Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Apparently We're Discussing Vegetarianism in General Now

2456739

Posts

  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I am an anal retentive linguophile, and so I am annoyed by the imprecise use of language. I am also pissed off by misuse of "irony" and am only just starting to cave on the use of "nauseous" to mean "nauseated".

    so... are you pissed when any words change? Considering that they have been changing since the creation of language wouldn't a real linguophile expect words to change meanings?

    Also, now that there are widespread dictionaries and spell check, as well as courses that teach, capital E, "English", do you think that the language will enter some sort of stasis where words will no longer change as fast?

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • DelzhandDelzhand Hard to miss. Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    KalTorak wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    What if you ritually slaughter a pig every time you make a green salad?

    Then the Blood God blesses your meal and you gain immortality for the time it takes you to consume the salad.

    What if you have leftovers and you put them in the fridge or freezer? Are you immortal still? Because I've got a FoodSaver and a head full of insane stunts I've always wanted to try.

    Delzhand on
    Steam|FFXIV|Switch SW-3472-4893-0802
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Delzhand wrote: »
    Aren't most egg-farm chickens living in conditions worse than death, though? I assume eggs and such are only okay for the animal-ethics vegetarians if they're free-range corn-fed organics, or whatever the latest trend in consumer-feel-goodery is.

    Depends where you get your eggs from. Battery farming is being phased out in the EU and will be illegal from 2012.

    In practice most of the supermarket chains have signed a voluntary agreement not to sell the products of battery farming.

    japan on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I guess, deal with it. There is no difference between people saying "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" or saying "I'm not a vegetarian but I only eat fish." It conveys the same idea.

    Except they don't. The first conveys that the person doesn't know what the word vegetarian means.

    How do they not convey the same idea? One says, I am a carnivore except for this, one says I am an herbivore except for this. Both show they know what the word means.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I am an anal retentive linguophile, and so I am annoyed by the imprecise use of language. I am also pissed off by misuse of "irony" and am only just starting to cave on the use of "nauseous" to mean "nauseated".

    so... are you pissed when any words change? Considering that they have been changing since the creation of language wouldn't a real linguophile expect words to change meanings?

    I don't mind most words changing until the change means they become meaningless.

    "I'm vegetarian. nah man, that steak's cool."

    Quid on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Bergy wrote: »
    I only eat cloned animals.
    They don't have souls, so it's fine.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I guess, deal with it. There is no difference between people saying "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" or saying "I'm not a vegetarian but I only eat fish." It conveys the same idea.

    Except they don't. The first conveys that the person doesn't know what the word vegetarian means.

    How do they not convey the same idea? One says, I am a carnivore except for this, one says I am an herbivore except for this. Both show they know what the word means.

    It makes as much saying "I'm a vegetarian but I eat any meat".

    Quid on
  • KalTorakKalTorak Way up inside your butthole, Morty. WAAAAY up inside there.Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Delzhand wrote: »
    What if you have leftovers and you put them in the fridge or freezer? Are you immortal still? Because I've got a FoodSaver and a head full of insane stunts I've always wanted to try.

    The Blood God is unamused by your puny antics of food preservation. If you're not scarfing down arugula and cucumber slices in midair while attempting that cordless bungee jump, you're on your own.

    KalTorak on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I guess, deal with it. There is no difference between people saying "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" or saying "I'm not a vegetarian but I only eat fish." It conveys the same idea.

    Except they don't. The first conveys that the person doesn't know what the word vegetarian means.

    How do they not convey the same idea? One says, I am a carnivore except for this, one says I am an herbivore except for this. Both show they know what the word means.

    It makes as much saying "I'm a vegetarian but I eat any meat".

    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • KalTorakKalTorak Way up inside your butthole, Morty. WAAAAY up inside there.Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I guess, deal with it. There is no difference between people saying "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" or saying "I'm not a vegetarian but I only eat fish." It conveys the same idea.

    Except they don't. The first conveys that the person doesn't know what the word vegetarian means.

    How do they not convey the same idea? One says, I am a carnivore except for this, one says I am an herbivore except for this. Both show they know what the word means.

