Pescitarianism in this forum

sweet-rasmus

So, what do you think about it all? I understand that everyone needs to voice their opinions and that pescetarians like to associate themselves with vegetarians to help avoid confusion when concerning food, etc, but... As a vegan (long time vegetarian), I find it very irritating to have that association of; "Do you eat fish?" tied to anyone trying to feed me. I can honestly say percetarians and fake 'vegetarians' drive me a little mad by associating the eating fish label with vegetarians.

So everytime a thread here is answered (eg. 'who is what for how long' poll, the pescetarians signed in as vegetarians), do you find it annoying, the pescetarians taking the vegetarian label?

Perhaps posts conerning pescetarians could more clearly be labeled so? Pescetarian posts in a "Vegan and Vegetarian" forum... eh, annoying? If the pescetarian voice is to be represented properly, any chance of adding them into the forum title?

Sorry if I've gone on a rant, but the whole idea that vegetarians eat fish drives me nuts!

Opinions?

rockbeer

How pure do you want to be? Would you take exception to 'fake vegetarians' wearing leather? Do you wear leather?? Do you ever down a Guinness?

I'm sure if we analyse your behaviour in enough detail we'll eventually turn up some inconsistency.

Why does it bother you so much what other people do or say or choose to call themselves? Is it about a badge of purity, or about people doing what they do for their own personal reasons. Seems to me that you're hung up on the importance of labels and that you want everyone to conform to your personal definition of vegetarian.

Perhaps the forum should be retitled "Vegan & Vegetarian according to the rules laid down by sweet-rasmus"

unicorn2

I'm with Rasmus on this one, and no i've never downed a guinness or wear leather

rockbeer wrote:

How pure do you want to be? Would you take exception to 'fake vegetarians' wearing leather? Do you wear leather?? Do you ever down a Guinness?

I'm sure if we analyse your behaviour in enough detail we'll eventually turn up some inconsistency.

Why does it bother you so much what other people do or say or choose to call themselves? Is it about a badge of purity, or about people doing what they do for their own personal reasons. Seems to me that you're hung up on the importance of labels and that you want everyone to conform to your personal definition of vegetarian.

Perhaps the forum should be retitled "Vegan & Vegetarian according to the rules laid down by sweet-rasmus"

maniac101

sweet-rasmus wrote:

So everytime a thread here is answered (eg. 'who is what for how long' poll, the pescitarians signed in as vegetarians), do you find it annoying, the pescitarians taking the vegetarian label?

OP, your post appears to indicate that you claim some ownership rights over the 'vegetarian label' (your words). I don't eat animals but I've been known to eat fish on occasion. This is a pragmatic compromise, which is necessary as I'm part of young family of meat-eaters. Yet I refuse to be labelled as either a vegetarian or a 'pescitarian', because I don't like people-labelling, and because I don't want to be associated with people who claim exclusive ownership of these labels.

Vegetarianism is just a word that broadly describes an eating habit, it's not a movement, nor is it an exclusive club. As you know, people don't eat meat for many reasons: health, religious, ethical, etc. Personally, I don't eat meat because I object to the way that farm animals are treated when alive. I'm sure there are many people who don't eat meat for other reasons who wouldn't like to be considered part of the same grouping as me.

I consult a 'Vegan and Vegetarian' forum like this because I'm most likely to find information there that might be useful to me, not because I want to associate with a particular grouping. This is just a message board after all, and is (and should be) open to meat eaters and non-meat eaters alike. It's not an exclusive talking shop reserved for 'I'm-more-pure-than-you' precious vegetarian fundamentalists.

Nature Boy

maniac101 wrote:

OP, your post appears to indicate that you claim some ownership rights over the 'vegetarian label' (your words).
...
Yet I refuse to be labelled as either a vegetarian or a 'pescitarian', because I don't like people-labelling, and because I don't want to be associated with people who claim exclusive ownership of these labels.

...

It's not an exclusive talking shop reserved for 'I'm-more-pure-than-you' precious vegetarian fundamentalists.

Pesceatarians seem to use this 'we don't like labels' argument a lot and it kinda irritates me. I'm a vegetarian and i use that word (or 'label') to describe myself as it accurately describes my diet, nothing else. I don't call myself (and i'm sure i speak for most veggies here) veggie because i think i'm better than other people.

We use words to describe people because it makes life easy. Instaed of me explaining to people what i don't eat i can simply say i am a veggie and they know what i mean (or at least they should!).

