Should I call myself vegan or plant based?

[Tifah]

Hello there, I recently have been having a issue on whether I call myself vegan or plant-based. Basically when I was in high school, I went vegan for ethical reasons. I stayed vegan for about seven years. During my time being vegan, I was diagnosed with schizophrenia. I went through a lot of ups and downs. I have been hospitalized several times. I eventually at one point stop being vegan and started to use animal products again it was hard to focus on mental health and being vegan at the same time. Eventually I started to go back plant-based but it was hard at first I feel like I was a hypocrite because of the choices that I made. Because I stop being vegan at one point I feel like now going back to the vegan lifestyle I question whether or not, I should call myself vegan or whether I should just call myself plant-based.
The reason being is because I feel like maybe I haven’t made that ethical connection. I went vegan for the ethics it at first but I feel like I lost that connection. Again, I feel like a hypocrite.
Also, I feel that if I call myself plant-based it would be easier because if I messed up in the future again, like I did in the past, I wouldn’t have a label on it. with all I have to balance its hard to label myself in fear of messing up again.
What would you suggest?

 

[Lou]

Vegan.
This is why I think so. But it's just my opinion and you can and should do whatever you think is best.

The Vegan Society defines veganism as “a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals”.

Couple of key concepts.
there is that "seeks to exclude" which is different than just saying, "excludes". In other words it's about intent. or what I like to say, it's about the process - not the product.

the other part is that "possible and practicable" clause. So I don't believe they are saying you have to be perfect.

Basically, I think it's just about trying. In fact, I think that if you want to call yourself vegan, then just the fact that you want to be a vegan - makes you a vegan. Yeah I know that brings up a lot of issues with hypocrites and people who are dishonest. but I don't care.

BTW, I have noticed there are several other definitions out there. Most of them are more dietary than philosophy or way of living. But you can drive yourself crazy worrying about stuff like that.

the other thing is why do you want to call yourself vegan. For me it makes it easy to explain to people why I won't eat this or that without offending them.

 

[Emma JC]

Life does have a way of interfering in our best intentions sometimes.... kudos to you for being able to overcome your challenges to make healthy choices and also to care about the animals and the environment.

I think you should call yourself whatever is most comfortable in the situation that you are in at the time. If anyone asks you why you are vegan or plant-based you can say that you are trying to take better care of your health, you don't choose to harm animals and you believe it is the better choice for the environment. That isn't too in anyone's face and it is true for you.

Wishing all the best and happy to have you here with us.

Emma JC
Find your vegan soulmate or just a friend. www.spiritualmatchmaking.com

 

[beforewisdom]

The word "vegan" was created in the 1940s to refer specifically to people who believe that using animal products is unethical

About Vegan Diets – Before Wisdom

If you don't believe that or feel it strongly, it could be easier on yourself just to tell people you try to stick to a plant based diet.

 

[silva]

Hello there, I recently have been having a issue on whether I call myself vegan or plant-based. Basically when I was in high school, I went vegan for ethical reasons. I stayed vegan for about seven years. During my time being vegan, I was diagnosed with schizophrenia. I went through a lot of ups and downs. I have been hospitalized several times. I eventually at one point stop being vegan and started to use animal products again it was hard to focus on mental health and being vegan at the same time. Eventually I started to go back plant-based but it was hard at first I feel like I was a hypocrite because of the choices that I made. Because I stop being vegan at one point I feel like now going back to the vegan lifestyle I question whether or not, I should call myself vegan or whether I should just call myself plant-based.
The reason being is because I feel like maybe I haven’t made that ethical connection. I went vegan for the ethics it at first but I feel like I lost that connection. Again, I feel like a hypocrite.
Also, I feel that if I call myself plant-based it would be easier because if I messed up in the future again, like I did in the past, I wouldn’t have a label on it. with all I have to balance its hard to label myself in fear of messing up again.
What would you suggest?

I think you should do what feels normal to you, and that term can vary
I can identify with some of what you describe. I went through periods of overwhelming emotions and ocd, followed by apathy
Since I've come to grips with truly living as I see fit, which has been since about 2009, I've vascillated between just avoiding flesh and being vegan, or more really strict vegetarian. I still have leather shoes, and am just not strictly concerned with everything

I usually say 'mostly vegan'. Sometimes I just say vegetarian, and if people ask I say I avoid dairy and eggs. I know quite a few vegetarians, but not really vegans, although some call themselves vegan
Do what won't cause you further stress. Everyone is different

 

[Brian W]

The word "vegan" was created in the 1940s to refer specifically to people who believe that using animal products is unethical

About Vegan Diets – Before Wisdom

If you don't believe that or feel it strongly, it could be easier on yourself just to tell people you try to stick to a plant based diet.

