Defining "Vegan/Vegetarian"?

[VictorVegan]

This will probably win the award for newbiest question in the history of the forum, but that's alright, because I'm a newb to the lifestyle and I can get away with asking it (hopefully without offending anyone).

 

I'm in the process of leaning away from an omnivorous diet, and I'm wondering what are the definitions or "degrees" of vegetarianism and veganism? It seems like different places I look at define the sub-categories differently...

 

Lacto-ovo vegetarian: Allows dairy products (milk, cheese, etc.) and eggs. No animal meat (beef, poultry, pork, fish, etc.)

 

Lacto vegetarian: Allows dairy products. No eggs. No animal meat.

 

Vegan: No dairy products. No eggs. No animal meat. No foods from an animal source (honey, butter, etc.)

 

Am I misunderstanding anything? Are there other "styles"?

 

As a vegan, am I correct in thinking you'd also generally stay away from nutritional supplements that come in gelatin capsules (like a multi-vitamin)?

[Zack]

 

As a vegan, am I correct in thinking you'd also generally stay away from nutritional supplements that come in gelatin capsules (like a multi-vitamin)?

 

Yeah.

 

 

Also, I guess there is Ovo Vegetarian- Eggs only, but I don't see the need for specification.

[HCPinGviini]

And you should also realise that being vegan is more than just the food you eat. It's what you wear (no animal products like leather, silk and wool) and that you shouldn't use animal tested products - or at least avoid them, whenever it's possible.

 

A strick vegetarian is a good term for someone, who's diet is vegan.

[Nathan Nearing]

And you should also realise that being vegan is more than just the food you eat.

 

Here's where people tend to disagree. At least, I do. Being Vegan IS dietary.

 

My diet is Vegan, but I don't go out of my way to make sure my life is 100% vegan in regards to the products I use. Does that make me "not vegan"? Of course not. Not that it isn't important, but it shouldn't be a weighing factor in whether a person can use the term or not. Donald Watson and Brendan Brazier (just to mention two) both defined veganism as a dietary one, not one that includes activism and/or other products/clothing.

[HCPinGviini]

And you should also realise that being vegan is more than just the food you eat.

 

Here's where people tend to disagree. At least, I do. Being Vegan IS dietary.

Would a vegan wear a fur coat? Not. Or go to watch a bull fight? No.

 

You said it yourself, you're a dietary vegan, so by that you yourself make it seem like you do something that a vegan wouldn't do. And as a vegan I could never picture myself wearing a fur coat, leather shoes or anything alike, 'cause in my world all animals are equal and as I couldn't picture myself wearing my friends skin on me as a coat, I couldn't picture myself with a skin of fox's or mink's either.

 

By making veganism as a dietary thing, you're giving animals different values. There are no guinea pigs, who want or deserve their skin to be burnt so that humans could explore their physical reactions or would there be any dogs, that would want to be trapped in a box while toxic smoke of a cigarette going inside their lungs as a way to test the effects of smoking. Or would any other animal want to have this kind of a treatment. And neither do I want this kind on experiments to be done to them.

 

I'm not an activist, but I still think that the idea about veganism is far more than what you think it is.

[VictorVegan]

My diet is Vegan, but I don't go out of my way to make sure my life is 100% vegan in regards to the products I use. Does that make me "not vegan"? Of course not.

I think a lot of this also ties in to the reasons behind why someone adopts the lifestyle. If it's due to a concern for the possible mistreatment of animals, as opposed to "just for health", then I can understand avoiding certain clothing and other products.

 

Like HCP mentioned, before I looked into it further, I thought the difference between a "strict vegetarian" and a vegan was that the term "vegan" implied more than just food choices.

 

Nathan, as a vegan, do you avoid all foods from an animal source (honey, butter, etc.)?

[blabbate]

And you should also realise that being vegan is more than just the food you eat. It's what you wear (no animal products like leather, silk and wool) and that you shouldn't use animal tested products - or at least avoid them, whenever it's possible.

 

A strick vegetarian is a good term for someone, who's diet is vegan.

Agreed. My gf has always been careful to say that she "follows a vegan diet," since she still wears wool. I started that way, but now I'm becoming truly vegan. Tossed my leather and wool, won't buy down, etc.

 

I definitely feel like there's a difference. If you tell someone you're vegan, but you're wearing leather, what does that say about veganism in general?