    It makes as much saying "I'm a vegetarian but I eat any meat".

    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.

    I think it's mostly that the word defines itself through exception. A vegetarian is defined by what he/she doesn't eat - meat. If the vegetarian does eat some meat, the definition changes.

    KalTorak on
  • DelzhandDelzhand Hard to miss. Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I guess, deal with it. There is no difference between people saying "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" or saying "I'm not a vegetarian but I only eat fish." It conveys the same idea.

    Except they don't. The first conveys that the person doesn't know what the word vegetarian means.

    How do they not convey the same idea? One says, I am a carnivore except for this, one says I am an herbivore except for this. Both show they know what the word means.

    It makes as much saying "I'm a vegetarian but I eat any meat".

    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.

    I'm actually seeing a term entering the vernacular via cookbook titles - "flexitarian". It's basically "When I'm cooking for myself or others, I only prepare vegetarian dishes, but I don't have a problem eating meat when I'm out with other people". I think the sentiment is that your vegetarianism isn't going to prevent Hickory Park from ordering X lbs of meat this week, so you're not really helping anyone by refusing it if a group of friends wants to go there.

    Delzhand on
    Steam|FFXIV|Switch SW-3472-4893-0802
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I am an anal retentive linguophile, and so I am annoyed by the imprecise use of language. I am also pissed off by misuse of "irony" and am only just starting to cave on the use of "nauseous" to mean "nauseated".

    so... are you pissed when any words change? Considering that they have been changing since the creation of language wouldn't a real linguophile expect words to change meanings?

    Also, now that there are widespread dictionaries and spell check, as well as courses that teach, capital E, "English", do you think that the language will enter some sort of stasis where words will no longer change as fast?

    I'm annoyed when words change due to ignorance. Like "irony" or "nauseous". It's not people appropriating a new word for previously unexplored purposes, it's dumb people using words wrong. Same way "irregardless" is becoming a word because people are dumb.

    I don't rage uncontrollably, it just annoys me.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • takyristakyris Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm a vegetarian and get annoyed when people ask if I eat fish. No, I don't eat fish. I'm a vegetarian. You know, an actual one.

    I'm not trying to convert anybody. I don't consider it terribly complicated. If somebody gets dense or decides to play "test the person who does something I don't do", I find that the dog shit analogy works well.

    Them: What about chicken stock? It's not like there's pieces of chicken in there. You're not really eating chicken.

    Me: You don't eat dog shit, right? How about if I make some liquid dog shit and then use that as stock for your meal. It's not like you're, you know, eating entire pieces of dog shit. It's just a little liquid dog shit that makes it taste better.

    Again, that isn't my go-to analogy. I only use it if people feel the need to convert me back to omnivorism.

    takyris on
    Dox the PI wrote:
    takyris, Greek God of blowing shit up.
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.
    You're making an exception that directly contradicts the definition of the world. "Vegetarian that eats meat" is a contradiction in terms. It's like gravity that pushes stuff away, or light that darkens a room, or water that dehydrates stuff.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'll never understand the absolute carnivores. How can you have a steak without a baked potato and fried onion?

    It's not natural.

    MKR on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    Nova_C wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Fallout wrote: »
    pescetarianism sounds pretty half-assed to me

    what makes fish less worth sparing than other animals

    That's an assumption of why they're pescetarian. Maybe they only like fish. Though usually people do it for health reasons.

    Yeah, most of the vegetarians I've met aren't really doing it to protest animal husbandry, but because they feel healthier removing meat from their diet.

    Why only plants? They're also multicellular eukaryotes. I only eat yeasts, although I've been thinking of moving to vitamin supplements and synthetic lipids.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • KalTorakKalTorak Way up inside your butthole, Morty. WAAAAY up inside there.Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Richy wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.
    You're making an exception that directly contradicts the definition of the world. "Vegetarian that eats meat" is a contradiction in terms. It's like gravity that pushes stuff away, or light that darkens a room, or water that dehydrates stuff.

    I'd say it's more like a pacifist who only beats up black people.

