Salley wrote: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 ?!
Never eat anything that has an ass.