The word "vegan"

[Salley]

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".

seriously? even with repeated clarification on that point? will it make any difference if I say it again? Eating a vegan meal does not make a person a 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.

Those are all reasons not to label oneself vegan... none are arguments against labeling a meal vegan, which was the point of the start of this thread, whether or not to use the word to help describe how we eat... brec mentioned 'vegan, no oil' was an economical way to describe the diet, and it really is, whether or not someone chooses to use that term themselves.

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.

Well, I guess if you really are confused then I've done a terrible job of expressing myself and will have to just admit defeat (did you really count my posts? for some reason, I find that very odd)... I thought I did express I was deeply troubled by the motivation and the prejudice behind avoiding the term... so while I really don't care what someone calls them self, clearly I do care about the person behind that label and how they think, feel, care about and treat others.

[veggylvr]

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.

Yeah, I agree. It's a strong word. I was just using it because that seems to be the view of vegans here. But, to me, "animal rights activist" describes what someone does or believes, and "vegan" describes how someone eats. A vegan can certainly be an AR activist, but not necessarily.

Maybe at one time, all vegans were AR activists, but this seems to have changed, which is the case with words. They evolve to have different meanings. I submit that the average person now identifies the term "vegan" with someone who simply eats no meat or dairy, not in an activist sense.

[Debbie]

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".

seriously? even with repeated clarification on that point? will it make any difference if I say it again? Eating a vegan meal does not make a person a 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.

Those are all reasons not to label oneself vegan... none are arguments against labeling a meal vegan, which was the point of the start of this thread, whether or not to use the word to help describe how we eat... brec mentioned 'vegan, no oil' was an economical way to describe the diet, and it really is, whether or not someone chooses to use that term themselves.

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.

Well, I guess if you really are confused then I've done a terrible job of expressing myself and will have to just admit defeat (did you really count my posts? for some reason, I find that very

odd)... I thought I did express I was deeply troubled by the motivation and the prejudice behind avoiding the term... so while I really don't care what someone calls them self, clearly I do care about the person behind that label and how they think, feel, care about and treat others.

I think what youre missing is, even if I don't label myself but my meal vegan, it confuses people. I've said my food is vegan then had people question why I was wearing leather shoes or use dove soap or whatever. They also shut down. They don't want to hear it. Period. To them it is an agenda. It doesn't stay about me or what I eat it turns into me judging them, they feel guilty eating their food in front of me. All becAuse I used the word vegan to describe my diet, when I'm not vegan to begin with.

[erin]

"preachy, grease-fuelled cupcake-pushers"

Wow. Thats one way to describe vegans. Here's another:

"A vegan is someone who tries to live without exploiting animals, for the benefit of animals, people and the planet."

Since most of the non-related people who know me don't even know I'm vegan, and the last cupcake I made was fat free (and at the request of a 3 yr.old) I find the latter definition a better fit .

P.S. Anti-vegan sentiment has always been mind-boggling to me . It's like hating on the good guys.

~ Erin

[Lesliec1]

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.

Yeah, I agree. It's a strong word. I was just using it because that seems to be the view of vegans here.

Definitely not directed at you. Some of these posts are so offensive. Nothing like one minority picking on another. My fault for reading a thread with this title. When will I learn?

[LoriLynn]

Clearly, the label "vegan" has a lot of baggage associated with it, much of it negative. I think one can distinguish between being a "vegan" and eating a "vegan diet". While it is true that "vegan diet" doesn't adequately describe our WOE, I think it gets us in the ballpark quicker and easier than spouting off "whole foods, plant-based no-oil diet". And when I am looking at a restaurant menu to find possible food options, I am thrilled to see items labeled "vegan". Then I can scroll through and see if I can find something without processed fake meat or added fat. It gives me a starting point with the waitperson to discuss meal options. That seems to be the easiest approach for me. With the exception of honey, our diet really is a subset of a vegan diet, which in turn, is a subset of a vegetarian diet.