    KalTorak on
  • ZeromusZeromus Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    My girlfriend has been a vegetarian pretty much all of her life because she doesn't like the taste of meat, generally speaking, so it's a little annoying when she tells people about her dietary restrictions and they immediately retort with assumptions about her moral high horse that couldn't be farther from the truth

    She is not infallible, though. Bacon, and only bacon, is at times a problem. Sometimes I will order something with bacon and the mere smell of it drives her into a haze of carnal lust and she simply must take a bite of it, though she usually can't stomach it.

    So, I don't really know what I'm supposed to call her other than "peculiar." I mean, she is a vegetarian, but mostly just because. She could probably do without the label altogether, except how else does she explain herself to people that ask why she can't eat at a certain restaurant, etc. etc.?

    Zeromus on
    pygsig.png
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Pretty much any selective minority deals with that, and it sucks.

    Linux and Mac users know it well.

    MKR on
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    My girlfriend was a vegetarian before she met me. And I was a nearly complete carnivore. We've met each other halfway and now have balanced meals.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • ZeromusZeromus Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    I don't see why an animal's capacity for feeling pain should be the justification for "selective vegetarians" that consume said creatures

    Shouldn't the decision ultimately be made based on the creed of "if I am ending an animal's life to eat this when I have no biological reason to do so, I am doing something wrong?"

    I mean, again, we're only talking about moralistic vegetarians here (oh how nuanced this issue becomes when you start getting so specific!), but still

    Zeromus on
    pygsig.png
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Richy wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.
    You're making an exception that directly contradicts the definition of the world. "Vegetarian that eats meat" is a contradiction in terms. It's like gravity that pushes stuff away, or light that darkens a room, or water that dehydrates stuff.

    I think it is more like saying, I work out every day, except saturdays. That is a contradiction because you don't work out everyday, even though you started the sentence saying you did. No one is going to flip their shit over that one.

    I think the reason for the strong reaction when people say "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" is the moral element. It offends their sensibilities. Otherwise it is just a normal use of a term with an exception.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Zeromus wrote: »
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    I don't see why an animal's capacity for feeling pain should be the justification for "selective vegetarians" that consume said creatures

    Shouldn't the decision ultimately be made based on the creed of "if I am ending an animal's life to eat this when I have no biological reason to do so, I am doing something wrong?"

    I mean, again, we're only talking about moralistic vegetarians here (oh how nuanced this issue becomes when you start getting so specific!), but still

    That's the excuse, don't ask me why that stuck. They needed to eat something though.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I could see someone who eats fish telling people they're vegetarian when offered some beef or pork or something. Why bring up the exception to your vegetarianism if it's not relevant?

    On the other hand, if you ask someone "Hey, we're cooking for the group next week. Any dietary restrictions we should know about?" and they respond "Yeah, I'm a vegetarian" even though they eat fish, they're fucking stupid.

    Powerpuppies on
    sig.gif
  • BergyBergy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    3 pages in and no vagitarianism jokes? I applaud you all.

    Bergy on
    ChicagoBulls01.jpg
    I've been trying to reach you, but your extension cord doesn't reach that far.
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I think the reason for the strong reaction when people say "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" is the moral element. It offends their sensibilities. Otherwise it is just a normal use of a term with an exception.

    I think it's more that diluting the definition causes problems for literal vegetarians. For the record, I don't have a problem with "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish", because that at least acknowledges that they're outside the normal definition.

    The issue is people who say "I'm a vegetarian" (rather than saying "I'm a vegetarian but..."), yet eat fish.

    japan on
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    japan wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I think the reason for the strong reaction when people say "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" is the moral element. It offends their sensibilities. Otherwise it is just a normal use of a term with an exception.

    I think it's more that diluting the definition causes problems for literal vegetarians. For the record, I don't have a problem with "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish", because that at least acknowledges that they're outside the normal definition.

    The issue is people who say "I'm a vegetarian" (rather than saying "I'm a vegetarian but..."), yet eat fish.

    Yes, anything that could conceivably lead morons to believe that people who call themselves vegetarians eat fish by default is asinine. I don't have a problem with it if and only if the fact you eat fish is unlikely to become known to the person you're talking to.

