The word "vegan"

[veggylvr]

I know that in the small Texas town I live in, vegan has negative connotations and some generally unfair stereotypes politically. I prefer to avoid dealing with that. I also think that eating like Dr. McDougall advocates is much healthier and, since it is much more specific about what I do and do not eat, I tell people I eat a whole plant-based diet.

It would be simpler if "plant-based" became a term that the vast majority of people understood, but that's not the case yet, and, even if it happens, that term will probably just end up having the same negative connotations.

We can't hide from the fact that this WOE is weird to the majority of people, and no matter what we call it, that term will still be associated with being different, which will always be threatening to some.

This reminds me a bit of how "feminist" has become a term that a lot of young women do not want to use. They have those beliefs, yet they don't want people to think they're militant and gender biased.

Yet, isn't it a disservice to the cause - and kind of cowardly - to run away from a term out of fear of misperception? When we do that, we essentially leave the term to the militants only, making things even worse for us. Then, nobody knows that there are reasonable, non-militant vegans.

[fulenn]

It would be simpler if "plant-based" became a term that the vast majority of people understood, but that's not the case yet, and, even if it happens, that term will probably just end up having the same negative connotations.

Absolutely and who's fooling anyone? As soon as you get around to saying you don't eat meat you're a freak anyway.

Yet, isn't it a disservice to the cause - and kind of cowardly - to run away from a term out of fear of misperception?

Cowardly is a good way to put it. I'd like to add that some of the posts here are pretty awful with no regard for other readers. I guess we want to seem very exclusive here at McDougallville and let vegans know they are not welcome? Maybe I should be ashamed to say I'm a McDougaller. People might read this thread and think I too am a bigot.

Hmmm, I don't think I have ever been referred to as either a freak or cowardly before and I certainly hope those words were not referencing me.

In my situation, I have had such a visible improvement in my health that the people in this small town have asked me what made the difference. It was NOT a vegan diet, it was a whole food plant-based McDougall diet and that is what I tell them. I am not a vegan. I have a close friend who IS a vegan and I have no problem with that. The people who I live and work with are respectful and joyful for me in regards to the health benefits that I have experienced from eating this way and they do not see me as a freak nor do they treat me as such. I'm sorry you have experienced such people. Prejudice exists in many forms, but my choosing to label myself as what I am is not one of them.

Fulenn

[Salley]

Okay, I'm confused, maybe I am misunderstanding here but it seems like some people are trying to argue why they don't want to label themselves as vegan and as far as I know, no one has ever argued that anyone should, that would just be weird... besides which most McDougallers aren't vegan (I imagine) and most vegans aren't McDougallers in any case. For myself the points I have been trying to make are that if we actually do want to call ourselves vegan we don't have to be perfect anymore than we have to be perfect to self identify as a "McDougaller" and that this is, for the most part (with the exception of the honey 'controversy') a vegan diet. That doesn't mean you *have* to call it that, and again, I don't think anyone has argued that point either, just that it is what it is whatever you decide to call it... and that's one of my other points, how strange (and at times offensive) it is to go to so much trouble to insist it isn't what it is... quite frankly calling it 'plant-based' when there was already a well established term, commonly used even to describe McDougall foods on the shelves, is a bit insulting... sort of like someone saying they are a follower of the new testament but insisting they aren't "christian" or don't follow "christian" practices, because the implication is there is enough "wrong" with "those people" and that term you don't want anyone else thinking that's what you do, even though that is what you do. It would be just as easy to design an unhealthy plant-based (which I don't see how that term can include honey or mushrooms for that matter) meal as a vegan one, so I don't see how trading in one term for the other matters so much. I mean like it or not, if you are eating on plan you are mostly if not entirely eating vegan... I find it incredibly sad this seems to bother people so terribly much.

Just to reiterate, I don't care what anyone wants to call their diet or label or not label themselves and I'm pretty confident no one else does either. It's the motivation, especially to the extent where it creates confusion for others, I find myself questioning.... but if for whatever reason anyone wants to distance themselves from one term or another, feel free, I generally just go along with whatever term anyone else wants to use myself, I'm easy, it just gets a bit tiresome and, yeah, silly, to have to keep changing terms to make others not get all twitchy... like Jan mentioned, I don't understand what the big deal is...

[Salley]

The word vegan doesn't care at all about processed foods. The word paleo does. That is why it'd be easier for me to explain my diet quickly to a paleo eater than to many vegans, even though my diet is mostly vegan.

