-And, addressing the issue of 'backyard breeders,' which law enforcement seems to continue to just let slide.. I mean, 'craigslist..'
Should I call myself vegan or plant based?
- Thread starter Tifah
- Start date
This isn't generally an issue here in Sweden AFAIK.
All puppies MUST be chipped, MUST have all the relevant vet visits for jabs etc. And they cost accordingly.
Our little DSG was 15000 SEK (around 1400$).
The same can't be said for cats unfortunately (which are a far worse problem too)
VeganRachel
Forum Legend
Hi, The word "vegan" has been criticized and demeaned just like a 4 letter word. I believe it is deliberate.
It is sad that the definition is changing to accomodate that fact.
To me, plant-based is a loose definition which can, for some, include animal products.
There is also "strict vegetarian" as a moniker.
I prefer anti-speciesist, herbivore, etcetera
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
NO! Veg-an was designed as an alternative to veg-etarian to describe specific vegetarians who eat neither meat nor dairy like carn-ivore describes a diet solely of meat. The clue is in the words. The way I understand it, after Leslie Cross persuaded his animal rights friends to join the vegan society, a vote was taken about leadership and because Cross had enough friends voting for him he won. He then removed Donald Watson's lifetime membership of the society along with that of those who supported Watson so that he could forcefully change the official definition to an animal rights definition. The facts are available online in the Vegan Society's own early publications. Watson's membership was only reinstated after his death. The problem is that the meanings of words are not decided upon by committees but by their common usage and outside of internet echo chambers, the most common usage by far is a dietary one. This is why nearly all, if not all dictionarys will give a dietary definition but not an animal rights definition. Here in Sweden, 1/10 of people identify as either vegan or vegetarian with the majority stating environmental reasons, not animal rights. I think both sides of the debate (including myself) are going to have to accept that there are now two definitions, both of them correct. I don't bother with the label anymore, partly because of this issue, partly because there is a lot of toxicity in the community and partly because, by my preferred definition (the dietary one) I don't have the right because I would happily eat animal derived foods that would otherwise be thrown away or that was lab-grown. It doesn't really matter because the important thing is, I am doing the best I can to put my love of the animals, people and the Earth into practice.
Vegan Society Today
vegan_society Publisher Publications - Issuu
Last edited:
beforewisdom
Forum Legend
YES! You literally have the link to an authoritative article about Donald Watson. Watson and his wife were about ethics. Vegan referred to a person who did not believe exploiting animals was right, so they ate just plants.
Please don't spread misinformation on the Internet.
Indeed.
Veganism is primarily about ethics, not diet. The society says so, and the origins say so.
I try not to use the term so often now as I don't 100% believe in the "letter of the definition". i.e. I do not think *all* exploitation of non-human animals is a bad thing.
I believe we have the right to have "pets" for want of a better word, and the use of service animals.
I don't eat any animal products, wear any, and I buy cruelty free soaps etc. But many online vegans will say I am not vegan... So be it.
Eating leftovers that would otherwise be thrown...no, I wouldn't do that as it's a slippery slope and shows other people that you are not serious...eg. I was at a NY eve get-together last week... EVERYONE but me was eating fillet steak and buttery potatoes.
Almost certainly some will have been dumped... Better to feed the soil than to show others that they can "order more for me" next time. I stuck to my home-made veggy curry.
I was confused by @Brian W 's post on December 25th just above. For a long time, I always thought that veganism was essentially an ethical stance, although I suppose some vegetarians might also avoid dairy or egg for other reasons (lactose intolerance, avoidance of saturated fat/cholesterol...).
Brian W
Conscientious Christian
That's because the UK Vegan Society now take that position and try to cover up their history. Nobody is to blame.
Lou
Forum Legend
I still think that.
The way I see it is that there is Veganism and then there is the Vegan Diet. Which are often used interchangeably but are not identical.
I'm aware of the history of the Vegan Society. I don't feel it's relevant. Those things happened ...over 50 years ago. things evolve. the meaning of words change. Things happen. There is a current accepted definition And it is about ethics.
I'm also aware of the definition of Vegan in the dictionary is not the same as the Society's. So what?
If a vegan is JUST concerned with his diet and not animal rights, why would he
- be against Zoos and Rodeos
- not purchase leather and wool
- shop cruelty free
- promote laws protecting animal rights.
I wasn't that familiar with the UK Vegan Society's history, but the post I was referring to certainly doesn't portray the Leslie Cross faction favorably. Their treatment of Donald Watson strikes me as crappy. I understand why they would feel so strongly about advocating for better treatment of animals; I feel almost as strongly about that as they did, and I wouldn't restrict my food choices they way I do if I didn't care about animals**. I think they should have started their own group, with an unambiguous, clear statement of purpose and philosophy.
