The funniest are the people that try and figure out why my SO doesn’t eat beef. It has nothing to do with religion, culture or anything else…he just doesn’t like beef. They usually start in with “what about chicken, or fish, or lamb or insert other meat product here?” It’s really odd, people don’t seem to get that he just doesn’t like beef.
People usually ask these questions anyway! At my old job, our hiring practices were quite lax, so I used to deal with dimwitted people all the time. I would try to not tell them I was vegetarian just to avoid the long IQ-draining conversation. (Note: I am not exaggerating this conversation.)
“Do you want some Li’l Smokies?”
“No, thanks.”
“But they’re really good!”
“That’s ok.”
“No really, they are soooo good!”
“No thank you.”
“But so-and-so made them, aren’t you going to at least try them?”
“I’m vegetarian.”
“Oh… [long pause] So, you don’t eat any meat?”
“That’s right.”
“No meat at all?”
“Nope.”
“Never?”
“Never.”
“Don’t you miss it?”
“Not really.”
“What about fish?”
“No fish.”
“Chicken?”
“No.”
“Beef?”
“No.”
“Ham?”
“No.”
“Not even bacon?”
“…No.”
Yes, seriously, this person started asking about fish but then worked their way up to pork and beef.
(quote snipped for brevity)
Oh, I totally understand that. I just find it amusing because he is not a vegetarian, far from it…he just doesn’t like beef. For whatever reason people find that very strange.
Why? You can label yourself anything you want. They can label themselves anything they want. It just shows that labelling proves nothing.
I’m not trying to start a fight over this ('cause in fact I generally agree with this), but I thought of something today that made me think about this again.
All other food choice styles we define by what they do eat, not what they don’t: carnivores do eat meat. Herbivores do eat plants, Omnivores do eat practically “everything”, or at least we can. Fruitarians eat fruit, breatharians are delusional, so their heads are full of air, if not their bellies!
So why is “vegetarian” the only one defined by what they don’t eat? That doesn’t make sense. A “vegetarian” is one who eats vegetables (or plant matter), and “octo-lavo vegetarian” eats milk, eggs and plant matter. So of course a “pesco-vegetarian” eats fish and plant matter. What they don’t eat shouldn’t enter into it, logically. They aren’t “omnivores”, because they won’t eat large categories of what their culture deems edible.
I don’t follow you. Vegetarians are defined by what they DO eat-- vegetable matter. Lacto-ovo DO eat milk and eggs, in addition to vegetables. Pescatarians DO eat fish. What is this about defining by what they DON’T eat? They don’t eat animal’s bodies. It’s as simple as that.
It was in response to Otto’s assertion that “pesco-vegetarian” is horseshit because vegetarians, by definition, do **not **eat meat. I’m saying that, by definition, they DO eat vegetation, but that can be modified any way the individual cares to with other descriptive words.
WhyNot, I see what you’re saying, and it makes sense in terms of definition of what you choose to eat or not. And absolute sense in terms of those who choose dietary restrictions of flesh eating for purely health reasons, as opposed to ethical concerns over killing any creature. This could be by opposition to the cruel practices of modern technique of raising animals, or an opposition to eating another creature absolutely.
For Otto and Rubystreak, the offense is that vegetarian means just that: one who eats only vegetables, and “Pescatarian” serves fine for those who eat fish. They don’t deserve the Veg distinction, because a Fish is still a life taken. Ovo-Lacto isn’t in the same league, because no distinct life is taken by eating eggs or milk.
Does this help with the distinctions? I’ll add, I’m a decades ovo-lacto vegetarian, for ethical reasons,(ovos less and less often), and used to back-in-the-day when it was not so accepted, and had to explain it over and over and over…
As I get older, I get looser about distinctions. Do the best you can, think a good bit about where your food comes from, how lucky you are to have it, try to avoid another’s suffering, and be gracious.
I wasn’t aware plants weren’t alive.
Here we go… :rolleyes:
Well, if “a life taken” is the criterion between a vegetarian and non-vegetarian, then by that standard, vegetarians live on inorganic matter.
If elelle modifies the statement to “an animal life taken”, fine. And be careful about rolling your eyes. They might fall out and someone’ll eat 'em.
And besides, if we’re going to label people by what they DO eat, why is “pesco-vegetarian” inaccurate?
I’m a likotarian, in that I eat what I like.
As far as I’m concerned, pescotarian and pesco-vegetarian are okay terms for fish eaters.
The problem arises when they call themselves vegetarians and the real vegetarians do things like… go to weddings after making it known they’re veg and being assured their food will be meat-free, and getting a lovely plate of fish. (which usually goes to waste and ends up being a fish killed for no reason, which just sucks.) Or asking a waiter if the salad is meatless only to find when you get it that there are nasty little anchovies in it. And then, once you learn to specify, everyone suddenly gets that fish=meat, so everyone’s insulted or confused when you say “no meat, no fish”
It’s not the end of the world, but it certainly does create some hassle for real vegetarians. So it isn’t that we (or I, at least) care what people call themselves just because of MYOB problems. It does actually have an effect.
