Nope. in a few other thread I've explained my views. I don't believe that 100% eliminating things that contain animal products or require the death or exploitation of animals is possible. I don't believe that is The Standard. Right there in the Vegan Society's definition it includes the phrases "seeks to exclude ", and "as far as possible and practicable".
you can make the argument that films are not free of animal products. Its just as easy to argue that plants are not entirely produced without harming animals. I don't see that as reasons to avoid films (or plant-based foods). For me its enough to just try and do my best. But drawing the line is somewhat tricky and pretty much subjective. For instance its possible to avoid film but not food.
A lot of non-vegans use the argument that if you can't avoid harming animals entirely than why even try. or perhaps a vegans belief system is unworkable or hypocritical. I think the guys who wrote the definition maybe expected something like that. And therefore included the words, seeks, possible, and practical.
A lot of "vegan influencers" bring this up. I like one who thinks that the way to advocate vegansm is to emphasize that each person only has to be as vegan as they think is possible or practical for themselves.