**- I'd probably have to limit my consumption of non-vegan foods to a certain extent, even if I didn't care about animals, because of the cardiovascular disease in my Mom's family.
Graeme M
Forum Legend
For anyone intererested, I just published a brief history of veganism on my blog. I'll copy it here, though I guess it is a little long for this forum:
Humans are moral creatures and we have been working out morality for most of our existence, though with the focus squarely on our own species. Having moral regard for other animals on the other hand is a more recent phenomenon, perhaps as recent as the past several thousand years. For example, some ancient Greek philosophers held that other animals deserve our moral regard when working out what’s best to do when our actions affect them.
Over the years attitudes to this idea have fluctuated from disregard to quite determined support for fairer treatment of animals. One famous example is the concern over vivisection in Britain during the 19th century. The anti-vivisection movement, largely led by women, became one of the prominent social activist causes of the time. It was not uncommon in those times for people to regard other animals as almost unfeeling automatons.
For some time there have been people we would loosely describe as vegetarians. The Jains in India have for several thousand years believed in the principle of non-violence, including all living things within their scope. In Britain, the Vegetarian Society was formed in 1847 as a natural follow on from growing interest in moral concern for other animals. The Vegetarian Society promoted a meat-free diet for its members. Even today, the Society claims to be “UK’s original and leading voice for the vegetarian and vegan movement… driven by their convictions and hungry for change”.
In the late 1940s, some members of the Vegetarian Society sought to go further and promoted the idea of dairy-free, egg-free vegetarianism. Donald Watson and several others formed a sub-group which promoted a “vegan” diet. The term “vegan” was formed from the first and last letters of “vegetarian”. The first newsletter appeared in 1945 and the Vegan Society came into being.
The Vegan Society’s main aim was for members to avoid any animal products as food, but it also encouraged members to avoid the use of “animal commodities”. However, while its original meaning largely referred to diet, the idea for veganism came from an underlying motivation to treat other animals better. That is, veganism embraced the moral belief that humans should free animals from human use and ill-treatment and restore a fairer relationship with them.
The original definition Watson offered was:
VEGANISM is the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains and other wholesome non-animal products.
VEGANISM excludes as human food: flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, and animals’ milk, butter and cheese.
VEGANISM aims at encouraging the manufacture and use of alternatives to animal products.
Watson himself was vegan on compassionate and health grounds, believing as he did that a vegan diet was best for human health. While he had a vision for what veganism might mean, he didn’t remain with the Vegan Society very long. By 1949 Watson had no further active involvement in the Society.
At the November 1948 General Meeting, Leslie J Cross was elected to the committee. Cross was an emancipationist, which today we would think of as an animal rights advocate. He believed that the Vegan Society should be more vocal in support of animal emancipation, ie animal rights. Cross introduced a new Constitution in 1950 and proposed a new definition for Veganism:
The object of the Society shall be to end the exploitation of animals by man… The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals… The Society pledges itself in pursuance of its object to seek to end the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection and all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man.
There followed a rather up and down time for some years during which the definition of veganism and what people wanted it to represent changed often. Broadly speaking, it swung back and forth between being primarily about diet and health to being about animal rights first and foremost. Interestingly, membership seemed to rise and fall in concert with this – more members when diet-focused while fewer members when rights-focused.
In 1962, the definition became:
Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom ….
The definition ever since has largely remained true to the aim of preventing animal exploitation and cruelty. Of course, people didn’t think in terms of “animal rights” as such in those early days but rather in general terms of “emancipation” of animals from human mistreatment. Animal rights as a concept really emerged in the 1970s, probably in response to Peter Singer’s controversial and influential book Animal Liberation. Singer also introduced to a wider audience the idea of “speciesism”, a term first coined in 1970 by British psychologist Richard Ryder.
Interestingly, vegan societies in other countries varied from the UK Society with most focusing primarily on a plant-based diet rather than an animal rights motivation. The American Vegan Society was founded by Jay Dinshah in 1960. This organisation focused on veganism as a plant-based diet but introduced Ahimsa as the basis for its beliefs about animal treatment. That remains the case to this day with the AVS describing veganism as a lifestyle that embraces eating only plants while integrating Ahimsa into one’s everyday life. Ahimsa is a spiritual tradition common to Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, expressing the ethical principle of not causing harm to living things.
Today, the UK Vegan Society definition is:
Veganism is 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 for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.