That definition is relatively modern, hence the reason the dietary use of the word is more prevalent outside of the internet vegan echo chamber. I.e. if you ask the average man or woman who isn't familiar with the online vegan community what a vegan is, they will refer to food and not animal rights because that was the primary definition for many years. The word was derived from the word "Vegetarian" which was derived from the word "Vegetable" clearly demonstrating that it is a dietary definition. The Vegan Society have misrepresented their history and information from them on the subject is untrustworthy.

Try looking at this:
Vegan Society Today

The modern UK Vegan Society has gone to some lengths to sanitize its own history about its beginnings; we endeavor here to present a more honest summary. The information on this site is based on published reports in the Society's own newsletters, which are freely available. It is no longer possible for the UK Vegan Society to misrepresent its history and the origins of veganism, now that all the original documents have been put online. Everyone can see the truth for themselves.

Nearly all the information reported on this page has been taken directly from newsletters of the first decades of the UK Vegan Society, all of which can be accessed online here: vegan_society Publisher Publications - Issuu

Watson's original definition of Vegan from the Vegan Society's first publication.

 

[Lou]

Interesting but I don't see why it's necessary to vilify the Vegan Society.
Words change over time. Organizations and institutions evolve.
Today veganism is a life style and an ethical philosophy. That it hasn't alway been is ok with me.

Plus I think there has been too much attention on the labels.

A lot of organization get trapped into thinking of products instead of process.
For instance, today's educators think of education as a product. They make graduates. they make test scores go up. but really they should be thinking it as a process. they should be concentrating on educating students.
Anyway same as veganism. We shouldn't be thinking of making more vegans. we should be thinking of adding more compassion for animals.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Even though yes it was focused more on food initially, veganism was always about ethics. It started because some vegetarians thought that some animal products such as diary and eggs were not ethical and so should be avoided as well. I believe if I recall correctly some of the early vegans also avoided animal clothes etc.

I think there doesn't seem to be any clear definition about whether vegan or plant based are different and if so how.

But I've noticed that vegan is most commonly applied to more than just food and plant based is more common for just food.

Vegan tends to be stricter e.g. not allowing processed foods that have small amounts of animal products as a minor ingredient. Whereas "plant based" might more commonly allow that.

beforewisdom´s post is a statement that at least some other vegans would support.

 

[Tom L.]

Hi, Tifah- and welcome!

I think it's impressive that you went vegan as early as high school- I had only made it to "pescatarian" at that age!!! Please don't worry too much about labels- just do the best you can.

Consider this: All religions I am familiar with have a code of behavior which adherents are expected to follow. They normally recognize that humans sometimes fail to follow their principles, and advise that someone sincerely repent for such wrongdoings. I know this is somewhat off-topic, and I don't know what beliefs you have other than veganism- but please try to cut yourself some slack.

 

[ewomack]

Just like with many terms, movements, or lifestyles, you'll find differing opinions on what it means to be "X," often depending on who you ask. The same is true of veganism. I wouldn't worry about the terminology too much. If you use the term "vegan" you'll find people who agree with you and people who don't agree with you. I've started avoiding the term, mostly around other vegans, because it seems to cause more strife than unity. I instead say "I really don't eat much meat," or "I do my best to avoid animal products." If I claim to be vegan then 20 questions sometimes start, as if I need to justify my use of the word: "are those leather shoes? Do you eat skittles? Do you use beeswax? Etc." It's not worth it. I don't live the way I do to fit a vocabulary term, I'm doing it for health, ethical, and personal choice reasons. The actions are far more important than the label. So, I wouldn't worry about whether or not you fit the term, keep doing what you're doing and never feel like you need to justify it to anyone.

 

[LukethePrettyGood]

To me, 'vegan' reflects the lifestyle of non-cruelty. Question: If you feel guilty and like a hypocrite for not making the choice out of love, doesn't that imply you have? I think 'vegan' is easier to understand.

 

[Graeme M]

To the OP, you don't have to call yourself anything, you know. What you do and why you do it really is up to you. However, if you must give yourself a label, then I think "vegan" should be used whenever we do what we do for ethical reasons. Given you say that you have lost that ethical motivation, I can only assume that you are eating somewhat plant-based, so perhaps plant-based is the label you want. But again I stress that it just doesn't matter.