It is my thought that if more level-headed, health-minded folks used the term "vegan diet" or "low-fat vegan diet" or "whole foods vegan diet", perhaps in time we could collectively alter the public's perception of what a vegan diet is and how it may differ from actually being a vegan. The meaning of words change over time, often negatively (like "retarded", "special" or "gay"), and there is no reason to think that the term "vegan" or "vegan diet" couldn't evolve into a different perception, a more positive one. In time, it could be associated with being health conscious, being educated about nutrition, and being concerned for the environment and the future of our planet. We don't have to avoid the word because of the connotations; we could use the word and CHANGE those connotations. I am not suggesting that we change the meaning of what it is to be vegan, but I am suggesting that we should be able to mention a "vegan diet" without people thinking we are extremists.

In my mind, that would be the preferred option until we can find a simple one or two word phrase to call it. It may take decades of usage for that newer word to become widespread enough for the general population to understand what we mean. Perhaps, this is why Dr. McDougall has used terms like "starchivore" and "starch-eater" and "starch-based". If we can agree on one of those new words and use it extensively, then when we get the blank stare of misunderstanding, we can add, "It's like vegan diet without the processed foods and added fat". Simultaneously, let's work to improve the perception of the phrase "vegan diet".

[Norm]

How about "veganish"?

Excellent! I will use this when the context is appropriate, as it clearly points the direction my diet is headed while clearly stating it's not the same, and hopefully leaving the person listening open and responsive to just what the differences are.

I'd also like to add in a clarification.... some of us are taking heat for being adamant about avoiding the word vegan as if we're putting ourselves above vegans, pretending to be better than vegans, or in some way looking down at vegans.

That is not in any way my motivation.

I have a respect for vegans, and it continues to grow daily. A couple of vegan friends of mine planted lots of seeds in my mind over the years that made my transition this direction easier. Having separated myself from eating animal products for some time now I also see myself becoming more vegan, and as I said earlier, I may one day work up to calling myself a vegan.

But I do not call my diet a vegan diet now because it isn't, and I respect the vegans I know enough to make that clarification.

And I likely won't use the word vegan as the main describer of my diet even after I become vegan, for the various reasons stated already, and because I honestly believe that the word steers the thought processes more in the direction of my relationship to animals than it does to my relationship to my diet, and when I'm talking about diet, as I am when I'm talking about food, I want the focus to be on the food, not the label.
Now, if the context of the discussion happens to be animal rights I'll gladly talk about my experiences having given up meat and how that is shaping my attitudes towards the morality of exploiting animals for any purpose and I'd gladly share where I'm at on my journey to becoming vegan.
But most people simply cannot see these things and have a cognitive dissonance that wont allow them to see clearly the vegan perspective. I believe the only way you'll ever reach those people is to remove that barrier by putting them some distance from it by getting them to stop eating animal products. You do that by pushing the dietary aspects of eating animal products.

Along these lines.... I have a hat. It's made of rabbit fur. I get so cold anymore and that hat keeps my head so warm and I wear it a lot this time of year. A vegan wouldn't. It truly saddens me that a rabbit (or two, or three) was bred, raised, then slaughtered so that I could have that hat. I surely would never buy such a hat now and perpetuate the suffering.
But while vegans care about rabbits in general, who cares about THAT rabbit? I do. I put his fur on my head every day. Vegans care about all rabbits, and on some level I do too, but by far my biggest focus is on one rabbit, the one that died to make my hat. So I keep the hat. I wear the hat. And I apologize to the rabbit and tell him that his death has touched me and touches me every time I put on that hat. And I thank the rabbit and tell him I think of him often, and assure him that no other rabbit will ever suffer and die to make ME a hat, and that his death is helping to shape me into a better person and that perhaps I can have a positive impact on the world and that maybe this small thing can bring meaning to his sacrifice. I can't bring myself to get rid of that hat because it's all that's left on this planet to remind me of the sad life of that particular rabbit.
So I wear my rabbit hat, and yes, I've taken flack over it, having it pointed out to me that I'm a hypocrite for not eating meat yet wearing a rabbit on my head. Under better circumstances that could have been a teaching moment where I shared all this with the fellow who said that to me.... but it wasn't a good interaction. I probably shouldn't have told him I could skin his hide and make a matching coat to go with my hat! Then again... maybe it was a teaching moment after all!