While the definition, meaning and enactment of veganism has varied over the years, progress in the broader field of animal protection and rights consideration has similarly been evolving. Today there exists a deep and comprehensive literature around the matter as well as many highly influential thinkers whose ideas have ranged across notions of care, compassion, protection and rights.
Humans are moral creatures and we have been working out morality for most of our existence, though with the focus squarely on our own species. Having moral regard for other animals on the other hand is a more recent phenomenon, perhaps as recent as the past several thousand years. For example, some ancient Greek philosophers held that other animals deserve our moral regard when working out what’s best to do when our actions affect them.
Over the years attitudes to this idea have fluctuated from disregard to quite determined support for fairer treatment of animals. One famous example is the concern over vivisection in Britain during the 19th century. The anti-vivisection movement, largely led by women, became one of the prominent social activist causes of the time. It was not uncommon in those times for people to regard other animals as almost unfeeling automatons.
For some time there have been people we would loosely describe as vegetarians. The Jains in India have for several thousand years believed in the principle of non-violence, including all living things within their scope. In Britain, the Vegetarian Society was formed in 1847 as a natural follow on from growing interest in moral concern for other animals. The Vegetarian Society promoted a meat-free diet for its members. Even today, the Society claims to be “UK’s original and leading voice for the vegetarian and vegan movement… driven by their convictions and hungry for change”.
In the late 1940s, some members of the Vegetarian Society sought to go further and promoted the idea of dairy-free, egg-free vegetarianism. Donald Watson and several others formed a sub-group which promoted a “vegan” diet. The term “vegan” was formed from the first and last letters of “vegetarian”. The first newsletter appeared in 1945 and the Vegan Society came into being.
The Vegan Society’s main aim was for members to avoid any animal products as food, but it also encouraged members to avoid the use of “animal commodities”. However, while its original meaning largely referred to diet, the idea for veganism came from an underlying motivation to treat other animals better. That is, veganism embraced the moral belief that humans should free animals from human use and ill-treatment and restore a fairer relationship with them.
The original definition Watson offered was:
VEGANISM is the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains and other wholesome non-animal products.
VEGANISM excludes as human food: flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, and animals’ milk, butter and cheese.
VEGANISM aims at encouraging the manufacture and use of alternatives to animal products.
Watson himself was vegan on compassionate and health grounds, believing as he did that a vegan diet was best for human health. While he had a vision for what veganism might mean, he didn’t remain with the Vegan Society very long. By 1949 Watson had no further active involvement in the Society.
At the November 1948 General Meeting, Leslie J Cross was elected to the committee. Cross was an emancipationist, which today we would think of as an animal rights advocate. He believed that the Vegan Society should be more vocal in support of animal emancipation, ie animal rights. Cross introduced a new Constitution in 1950 and proposed a new definition for Veganism:
The object of the Society shall be to end the exploitation of animals by man… The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals… The Society pledges itself in pursuance of its object to seek to end the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection and all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man.
There followed a rather up and down time for some years during which the definition of veganism and what people wanted it to represent changed often. Broadly speaking, it swung back and forth between being primarily about diet and health to being about animal rights first and foremost. Interestingly, membership seemed to rise and fall in concert with this – more members when diet-focused while fewer members when rights-focused.
In 1962, the definition became:
Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom ….
The definition ever since has largely remained true to the aim of preventing animal exploitation and cruelty. Of course, people didn’t think in terms of “animal rights” as such in those early days but rather in general terms of “emancipation” of animals from human mistreatment. Animal rights as a concept really emerged in the 1970s, probably in response to Peter Singer’s controversial and influential book Animal Liberation. Singer also introduced to a wider audience the idea of “speciesism”, a term first coined in 1970 by British psychologist Richard Ryder.
Interestingly, vegan societies in other countries varied from the UK Society with most focusing primarily on a plant-based diet rather than an animal rights motivation. The American Vegan Society was founded by Jay Dinshah in 1960. This organisation focused on veganism as a plant-based diet but introduced Ahimsa as the basis for its beliefs about animal treatment. That remains the case to this day with the AVS describing veganism as a lifestyle that embraces eating only plants while integrating Ahimsa into one’s everyday life. Ahimsa is a spiritual tradition common to Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, expressing the ethical principle of not causing harm to living things.
Today, the UK Vegan Society definition is:
Veganism is 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 for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.
While the definition, meaning and enactment of veganism has varied over the years, progress in the broader field of animal protection and rights consideration has similarly been evolving. Today there exists a deep and comprehensive literature around the matter as well as many highly influential thinkers whose ideas have ranged across notions of care, compassion, protection and rights.
