This is a vegan board with a beegun admin. Let's talk labels. Disclaimer, I know we all do good eating whole food raw but if you want to claim a label, shouldn't we walk the walk???

Disclaimer #2 , language evolves... people coopt and change what terms mean. That is what this fight is about. And word change is inevitable. I would just like to slow it down a little to give meaning to the way Donald Watson and the British Vegan Society originally used before we water it down, bastardize it, and send it into nothingness. At one point it had/has meaning. It means simply setting your targets higher, doing more than the average vegetarian. Here is a brief excerpt from the late Donald Watson who coined the term vegan..

[www.foodsforlife.org.uk]

Q: Do you have any message for vegetarians?
A: Accept that vegetarianism is only a stepping stone between meat eating and veganism. There may be vegans who made the change all in one leap, but I'm sure that for most people vegetarianism is a necessary staging post. I'm still a member of the Vegetarian Society to keep in touch with the movement. I was delighted to learn that at the World Vegetarian Conference in Edinburgh the diet was a vegan diet and the delegates had no choice. This little seed that I planted 60 years ago is making its presence felt.

And then there is the British Vegan Society definition which Watson is referring to.
"The word "veganism"denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practical — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."[www.definevegan.com]

So, you can adopt vegan ethics, do great things by buying hemp over leather wallets. Eat great raw food 90 percent of the time... Call yourself vegetarian, call yourself plant based.. flexitarian... near vegan, quasi vegan... just don't call yourself vegan until your diet comports to the British Vegan Society definition. Don't water it down!!!

Paul

pborst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .......Here is a brief excerpt from the late Donald Watson who coined the term vegan...
Don't water it down!!!

What impressed me most about the interview was how mentally 'sharp' he was at age 92. I'm sure Veganism played a strong role, as did good Genes......WY

I agree. If it's very odd when it's only the label that's important to you (I see this w people who use bee products but INSIST that they are vegan).
I don't call myself anything, I just am.

I find it strange that moral is used to define natural behaviour. Do we expect lions to eat apples? I eat fruit and veggies because I believe that I was designed to do so. It is then moral not to destroy the nature but leave it intact for other species. But I do not avoid eating meat because I think it is not moral to kill animals. Animals kill animals too. Are they not moral then?

We are too judgmental about things, assuming rights to criticize even the natural order of things. Who are we to do that?

Nobody is doing that. What's being discussed here is people taking a label for themselves that has a very specific meaning and then not following the meaning. That's not about people judging others, that's about being duplicitous. Why bother? If you don't embrace vegan principles, don't bother sticking that label on yourself.

As for people killing animals, is it moral if it's not necessary for survival? I personally don't believe that it is. I'm not a tiger after all.

I just pretty much alienated myself from VegSource.com because of a post by Sarah Taylor where people in the post described themselves as "35 percent vegan". That kind of talk scares the crap out of me. It becomes trendy to assume the label based on a permissive revisionist view of what the term originally meant.

I concede language evolves, even for the good in most cases. And linguistic rigidity is not my specialty though in the sentence (Cherimoya Kid is a troll) Cherimoya Kid is the noun, "is" is the state of being verb and "troll is the predicate nominative. There.. whew that felt good. Another thread. Noun verb noun.

I think if you care about maintaining the high standard that the term vegan originally meant, the way Joanie Stepaniak operationalized in the Vegan Handbook and the way Davis and Melina published solid vegan high raw guidelines for those of us eating a raw vegan diet, then you have a choice. Weigh in and agree with the revisionists and water down the vegan definition or stand tall and keep principle in mind.

I bought "Vegan for Life" by Norris and Melina. Even though I like them both, it's recipe for vegan junk food. "Industry studies are the same as independent" they assert. Eat "oreos" on your vegan transition. the list goes on and on. It's crap.

