Fair enough, ML. You are probably correct in that people assume if you don’t eat steak or hamburgers that you are a veggie, but I also knew dozens of college girls who liked to call themselves veggie but still ate fish/chicken.
In ANY case, I am a meat eating motherfucker. Pigs, cows, chicken, fish, kangaroos, horses, dalmations, siamese cats, parrots, and some childen > 75 pounds.
So none of the confusion falls on me, either! 
They get too tough and gamey when they’re over 75 pounds.
The fat ones who play Nintendo all day are pretty tasty at 100 pounds and beyond.
Gross.
Kabbes, I’m very sorry you took offense, but I do feel strongly about what I said. I will kindly direct you to this thread where the topic was thrashed out quite thoroughly. I am linking you to the second page of the thread because that’s when things got really rolling.
I have great respect for many people who restrict their diets to fish and/or chicken. I just don’t think they are “vegetarian”. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, there ARE a lot of “vegetarian wannabes” who want to eat fish and chicken, want to be called vegetarian, and well, they’re not. At least not to me, and as you will see from that thread I cited, not to a lot of other people either.
I assure you that I feel just as strongly about this as you and Mrs. Kabbes do. We may have to agree to disagree. I am guessing that perhaps you are not from the USA? Perhaps this is why we disagree with this. I guess the sentiment about this issue may vary, depending on geographical location.
kabbes
I completely overlooked your reply to me earlier today. Apologies if it seemed I was ignoring you (Not that I’m sure you’d care…)
I can certainly understand that there are invariably going to be yahoos who will not know or care the difference between vegetarian, vegan, and viagra. I also don’t doubt that it is also easier in many situations to call yourself vegetarian. However, that doesn’t make it true. And (me being fully omnivorous, this should be obvious) I am not in a position to “look down on you”, and even if I was, I wouldn’t. Your diet is your choice, but you and your wife are not vegetarian. Not an insult, it’s just a fact. The point you make that it is easier to do so in some situations doesn’t refute anything that yosemitebabe said in her post, it just is your excuse for doing what she was referring to. Let me say that I don’t doubt you or your wife’s (For some reason, this was a surprise to me…I thought you were a female ::shrug:: ) convictions concerning diet or ethics therein.
I just didn’t, and truthfully, still don’t understand why her post set you off.
Thank you mouthbreather, for your articulate post.
Kabbes, I hope I can make it clear, I pass no judgment on people who restrict their meat intake to fish only - sounds great to me. Sounds really healthy, sounds great for a lot of reasons. And I see you are in the UK, so I won’t comment on how things are over there. But in the USA, it is not commonly accepted among vegetarians to believe fish is part of vegetarianism. Don’t blame me, blame Vegetarian Times. (It was my primary influence when I was making the transition to vegetarianism, BTW.) I have never seen a recipe for fish in it, and it definitely does not advocate fish as part of a vegetarian diet.
And while I can certainly sympathize with the yahoos who want to argue with your wife about what she can eat, etc. etc., it does not change my position about why I feel that calling yourself a vegetarian (while still eating fish) “muddies” the definition for the rest of us. I do not, however, feel in ANY way that your wife is a “wannabe”. She is someone who has obviously put great thought into her diet, and has chosen it for her reasons, and I respect that. I would never dream of giving her any disrespect because she eats fish - whatever she wants to eat is fine by me.
The “wannabes” (and I occasionally encounter them, or hear about them) are people who are lukewarm about vegetarianism, take it on as a fad, and/or who want to “look” like vegetarians without having to put themselves out too much. So, instead of getting the Big Mac at McDonalds, they’ll get the chicken burger. That sort of thing. I don’t think your wife falls into that category at all.
Nah, go to Burger King. Whoppers are IMPROVED by leaving out the meat. And most stores will charge you less.
Girlfriend, not wife. Don’t let her hear you call her that - you’ll give her a heart attack.
Ok, okay. Sorry - maybe I did go off a bit there. What can I say? I’ll accept any number of gratuitous insults to my person, but if I hear anyone slight her, even tangentially, I tend to see, if not red, then at least a shade of pale pink.
I think we should all be a little careful just who we look down on though - we’re all at least partial hypocites when it comes to something. Those “veggie wannabes” who can’t quite give up chicken, for example - at least they’ve gone some way towards your ethical ideal. Why do they deserve more scorn than a meat-eater?
And who cares what label you ascribe to it? As many people are so fond of pointing out on this board, language is flexible. If a word is commonly used to define something, the definition will eventually reflect that common usage. Is it really so hard simply to say that you’re a strict vegetarian, for example?
But I’ll retract my harsh tone - that was uncalled for in retrospect. Sorry.
pan
And let’s not forget the “vegetarian temps”… people who think it’d really stir up a reaction to become a vegetarian, so they can yell and scream about something… and they ditch meat for a week, but eventually say “Fuck it” and immediately begin scarfing the beef.
Not to say that there’re a lot of people like this, but I have personally known two girls who’ve done this.
And remember kids, cows and scarves don’t mix!
Unless they have a paisley pattern. Then they look quite fetching, when draped around the neck in a devil-may-care fashion.
pan
No no, not scorn - not necessarily. I reserve “scorn” for people who insist they are something they are not, even though they should know better. I don’t have a problem with a fish/chicken eater who says “I’m usually vegetarian” or “I eat vegetarian a lot” or something like that. People choose their comfort level, and that’s that. I totally respect that. And after all - I’m ovo-lacto - so I’m not as “strict” as a vegan. I respect vegans, but I don’t have the desire to be one. But I hope vegans still respect the effort I am making, and the effort your girlfriend is making, and so on. We all can respect each others’ efforts. I am totally for that.
But there is sometimes a certain inconsistency among some “vegetarians” that pisses me off. They make a big production about their vegetarianism, make sure everyone knows, but then are really inconsistent about it. For instance, let’s say I was a “wannabe” vegan. So, I make a big deal to everyone that I’m vegan, blah blah blah. But now and then I eat some ice cream. I’ll go on cheese binges. But if anyone dares say anything or question me, I’ll still insist I’m vegan, and probably get huffy about it. That’s one example of the behavior of a “wannabe”. That kind of behavior causes so much trouble, so much confusion. If I were to behave like that, I wouldn’t blame the “real” vegans for getting royally pissed at me. I’m giving out misinformation, and because I’m so “out there” about my vegetarianism, more people hear my crap. I’m messing things up for the strict vegans, who will have to spend time trying to correct the bad information I’ve spewed out. That’s what pisses me off. I feel sympathy for the poor fish or chicken eater who is beaten into submission and finally mutters “Yeah, vegetarian, whatever” in order to get everyone to shut up at the dinner table.
Oh, and I see in preview that SPOOFE has described another type of “wannabe”. Excellent example, SPOOFE, thanks.
It may come to that. But I am not a big fan of flexible language, when it comes to something like this. I get sick of people asking me if I can eat fish or chicken. I get sick of people insisting I can eat fish or chicken. I don’t see any need for this. I think people are being misinformed. I don’t like seeing certain definitions blurred. I don’t want to be called a vegan, because I am not a vegan. I don’t want a person who eats fish or chicken to be called vegetarian, because they are not. Nothing wrong with being ovo-lacto, or eating fish or chicken, but I just like the definitions to stay clear. Yes, I know I’m being anal and picky, but I do feel strongly about it.
Oh, no problem. Apology accepted. I’m sorry you thought I was calling your girlfriend a “wannabe”. Glad we got it cleared up.