As to the actual terms, I think "veganism" and "vegan" are now so tainted that maybe they no longer serve a useful purpose. For me, veganism is the idea that we include other sentient animals within our scope of moral concern. Now, I would love to find a better term than veganism to describe that idea, but I don't know of one. Brian W above raised the point that the Vegan Society originally defined veganism as a dietary strategy but have broadened that to an ethical philosophy after being captured by animal rights activism (I haven't read through that vegansocietytoday website but I will because I had never heard of this).

My own opinion is that it is impossible to separate veganism for ethical reasons from animal rights. Veganism as nothing but a strict diet carries no real value and effectively delivers no imperative for anyone to bother with it. I have read interviews with Donald Watson and I am pretty confident that he came to where he did from ethical reasons. He absolutely did want to extend his moral concern to other animals. My suspicion is that most people don't understand what is really meant by "animal rights".

 

[LukethePrettyGood]

To the OP, you don't have to call yourself anything, you know. What you do and why you do it really is up to you. However, if you must give yourself a label, then I think "vegan" should be used whenever we do what we do for ethical reasons. Given you say that you have lost that ethical motivation, I can only assume that you are eating somewhat plant-based, so perhaps plant-based is the label you want. But again I stress that it just doesn't matter.

As to the actual terms, I think "veganism" and "vegan" are now so tainted that maybe they no longer serve a useful purpose. For me, veganism is the idea that we include other sentient animals within our scope of moral concern. Now, I would love to find a better term than veganism to describe that idea, but I don't know of one. Brian W above raised the point that the Vegan Society originally defined veganism as a dietary strategy but have broadened that to an ethical philosophy after being captured by animal rights activism (I haven't read through that vegansocietytoday website but I will because I had never heard of this).

My own opinion is that it is impossible to separate veganism for ethical reasons from animal rights. Veganism as nothing but a strict diet carries no real value and effectively delivers no imperative for anyone to bother with it. I have read interviews with Donald Watson and I am pretty confident that he came to where he did from ethical reasons. He absolutely did want to extend his moral concern to other animals. My suspicion is that most people don't understand what is really meant by "animal rights".

To the OP, you don't have to call yourself anything, you know. What you do and why you do it really is up to you. However, if you must give yourself a label, then I think "vegan" should be used whenever we do what we do for ethical reasons. Given you say that you have lost that ethical motivation, I can only assume that you are eating somewhat plant-based, so perhaps plant-based is the label you want. But again I stress that it just doesn't matter.

As to the actual terms, I think "veganism" and "vegan" are now so tainted that maybe they no longer serve a useful purpose. For me, veganism is the idea that we include other sentient animals within our scope of moral concern. Now, I would love to find a better term than veganism to describe that idea, but I don't know of one. Brian W above raised the point that the Vegan Society originally defined veganism as a dietary strategy but have broadened that to an ethical philosophy after being captured by animal rights activism (I haven't read through that vegansocietytoday website but I will because I had never heard of this).

My own opinion is that it is impossible to separate veganism for ethical reasons from animal rights. Veganism as nothing but a strict diet carries no real value and effectively delivers no imperative for anyone to bother with it. I have read interviews with Donald Watson and I am pretty confident that he came to where he did from ethical reasons. He absolutely did want to extend his moral concern to other animals. My suspicion is that most people don't understand what is really meant by "animal rights".

Exactly, the OP's entire post exhibited a desire to be 'plant based' for the removal of animal suffering, I think people who are insisting on perfection are who are missing the point, the entire idea is to 'do less harm.' Pretty sure you nailed it!

 

[LukethePrettyGood]

Just like with many terms, movements, or lifestyles, you'll find differing opinions on what it means to be "X," often depending on who you ask. The same is true of veganism. I wouldn't worry about the terminology too much. If you use the term "vegan" you'll find people who agree with you and people who don't agree with you. I've started avoiding the term, mostly around other vegans, because it seems to cause more strife than unity. I instead say "I really don't eat much meat," or "I do my best to avoid animal products." If I claim to be vegan then 20 questions sometimes start, as if I need to justify my use of the word: "are those leather shoes? Do you eat skittles? Do you use beeswax? Etc." It's not worth it. I don't live the way I do to fit a vocabulary term, I'm doing it for health, ethical,

Hi, Tifah- and welcome!

I think it's impressive that you went vegan as early as high school- I had only made it to "pescatarian" at that age!!! Please don't worry too much about labels- just do the best you can.