Now, we all know words change meaning over time and it's possible that the word 'vegetarian' could be made to include fish eaters. But why do that? If we do that then what do veggies call themselves? Vegans? Then what do vegans call themselves? It's just easier to use another word like pescetarian.

So in summary...
Describing a diet in one word = Convenience.

Jimoslimos

unicorn2 wrote:

I'm with Rasmus on this one, and no i've never downed a guinness or wear leather

Well happy as you are in your PVC trousers.....

PVC/plastics

---

> By-product of oil

---

> Compressed remains of dead plant and animal life millions of years ago.

Point is a bit obscure, but it does show that no matter what we do we can't avoid using dead animals for our gain. (Its only a matter of a few million years that separates you from the scavenging vulture!)

sweet-rasmus wrote:

Perhaps posts conerning pescitarians could more clearly be labeled so? Pescitarian posts in a "Vegan and Vegetarian" forum... eh, annoying? If the pescitarian voice is to be represented properly, any chance of adding them into the forum title?

And perhaps while we're at it I'm sure the fruitarianists(sp) would like to be distuinguished from the nasty vegetarians and their plant-damaging ways! No need for change. I'd imagine that posts concerning fish and cooking should be in the Cooking & Recipes forum

maniac 101 wrote:

I consult a 'Vegan and Vegetarian' forum like this because I'm most likely to find information there that might be useful to me, not because I want to associate with a particular grouping. This is just a message board after all, and is (and should be) open to meat eaters and non-meat eaters alike. It's not an exclusive talking shop reserved for 'I'm-more-pure-than-you' precious vegetarian fundamentalists.

Likewise, I'm no vegetarian but I do like eating vegetables. As maniac101 correctly pointed out, the title of this forum broadly describes an eating habit NOT a political movement, otherwise this subforum should be moved out of "Food and Drink"

rockbeer

I know what you're saying Nature Boy and I've a lot of respect for your position. We've had this discussion before so you'll know that I personally don't call myself vegetarian because I eat fish occasionally. But you see there is no label that adequately describes me, that's why I don't like labels. I eat fish occasionally, maybe twice a month. So what am I - a 90% vegetarian? Pescetarian implies I eat a lot of fish, which isn't the case. In fact, it implies fish is the central element of my diet which is so far from the case that it's laughable. It's OK for you to defend labels because you stand quite happily under the vegetarian banner. From where I'm standing, labels only serve to mislead and confuse. I find it more useful to apply the word vegetarian to the things people eat rather than the people doing the eating.

Also, sweet-rasmus' use of the term 'fake vegetarian' makes it quite clear that he regards himself a cut above pescetarians (I wish he would learn to spell it - it might make his argument more convincing). If he didn't attach some kind of moral superiority to his veganism he wouldn't be so worried about those he regards as 'fakes' stealing his precious label.

Personally I have to say vegetarian and vegan fundamentalists getting on their holier-than-thou high horses and acting all superior to the rest of us is what drives me nuts.

sweet-rasmus

Nature Boy wrote:

I'm a vegetarian and i use that word (or 'label') to describe myself as it accurately describes my diet, nothing else.

Now, we all know words change meaning over time and it's possible that the word 'vegetarian' could be made to include fish eaters. But why do that? If we do that then what do veggies call themselves? Vegans? Then what do vegans call themselves? It's just easier to use another word like pescetarian.

Perfect description! I'm looking for opinions on this topic... not another argument :P
(Sorry about the spelling, but I was simply copying a previous poster's spelling )

Tar.Aldarion

Rockbeer:
"pescetarian — will not eat the flesh of any animals other than fish or other types of seafood: they may or may not also exclude other animal products like eggs and dairy from their diet. The Vegetarian Society does not accept it as a type of vegetarian diet"

This does not imply that somebody would eat a mostly fish diet, I think it is subjective, and that you infer it as that.
In my opinion it does not make you a 90% vegetarian, it makes you a pescetarian. It describes your diet, not the frequency, not inferiority or superiority.
Otherwise, whenever somebody that eats meat happens to not be eating it, they would be vegetarian. It's like saying omnivore suggest people get a balanced diet of meat and vegetables.

To me, the word describes the choice you have made, what you will and would eat. No frequency etc.
I agree with Nature boy.

maniac101

Nature Boy wrote:

I'm a vegetarian and i use that word (or 'label') to describe myself as it accurately describes my diet, nothing else. I don't call myself (and i'm sure i speak for most veggies here) veggie because i think i'm better than other people.