Veganist by Kathy Freston. ???? more of the same. I agree don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. My plea is don't redefine the perfect. Let people aspire. Don't rationalize away how high you can go. Keep the target high. Our sites are awefully low. Now is not the time to set a poor example. We need more rising stars not less. Be that rising star. Be that vegan who sets apart. Let others come to you. Never ever lower your standards!!! Please stand tall. Take the side of high veganism. Understand what Watson meant and preserve its meaning. My pleas. My pledge. Best.

Paul Andrew Borst

Paul,

Agree. Until I get to that point, and, as you know, I am striving, I won't call myself vegan. I was truly vegan for almost three years at one time, and I know now what my limitations were and how I can eventually get around them, something I didn't know when younger. Thus, I know it is truly a long transitional period, as Donald Watson supposed. Thanks for posting this

Tamara, I think your veganism could best 5 vegan wannabees on a good day. You don't need to explain yourself to anyone. Never ever be less ambitious. we all have trials just don't let trials be rationalizations.

Paul



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/07/2012 07:44PM by pborst.

pborst Wrote:
> I bought "Vegan for Life" by Norris and Messina, not Melina,

Thanks

Nice post, pborst

I guess I'll play bad cop here and ask the obvious question: If you're not raw vegan and likely never will be (again?), why do you hang out in a raw vegan forum when you're not raw vegan? Why not come back when you are raw vegan or maybe just lessen the weight of your non-raw vegan presence a bit? Is it some kind of Helena Bonham Carter in "Fight Club" thing? Are you a drinker who hangs at AA meetings? A benzo popper who ges to NA meetings? A healthy person at terminal cancer support groups? I honestly do not get it. Is this the diversity dogma taken to its most absurd extreme or what?

"You must except us! Your government says so! No group of people are ever allowed to be alone with each other under the pretense of enjoying something that they have in common and that not everyone shares! EVAR!"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2012 12:02AM by HeavenHands.

HeavenHands Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ......If you're not raw vegan and likely never will be (again?), why do you hang out in a raw vegan forum when you're not raw vegan?

If everyone here had to wait until they were 'Perfect', then there would be no one posting here.
I see this Forum like a sporting event. I can admire the players, and play the game, without being on the same level as the Best.......WY
P.S. What's that quote?...."If everyone is the Buddha, why all this striving?"....something like that.

HeavenHands - I never knew there was such a strict description of "raw vegan". So, you are only vegan if you are 100% vegan? That eliminates a huge number of people who eat mostly vegan but have not succeeded to be 100% or don't exactly want to be 100% vegan.
Most vegans had to swim against the current of 'normal' people and had to face prejudice. Having such strict rules makes you very similar to the establishment you once faught against - you are practically saying 'whovever does not do EXACTLY as I say is wrong'. And 'science is on my side'.
Some science is on the side of raw vegans, but there are other points of view that deserve attention also. Like it or not, 'raw vegan' is not the final answer. There never is one.

Yes, one is only vegan if they actually follow a 100% vegan lifestyle (that means ZERO animal anything). If that's not the case, one is not vegan. No biggie, just don't assume the label, right? Live your life the way you see fit, strive to always improve, but don't call yourself something you're not. What's the point in that?

Helena Bonham Carter was in "Fight Club"?

Ok, if I cannot use 'raw vegan' in the description of how I eat, what should I use. 'I am a raw vegetarian', maybe?

- 'Hi. Oh no, thanks, I don't eat that. I am a raw vegetarian 90%, sorry..'
- ' ??...you mean 'raw vegan', right?'
- No, I am not allowed to call myself that yet.'
- 'You are not allowed? I knew you guys were weird, but this is a new one!'
- ' It is hard to explain...I would really like to call myself vegan, but I can't, since 100% vegans think that this is insulting and pretending you are something that you are not'.
- 'Whatever!..so, what do you want to eat again?'