-Norm

[EvanG]

veggylvr has had some really great posts on this thread, imo. I also use the vegan, no oil added description as a quick way to tell people what I eat. I also see how the Drs want to avoid that for reasons veggylvr already stated.

The one thing to add is that when some people hear 'vegan, no oil added' they hear the vegan part, but forget the no oil part. If they are cooking for you, that is a problem. Maybe 'no added oil vegan diet' would be more effective. That way, you stress 'no oil', and you specify that the diet is vegan, not the person. I think people grasp onto the vegan part, because they know what that is. So, even stressing the no oil part might not always work.

[Debbie]

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.

Yeah, I agree. It's a strong word. I was just using it because that seems to be the view of vegans here.

Some of these posts are so offensive.

Im kind of having trouble finding offensive posts in this thread. I know threads about veganism in the past have been very nasty and contentious, but this one by far is the tamest Ive seen in quite some time. Heck, I dont even think Jim has commented in this thread, which means he's not making his presence known, as a kind of warning that things are getting tense. Maybe Ive missed something? Or maybe its mine that are so offensive that I am unable to see it?

[sharonbikes]

I think the answer to the OP's question is found in the length of this thread - if we who are all fairly like minded in how we eat cannot agree, without the need for debate and discussion, what it means when you say you are "vegan" - how could we expect the rest of the world to know what we mean when we use the word "vegan."

For me, I will stick with eating real food and not worry about a label. No one really asks me what I eat or don't eat. I guess I view it as now I don't eat animal products or added oil, but when I was eating SAD, I didn't eat cottage cheese, jello or lima beans (yuck!), but I didn't feel the need to apply a label to how I ate then and I don't now.

Sharon

[Theodore]

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.

Those are all reasons not to label oneself vegan... none are arguments against labeling a meal vegan, which was the point of the start of this thread, whether or not to use the word to help describe how we eat... brec mentioned 'vegan, no oil' was an economical way to describe the diet, and it really is, whether or not someone chooses to use that term themselves.

Perhaps the phrase "vegan no-oil, yes-honey" would be more appropriate.

The thing is, that doesn't adequately convey the fact that we're aiming for whole grains. And it actually makes it sound like we're coming onto the person we're talking to.

Plus there's still the problem that, however you dress it up, the word "vegan" does not adequately convey the fact that we come from planet earth.

[veggylvr]

But while vegans care about rabbits in general, who cares about THAT rabbit? I do. I put his fur on my head every day. Vegans care about all rabbits, and on some level I do too, but by far my biggest focus is on one rabbit, the one that died to make my hat. So I keep the hat. I wear the hat. And I apologize to the rabbit and tell him that his death has touched me and touches me every time I put on that hat. And I thank the rabbit and tell him I think of him often, and assure him that no other rabbit will ever suffer and die to make ME a hat, and that his death is helping to shape me into a better person and that perhaps I can have a positive impact on the world and that maybe this small thing can bring meaning to his sacrifice. I can't bring myself to get rid of that hat because it's all that's left on this planet to remind me of the sad life of that particular rabbit.

What a moving passage, Norm. I've come to this way of eating after years of living with a vegetarian. He became one back in the 70s, before it was mainstream, and sadly, he is gone now. He never understood how eating so many oily, cheesy foods was bad for his health. Yet, he was never apologetic about buying second-hand leather or fur. He loved yard sales and thrift shops, and he'd buy those things used. In his reasoning, what good did it do not to appreciate the fur or leather at that point? You are paying tribute to the rabbit who provided the fur for your hat, and that is a lovely thing. It's much more than most people do chowing down on a chicken or beef dinner.

