasoning rub from some yuppie nuts & berries place. Maybe it was Wild Oats. Anyway, it has pepper and orange and stuff. If I completely cover salmon with it, I can eat it. Mrs. Plant likes salmon. Shalom bayit, and all that.
Someone on the board suggested an orange sauce. That helps hide the fish taste, too.
[QUOTE=carnivorousplant]
We found some seasoning rub from some yuppie nuts & berries place. Maybe it was Wild Oats. Anyway, it has pepper and orange and stuff. If I completely cover salmon with it, I can eat it. Mrs. Plant likes salmon. Shalom bayit, and all that.
Someone on the board suggested an orange sauce. That helps hide the fish taste, too.
[/QUOTE]
I have it on…good authority…that A1 sauce covers the fish flavor, too, so that you think you are eating a steak that has a fishy flavor to it! Not that I accidentally did that to a fish steak thinking it was a cow steak, or anything.
[QUOTE=Biggirl]
That’s kinda, well, ridiculous. According to that phrase, red herring isn’t fish.
[/QUOTE]
It isn’t, is it? Is there an actual fish called a red herring? The literary device is named after a use for kippers, but that’s their real name, not red herring.
[QUOTE=elfkin477]
It isn’t, is it? Is there an actual fish called a red herring? The literary device is named after a use for kippers, but that’s their real name, not red herring.
[/QUOTE]
Kippering is a method of fish preparation. Kippers are usually made from herring.
[QUOTE=Brown Eyed Girl]
Um, no, because it’s not animal flesh.
[/QUOTE]
That would be significant for those people called non-animal-fleshitarians. But the label is vegetarian. It’s derived from “vegetable,” and if we’re going to define words according to their origin, a vegetarian ought to eat only vegetable matter. Eggs ain’t vegetable matter.
When I ate fish but no warm-blooded animal, I often referred to myself as a vegetarian, for simplicity’s sake: it ensured that I wouldn’t get slipped some bacon on my pasta or anything. I figure it’s a continuum, anyway.
I agree that this question is similar to the “is a tomato a vegetable” question. Although I prefer to phrase it as, “is a zucchini a vegetable,” since that blows more people’s minds when they realize that botanically, the zucchini is a fruit. (I then follow it up by asking whether a strawberry is a fruit; it’s nearly caused fistfights before when I’ve explained why it isn’t a fruit).
It’s not a question of trying to get around dietary restrictions; it’s a recognition that there are some significant culinary, ethical, and cultural distinctions to be made between red meats and other kinds of meat.
Daniel
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
I agree that this question is similar to the “is a tomato a vegetable” question. Although I prefer to phrase it as, “is a zucchini a vegetable,” since that blows more people’s minds when they realize that botanically, the zucchini is a fruit. (I then follow it up by asking whether a strawberry is a fruit; it’s nearly caused fistfights before when I’ve explained why it isn’t a fruit).
[/QUOTE]
What’s weirdest about all of that is it’s always the tomato. People say “you know, a tomato is actually a fruit!”, as if it’s exceptional in this regard, when really it isn’t.
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
That would be significant for those people called non-animal-fleshitarians. But the label is vegetarian. It’s derived from “vegetable,” and if we’re going to define words according to their origin, a vegetarian ought to eat only vegetable matter. Eggs ain’t vegetable matter.
[/quote]
Or ,
[QUOTE=Wikipedia]
The first Vegetarian Society founded in 1847 claims to have “created the word vegetarian from the Latin ‘vegetus’ meaning ‘lively’ (which is how these early vegetarians claimed their diet made them feel) …”
[/QUOTE]
This may or may not be true. You can argue all you want with how a word should be defined, but usage obviously varies. A more accurate term for a person that restricts himself to a plant-based diet might be herbivarian. A bit more succinct than non-animal-fleshitarian, don’t you think?
There are already more distinctive terms to identify vegetarians who exclude milk and eggs from their diets: lacto-vegetarian and ovo-vegetarian, respectively. Pescatarians or pesco-vegetarians include fish in an otherwise vegetarian diet. Flexitarians (an even more recent term) are mainly vegetarians that on rare occasions eat animal flesh.
What you are describing is a vegan, which is still a vegetarian, but one that doesn’t include any animal by-products in their diet.
As for vegetarian, consider the term a distinction of the primary means of nutrition. The word in no way limits it to vegetable only, otherwise vegetarians wouldn’t eat fruit. Ok, so ‘vegetable’ in the culinary sense includes fruit. They wouldn’t eat mushrooms (a fungus) either. Legumes? Not a vegetable in the culinary sense, although they are plant-based. While chocolate may be derived from a plant, it is so processed nobody is ever going to refer to it as a vegetable in any sense. The problem with using ‘vegetable’ as the defining word behind vegetarianism is that it is a culinary term and not all the things vegetarians eat fall in that category. And there are no ‘vegetables’ in botany.
There are also health distinctions. Some people are fish-eating vegetarians because fish have a nutritional value that is not easily replicated in the plant-only based diet.
[QUOTE=Ferret Herder]
Those haven’t been fertilized. As I’ve seen on this board before, it’s more like a “hen period” than an embryo. An egg also does not require the death of an animal for its production. Besides, not all vegetarians eat eggs anyway.
[/QUOTE]
As an omnivore, I’ve always like eggs. Until I read the words “hen period.” :eek:
This thread isn’t getting the job done. Igonorance is being left unfought.