Do you need a label that desperately? And that's a big assumption anyhow, that others are going to know what vegan means. Or raw for that matter. Do you know how many times I've been offered a sandwich? Because it's cold "that's not cooked, right?"
Really, vegan means no animal products. If you want to order a raw vegan meal in a restaurant or from a person that knows what that means that should be easy enough without have to make a proclamation about which label exactly describes you as an individual. Saying "I am following a raw vegan diet" is more than enough.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not 100% vegan so I'm not saying that non-vegan practices are better or worse than any other. The debate is simply regarding what vegan denotes and it does in fact have a very specific definition.

Tamukha, she was the lead female role. Playing the character she plays in every movie. :/

"I am following a raw vegan diet"

I actually think that even the disctinction between 'vegetarian' and 'vegan' is not clear. The word 'vegetarian' does not have any linguistic connotation that would describe either 'cooked' or 'including dairy'. It is a pure convention and I don't think it is functioning.
I will, from now on, call myself a 'vegetarian' and nothing else. Even if I eat 100% raw vegan, I will still call myself a vegetarian. The whole sharade with descriptions is only there to make things more unappealing to SAD mortals. It is so filled with prejudice and moralistic definitions that it is completely useless.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2012 02:30AM by rab.

Well, that's a perception. For me linguistics is fascinating and deserving of respect. It's not even about diet, the definition of a word is something that stands on it's own. Aside from that I don't want a label, they are not one size fits all so why lump people together under one? It serves nothing that I can see. It does not dictate my behavior or feelings about anything. It is a name for something specific but even if I followed that to the letter myself, would I adhere to the principles because of my own desires or because of the dogma associated with the terminology? Better to follow one's conscience IMHO and just call things what they really are.

coco,

Huh, I need to pay more attention to movies.

rab,

I call myself a "mostly raw foods vegetarian" and no one analyzes it, except at a gathering, maybe, to point out that one salad has cheese in it, but the other one just has just beans. It's not a big controversy. I dunno, maybe it's because I've been a vegetarian so long no one questions it anymore . . .

This is very confusing. So, is being a vegan, a person who not only does not eat any animal products, including honey, but also does not own or wear any animal product. Is that right???

If that's true, then I'm a mostly raw vegetarian.............

the definition of "veganism" means "the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals," linked to the Jain concept of ahimsa, the avoidance of violence against living things.
[en.wikipedia.org]

“veganism is not a diet! [...]
Vegan is a term used –or at least in my opinion should be used– to categorize someone who has chosen to live their life in such a way as to reduce their contribution to animal exploitation as much as possible. It is an expression of their ethical commitment to the abolishment of animal exploitation. The fact that this results in a plant based diet is clear, however it would be a gross inaccuracy to equate the term vegan with nothing more than choices made at the checkout counter or a restaurant.”
[www.vegansoapbox.com]

Nobody is truly vegan. We all are part of a society that is built on the exploitation of animals.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

rubbish, then noone who does anything relieves any suffering? Is that your position. Cause, sorry I don't share it. Bet most don't either. The definition of vegan isn't built on things we can't change. Bet that was true for Watson in 1944 too. It's based on who you are today and what choices you make today. So, forgive me if I reject your jaded view of veganism. Anyone including the carnivore who got an epiphany from his last cheeseburger that it was his last cheeseburger can be become a vegan.

You just can't do it while you are eating honey and sneaking eggs or raw goats milk. No word for folks like that. Not even limbo-lites which is the closest. Vegan is a discrete term over a period of time, it's a door you can go out of an walk back into but it isn't a door with a window where eggs and dairy go in and never come out. nor is it a door where honey goes in but never comes out.

You can stay a while if you want and say you were vegan when but don't try to bullshit the door.... the camera of ethics sees who comes and who goes.. and it's a revolving door.

Paul



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/2012 09:10PM by pborst.

And who appointed me anyway??? noone. noone appointed me. My view is no more and no less valid than any other poster on this board. And it is under the no less valid part I assert myself without apology or explanation. And your opinion of what a vegan is or isn't is equally as valid as my own without any kind of verification.

