What do you guys think of the term flexitarian. It basically means that you eat veg. most of the time, but you still eat some meat. I kind of see it as a just a buzz word becuase if youe at meat, you eat meat. Anyway, I could be described as a flexitarian b/c i don't eat meat when i cook or eat out because I think overall it is a better way of eating. However, I will eat meat when someone else is cooking or there isn't another prectical option just because I don't like making people accomodate me. I personally don't label myself as anything but an omnivore. What do you guys think?
Flexitarian is bullcrap. That term could apply to any meat eater. Hell, it could apply to a meat eater who takes 5 minute intervals inbetween their meat meals. If ya eat meat, ya eat meat. It doesn't matter how often. Youre not any type of veggie when you expect you'll eat meat. The term pisses me off because its saying "oh, im a vegetarian except for when..." YOU ARENT VEGETARIANS YOU BITCHES. Thank you I feel better. And no, i wasnt yelling at you ^_^ I was yelling at my lovely flexitarian friends all around the world. May peace, love, and hot dogs be in your future.
Exactly At least have the decency to own up and say 'yes I eat meat' rather than hiding behind some stupid term, as if they feel guilty about eating meat. (though they probably should) Could call my family flexitarians, they eat vegetarian food whenever I cook. (About once a week) not sure one meal out of 21 really doesn't qualify for anything.
shit at least they arnt a glutonous meat ravaging vagabond, the less meat the better, but i agree with whoever said, that you gotta work for an -itarion, suffix's like those dont just get handed out
I would distinguish between 1 out of 21 on one hand, and 20 out of 21 on the other. I believe in giving people some credit for trying, even if they aren't quite where they want to be.
Yeah, you should just give up meat totally, it may be hard for you, but anytime you're about to pick up a hamburger, think of the animals being tortured
Although I agree that flexitarian is just another word for omnivore, I think it might be good for vegetarians if the word picks up steam. I believe that in the US, something like 3 to 5% of people are vegetarians and 1% of those identify themselves as Vegan. On the other hand, I think I read somewhere that 30% would identify themselves as flexitarians. If the food industry believed that 30% of people were interested in vegetarian choices, then there would be more vegetarian choices at restaurants and in the supermarket convenience foods. Also, maybe if the term flexitarian becomes popular, people who really aren't vegetarians will stop identifying themselves as such, which causes confusion (you know, the "I made you chicken (or fish) because you're vegetarian" problem many vegetarians have experienced).
I Must express Utter Repulsion for the comments of acetonePhish and Kiz in this thread..... They Totally lack the spirit and wisdom of Vegetarianism.... Do they REALLY think that attitude is going to encourage someone to eat less meat!! if anything Ahimsa is going to walk away thinking about what SNOBS these vegetarians are. Keep this in mind: The meat reduction of two people = a vegetarian !!! I say KUDOS to anyone who makes a concious choice to lower thier meat intake!!! I'm proud of Ahimsa!!! Keep up the good work! (and remember you can bring your own dishes to reheat if you plan ahead - stuffed zuchinni or morning star "chickn" fingers are some good portable meals)
What crap. It's got nothing to do with snobbery. "Flexitarian" is simply a meaningless word. I applaud anyone who tries to reduce the quantity of meat that they eat, but they're still a meat eater/omnivore. Nobody's judging them. It's simply a statement of fact.
I disagree that the word is meaningless... it may not be in the dictionary... YET. Why not a word to give credit to those who cut down. Since when did vegetarianism get so fundamentalist ?
It's not a case of being fundamentalist. I give huge credit towards anyone who tries to do anything towards reducing suffering in the world - and that includes those who try and cut down the meat that they eat. It's simply a matter of language - if you eat meat, you're an omnivore. If you don't eat meat, you're a vegetarian. If you invent a new word to cover some grey area in between, how do you define it? Where do you draw the line? How much meat are you allowed to eat while still calling yourself a flexetarian? It's fundamentally a word with no meaning. As such, it's vacuous and pointless. Why not just say you're an omnivore who's trying to reduce the amount of meat that you eat? It might not sound so catchy, but I'd have more fucking respect for someone who said that rather than trying to attach a meaningless label to themselves.
Ugh, it is a word... a label. I don't know why you're getting so pissy about it. They're not saying they are vegetarian... they are using a word which says they are somewhat in between. If anyone has a doubt about exactly that means for each person they can ask the person using the label. Get off your high horse... Seriously... sometimes you people are too uptight. Relax. Edit: Personally, I use the term pescatarian as it describes what I eat. But I don't eat egg or dairy unless it is hidden (my mom loves to do that) or completely unavoidable (my aunt puts butter in everything... veggies and mashed potatos... and I will be eating Thanksgiving with the family... just passing on the meat dishes)... so am I closer to Vegan? Bah! Labels are bullshit. People who worry about them really need to get over themselves. This is life not some secret club. Edit #2: Yes, as far as I know I am the only person who will eat fish but not eggs or milk. Of course, it does align more correctly when people realize I went vegetarian from personal preference and not out of a complete moral dictum. Although morals did play into my choice. But I really don't like milk products... and eggs are gross too. But I love a couple ounces of fish once a month or less. I consider it something for special occasions only.