[Theodore]

"preachy, grease-fuelled cupcake-pushers"

Wow. Thats one way to describe vegans. Here's another:

"A vegan is someone who tries to live without exploiting animals, for the benefit of animals, people and the planet."

Since most of the non-related people who know me don't even know I'm vegan, and the last cupcake I made was fat free (and at the request of a 3 yr.old) I find the latter definition a better fit .

P.S. Anti-vegan sentiment has always been mind-boggling to me . It's like hating on the good guys.

~ Erin

I can't let this thread die without pointing out how sick it is that someone on this forum would try and twist another member's words like that. Here's what I actually said:

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.

The thing is, even when taken hideously out of context as it was, you can still see that that comment was aimed at a certain style of vegan advocate, as opposed to a certain style of vegan. Let alone all vegans.

And if anyone wants to talk about people hating on the good guys, they should go to a mainstream vegan message board and see how those folks talk about Dr McDougall / Dr Esselstyn et al.

FTR, I've been an ethical "vegan" for 12 years now, so I know what a vegan is and what I'm ashamed to be associated with.

[JeffN]

To clarify my comments...

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.

The same holds true for those of us, who in describing what we eat or what we want to eat, do not want to be seen as inconsistent, even if it is just in our daily lives, even if we are just describing our diet. Many have commented in this thread about the inconsistencies it raises for them. I agree with them. As did the panel, which was speaking in regard to much more than just their professional health message.

Most of us, however, aren't delivering any message except what we need to eat.

In many cases, such as when ordering at a restaurant or when explaining to someone who invited you over for dinner, this is true. However, in addition, for many people, there is more to the picture because each time they describe their diet to someone else, they are also sharing (or wanting to share) in their own little way, a little bit of this WOE and this WOL and the message of health and hope that it carries with it.

Therefore, in both cases, describing it accurately is important and while it is true that for many people following this WOE, their diets will be able to be classified vegan, the term vegan falls way short of describing many of the most important aspects.

Because of my unique position, many of the people who come to me are already vegan and/or plant based/strong/perfect, yet they are not well. And, one of their main frustrations they have is that they have been doing the vegan and/or plant based/strong/perfect for some time and it does not seem to be working for them in the same way they hear it does for so many others. There have even been many such discussion in these very forums.

In fact, one of the biggest problems I see in helping people improve their diet is their use of the term vegan to describe their diet or their food choices. So much so, that I ask people not to use the term when discussing what they eat with me.

At the last 10 day program, in one of the classes, we had a long discussion on why the use of the thought process, "well at least it was vegan" can do more harm than good especially for those who are on the path of improving their health, as by using that phrase, they are mixing up two concepts. Too many times, I hear people say that they were out to a restaurant and/or at an event or party and there was not any healthy food to eat so they ate "so and so" food, and then they say to me, "but at least it was vegan!" This tells me absolutely nothing about the food other than it had not animal products in it. And, sadly, most of the time, the food they choose may have been high in fat, sat fat, oil, salt, sugar, refined/processed grains and low in fiber, etc etc (or all of the above) and was nothing more than pure junk food.

The worst part is not that such a food on a rare occasion may hurt them, but that they believe it was OK or "more" OK, because it was "vegan." However, I am not promoting veganism or vegan food but health and healthy food and so an unhealthy choice should not be rationalized in a discussion of health as being a healthy choice just because it is vegan. Label it what is it. Don't say, "at least it was vegan, say "I ate some pure unhealthy junk food that was vegan."

Best of all, make a healthy choice, and/or do the best you can in regard to making a healthy choice and keep that the focus. And, for most of us, it will be vegan too.