Norm, I understand what you are trying to say... I mean I can find more food to eat at a steak house than a vegan restaurant often... I just found it hard to believe that you would truly be more easily accommodated by paleo eaters than vegan eaters. I've been to potlucks with both paleo and vegan offerings and the paleo is just so far outside of anything I eat I can't imagine it ever working.... they stick loads of meat in *everything*... granted the vegan lentil stew might have a TB of oil in the whole pot and I'd probably have to pass on the vegan salad if it's already been dressed but usually there will be at least *something* and when at a paleo type friend's home about all I can find are possibly some green leaves and *maybe* broccoli if I'm really lucky in the fridge, but there's always tons of options in the pantry and fridge/freezer at a vegan's home. Plus, quite honestly, at this point it's hard for me to eat in a paleo home regardless -seeing all that flesh and the smell makes me lose my appetite I'm afraid. At least in the vegan home it's easy enough for them to hold off on the oil... and that's usually about all the further request I need. I don't know any vegan that *only* has already packaged processed food.... besides which many of those still at least fit within the McDougall plan. Even in your mentioning of how you would describe it to your paleo pals you said 'no animal products'... vegan is just a way to say the same thing with fewer syllables, so why be so afraid of it? (again, I'm not saying you *have* to, I'm just saying it sure seems simpler... I'm talking being able to say the same thing for 1/3 the syllable cost here, maybe it's just the fact that I am so obviously challenged by being able to get a point across succinctly that makes this seem like such an incredibly great word to be able to use )

[Theodore]

Okay, I'm confused, maybe I am misunderstanding here but it seems like some people are trying to argue why they don't want to label themselves as vegan and as far as I know, no one has ever argued that anyone should, that would just be weird... besides which most McDougallers aren't vegan (I imagine) and most vegans aren't McDougallers in any case. For myself the points I have been trying to make are that if we actually do want to call ourselves vegan we don't have to be perfect anymore than we have to be perfect to self identify as a "McDougaller" and that this is, for the most part (with the exception of the honey 'controversy') a vegan diet. That doesn't mean you *have* to call it that, and again, I don't think anyone has argued that point either, just that it is what it is whatever you decide to call it... and that's one of my other points, how strange (and at times offensive) it is to go to so much trouble to insist it isn't what it is... quite frankly calling it 'plant-based' when there was already a well established term, commonly used even to describe McDougall foods on the shelves, is a bit insulting... sort of like someone saying they are a follower of the new testament but insisting they aren't "christian" or don't follow "christian" practices, because the implication is there is enough "wrong" with "those people" and that term you don't want anyone else thinking that's what you do, even though that is what you do. It would be just as easy to design an unhealthy plant-based (which I don't see how that term can include honey or mushrooms for that matter) meal as a vegan one, so I don't see how trading in one term for the other matters so much. I mean like it or not, if you are eating on plan you are mostly if not entirely eating vegan... I find it incredibly sad this seems to bother people so terribly much.

Just to reiterate, I don't care what anyone wants to call their diet or label or not label themselves and I'm pretty confident no one else does either. It's the motivation, especially to the extent where it creates confusion for others, I find myself questioning.... but if for whatever reason anyone wants to distance themselves from one term or another, feel free, I generally just go along with whatever term anyone else wants to use myself, I'm easy, it just gets a bit tiresome and, yeah, silly, to have to keep changing terms to make others not get all twitchy... like Jan mentioned, I don't understand what the big deal is...

I think I'm the one who's confused, Salley. Many of us have explained to you very carefully the various reasons why we don't refer to ourselves or our diet as "vegan". And yet here you are again talking about how you don't understand it, and how, despite this being your 10th (or so) post on the topic, you don't really care what people call themselves. I'd be interested to see how many times you post on a topic that you do care about ! And just to be clear, there are probably many McDougallers who do refer to themselves or their diet as vegan, and I'm sure there are many more McDougallers who'd be happy to "admit" that their diet is a type of vegan diet, so no-one needs to feel alienated by this thread.

At this point, what it's starting to look like is a rather juvenile attempt on your part to wave a finger at people and say "haha, you're vegan whether you like it or not". So I doubt that anything we say will "convince" you, but for the benefit of other enquiring souls reading this thread, let me recap the various reasons why many people here, including Dr McDougall himself, do not refer to themselves or their diet as "vegan":

1) Some people here eat or wear animal products and therefore do not feel that they qualify for the term "vegan".

2) Some people here feel that the word "vegan" does not adequately capture the additional restrictions of their diet.

3) Some people here simply do not want to be associated with the rather large number of preachy, grease-fuelled cupcake-pushers who currently populate the vegan movement.

4) Some people here are motivated by a combination of the above reasons.

The fact is, some McDougallers may be eating a diet that falls into a lot of categories. There's a member Burgess for instance who doesn't eat any grains or pulses. There isn't anything he eats that wouldn't be suitable for a paleo. So should he describe himself or his diet as paleo ? Would we understand if he didn't want to be associated with those monkey-brain munchers ? Would paleos even want a meat-shunner calling themselves "paleo" ?