Or as a Buddhist would say, a sentient life.
You’re being a disingenuous nitpicker. I think you know full well what ellele meant and you’re doing that thing that many people said they don’t like. Finding fault, pointing out flaws in people’s belief system. I hardly think precision in language is the goal of your post.
But you know what she meant. Why be so uptight about it? My eyes are practically permanently rolled back on this issue. I’m really tired, after 15 years, of the same digs, the same questions, the same snotty attitude. Since this is not the Pit, I’ll just use this. :rolleyes:
Ignoring the sidetrack the thread has taken, can I just say, this thread has opened my eyes, too. I know that I do NOT ask in an offensive way at all “why are you a vegetarian”? My questioning is generally like this
“I’m a vegetarian.”
“Oh. Can I ask why?”
“Because ________.”
“Oh. Cool. Can you find something to eat at the restaraunt we’re going to?”
End of story.
But it is rude to ask at all, isn’t it? It makes it seem like I’m calling attention to something different about them. And I hereby apologize to Spatial Rift 47, who was the last one I asked, and anyone else I’ve asked. And I’ll stop asking in the future.
It is in most social situations. It’d be like me asking you why you are a Hindu. It’s just a really personal question that is not necessary to ask before asking if a person can eat at a restaurant.
No, I’m asking that you be consistent. Why is it okay to say a person who eats fish cannot claim to be a “pesco-vegetarian” (in the interest of accuracy) and not “a vegetarian diet cannot claim to be free of the taking of life” (in the interest of accuracy)? The labels are pretty arbitrary but the fact that plants are alive (well, until someone picks and eats them) surely is not. I do know what elelle meant, but that doesn’t insulate him/her from having an inaccuracy in what he/she said pointed out.
And you’re splashing your drama-queen all over me. I don’t care and am certainly not “uptight” about what foods you eat. YOU came after ME, eyes-a-rolling, when I pointed out a minor flaw in elelle’s statement. If after 15 years your patience has worn that thin, you should probably stay out vegetarianism-related threads (or at least take a break from this one) because they get you all worked up.
And in case you come back with more along these lines, I’d like to point out that at no time have I ever asked a vegetarian to justify his or her dietary choices. That would be rude.
I don’t think I’ve been inconsistent.
Wow, I’ve only said it about 50 times. Apparently making your point is more important than reading the thread.
Because when pick a plant, it’s not referred to or discussed as “taking a life.” And harvesting vegetables often does not require killing the plant. Eating meat ALWAYS does.
So when you pick an apple, you think something dies? Really?
Does it make you feel good, that you pointed it out?
And again, because this isn’t the Pit, I won’t characterize what YOU are splashing all over.
You’re nitpicking people and being disingenuous. Why do that if you don’t care?
Why did you feel the need to point it out? Was it not clear what she meant? Why did you need to call her to task on it? Are you a crusader for plants’ rights?
Please don’t characterize me as “worked up.” “Annoyed by you” would do fine. You are falling into the behaviors already described here as rude. I don’t understand why you’re doing it, except to make those little self-righteous points about how vegetarians who are so because they respect lifee are hypocrites, because plants are alive too, OMG!!!111!!1! It’s tired and old.
Passive-aggressively calling people’s beliefs hypocritical is also rude, you know.
Hey, you chose to jump into a trivial quibble I had with elelle. The “you” in my statement is a generic one, referring to someone who feels as elelle does:
If you don’t agree with elelle, than what was the point of your involvement except to self-righteously overreact?
Well, how convenient.
It’s true one can pick apples and not kill the tree, but large-scale farming and harvesting typically involves combines and threshers and whatnot, chewing across the fields, leaving devastation in their wake. Farmers routinely buy seed because all the harvested plants are dead and they have to start over.
Apples would be analogous to eating eggs and milk, I gather.
Wait, are you asking me to justify why I like to correct inaccuracies? How rude! 
The fact you feel (or at least have expressed twice) that you have to hold yourself back is an even better sign that you should take a break from this thread. Or start a cathartic Pit thread, for that matter. No point giving yourself an ulcer.
Plants being alive isn’t a nitpick - it’s a fact. I care about accuracy.
How rude.
I never accused anyone of hypocrisy (THAT’S tired and old). I implied elelle was guilty of inaccuracy and inconsistency. And I like eating plants, with Caesar dressing and bacon bits (though simulated soy bits will do).
You’re projecting a motive onto me, I assume drawn from the conflicts you claim to have suffered for the last 15 years. Do you think I want you to eat meat? Why would I care about that? I don’t even know you.