I travel about 60% of the time and so am on the road and eating out often. I have found that some of the worst restaurants for me are ones that promote themselves as serving vegan and/or vegetarian options, with those promoting the concept of "raw" being the worse. I rarely if ever can find anything to eat at these restaurants that is healthy. And, if I have to go through the same process of special ordering to get something healthy, then why did I even have to go to a veg/vegan/raw restaurant to begin with as they usually charge more. At our local (and famous) vegan restaurant (at which I can not eat), you are charged extra if you want your food made with whole grains. The most popular item on their menu is their fried cauliflower.

I was at a recent health conference put on by a traditional group. For dinner there was a choice of fish, chicken or vegan. I asked what was the vegan choice and they said a lasagna dish made with vegan cheese, etc. No sides of veggies (as they were supposed to be in the lasagna). So, I asked what was the chicken dish. They said, grilled chicken, with sides of steamed vegetables and sweet potato. I ordered the chicken dish and traded my piece of chicken with the person next to me for their steamed veggies and sweet potato. The non vegan choice was the better choice.

This is why I often say that steak houses are my favorite healthy restaurants. I can get a large plain baked (or sweet) potato, a large salad and some plain steamed veggies without any problems and the fancier the place, the easier it is.

I am currently traveling on vacation and last week I stopped in to a new restaurant featuring local, organic, fresh, healthy, vegetarian food. However, there was nothing I will eat. One item they have is a "Warm Kale Salad" which is finished w/Braggs and it says .. A healthy alternative to soy sauce. So i asked the server, what is Braggs and she said its a healthy alternative to soy as it has much less sodium.

It has the same amount!

And if they are promoting themselves as veg and healthy, they need to know this. Everything is marked veg, or gluten free, organic etc but its all white flour and some of the veg stuff has eggs & milk and the vegan is full of oil.

We spoke to the owner who said, come in for dinner and their chef will make me whatever I want. So, I did. I ordered a large version of an appetizer salad that was ok and got me about 100 calories at most (for about $10). Then we special ordered a plate of quinoa, and steamed vegetables. We reviewed this with the manager several times, emphasizing that I wanted just plain steamed veggies and a starch, either quinoa, brown rice or a sweet potato. Our plate come out and it was a little salad on 1/3 the plate, which I did not need as I already paid $10 for a salad, a small pile of quinoa and a small pile of mixed vegetables DRIPPING in oil and full of salt. It may have been vegan but I would not eat it.

So we got up and left (leaving a few bucks to cover the costs) and ate next door at the Thai place and got nice size salads, steamed edamame without any salt, and a plate full of steamed veggies & steamed brown rice. All for half the price

This is what happens to many who go out to eat and describe their diet as vegan. They may think it is easier, but it does not work and they are often left with unhealthy options that they rationalize as healthy because they are vegan.

Your perspective may be different, but mine is as a healthy person and as a health professional who works with unhealthy people (many of them already vegan) to help them get well, and from that perspective, the word vegan simply does not work.

For those who missed it, they may enjoy this thread and option 21.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=16395&p=149495

In Health
Jeff

[veggylvr]

So, what term should replace vegan? And won't the same negatives eventually apply to that as well?

Someone could eat potatoes or a salad loaded with oil, and say, "at least it was plant-based whole food". And restaurants will probably still not get why their "healthy" offerings aren't really healthy. And the vast majority of people will still probably develop negative associations with whatever term we use because our type of diet is out of the norm.

It seems to me that we should work to make the term "vegan" - which is already widely accepted in our culture - more synonymous with healthy food. We should educate the junk food vegans - or maybe just spread that term around as a way to separate our healthy vegan diet from the unhealthy kind. "I'm vegan...but not a junk food vegan...I eat whole food."

That seems easier than trying to get an entirely new term popularized.

I've tried telling people I eat the "Forks Over Knives" diet, but most have just stared blankly because they haven't seen the movie. Whole food, plant-based goes over about the same way. I don't mind explaining if people are interested, and there's time, but in restaurants and stores, "vegan" is the quickest way (and even then, I often get asked if I eat fish).