Towards Freedom

pradmin · 2006-06-11 20:22:42

the popular definitions of vegetarian and vegan don't really take into account the meaning of the words so here we will try to clarify some of this. please note this is not a discussion of principles but one of semantics.

Dyl and i have been talking about this and I'll post some of the comments he has made here as well.

A vegetarian doesn't consume any animal products such as meat, fish, milk, cheese, butter, eggs, sea foods, or even honey (a vegan is a vegetarian who has adopted a lifestyle avoiding animal products like wool, leather, silk). The 'veg' in vegetarian after all does represent vegetables, fruits and other plant-based foods. People who include dairy to an otherwise vegetarian diet consider themselves to be lacto vegetarians. Those who consume both dairy and eggs call themselves lacto-ovo vegetarians. Of course, by that reasoning those who eat everything other than red meat should fancy themselves to be lacto-ovo-pesco-polla-miele vegetarians.

most 'vegetarians' are lacto-ovo vegetarians which is why the term vegetarian is used for them rather than strict vegetarians. this led to the incorrect usage of 'vegan' to define people who are strict vegetarian even in dictionaries (eg http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Vegan)!

however, an examination of the historical roots of the word vegan will show that there is much more than diet involved since its inception in 1944 by Donald Watson in england. i have posted the relevant information below from the article by Joanne Stepaniak.

in friendship,
prad

http://www.vegsource.com/jo/vegan.htm
Being Vegan

To understand what it means to be vegan, it is vital to reflect on the historical roots and origin of the word. Many people think of the term vegan and its associated lifestyle as something new, faddish, insurgent or radical. In many ways, just the opposite is true. The word vegan was coined in England by Donald Watson in 1944. He, along with several other members of the Vegetarian Society in Leicester, England, wanted to form an alliance of nondairy vegetarians as a subgroup of the Society. When their proposal was rejected, they ventured to start their own organization. They prospected what to call themselves, and, after evaluating a range of ingenious possibilities, agreed that "vegan" (decisively pronounced VEE-gn, with a long "e" and hard "g" ) was best. It was derived from the word "vegetarian" by taking the first three letters (veg) and the last two letters (an) because, as Donald Watson explained, "veganism starts with vegetarianism and carries it through to its logical conclusion."

In late 1944, The Vegan Society was established, followed shortly thereafter by the creation of a manifesto describing their unified mission and perspective. Although the group advocated a totally plant-based diet excluding flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, and animals' milk, butter and cheese, they also encouraged the manufacture and use of alternatives to animal commodities, including clothing, shoes and other apparel. In addition, the group acknowledged that the elimination of exploitation of any kind was necessary in order to bring about a more reasonable and humane society and emancipate both humans and animals.

(there is more in the article at the website it is from)

pradmin · 2006-06-11 20:26:43

here are some excerpts from conversations with dyl whose words are in blue:

Wouldn't that mean we both qualify for the title of vegetarian, but fall under different sub-categories?

well sort of but then you'd be a lacto vegetarian and i'd be a strict vegetarian (so what is a vegetarian?). however, that is redundant considering the actual meaning of the word vegetarian who is supposed to eat vegetation in its various forms. in other words, milk is not vegetation so to describe your diet we add lacto. the millions of hindus, for instance, are called vegetarian even though they are lacto vegetarian. so does that mean that vegetarian = lacto vegetarian?

because the vast majority of vegetarians tend to be lacto-ovo veg, the term vegetarian is ascribed to them. however, this is done through usage rather than meaning.

so we both can qualify for the 'title', but as extensions: i start with the word vegetarian, you start with the category vegetarian.

please continue if my explanation isn't satisfactory.

Well by every definition I've been able to drag up, including the dictionary, you would be a vegan (the choice of not using any animal based products, such as clothing, is specified as sometimes being the case, but not necessary for the definition to apply). Vegans are sometimes referred to as strict vegetarians, especially if they exclude the use of animal based products, but that isn't an official definition. I would be lacto-vegetarian, as I eat dairy and eggs. But we are both vegetarians.

I can see where you're coming from when you say a vegetarian should only be one who eats vegetation, but as long as flesh is excluded from the diet the name applies by official definition, or so it seems. You seem fairly certain, however. How did you come to understand the definitions as such, Prad? Wouldn't the dictionary be pretty correct on something like this?

not necessarily when you consider that dictionary definitions fluctuate - eg look at the dictdef i supply for vegan in the post and notice that it is only diet related.

my randomhouse dictionary from 70s defines it something like "someone who for ethical or nutritional reasons doesn't eat meat, fish, poultry, eggs and sometimes even milk and other animal products."
while my merriam-webster in front of me from 1974: "one that believes in or practises living soley on plant products" (very veganish, but incorrect because a vegetarian may use leather for instance since he is not eating it"

i know your research is correct - sangeeta told me that even peta goes with definitions similar to yours because they are what is currently in use for the majority.