In case it wasn't clear, the reason I dislike labels and people trying to cling to them is because it causes people to almost always guess wrong for me or I am accused of being a liar. The only time people even know about my dietary wishes is if they are making food for me (or I am discussing them here) so saying something that is going to most probably cause them to make the right choices is best but also causes confusion for them later. If I say I am a pescatarian... then it is assumed I eat dairy and egg products and that I would enjoy it if you would prepare fish for me. That is flat out wrong on two counts and probably wrong on the third. I don't eat very much fish and wouldn't want you to prepare any unless we had previously discussed it. I told this to my aunt and had her prepare me a huge (probably 3 pound) piece of Salmon and a salad covered with cheese and eggs, I appreciated the thought but I didn't want to eat it. If I say I am a vegetarian... well, they aren't going to cook me fish (which is good) but most will still assume dairy and eggs are fine. I really prefer not to eat them. And I am called a liar when I eat fish... even though I used the label to try and help people prepare food for me not to chain myself to some agreement. The chances of me getting a heaping plate of butter soaked veggies and mashed potatos is very high. If I say I am vegan... (and the person is willing to cook vegan food for me) then I WILL get something every time that I want to eat. But I am again called a liar when I sweeten my food with honey... or have something with dairy in it... or put some mayonaise on my food. The term provides the largest likelihood of the person preparing food that I would be delighted to eat... but the largest probability of me being accused of being a hypocrite.
I'm not getting pissy about it. I have an opinion about the issue which I'm expressing and explaining. Is that ok with you? But there's no such thing as "somewhat inbetween"! It's nonsensical! How do you define that? How much meat must a person refrain from eating before they make the transition from an omnivore to a pescatarian? Oh fuck off. I'm neither uptight nor am I on a high horse. I have a fucking opinion. Is that so radical? As I've said numerous times, I admire, support and encourage anyone who makes any effort at all to give up meat, so why don't you get off your high horse and stop judging me? I couldn't agree more. So perhaps it would be an idea if you stopped projecting your own personal issues for long enough to realise that I actually agree with you on this, and am not on some kind of puritanical vegetarian crusade?
No, you are being pissy about it. You refuse to accept a term because you don't like that the people aren't meeting your standards. They aren't claiming to be vegetarian... and yes there is something in between. You want to say that if you eat meat you are always an omnivore. Well unless you have never had meat in your life... welcome to club omnivore. The problem is that you are not seeing that this term does have a positive benefit. The person is stating that they would highly prefer to not be served meat. If I asked someone what they ate and they said "omnivore" then I would expect them to not care. If they said flexitarian and defined that as not wanting to eat meat but being willing to in cases where it was unavoidable... then I would know how to prepare food they would want to eat. They are not trying to usurp a term or claim they are vegetarians. They are trying to use a term that will cause less confusion. As was stated above, their using this "more correct" term will reduce the amount of times a person makes a true vegetarian chicken because they think that is what vegetarians are okay with eating. This term is NOT meaningless. It has a meaning, it just happens to be one you don't like. How much meat would they have to refrain from eating to change from an omnivore to a pescatarian? I don't know. For me it was the vast majority of meat that I would have otherwise consumed. I think it is a personal matter that they as an individual would have to decide. Would I consider a person as a vegetarian if they were a flexitarian? No... because they AREN'T a vegetarian. Just like I am not completely vegetarian... I use pescatarian because it properly describes me. I only use other terms when I choose to further clarify my eating preferences. Do I think a person who is flexitarian should feel comfortable discussing their eating decisions with vegetarians? Yes. I don't think they should be offering recipies that include meat -- of course but I think they would benefit from communing with people who have a similar idea. The reason I talk with vegetarians is because the majority of what I eat falls well within their definition and it provides me with information and inspiration. There have been times when I have run into people who have tried to exclude me for my occasional consumption of fish. I guess I am not vegetarian enough for them. I would openly welcome a person who claimed to be flexitarian as someone on the same path. And I would appreciate the fact that they are accepting a label which admits they are not perfect. I would know not to expect them to meet the same level of commitment I expect from vegans. You are claiming that I am projecting my own personal issues onto this. Of course I am. I couldn't do anything else as my issues are related to this very topic. Encouraging open acceptance of all people who are trying... even if they aren't succeeding as often as we would want. And it is not the opinion I mind... it is the manner in which you dismiss those with a different one that bothers me. Edit: And I think flexitarian is a much better term than semi-vegetarian... as the former is much less confusing. Semi-vegitarian is closer to the semantic issues I see you expressing a problem with. You can't be semi-vegetarian... anymore than you can be semi-drug-addicted. But a flexitarian is not making a claim to be vegetarian... just that they prefer vegetarian food if possible.
Thanks, but I think I have a better idea of what I'm being than you do. You're paranoid. It has nothing to do with 'standards'. I've never even mentioned 'standards'. I'm not fucking interested in 'standards'. Huh? What the hell are you talking about? Ever heard of past and present tense? What you mean is I was am onmivore, but am now a vegetarian. The vast majority of people would think "oh cool, I can cook them meat then". You'd be better off saying "I try to avoid eating meat". I never said they were. This is just you being paranoid and projecting your issues again. Could you stop being a prick for just one minute? Why are you insisting on making this a personal argument? It has nothing to do with me not 'liking' the term - I just don't agree that it's useful or logical. Just because people hold a different opinion from your own it doesn't make them any less rational. Well this is my point. The term has no meaning. It's entirely subjective. Again, you're absolutely paranoid. I'm not dismissing your opinion. I'm disagreeing with it. If anything, you're dismissing my opinion, since you seem intent on accusing me of holding it for all sorts of unrelated reasons and don't seem willing to accept that it's an opinion that's arrived at rationally. But a flexatarian is a semi-vegetarian, which is exactly why the term is nonsensical.
