Correct – the vegans I know are concerned with avoiding the exploitation and death of the animals at any point in the process,and would find a product that used animal flesh unsuitable, even if that flesh was filtered out of the end product. There are websites where one can look up details like isinglass or how wine is clarified, and although it entails more work, it’s not a bad thing to be more conscious of what you’re consuming.
But there may be squeamish vegetarians or semi-vegetarians out there at whom the Guinness blurb is aimed.
Thanks. This point comes up a lot, and at this point I’m testy about answering it. But yeah, a lot more plant farming is necessary to support livestock. We do what we can to reduce the harm we do.
Following a vegan diet doesn’t make that guy “vegan” any more than listening to hip-hop makes me “black.” Veganism is a philosophy with a specific founder, who coined the term, so it’s not really an ill-defined word.
Well, aside from the (admittedly very low) possibility of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (“mad cow”) in the gelatin. Since it’s a contagious, replicating agent of disease, I’m not sure there’s a safe minimum dose of BSE.
You can use purely vegetable based organic compost, it’s practical at least on a small scale. I’ve not come across anyone who only eats food produced that way, though I have met people who refuse to use animal manure or artificially produced fertilisers when growing their own vegetables, and still get a crop.
I think I know far too many mad hippies…
Oh, and veganism was originally formed as a purely dietary movement- the inclusion of non-food products was a later addition. You can be absolutely true to the original ‘vegan society’ definition of a vegan while living in a hollowed out dead elephant and using a giant tortoise as a footstool if the fancy should take you that way, so long as you don’t lick the walls.
I’m generally vegetarian, but recently decided to be more practical. For example, if a friend and I have 2 pizzas, one with pepperoni and one without, in the past I would have eaten the one without pepperoni and the friend would have eaten the pepperoni. Now I take the attitude that if we share both, no more meat is bought or eaten so it’s OK. Before that I didn’t want to eat any meat, even a little drop of grease from bacon accidentally dropped in a pan with my eggs would be too much. It’s illogical, but you get used to not eating meat, and the idea of any at all being in your food can put you off eating it. So maybe there’s that, for some people. I’d guess the comment about Guinness saying most is filtered out but there might still be traces was just poorly thought out, though.
It’s not true that following a vegan diet is not the same as being vegan and your comparison to listening to hip-hop and being black doesn’t really make sense.
Good insights so far. A few stand out for me. The idea that for some being vegan is not just a diet, but a state of mind/philosophy goes far to explain some of the things that to my eyes just look like nitpicking. Billfish’s comment comparing it to an almost religious level of zeal makes a lot of sense too - some vegans actually remind me a lot of people who keep Kosher kitchens. I once briefly shared a dorm kitchen with a girl who asked me not to use a certain knife for meat. I asked her if she was Jewish, and she replied that she was Vegan. It sort of through me for a loop, but there were plenty of other knives in the kitchen so it really wasn’t an issue. I don’t eat meat on Fridays in Lent, but you’d be hard-pressed to call me a devout Catholic. I just like doing it because it reminds me of growing up and it makes my mom happy. So I guess I can appreciate having irrational dietary guidelines for what others would consider trivial reasons.
Another point that makes sense is the fact that there are a million little things that might fall into a gray area (cochineal, honey, isinglass, etc), and it’s probably easier to just have a hard and fast rule (no animal products whatsoever) then devoting time to researching and weighing all the ethical considerations of each case.
I like Bufftabby’s suggestion that for some people there’s also a gross-out factor that makes them avoid these products. I never even thought of that, but it seems obvious now that someone mentioned it.
And of course, as many have posted for some people there’s also the smug factor. “Oh, you eat THAT? There’s 1.5 micrograms of butterfly tears in every serving. I guess you’re not as Vegan as I am…”
I also do not completely get what you mean here. Are you saying that there is some sort of point of perfect veganism that people are trying to achieve, like a dietary nirvana? They are following the diet, but they have not yet reached the point of being a vegan? Because I can understand it to the point that practice makes perfect.
Also, are you saying that hip hop is like an image or a fad that anyone of any background can follow, but that does not make them black ? Are you saying that some people follow veganism as a diet like a fad or for their image, but that the effort to live as a vegan philosophically and morally is a more genuine reality?
Being vegan is a defined philosophy of avoiding harm and exploitation of animals for food AND for everything else, clothing included. A vegan diet is certainly part of veganism but it ain’t the whole thing.
Bozuit saying it’s not true doesn’t make Bozuit right.
The word vegan was coined by a specific man under specific circumstances and grew into a movement:
regarding “more than just diet”:
I am not a member of that society, and veganism is a larger movement than just that one society. But that’s the one that coined the word, and they have a better claim to define it than some random person on the Internet.
So is Christianity, and look at the disparity there. Or if you prefer- followers of the Prophet. Or Communism- modern Communism has little to do with Marxism.
I was saying that following a vegan diet does make someone a vegan. To be more specific, definitions of the word vegan are normally about diet (although use of animal products may be included). Although the word “vegan” was invented by one person, he doesn’t get to decide the definition any more. To say someone is not vegan when they follow a vegan diet is therefore unreasonable.
I’m also saying that comparing being a vegan diet and veganism to listening to hip-hop and being black makes no sense because:
[ul]
[li]Being black is not a choice, unlike veganism.[/li][li]Following a vegan diet IS the main part of the definition of being vegan. In many definitions it is the only part.[/li][li]Listening to hip-hop is not in any (accepted) definition of the word black.[/li][/ul]
I get that it was intended as hyperbole but the underlying point was untrue, or at best not very clear.
I probably didn’t write very clearly or eloquently but if you look at the post I quoted and then my response it should make sense.
I think most of the OP’s question has been answered, or rather that most of the motivations for this have been mentioned, but I’d add the concept of “pollution” to “ick factor,” “religion”, and “health consciousness”. Desire to avoid pollution may be part of all three (or may not, depending on the person, of course). There is this common human notion that not just substance but also intangible qualities can be transferred by touch; this is how you get things like homeopathy and children’s cries of “Cooties!” and several of the world’s traditions of how magic is expected to work. The notion of pollution is also prominent in some religious traditions, including Hinduism and Judaism. I believe this idea is somehow easy or natural to us, whether or not we know better – it’s involved in some forms of OCD, for example, and the notion can’t always be dispelled just by thinking about it.
IOW, I think some vegans and vegetarians feel that animal products pollute their bodies or souls if they actually ingest them. Some also feel that the *touch *of animal products is polluting, but those probably aren’t the ones avoiding Guinness because of possible isinglass traces.