I think you've misunderstood me. I don't mind what you call yourself. I've absolutely no problem with you or anyone else calling themselves vegan, vegetarian or pescetarian. I've never found any need to use any of these labels for describing myself.

We use words to describe people because it makes life easy.

These words don't describe people, they describe what they eat.

Instaed of me explaining to people what i don't eat i can simply say i am a veggie and they know what i mean (or at least they should!).

Again I've no problem with this. In the same situation I simply say that I don't eat meat.

Now, we all know words change meaning over time and it's possible that the word 'vegetarian' could be made to include fish eaters. But why do that?

Why indeed. I see no reason to change the meaning of the word vegetarian and I certainly wouldn't advocate that. The word is a pronoun as well as a noun. As a pronoun, it accurately describes almost everything I eat. The fact that I've occasionally eaten food that isn't vegetarian doesn't proclude me from participating in 'Vegan & Vegetarian' forum. Fish recipes and the like have no place on this forum. However, contrary to the OP's views, the people who eat them do.

Describing a diet in one word = Convenience.

And describing a person in one word = laziness.

sweet-rasmus wrote:

Perfect description! I'm looking for opinions on this topic... not another argument :P

That sounds to me like you're looking only for opinions that are the same as yours.

nervous_twitch

maniac101 wrote:

And describing a person in one word = laziness.

That sounds to me like you're looking only for opinions that are the same as yours.

Believe it or not, labels have a very valid function - I say that I am vegetarian in order to clarify that I do not consume any type of animal flesh.

I freely admit that I am the first to dissociate myself from pescetarianism; not because I feel that I am better than anyone else, or more pure (:rolleyes:) in my beliefs, but I believe it is vital to preserve the 'vegetarian' definition - otherwise, a few years down the line, I'm gonna find myself in a situation where any dish 'Suitable for Vegetarian' may contain any type of water-dwelling animal.

Heh, what intrigues me tbh, is the fact that people who eat fish seem to want to distance themselves from the Pescetarian label. Why so?

maniac101

nervous_twitch wrote:

Believe it or not, labels have a very valid function - I say that I am vegetarian in order to clarify that I do not consume any type of animal flesh.

I freely admit that I am the first to dissociate myself from pescetarianism; not because I feel that I am better than anyone else, or more pure (:rolleyes:) in my beliefs, but I believe it is vital to preserve the 'vegetarian' definition - otherwise, a few years down the line, I'm gonna find myself in a situation where any dish 'Suitable for Vegetarian' may contain any type of water-dwelling animal.

To repeat myself, I've no problem with what you call yourself and I never suggested changing the meaning of the word vegetarian. I've taken issue with the contention of the OP that the forum should be kept exclusively for people who don't eat meat. The title of this forum describes a category of food, in the same way that the 'Beer & Wine & Spirits' and 'Snacks & Sweets' forums do. The forum title is not meant to prohibit meat eaters or fish eaters from using it.

Gadgie

maniac101 wrote:

To repeat myself, I've no problem with what you call yourself and I never suggested changing the meaning of the word vegetarian. I've taken issue with the contention of the OP that the forum should be kept exclusively for people who don't eat meat. The title of this forum describes a category of food, in the same way that the 'Beer & Wine & Spirits' and 'Snacks & Sweets' forums do. The forum title is not meant to prohibit meat eaters or fish eaters from using it.

Yes, but there's no point in said fish/other meat eaters posting a recipe containing fish or other seafood in this forum, for example. Would a recipe for (pork) bangers and mash be suitable here? I think not. So why should fish/seafood be any different?

Unless pescetarianism gets it's own forum or is added to the title of this one, then posts relating to it should go in the general food and drink forum. Don't you agree?

PS. Can you please explain how you have come to the opinion that the OP thinks that the forum should be used exclusively by vegans/vegetarians? I've read their post several times but am coming up blank.

Slaphead07

I just answer my own conscience. If some bloke down the pub thinks he's scoring a debating point by asking if my shoes/belt/truss is made out of leather then bless him but I don't answer to his conscience.
I never decided to become vegetarian but many years ago I realised i could no longer eat meat... and that included poultry and fish. The label "vegetarian" is often a handy one if eating out or visiting but I nearly always have to clarify I don't eat fish or fowl either... "nothing with a face" usually covers it!

maniac101

Gadgie wrote:

Yes, but there's no point in said fish/other meat eaters posting a recipe containing fish or other seafood in this forum, for example. Would a recipe for (pork) bangers and mash be suitable here? I think not. So why should fish/seafood be any different?