however, if you look at the inclusive structure you propose vegetarian as a general category with everything in it being subcategories - the word vegetarian really has no meaning other than as a category.

my (well it's not really mine) extension structure keeps the actual meaning of vegetarian intact, but then adds descriptive extensions eg 1972-1990 i was a lacto-ovo vegetarian meaning i ate vegetation and added milk and eggs

also look at the 1944 origin of the word vegan and you will see that it really is a way of life rather than a way of eating.

so if vegan is misused in a dietary sense to mean a strict vegetarian, what exactly is a vegan who wears a wool sweater or a leather belt?

lets discuss further, but in the becoming vegetarian 101 forum in veggiechess because of the 1000 pm limit.

your points are legitimate considering what is current and i doubt if i'll rewrite the dictionaries, but i thought i should try.

I'll gladly continue the discussion with you in the forums in a few days, Prad. I'm short on time at the moment.

Even then, there's no need to go too deep into it. It is, after all, only a definition. We agree on the morals behind the word (at least, for the most part ).

pradmin · 2008-02-09 18:10:55

here is veganism defined by the originators of the society back in 1951. notice how veganism as a principle applies well beyond diet.

=====================
VEGANlSM DEFINED
(The Vegetarian World Forum
No.1 Vol.5 - SPRING 1951 pp.6-7)

Recently the Vegan Society adopted revised and extended rules which among other things clarify the goal towards which the movement aspires.

The Society's object and meaning of the word "veganism", have until now been matters of inference and personal predilection, are now defined as follows:

'The object of the Society shall be to end the exploitation of animals by man"; and 'The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals."

The Society pledges itself 'in pursuance of its object" to 'seek to end the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection and all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man.

Membership [in] the Society is available to all who wish to see the object achieved and who undertake to live as closely to the ideal as personal circumstances permit. An Associate makes no promise as to behaviour but declares himself in agreement with the object. The door is thus widely opened, and the Society welcomes all who feel able to support it. Direction and management of the Society's work, however, rest with the members.

The effect of this development is to make veganism unique among movements concerned with animal welfare. For it has crystallised as a whole and not, as are all other such movements, as an abstraction. Where every other movement deals with a segment - and therefore deals directly with practices rather than with principles - veganism is itself a principle, from which certain practices logically flow.

If, for example, the vegan principle is applied to diet, it can at once be seen why it must be vegetarian in the strictest sense and why it cannot contain any foods derived from animals. One may become a vegetarian for a variety of reasons - humanitarian, health, or mere preference for such a diet; The principle is a matter of personal feeling, and varies accordingly. Veganism, however, is a principle - that man has no right to exploit the creatures for his own ends - and no variation occurs. Vegan diet is therefore derived entirely from "fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains and other wholesome non-animal products," and excludes "flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey and animal milk and its derivatives.''

In a vegan world the creatures would be reintegrated within the balance and sanity of nature as she is in herself. A great and historic wrong, whose effect upon the course of evolution must have been stupendous, would be righted. The idea that his fellow creatures might be used by man for self-interested purposes would be so alien to human thought as to be almost unthinkable. In this light, veganism is not so much welfare as liberation, for the creatures and for the mind and heart of man; not so much an effort to [make] the present relationship bearable, as an uncompromising recognition that because it is in the main one of master and slave, it has to be abolished before something better and finer can be built.

Veganism is in truth an affirmation that where love is, exploitation vanishes. It possesses historical continuity with the movement that set free the human slaves. Were it put into effect, every basic wrong done to animals by man would automatically disappear. At its heart is the healing power of compassion, the highest expression of love of which man is capable. For it is a giving without hope of a getting. And yet, because he would free himself from many of the demands made by his own lower nature, the benefit to man himself would be incalculable.

Leslie Cross, (Vice-President,Vegan Soc.)
39, Willow Crescent East, Uxbridge, Middx.
(http://www.animalrightscommunity.com/bl … vegan-blog)
=====================

while a vegan must be a vegetarian, the converse is not necessarily true. one of the probable reasons the vegan term was coined, of course, was because of the absurd usage of vegetarian to mean just about anything anyone felt like.

the veg btw doesn't stand for vegetables - the latin root is vegetus means source of life or lively or vibrant, but it is the same root from which vegetation or vegetable are derived. Please note that bovine mammarian secretions, poultry menstrual excretions and bee vomit do not possess the same root ... no matter how much the wannabe 'vegetarian' might insist.

Towards Freedom

#1 2006-06-11 20:22:42

veg definitions

#2 2006-06-11 20:26:43

Re: veg definitions

#3 2008-02-09 18:10:55

Re: veg definitions

Board footer