    Powerpuppies on
    sig.gif
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I could see someone who eats fish telling people they're vegetarian when offered some beef or pork or something. Why bring up the exception to your vegetarianism if it's not relevant?

    On the other hand, if you ask someone "Hey, we're cooking for the group next week. Any dietary restrictions we should know about?" and they respond "Yeah, I'm a vegetarian" even though they eat fish, they're fucking stupid.
    Yes, this.

    I don't think someone should have to give a lecture on pescetarianism every goddamned time they try to explain their dietary restrictions, especially when it's not relevant.

    Thanatos on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Zeromus wrote: »
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    I don't see why an animal's capacity for feeling pain should be the justification for "selective vegetarians" that consume said creatures

    Shouldn't the decision ultimately be made based on the creed of "if I am ending an animal's life to eat this when I have no biological reason to do so, I am doing something wrong?"

    I mean, again, we're only talking about moralistic vegetarians here (oh how nuanced this issue becomes when you start getting so specific!), but still

    That's the excuse, don't ask me why that stuck. They needed to eat something though.

    If you are using ending life as the criterion for it being immoral then you also have to include plants. You are killing plants to eat them most of the time. Therefore you have to have a different criterion. Generally, the best accepted one is the utilitarian argument that pain is bad and needs to be reduced. Under utilitarianism the reduction of pain and the increase of pleasure is the goal. Most people only extend this to humans, though vegetarians extend this to anything that feels pain. Though I think most people realize that fish feel pain, so this argument doesn't really hold up anyway.

    I guess you could still eat clams and jellyfish or some such though.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    Zeromus wrote: »
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    I don't see why an animal's capacity for feeling pain should be the justification for "selective vegetarians" that consume said creatures

    Shouldn't the decision ultimately be made based on the creed of "if I am ending an animal's life to eat this when I have no biological reason to do so, I am doing something wrong?"

    I mean, again, we're only talking about moralistic vegetarians here (oh how nuanced this issue becomes when you start getting so specific!), but still

    Well, you're ending lives even if you're the most restrictive vegan in the world, so putting your boundary at organisms you consider less complex isn't the sole domain of piscetarians.

    Also YOU KILL CABBAGE PATCH KIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    originalkids.jpg

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • VoodooVVoodooV Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I've got no problem with not eating meat. But don't get all militant if someone serves you meat without realizing your tastes. In fact, I would go as far as to say there should be an exception if you're in someone's home, and they serve meat and don't realize your tastes and don't have any vegetarian alternatives handy. Unless somehow, the meat makes you physically ill, I don't see the issue with eating that meat. It's already dead, you can't bring it back and it's wasteful if it doesn't get eaten.

    VoodooV on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Scalfin wrote: »
    Well, you're ending lives even if you're the most restrictive vegan in the world, so putting your boundary at organisms you consider less complex isn't the sole domain of piscetarians.

    actually, I have heard, but don't quote me on this, that there are extreme forms of Buddhism where you can only eat plants that aren't killed when you harvest them. So, no carrots for example, but lettuce is fine.

    JebusUD on
    And I won, so you lose,
    Guess it always comes down to.
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    VoodooV wrote: »
    I've got no problem with not eating meat. But don't get all militant if someone serves you meat without realizing your tastes. In fact, I would go as far as to say there should be an exception if you're in someone's home, and they serve meat and don't realize your tastes and don't have any vegetarian alternatives handy. Unless somehow, the meat makes you physically ill, I don't see the issue with eating that meat. It's already dead, you can't bring it back and it's wasteful if it doesn't get eaten.

    No, this is unreasonable. Respect people's lifestyle choices. If there's no vegetarian alternatives handy, they don't have to eat meat because not doing so would be wasteful. In any case, the situations where you invite someone to eat food in you're home without asking about diet are few and far between.

    Powerpuppies on
    sig.gif
  • LoserForHireXLoserForHireX Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Zeromus wrote: »
    Fish/Egg vegetarianism comes from the idea that fish don't feel pain, kinda a misnomer if you ask me.

    It also is an old school approach because back then it could be difficult to get proper protein without some sort of meat in your diet.