Please read my earlier post.

maniac101 wrote:

Fish recipes and the like have no place on this forum. However, contrary to the OP's views, the people who eat them do.

Gadgie

maniac101 wrote:

Fish recipes and the like have no place on this forum. However, contrary to the OP's views, the people who eat them do.

Please explain how you have come to this conclusion.

Tar.Aldarion

Indeed, she suggested adding them to the forum title too.
Like it or not maniac101, labels are a necessity for people to communicate.
Do you reject all labels people have for you? man? Woman? etc

maniac101

When the OP says 'Pescetarian posts in a "Vegan and Vegetarian" forum... eh, annoying?' I conclude that he/she finds objectionable the posts to this forum from people who occasionally eat fish. A reasonable interpretation imo, given that the poster used the term 'pescetarian' exclusively to describe people, and not diet, in the rest of the post. I accept however that if the word pescetarian in the above phrase is describing diet rather than people, then the phrase could be interpreted differently. Perhaps the OP could clarify.

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Like it or not maniac101, labels are a necessity for people to communicate.
Do you reject all labels people have for you? man? Woman? etc

No, just the ones that are used in a deliberately disassociative manner.

microgirl

maniac101 wrote:

I've taken issue with the contention of the OP that the forum should be kept exclusively for people who don't eat meat.

Ehhh, he didn't actually say that. What his primary issue appeared to be is fish-but-not-any-other-sort-of-animal-flesh-eating persons would call themselves vegetarian, such as tick that box in a poll etc etc

Now I'l happily accept that there's gonna be situations where they're limited and the only options to tick (as it were) are "Vegan" "Vegetarian" and "Meat-eater" and of those three they'll say they're vegetarian because it's easiest. It means they're not handed a plate of bacon to eat.

But the fact remains that they're *not* vegetarian, technically speaking. SO therefore should not call themselves such without qualifications, because it *does* lead to confusion for the less enlightened in the meaning of terms to ask/assume vegetarians eat fish.

Or, like me, to assume that a ham-and-cheese sandwich with the ham removed is perfectly acceptable to vegetarians, because there's no *actual* meat there, because all the vegetarians (NOT pescetarians) I ever knew until I met my boyfriend did that. Or would pick the prawns out of a mixed fried rice or whatever. As long as they weren't consuming actual flesh it seemed to be fine.

And it leads to many good restaurants having various "vegetarian" options that heavily feature Parmesan cheese, which can *never* be vegetarian.

I don't think the name of the forum should be changed, but I do think those who eat fish shouldn't call themselves vegetarians. I wouldn't go so strict about the more hidden aspects of vegetarianism though, like gelatine and glycerine and some cheeses (even if it annoys me on behalf of my boyfriend) because then we are getting into "real" vs "fake" vegetarians.

For the record, I am an unrepentant omnivore

sweet-rasmus

maniac101 wrote:

I've taken issue with the contention of the OP that the forum should be kept exclusively for people who don't eat meat. The title of this forum describes a category of food, in the same way that the 'Beer & Wine & Spirits' and 'Snacks & Sweets' forums do.

The forum title is not meant to prohibit meat eaters or fish eaters from using it.

<<---- Of course not! I never said so. The title suggests this forum deals with vegetarian/vegan issues/opinions/ideas... etc. And the association of vegetarians and fish is an issue with most veggies. Hence we have a post on it

edit: I like the last post. Also, i didn't mean to upset anyone when I said 'fake' vegetarian; it's just that I've met so many 'vegetarians' who eat chicken or seafood and I don't know what else to call them; nothing to do with how strict people are with gelatine/guinness etc, and as we've already said, the UK and Irish vegetarian societies exclude them from the concept of what a vegetarian is.

rockbeer

microgirl wrote:

But the fact remains that they're *not* vegetarian, technically speaking. SO therefore should not call themselves such without qualifications, because it *does* lead to confusion for the less enlightened in the meaning of terms to ask/assume vegetarians eat fish.

Or, like me, to assume that a ham-and-cheese sandwich with the ham removed is perfectly acceptable to vegetarians, because there's no *actual* meat there, because all the vegetarians (NOT pescetarians) I ever knew until I met my boyfriend did that. Or would pick the prawns out of a mixed fried rice or whatever. As long as they weren't consuming actual flesh it seemed to be fine.

Speaking as a "vegetarian who very occasionally eats some fish" I would be appalled by anyone who thought handing me a ham sandwich with the ham removed was acceptable.

microgirl wrote:

And it leads to many good restaurants having various "vegetarian" options that heavily feature Parmesan cheese, which can *never* be vegetarian.