[veggieprincess]

VictorVegan,

 

The book "Being Vegan" by Joanne Stepaniak will answer all of your questions and then some about the "whys" and why nots" of Veganism

[beforewisdom]

Victor;

 

You classified vegetarian diets very well and described the category of vegan diets, but that is not the same as being vegan. Donald Watson and his wife invented the term "vegan" to refer to a person who believes that it is wrong to exploit animals. The diet is one partial means to part of that end only.

[VictorVegan]

VictorVegan,

 

The book "Being Vegan" by Joanne Stepaniak will answer all of your questions and then some about the "whys" and why nots" of Veganism

Thanks for the suggestion. I just found it on Google Books and I'll read through it when I can.

 

So, like beforewisdom and other are talking about, it seems like the best way to avoid confusion is to specify that one follows a "vegan diet" when discussing it, rather than labeling themselves a vegan. Kinda like the difference between being a New York Yankee and a New York Yankee fan. (Of course, while a New Yorker, I'm neither a Yankee nor a Yankee fan, but the point remains. )

[auburnoutlook]

i believe being 100% vegan...as in the not just dietary kind...is impossible in modern day civilizations. if you live on a farm and dont buy anything AT ALL, then sure, and i know some people do,and hopefully ill be there some day. but otherwise you support the enslavement of some creature, animal or human. im a dietary vegan who tries his damn best to make the best choices i can for every living thing. and i think thats good for now in my life.

 

as far as a lifestyle i believe vegan is a loose(in a good way) and therefore openminded and ever growing term..as a dietary term it is strict and has very clear lines drawn. just my opinion.

[DrNatural]

So, I am no expert here and I don't mean to start trouble. I've just recently learned so much about this stuff from discussion with others on that thread called "what about honey" or something. But what I am learning is that being a vegan is about how you think, not some strict set of rules.

 

The thing is, amongst all the other rural things I live with, I shear sheep. People have these sheep. The sheep have been bred over centuries to make wool. Now they have all this wool. If you don't shear them it's a problem. And really, if the sheep have been raised lovingly, it is beautiful, shiney, amazing wool. Is it the fault of the sheep? Is it the fault of the people who own them? No. There are sheep that need to be shorn. I go out and do it. Many times, the people pay me in wool. That's fine. I spin the wool into yarn and make something lovely. I made a nice sweater for my grandson. I made a nice hat for my former boyfriend. Am I less vegan because I work with the animals? Maybe. But I am pragmatic. Do I wear factory wool that comes from terribly abused sheep? Hell no. So vegan, for me, isn't as clear cut as "no wool" etc, etc, etc. It's a mindset, sort of an alertness. If you are eating food that comes from animals well, your food isn't vegan. But if I give you some yarn and you make a wonderful gift for somebody you love, well, in my thinking, good for you. And that's vegan, I think. But that's just me.

[auburnoutlook]

vegan is a dietary term that requires strict guidelines. as far as lifestyle i think vegan is a poor word to use. its confusing. so you use wool that needs to be removed anyway and treat the animals like family... i assume. you take that wool and make a sweater. another vegan wearing a cotton tshirt made in sweatsops(exploiting humans) and shipped long distances(gas killing everyone in the air and sea) is somehow more VEGAN because they are not wearing an animal product. that makes no sense to me. i understand the honey argument because you are digesting an animal product and even leather i get because.....eww.but i think why should a vegan(dietary) get rid of a good pair of boots they have from before they took up that lifestyle? in that case people ar just doing it for a word.

 

i think:

vegan should be a dietary term

we need to have another term for living a lifestyle that is as kind as possible.

 

i know some people have to drive. some people cant afford or get access to organic food and clothes. as far as a lifestyle vegan is very confusing. does this makes sense to anyone else?

[blabbate]

i think:

vegan should be a dietary term

we need to have another term for living a lifestyle that is as kind as possible.

Freegan!

[auburnoutlook]

whats freegan...am i already freegan? im interested....

[HCPinGviini]

DrNatural: I don't consider it to be vegan, if you have sheep and you use their wool for your own purpose. But I don't consider as being wrong either. In a way I don't even think that keeping pets is vegan, but I wouldn't try to get rid of my pets still. I only take care of animals who are thrown away or given away by someone else. I don't support pet shops or any other places that make money by selling animals.

 

But you know, because of this too loose use of the term vegan I always have to explain people, what vegans eat and what they don't eat. And in Finland atleast there are these people, who call themselves as "semi-vegans" and they eat dairy, eggs, chicken and sea food/fish. And aren't bothered by leather, wool, silk or honey. So by this definition someone, who just wouldn't enjoy eating red meat would be called as a semi-vegan, although his/her diet isn't vegan at all.

 

i think:

vegan should be a dietary term

we need to have another term for living a lifestyle that is as kind as possible.

Freegan!

Freegan is a term for people who might use animal products if they find them in a dumpster or something like that. At least in Finland this term is used that way.

 

Isn't vegan as a term for a lifestyle just enough? I think that dietary veganism should be called as strick vegetarianism or just vegetarianism. Or you might just accept the fact that there are two kind of vegans: those who consider veganism as a lifestyle and those who consider it as a diet. And when it comes to eating honey in your own back yard as animal friendly as possible, I don't consider it as a wrong thing to do and I don't consider it as a wrong thing to do to shear sheep and use their wool for yourself. But one shouldn't say that this is actually vegan thing to do.

 

If the term vegan is scary you can always say that one can always leave meat, dairy or eggs out of their plate and still manage and it isn't even hard, but to promote veganism like one could be like a semi-vegan I told you about earlier and use the vegan as a term of her or his diet. I disagree with this. One can survive without any labels at all, but the misuse of a label isn't a nice thing to do for someone, who's strick about their veganism.

[auburnoutlook]

is there a credible unobjective person that can define vegan. i thinkits about context. consuming animal products and not BUYing animal biproducts.

[Nathan Nearing]

vegan is a dietary term that requires strict guidelines. as far as lifestyle i think vegan is a poor word to use. its confusing. so you use wool that needs to be removed anyway and treat the animals like family... i assume. you take that wool and make a sweater. another vegan wearing a cotton tshirt made in sweatsops(exploiting humans) and shipped long distances(gas killing everyone in the air and sea) is somehow more VEGAN because they are not wearing an animal product. that makes no sense to me. i understand the honey argument because you are digesting an animal product and even leather i get because.....eww.but i think why should a vegan(dietary) get rid of a good pair of boots they have from before they took up that lifestyle? in that case people ar just doing it for a word.

 

i think:

vegan should be a dietary term

we need to have another term for living a lifestyle that is as kind as possible.

 

Backed.

[auburnoutlook]

represent

[blabbate]

Freegan is a term for people who might use animal products if they find them in a dumpster or something like that. At least in Finland this term is used that way.

Oh, here it's different. If they eat meat, they're meagans, not freegans. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism:

 

Freegans believe that even if a product is vegan, it does not guarantee that:

* Workers were not exploited in the product's production;

* Pesticides were not used in its growing;

* Non-renewable and radioactive resources (such as petroleum, coal, and nuclear power) were not used in production, energy use and shipping;

* Rainforest was not cleared to generate plantation land;

* Wildlife was not harmed in production;

* Wasteful packaging was not used.

Freegans claim that people sincerely committed to living the "cruelty-free" lifestyle espoused by vegans must strive to abstain not only from eating, wearing, and using animal skins, secretions (e.g. milk and its by-products), flesh, and animal-tested products, but must attempt to remove themselves from participation in the capitalist economy altogether as workers and consumers.

[auburnoutlook]

barely possible in the US but certainly what to strive for.

[auburnoutlook]

thats a sport where im from....dumpster diving, they called it. i never ate any of the shit they brought back to the farm. it was always tastycakes or bread or bulk candy.ew.

[blabbate]

A friend of mine dumpstered a mattress and got scabies. I've taken computers off the curb and messed around with them. Most of the ones that don't work when you try to turn them on just have faulty power supplies. I wonder if garbage on the curb is public property?

It is, at least for the purposes of privacy. When trash is left in a publicly accessible area for collection, the individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy. You could also argue abandonment if the area is not publicly accessible, but the trash collectors have access and the individual commonly leaves trash there to be collected.

 

Abandonment of expectation of privacy in this case could probably also be construed as abandonment of ownership.

[beforewisdom]

is there a credible unobjective person that can define vegan. i thinkits about context. consuming animal products and not BUYing animal biproducts.

 

Donald Watson and his wife created the word "vegan" back in the 40s. How about the first newsletter of the Vegan Society, written by Donald Watson where he explains why he felt this new word was necessary?

 

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=16065