    My grandfather was an egg/fish old school vegetarian while my uncle has been a full on vegan for forty years. It's not that hard to work around. Vegans just need to be prepared.

    I don't see why an animal's capacity for feeling pain should be the justification for "selective vegetarians" that consume said creatures

    Shouldn't the decision ultimately be made based on the creed of "if I am ending an animal's life to eat this when I have no biological reason to do so, I am doing something wrong?"

    I mean, again, we're only talking about moralistic vegetarians here (oh how nuanced this issue becomes when you start getting so specific!), but still

    Vegetarians still squish bugs. There are creatures that move that are still able to be killed with no real moral implication. They don't have to all be Jains.

    Crabs are water bugs, water bugs that have the side effect of being delicious.

    Whether a creature is capable of feeling pain is exactly what it's about to moral vegetarians/vegans. It's all about how much suffering the animal has had to go through for you to eat it. The notion is that crabs (and mollusks, clams, oysters, etc) just aren't capable of really being in pain.

    EDIT: On a side note, Pescetarian is a damn fine word and should be used just because it's awesome.

    LoserForHireX on
    "The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
    "We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Richy wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.
    You're making an exception that directly contradicts the definition of the world. "Vegetarian that eats meat" is a contradiction in terms. It's like gravity that pushes stuff away, or light that darkens a room, or water that dehydrates stuff.
    This would be accurate, if said light functions exactly like light in every room except the kitchen, or a variety of gravity that behaved exactly like gravity, except it pushes away apples, or water that was otherwise completely like normal water, but dehydrated a particular variety of sponge.

    I mean, fuck, even the goddamn dictionary defines a pescetarian as "a vegetarian who eats fish." So, if you don't eat the vast majority of meats, I don't see any problem with using "vegetarian" as a shorthand to describe yourself in situations where you don't feel like giving a vocabulary lesson along with your meal.

    Thanatos on
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    VoodooV wrote: »
    I've got no problem with not eating meat. But don't get all militant if someone serves you meat without realizing your tastes. In fact, I would go as far as to say there should be an exception if you're in someone's home, and they serve meat and don't realize your tastes and don't have any vegetarian alternatives handy. Unless somehow, the meat makes you physically ill, I don't see the issue with eating that meat. It's already dead, you can't bring it back and it's wasteful if it doesn't get eaten.

    I think this is going a little far.

    Etiquette is important sure, but I don't see why someone should compromise on their beliefs over a misunderstanding. Generally if someone is vegetarian they'll make it known to anyone planning on cooking for them.

    japan on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Because they make one exception that means they might as well be making all exceptions?

    *blizp* *zap*Does not compute.
    You're making an exception that directly contradicts the definition of the world. "Vegetarian that eats meat" is a contradiction in terms. It's like gravity that pushes stuff away, or light that darkens a room, or water that dehydrates stuff.

    I think it is more like saying, I work out every day, except saturdays. That is a contradiction because you don't work out everyday, even though you started the sentence saying you did. No one is going to flip their shit over that one.

    I think the reason for the strong reaction when people say "I am a vegetarian but I eat fish" is the moral element. It offends their sensibilities. Otherwise it is just a normal use of a term with an exception.

    More 'I'm an Orthodox Jew who loves bacon and double overtime on Sundays!' or 'I'm a devout Muslim that likes a good scotch' or 'I'm Catholic and don't feel guilt.'

    moniker on
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Research has more or less proven that fish do feel pain though.

    Plus no matter what you eat you're killing something that was/is alive. Brutal but true.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    VoodooV wrote: »
    I've got no problem with not eating meat. But don't get all militant if someone serves you meat without realizing your tastes. In fact, I would go as far as to say there should be an exception if you're in someone's home, and they serve meat and don't realize your tastes and don't have any vegetarian alternatives handy. Unless somehow, the meat makes you physically ill, I don't see the issue with eating that meat. It's already dead, you can't bring it back and it's wasteful if it doesn't get eaten.

    Okay, I eat meat and I'd be pissed if you had nothing that could be eaten by a vegan in the house. I prefer my meals to have some dietary value.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
This discussion has been closed.