That said, I stand by what I wrote. What's your definition? It's why I posted the thread.

Paul



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/2012 09:42PM by pborst.

I like precision. People say I can't when they mean they are not willing. If you want to be a true vegan then you would have to cease to support the existence of the society. Stop buying products the profits of which go to the pockets of meat eaters, for example.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

Degrees.

"Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived wholly or in part from animals"
Donald Watson.

If that means to you that you eschew all of society then that's your subjective view of the definition of veganism.
If it means to you that when you discover that something is not vegan (glue, for instance, postage stamps, etc) you cease using it and find an alternative, I suppose that could still in your subjective view mean that you are vegan.
If, however, you eat eggs and honey, cheese, wear silk, wool, etc, continue using that brand of glue you know to be gelatin based, well... that behavior doesn't fall under the definition of vegan at all.

While researching this topic before i also realized that tires used on cars, buses, trains, airplanes, and bicycles use a very small percentage of animal product in them....and the dilemna they pointed out was do you use the car and go petition animal rights and save hundreds of animals by helping 2-20 see the light, or do you not go petition and fight for the animals because you didn't use the car to travel there....it comes down to a lesser evil in some cases, do you use postage stamps, ect.....I as an artist had to fight my school on the requirement of the chamois for class, because it was made of leather and i refused to buy it and bring it to class.....others didn't understand this and said its one item...and my reply was it took one living creature to create this when i can use a piece of cloth that works just as well.....
Veganism to me is doing everything in your power to not exploit animals and to surround yourself by those who do the same! i like to shop at vegan/vegetarian stores, and grocers, i will travel the extra 20 minutes to purchase my groceries from People's Co-op, and wait till the local farmers market to get what i need, before i will simply walk next door to vons or albertsons! I will pay 30 dollars more for vegan clothing and shoes....Thats my definition and my decision, everyone has one....you can agree or not with my post...but to me i feel ethically and morally right and when i see an animal i know that i am doing all that i can do to save their lives!

Much peace and love!!!
EarthAngel
Xoxo

Hmmm, everyone has an opinion, and that's great. For me, this is the first time that I've heard the term 'vegan' mean anything else than not to eat 'ANY' animal products, as distinct from 'vegetarianism' which allows the intake of animal products. But I tell you, no-one fights more for animal rights than do the vegetarians.

Well, in my neck of the woods anyway. I joined the Queensland Vegetarian Society a couple of years ago, and wow, they were straight on to me to go on rallies etc. I pointed out to them that by only rejecting the eating of meat, they were still supporting a lot of animal suffering (chooks for example). Their answer was much like Pauls above, and I agree also. There's no point in throwing the baby out with the bath water haha.

I noticed that in your quote by Watson Coco, he used the word 'encourage', for us to find alternatives. As there's alot that we can't change like you have pointed out 'earthangel'. But if we definately can use an alternative, then perhaps we cannot call ourselves 'vegan'.

I think that it's ok to call ourselves 'vegan' if we do change what is in our power to change. But here's one for you....I mentioned earlier that I try to eat only base or alkaline forming foods. So, I might call myself an 'Alkalinian' or a 'Base-eater'. Haha you know like base-jumper, except the 'base' isn't an acronym like 'base-jumper is, the base meaning alkaline.

Now that I know this extended meaning of the term 'vegan', I'm going to have to sell my genuine Harley-Davidson leather jacket......NOT. Sorry guys, but from now on I won't be buying any more leather jackets, and I'll be more careful not to buy anything that may have come from the exploitation of animals.

And that's how I'm going to view it. Some things I can change immediately, others I cannot or will not.

Cheers,
geo x

Well, if the definition of vegan is subjective, then we have a problem. Some people eating fish say they are vegetarians, for example. A definition ought to be objective and precise. Thus far, I have not seen one.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams