ALOT of posts I am seeing all over Fb and such, people are "like look at this raw vegan pregnant girl"...but she posts cooked veggie plates and bottled juices on her photos account, or "look at me I am raw vegan", but posting baked potatoes photos.Or "I am raw, but I do have a cheat food- popcorn, as all raw foodists have cheat foods.."

Is this the new thing? Has raw changed? What is all this? It doesnt seem right to me. I am all for eating what you want, even high raw, but being raw to me, means eating raw fruits veggies nuts. Not cooking them. Thats the point. Isn't it?

CC, is that the woman who got all that press recently? If so, I remember Freelea snagging an interview with her. I believe she's Australian, too. In any case, is it possible that she had her kid and altered her diet recently? When I heard/read what she was consuming during that time, it seemed to be 100% raw vegan.

I don't think Facebook or Youtube yield the average raw foodist, honestly.

yeah, agreed
Fb is just that facebook

its like trying to go to yahoo in order to get "real" news about things that "matter"

This is who I was talking about--I guess she just gave birth!

[www.news.com.au]

Loni Jane was not 100% raw vegan during her pregnancy, she was eating both raw and cooked vegan and she still is, as far as I know. But she does look great.

I agree, a raw vegan is a person eating 100% raw fruits/veggies. Anything other than that is high raw, not fully raw. But I guess nowadays nobody likes to get down to details so they are not counting the % anymore...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Raw vegan for life. Vegan for the animals. Raw for my health.

[www.academia.edu]

Identity

Tajfel (1978) defines social identity as ‘that part of an individual’s self-concept which derivesfrom his knowledge of his membership in a social group’. More recently, it has been argued that social or collective identity arises when self-definition is focused upon a shared self-aspect, which may be inter alia a belief, a symbol, a psychological or physical trait, etc. (Simon, 2004). For instance, the salient self-aspect, upon which the social identity of an ethnic group is based,could be the belief in a shared heritage. Furthermore, social psychologists have argued that identity may be threatened if individuals’ feelings of continuity over time, distinctiveness fromothers, self-esteem and self-efficacy are threatened by changes in the social context (Breakwell,1986, 1992; Brewer, 1992).

People may or may not act in accordance with these representations; for instance, if a group or its language evokes negative social representations, a member of the social or linguistic group may seek social mobility through membership in a more positively evaluated group. The boundaries of linguistic identity are of course permeable; an individual may choose to leave their originalgroup and gain membership of another by adopting a new language.


[polyglossic.wordpress.com]

"Another one that really intrigues me is the concept of the language ego. (The word “ego” here should be read as “self”, not as in “My grade on that quiz really bruised my language ego.”) As first defined by Alexander Guiora, a researcher in personality variables in second language acquisition, the language ego is “the identity a person develops in reference to the language he or she speaks”[1]. H.D. Brown notes that “Oneself-identity is inextricably bound up with one’s language, for it is in the communicative process…that such identities are confirmed, shaped, and reshaped.”[2] "

Food, Self, and Identity

[www.researchgate.net]

Food is central to our sense of identity. The way any given human group eats helps it assert its diversity, hierarchy and organisation, but also, at the same time, both its oneness and the otherness of whoever eats differently. Food is also central to individual identity, in that any given human individual is constructed, biologically, psychologically and socially by the foods he/she choses to incorporate.

"researchers in experimental psychology, physiology, physical anthropology and
nutrition were busy analysing the human relationship to food in terms of behaviour, metabolic regulation, nutritional requirements. What the social scientists saw as "practices", they thought of as "behaviour". Where sociologists or anthropologists spoke of "representations" or "meanings",
they saw "wants" and "beliefs". Any given eating practice tended to be assessed in terms of its consistency with nutritional "needs". Thus, any "habit" deemed sound in those terms was seen as an instance of "wisdom of the body", while dietary traits devoid of any visible biological
relevance or "counter-productive" were described in often judgmental terms as "irrational prejudice", "superstitions" or ultimately manifestations of "ignorance"."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2014 02:49PM by Panchito.

Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.academia.edu]
> _identity_a_psychosocial_approach
>
> Identity
>
> Tajfel (1978) defines social identity as ‘that
> part of an individual’s self-concept which
> derivesfrom his knowledge of his membership in a
> social group’. More recently, it has been argued
> that social or collective identity arises when
> self-definition is focused upon a shared
> self-aspect, which may be inter alia a belief, a
> symbol, a psychological or physical trait, etc.
> (Simon, 2004). For instance, the salient
> self-aspect, upon which the social identity of an
> ethnic group is based,could be the belief in a
> shared heritage. Furthermore, social psychologists
> have argued that identity may be threatened if
> individuals’ feelings of continuity over time,
> distinctiveness fromothers, self-esteem and
> self-efficacy are threatened by changes in the
> social context (Breakwell,1986, 1992; Brewer,
> 1992).
>
> People may or may not act in accordance with these
> representations; for instance, if a group or its
> language evokes negative social representations, a
> member of the social or linguistic group may seek
> social mobility through membership in a more
> positively evaluated group. The boundaries of
> linguistic identity are of course permeable; an
> individual may choose to leave their originalgroup
> and gain membership of another by adopting a new
> language.
>
>
> [polyglossic.wordpress.com]
> /
>
> "Another one that really intrigues me is the
> concept of the language ego. (The word “ego”
> here should be read as “self”, not as in “My
> grade on that quiz really bruised my language
> ego.”) As first defined by Alexander Guiora, a
> researcher in personality variables in second
> language acquisition, the language ego is “the
> identity a person develops in reference to the
> language he or she speaks”[1]. H.D. Brown notes
> that “Oneself-identity is inextricably bound up
> with one’s language, for it is in the
> communicative process…that such identities are
> confirmed, shaped, and reshaped.”[2] "
>
> Food, Self, and Identity
>
> [www.researchgate.net]
> Food_self_and_identity/file/3deec51a472598c937.pdf
>
>
> Food is central to our sense of identity. The way
> any given human group eats helps it assert its
> diversity, hierarchy and organisation, but also,
> at the same time, both its oneness and the
> otherness of whoever eats differently. Food is
> also central to individual identity, in that any
> given human individual is constructed,
> biologically, psychologically and socially by the
> foods he/she choses to incorporate.
>
> "researchers in experimental psychology,
> physiology, physical anthropology and
> nutrition were busy analysing the human
> relationship to food in terms of behaviour,
> metabolic regulation, nutritional requirements.
> What the social scientists saw as "practices",
> they thought of as "behaviour". Where sociologists
> or anthropologists spoke of "representations" or
> "meanings",
> they saw "wants" and "beliefs". Any given eating
> practice tended to be assessed in terms of its
> consistency with nutritional "needs". Thus, any
> "habit" deemed sound in those terms was seen as an
> instance of "wisdom of the body", while dietary
> traits devoid of any visible biological
> relevance or "counter-productive" were described
> in often judgmental terms as "irrational
> prejudice", "superstitions" or ultimately
> manifestations of "ignorance"."

I guess this is panchito's way of telling us that he thinks if he eats 75% raw vegan he is really raw vegan and that we should think so , too, because he quotes people with degrees.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2014 10:06PM by SueZ.

I don't know anyone in the last 5 years that has eaten 100% raw 100% of the time. Can be pretty hard if you travel a lot too and have a high standard for what ripe fruit should taste like.

I know all the guru's as well. Spending time with them personally etc. Sad thing is a lot of them say they do eat 100% raw. This is just so they sound more pure than the next guru. I think this is misleading. Many are not even vegan. This is even more disappointing for me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2014 10:11PM by durianrider.

Finally you admit the truth DR that you and these gurus were never 100% raw. We can finally put this to rest, although Doug Graham still claims to have eaten no cooked food/successfully raw for more than 20+ years, same with fake guru John Rose.

However, do remember you were one of those gurus along with freelea up until last year who were hardcore 100% all or nothing raw promoters ?

So why the radical u-turn in beliefs, has the 100% raw 80/10/10 diet failed you ? and why is cooked food ok again when it was off limits before ?



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2014 10:29PM by temp.

durianrider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know anyone in the last 5 years that has
> eaten 100% raw 100% of the time. Can be pretty
> hard if you travel a lot too and have a high
> standard for what ripe fruit should taste like.
>
> I know all the guru's as well. Spending time with
> them personally etc. Sad thing is a lot of them
> say they do eat 100% raw. This is just so they
> sound more pure than the next guru. I think this
> is misleading. Many are not even vegan. This is
> even more disappointing for me.

Tavis Bradley travels a lot and you don't have to believe him but he said when he was with people in NY,NY they went to eat at a steak house where they had nothing Tavis would eat but parsley and that's all he said he ate. He's hard core about things like that.

coconutcream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ALOT of posts I am seeing all over Fb and such,
> people are "like look at this raw vegan pregnant
> girl"...but she posts cooked veggie plates and
> bottled juices on her photos account, or "look at
> me I am raw vegan", but posting baked potatoes
> photos.Or "I am raw, but I do have a cheat food-
> popcorn, as all raw foodists have cheat foods.."
>
> Is this the new thing? Has raw changed? What is
> all this? It doesnt seem right to me. I am all for
> eating what you want, even high raw, but being
> raw to me, means eating raw fruits veggies nuts.
> Not cooking them. Thats the point. Isn't it?

There is no shortage of raw and almost raw vegan exhibitionists these days that love to take pictures of themselves being "raw". "Raw" vegans have discovered marketing. Capitalism. Lots of spouting of the word "abundance" - they mean theirs of course, not yours. Not new but FullyrawChristina looks, (by the numbers), to be Matt Monarch's star marketing student and Loni Jane seems to be Ka Sundance's star marketing student - she's been studying in his school for years.

temp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> haha where are the anon's, fresh, john roses,
> panchitos today ?, inlight of durianriders
> revelation that it was all BS and none of these
> people were even 100% strict raw for the long
> periods like they claimed.
>
> Its great because once and for all, we can finally
> put this wondering to rest that these people are
> examples of people successfully living the 100%
> raw vegan lifestyle. Durianrider has also
> re-confirmed my beliefs, that the majority of
> these gurus/personalities were lying about what
> they were really eating, like he says. Some of the
> them are not even vegan. Again nothing i didn't
> clock about 3 years ago lol.
>
> So now when people say ohh look X guru is "walking
> the talk", we can just refer them to this thread,
> spoken from a former raw guru i.e durianrider,
> someone who has actually done this diet.
>
> Not been pretending to do the diet, whilst still
> eating the "occasional cooked animal foods for
> numerous reasons" like our friend fresh does
> here.
>
> I guess the response from these people like fresh
> and john rose will be the predictable suggestion
> that durianrider just did the diet wrong. Or like
> ive seen some say, it was his 30 banana's a day
> style diet that was the reason for his failure
> because 80/10/10 never fails.
>

I do think there are some people who durian rider doesn't know who aren't hypocrites and have somehow made that diet work for them. Here is one who I believe and has been at it for, as I recall, seven years.

Tannyraw with "I've got your BACKUP PLAN"

I wouldn't expect the 30bad site to showcase this video. It would not keep the spotlight on them there. Here's hoping they will prove me wrong and are bigger people than I give them credit for.

[www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2014 11:57PM by Prana.

>haha where are the anon's, fresh, john roses, panchitos today ?, inlight of durianriders revelation that it was all BS and none of these people were even 100% strict raw for the long periods like they claimed.


you are so infantile.
I was raw vegan for a decade and now eat about the same amount of cooked food in a year that you eat in a day.

do you even have a life?

do you know how pathetic and transparently ego driven it is for you to constantly bleat like a sheep, "see, you didn't eat 100% raw vegan for 1000 years!!"" see? I told you so!!


>" because 80/10/10 never fails. "

sure, it fails if you don't know what the hell you're doing, or you're very toxic or you don't give it more than a MONTH like you did.

get a life dude.

this is a support board. did you have any comments about the girl who healed herself on 811? funny how all the superfood gurus have nothing to say, or we have SueZ with the hilarious suggestion that she broke up with her boyfriend or some other nonsense.

since 30bananasadaysucks.com closed, we have seen an influx of negative new comers. PowerLifer (a 30sucks member) has been like on steroids. He's been banned but he makes new accounts.

I think that 30bananasadaysucks.com was a good idea to keep all the worms in one place. Now it seems they are all over and they need to spread their sickness to try to get rid of it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2014 04:34PM by Panchito.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >haha where are the anon's, fresh, john roses,
> panchitos today ?, inlight of durianriders
> revelation that it was all BS and none of these
> people were even 100% strict raw for the long
> periods like they claimed.
>
>
> you are so infantile.
> I was raw vegan for a decade and now eat about the
> same amount of cooked food in a year that you eat
> in a day.
>
> do you even have a life?
>
> do you know how pathetic and transparently ego
> driven it is for you to constantly bleat like a
> sheep, "see, you didn't eat 100% raw vegan for
> 1000 years!!"" see? I told you so!!
>
>
> >" because 80/10/10 never fails. "
>
> sure, it fails if you don't know what the hell
> you're doing, or you're very toxic or you don't
> give it more than a MONTH like you did.
>
> get a life dude.
>
> this is a support board. did you have any
> comments about the girl who healed herself on 811?
> funny how all the superfood gurus have nothing to
> say, or we have SueZ with the hilarious suggestion
> that she broke up with her boyfriend or some other
> nonsense.

Take care, fresh, you are well on your way to being as bat @#$%& crazy as john rose is. When that occurs you will drive more people off of your low fat raw vegan diet than he does as you are fundamentally a more vicious and sneakier breed of weasel than he is as you are a bit smarter than him. IMO.

suez and temp,

I hear guano is good for pancreatitis, CFS, adrenal fatigue and high copper. try it out. I don't need to try it out, I'm already deeply immersed in it, as you know.

I love you guys.

have a wonderful day!

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I do think there are some people who durian
> rider doesn't know who aren't hypocrites and have
> somehow made that diet work for them.
----
of course there are

Glad you started this thread. I do not know why they do not just call themselves vegan. But I guess they get more attention saying raw vegan pregnancy.
There seems to be a backlash against 100% raw vegans. A lot of new people just mimic what Freelee and durian rider say. It seems a lot of people who fail at something then start saying it does not work for anyone and everyone else is lying. I notice when it comes to making money off raw foods or anything ,people start being dishonest and it becomes only about the money.
I am glad this board is still around.

the truth is probably in the the middle somewhere
mas o menos

david

dvdai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the truth is probably in the the middle somewhere
> mas o menos


Huh?

Not just here but I can almost never figure out what the heck you are trying to say.

david

dvdai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [i.imgur.com]


Ok, thanks for letting me know not to bother with your posts in the future.

david

lol wtf

Utopian Life Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lol wtf

Not his ride. He's waiting for the next one - the short bus...

rawveggiemom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Glad you started this thread. I do not know why
> they do not just call themselves vegan. But I
> guess they get more attention saying raw vegan
> pregnancy.


There are so many now who want to make a living off of YouTube and the rest of the internet. They seemingly will do anything to get their share or their new idol "abundance". Publicity hounds. Exhibitionists. Nodders.

> There seems to be a backlash against 100% raw
> vegans.


It's probably the only recourse for the leaders and pioneers who now are not, or are just now admitting, that they no longer will be raw but just raw in name only.


A lot of new people just mimic what
> Freelee and durian rider say. It seems a lot of
> people who fail at something then start saying it
> does not work for anyone and everyone else is
> lying.

Yep, the liars calling the ones who are really raw liars. The sad part is those established leaders and pioneers who are now raw in name only will not want the real 100% raw people on YouTube around their established websites - especially if they are still doing well like Tannyraw is. It would make them look bad.

I notice when it comes to making money off
> raw foods or anything ,people start being
> dishonest and it becomes only about the money.
> I am glad this board is still around.

I agree. The raw food movement is as corrupt as any other movement it seems to me. We are all on our own, which is better anyway, than to continue to be led astray by trying to follow liar's words while they stuff their mouths with other things.

The one good thing that will come of all this abundance chasing is that just like in any marketplace the quality bar will probably have to rise with so many chasing hits. No one has time to follow all of these abundance chasers. Even most of the established people are going to have to stop resting on their faded laurels soon.

david