And that brings me to my final point, which is: if this diet is so vegan, then why does it receive so much venom from so many "highly principled" vegans on their "peace-loving" and "wonderfully wellcoming" message boards ?!

[TerriT]

Theodore, I think you've summed it all up very eloquently.

[rickfm]

3) Some people here simply do not want to be associated with the rather large number of preachy, grease-fuelled cupcake-pushers who currently populate the vegan movement.

Sorry... couldn't help myself.

[Wild4Stars]

Theodore does it again.

There are also those of us who still cook non-vegan foods for our family, which REALLY sets those militant vegans into convulsions. I've been told I CAN'T call myself a vegan if I cook chicken for my husband.

[veggylvr]

Only here could a bunch of vegans argue over being vegan.

I don't like the word "caucasian". I'm so much more than that - I've got a little native American in me and goodness knows what else, but darnit I have to check a box at times, and that's the closest way to describe my appearance and heritage.

Unless they aren't following the plan, McDougallers don't eat meat or dairy. Sure, maybe some cheat here and there - and some of us do still cook meat for others - but no waiter, storekeeper, or host wants to know about our dark moments of failure. It's hard enough to figure out how to feed us. We don't need to make it harder.

I get that some vegans are elitist, but refusing to use the term because of that is, in itself, a form of elitism. You're setting yourself above the preachy cupcake eaters, which perhaps you should, but own it for what it is - elitist.

Of course, everyone is free to use whatever term they want, and with close friends, more dietary detail is fine - "McDougaller" or "plant-based" may work if you explain - but in the larger world, when ordering off a menu, for instance, I think it's simply polite to say "vegan" because that's still what the majority of waitstaff will understand best. No meat, no dairy. Add in "no oil", and you're done. Whip out your leather wallet and pay for the meal...I'm betting nobody will really notice or care.

How about "veganish"?

[JohnLarson]

I like veganish. I also will start calling myself caucasianish.

[ETeSelle]

I describe myself as a no-added fat, whole foods vegan, b/c I really AM vegan. But I agree--if you are not avoiding leather and other animal products, you're not a vegan and you shouldn't call yourself one.

[JeffN]

As an FYI...

.... about a year and a half ago, I was speaking at an event along with Dr Campbell, Dr Diehl, Dr Esselstyn, Rip, Dr John Kelley, Dr Roger Greenlaw, Dr Demas and several other notables and at the end of the event, we had a panel discussion with all the speakers.

The question was asked about the word vegan and its appropriateness in describing this way of life and diet and the person asking the question asked if everyone on the panel could respond to how they felt about it.

As the microphone went down the line from one speaker to the next, everyone, no exception said they did not want to be associated with either the vegan word or the vegan movement as they felt it did more to distract from their main focus and to confuse people then it did to help them as by using the word it associated them with a movement that does not have the same specific focus, goals or details and is often heavily involved in other areas (ie, animal rights) that are not related at all to their specific focus.

In Health
Jeff

[Wild4Stars]

I describe myself as a no-added fat, whole foods vegan, b/c I really AM vegan. But I agree--if you are not avoiding leather and other animal products, you're not a vegan and you shouldn't call yourself one.

As far as I'm concerned ETeSelle and Jeff have answered exactly the way I feel. Thank you both.

[veggylvr]

I can certainly understand why the doctors or other plant-based advocates wouldn't use the term. They have a larger responsibility to deliver a health message, and any inconsistencies would be critiqued and ridiculed.

Most of us, however, aren't delivering any message except what we need to eat. I can inform my host that I'm a whole food plant-based eater, but that will probably just confuse him/her. I may still get a meal with cheese or other dairy products.

I also think that most people who aren't emersed in any dietary culture no longer associate the term "vegan" with animal rights. My girlfriend describes herself as "raw vegan" because her diet mainly consists of raw vegetable smoothies, but she also rides a Harley and wears leather biker gear. I don't think she, or any of our other friends, has noted this irony. A militant vegan probably would, but the rest of us merely took it as a description of what she eats, not who she is.

[Lesliec1]

My girlfriend describes herself as "raw vegan" because her diet mainly consists of raw vegetable smoothies, but she also rides a Harley and wears leather biker gear. I don't think she, or any of our other friends, have noted this irony. A militant vegan probably would, but the rest of us merely took it as a description of what she eats, not who she is.

So true. I know vegans who aren't animal rights people at all. They breed dogs and ride horses which many AR people wouldn't do. I also know AR people who don't like cats or dogs and would never want one in their house.

I don't like the term "militant" because people tend to slap that onto ANY group at all and justify why they are prejudiced. Militant Christian, militant teacher, militant gay, etc.