I don't think the name of the forum should be changed, but I do think those who eat fish shouldn't call themselves vegetarians. I wouldn't go so strict about the more hidden aspects of vegetarianism though, like gelatine and glycerine and some cheeses (even if it annoys me on behalf of my boyfriend) because then we are getting into "real" vs "fake" vegetarians.

And there you have a perfect example of my point. Firstly you contradict yourself - in one paragraph you say parmesan can never be vegetarian and in the very next you say it's OK for people who eat "some cheeses" (presumably such as parmesan") to call themselves vegetarian.

As for not including gelatine and glycerin, why not? It's an entirely arbitrary distinction, which is precisely my point. The animals from which these products are derived are just as dead as the one that provides you with a steak.

It only goes to show that everyone will define the vegetarian label to suit their personal practices and therefore it's utterly pointless getting upset about what you perceive to be inappropriate use. Or even inappropriate appropriation

I honestly can't understand peoples' fixation with the correct use of labels.

Jimoslimos

sweet-rasmus wrote:

<<---- Of course not! I never said so. The title suggests this forum deals with vegetarian/vegan issues/opinions/ideas... etc. And the association of vegetarians and fish is an issue with most veggies. Hence we have a post on it

I'd disagree (although I do think the discussion worthy). The title of the forum relates to vegan & vegetarian food. E.g., you would be unlikely to see a thread on licensing laws in the Beer, Wine & Drink forum.

microgirl wrote:

Now I'l happily accept that there's gonna be situations where they're limited and the only options to tick (as it were) are "Vegan" "Vegetarian" and "Meat-eater" and of those three they'll say they're vegetarian because it's easiest. It means they're not handed a plate of bacon to eat.

But the fact remains that they're *not* vegetarian, technically speaking. SO therefore should not call themselves such without qualifications, because it *does* lead to confusion for the less enlightened in the meaning of terms to ask/assume vegetarians eat fish.

Indeed, they probably shouldn't call themselves vegetarian, but you have to admit the word slips of the tongue a little easier (and is understood more widespreadly) than "pescetarian"(sp)! Perhaps the word has been lost to its original meaning and vegetarians may have to invent a new improved word to describe their diet to avoid confusion with those who eat fish.:eek:

Vegetarian n: 1: One who consumes vegetables and fish, but abstains from eating other meat products
2: Obsolete description for a person who eats only vegetables and does not eat food containing animal or fish matter

Tar.Aldarion

Yet again I wish we were still called Pythagoreans.

maniac101

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Yet again I wish we were still called Pythagoreans.

I hope Pythagoras didn't eat fish!;)

sweet-rasmus wrote:

The title suggests this forum deals with vegetarian/vegan issues/opinions/ideas... etc.

...and food as well I hope. It is the Food and Drink forum after all:)

Tar.Aldarion

The fish were counted, and the number confirmed as foretold. Pythagoras then asked that the fish be returned to the sea, after paying the men for their catch.

suggest Pythagoras once calmed a fierce bear with fruits and caresses, and then commanded it never to again attack any living creature, whereupon the bear stumbled off into the woods to live a life on berries, free from the vile habits of its brutal past.

He he he

maniac101

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

He he he

I suppose I should have read up on Pythagoras before posting. And there was me thinking I was smart because I could spell his name! he he he.

Jimoslimos

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

The fish were counted, and the number confirmed as foretold. Pythagoras then asked that the fish be returned to the sea, after paying the men for their catch.

Hmmm....I'm assuming that all you Pythagoreans will now be compensating me for the steak I chose not to eat yesterday;)

Tar.Aldarion

As you can imagine, I am massively in debt. How much do I owe you? :P

Peanut

microgirl wrote:

...
And it leads to many good restaurants having various "vegetarian" options that heavily feature Parmesan cheese, which can *never* be vegetarian.
..

There are some veggie Parmesan-style cheeses, just not very many, and they are more available in the UK. Cornucopia sometimes have parmesan listed in some of their dishes, I imagine it is a veggie alternative though.

Slaphead07

Peanut wrote:

There are some veggie Parmesan-style cheeses,

I'm pretty sure I've found veggie Parmesan in the past, peccerino is a lovely Italian cheese that does a similar job (I actually think it's nicer) and seems easier to get without animal rennet.

Peanut

ohhh never thought of looking for pecorino, cheers!
Do you remember where you've seen it?

Found this on the web for a parmesan substitute, but don't think it would be available here.
Interestingly, it's made in Italy, in the region where the other parmesans originate.