Consider this: All religions I am familiar with have a code of behavior which adherents are expected to follow. They normally recognize that humans sometimes fail to follow their principles, and advise that someone sincerely repent for such wrongdoings. I know this is somewhat off-topic, and I don't know what beliefs you have other than veganism- but please try to cut yourself some slack.

and personal choice reasons. The actions are far more important than the label. So, I wouldn't worry about whether or not you fit the term, keep doing what you're doing and never feel like you need to justify it to anyone.

I absolutely agree, to me, 'repent' is the same as 'atonement' (at-one-ment) where we become who we are. I absolutely think 'falling off the wagon' can help us discover who we are and 'make right!'

 

[g0rph]

I absolutely agree, to me, 'repent' is the same as 'atonement' (at-one-ment) where we become who we are. I absolutely think 'falling off the wagon' can help us discover who we are and 'make right!'

I use the word sometimes, but in the end I am probably not fully vegan according to the definition.

I don't eat meat, dairy, eggs etc, and I avoid products tested on animals (barring medication). As far as most people I know, I am vegan.

But I am not against all exploitation of animals. Responsible "pet" breeding is fine by me. Service animals have and do have a very important role to play.
From service dogs for the blind, deaf and as companions for the lonely. Police dogs and even army dogs fulfill an important role. From sniffing out drugs and even explosives to subduing criminals without the need of deadly force.

And whilst I lean toward being anti-horse use, I have very little issue with them other than the evil way they are treated in for example, horse-racing.
I live very close to a "hästgård" which is a large set of stables and some fenced-in jumping arenas. There are fields of horses all around. They all seem to be treated extremely well. Is it vegan? No. But is it horribly unethical like factory farming? No.

There are many other examples. So am I vegan? Mostly, yes, but the word comes with too much baggage in certain circles.

 

[Tom L.]

...But I am not against all exploitation of animals. Responsible "pet" breeding is fine by me. Service animals have and do have a very important role to play.
From service dogs for the blind, deaf and as companions for the lonely. Police dogs and even army dogs fulfill an important role. From sniffing out drugs and even explosives to subduing criminals without the need of deadly force.

(original post only partly quoted- emphasis mine) I'm not sure it's necessary to breed animals to be companions. Depending on the animal and the prospective human adopter, I'd think it would be possible to find a good match from the pool of animals who came into existence without being intentionally bred, wouldn't it?

 

[LukethePrettyGood]

I use the word sometimes, but in the end I am probably not fully vegan according to the definition.

I don't eat meat, dairy, eggs etc, and I avoid products tested on animals (barring medication). As far as most people I know, I am vegan.

But I am not against all exploitation of animals. Responsible "pet" breeding is fine by me. Service animals have and do have a very important role to play.
From service dogs for the blind, deaf and as companions for the lonely. Police dogs and even army dogs fulfill an important role. From sniffing out drugs and even explosives to subduing criminals without the need of deadly force.

And whilst I lean toward being anti-horse use, I have very little issue with them other than the evil way they are treated in for example, horse-racing.
I live very close to a "hästgård" which is a large set of stables and some fenced-in jumping arenas. There are fields of horses all around. They all seem to be treated extremely well. Is it vegan? No. But is it horribly unethical like factory farming? No.

There are many other examples. So am I vegan? Mostly, yes, but the word comes with too much baggage in certain circles.

I would say you are vegan, you prevent suffering. I only have an issue with breeders because they deprive our shelters, causing unneeded harm, but there are animals that need to be bred, as you point out. Horses, the only issue I have is glue farms and forceful training, other than that, they seem here to serve us and be served by us. Horses are a lovely companion.

 

[g0rph]

(original post only partly quoted- emphasis mine) I'm not sure it's necessary to breed animals to be companions. Depending on the animal and the prospective human adopter, I'd think it would be possible to find a good match from the pool of animals who came into existence without being intentionally bred, wouldn't it?

I think that's the ideal scenario of course.
But I wouldn't want the sensible breeds to go extinct either.

 

[LukethePrettyGood]

I think that's the ideal scenario of course.
But I wouldn't want the sensible breeds to go extinct either.

I obviously agree completely in theory, but the reality is that we cannot always find that 'match' and need a 'supply' of dogs (like Golden Retrievers) to serve our needs and help the disabled. -And who can resist a Golden Retriever?? I believe in saving every single homeless pet, but that doesn't mean anything about breeding dogs we 'need' too. Saving a chihuahua will not net us a Golden Retriever to serve as a guide dog..

 

[silva]

The problem isn't the breeding of dogs for service jobs but the breeding of "pets". The homeless situation could be eased by stricter laws, starting with spay and neuter