VeggieBoards banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Opinions of “Partial Vegetarians”

8K views 66 replies 34 participants last post by  Tom 
#1 ·
Hi everyone!

I'm new to the site, but I was hoping you all could help me out. I'm a college student doing research this summer (also a vegetarian of about a year), and I'm looking into partial vegetarians / selective or "ethical" omnivores / those who cut back their meat consumption for one reason or another.

How do you all feel about this? Does someone who reduces their meat consumption for animal rights reasons deserve moral "credit"? How about if their reasons are environmental?

In the same vein, how do you feel about people who cut red meat out of their diets, but continue to eat poultry and fish? And are pescetarians vegetarians?

Thanks in advance for all of your help! I really value any insight you can offer.
 
#2 ·
First, Pescetarians are omnivores. They eat creatures that were once living and breathing. Vegetarians don't do that. I'm not sure why they think they should be included under the umbrella, but they aren't. Eating a dead animal is eating a dead animal. Deciding you are somehow morally superior b/c you decided that fish are lesser beings is totally bogus.

As far as people who cut back meat for moral reasons, I don't know how I feel. I want to say that anything is better than nothing. But, I also know that if it's immoral, it's immoral. Doing it less doesn't make it anymore immoral. It's a bit like having an affair. Is someone who only sleeps with their mistress 6 days a week somehow better than someone who sleeps with her 7? Is it any less cheating on your spouse b/c you do it less? I'm not sure about the environmental thing b/c for me it is 100% ethics. I appreciate the health benefits as well. It does skeeve me out a bit that people would be more concerned about the environment than the pain and suffering of animals.

There is always a line, and the line is at different places for different groups. Vegetarians see themselves as making a more moral choice than omni's. Vegans see themselves as making a better choice than vegetarians. I guess it depends on who you are and who you talk to. I do tend to think that veganism is the best choice overall even though I have slipped from veganism lately. It certainly is the choice of least suffering. My foray into veganism has helped me make better choices. I fully intend to go back after I do a bit more experimenting with foods.
 
#4 ·
Less meat can be a good thing, but not if you are substituting more dairy, eggs, fish or especially chicken where you once ate red meat. The cruelest meal choice is chicken. They are the world's most abused animals. Dairy cows, pigs and veal calves live awful lives too. The steak cattle actually have the best lives of any land creature that we routinely eat. They usually get to spend a portion of their lives outside, whereas the other animals are confined to extremely small spaces their whole lives. So is less meat a good thing? Yes, if you are substituting plants for that meat and not other animal products.
 
#5 ·
Hi, jrsk.

I don't spend much time thinking about how much moral credit other people deserve, nor do I think doing so is very valuable. With regard to omnivores who cut back on their meat consumption for ethical reasons I am pleased by it, because they are doing less harm, because they recognize there is a problem and because they care about reducing the problem, to at least some extent. I would be more pleased if they went vegan, of course, but it's better than if they'd continued as they were doing before. Poppy makes a good point that this may not be the case if they are substituting other animal products in place of the meat they are reducing, however.

Good luck with your research.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrsk View Post
Does someone who reduces their meat consumption for animal rights reasons deserve moral "credit"? How about if their reasons are environmental?
I think someone concerned about the environment might cut back on meat, like people cut back on driving. But they really ought to stop it completely because it's much easier for many people to cut out meat than to cut out driving.

But I can't imagine anyone seriously concerned with "animal rights" continuing to eat meat. Unless they're starving or something. It's against the basic premise.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrsk View Post

Hi everyone!

I'm new to the site, but I was hoping you all could help me out. I'm a college student doing research this summer (also a vegetarian of about a year), and I'm looking into partial vegetarians / selective or "ethical" omnivores / those who cut back their meat consumption for one reason or another.

How do you all feel about this? Does someone who reduces their meat consumption for animal rights reasons deserve moral "credit"? How about if their reasons are environmental?

In the same vein, how do you feel about people who cut red meat out of their diets, but continue to eat poultry and fish? And are pescetarians vegetarians?

Thanks in advance for all of your help! I really value any insight you can offer.
No pescetarians are not vegetarians. Vegetarians don't eat any kind of animals I'm personally not into the whole label thing. It doesn't take that much more breath to tell somebody "I only eat fish".

It's my understanding that people who cut down on red meat are doing it for health, I don't have a problem with that, but soley cutting red meat doesn't make much of a difference ethically if your still consuming poultry or fish.

Perhaps it might make a small ethical difference if the meat they do eat comes from are humanely raised, free range animals(although that doesn't change the fact that they'll get their throats slit in the end, even if it's done in a "loving" way
dizzy2.gif
)
 
#11 ·
I pretty much agree with what Poppy said.

As much as I would love it if the entire world went veg*n, I know that's not going to happen overnight.

If people are eating less meat overall, then it's still helping the cause. I don't think they should call themselves vegetarians because then the "label" gets confused. But if people are eating a lot less meat than usual, then great!
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by thcause View Post

You have to realize that we are raised in a dollar menu society. It seems extremely hard to completely cut out meat, and it can be. Any effort they put into it, is effort that is headed in the right direction.
This is true. I live in an area where the dollar menu is something people choose their meals from every day.
So I agree that any effort is far better than no effort at all.
 
#14 ·
HI! :) I wouldn't really consider a "partial vegetarian." a vegetarian. That's basically just an omnivore xD They eat meat, therefore it's just not in relation to vegetarian. I think "partial." is just a word to make those feel better about themselves for "cutting back." I understand some people have cravings, but if you really did care about animals and didn't want to contribute to the suffering behind factory farms, my assumption is that you would go at least vegetarian. In today's society, vegetarian isn't the least bit hard. Every place I go to has some sort of (and sometimes even multiple) vegetarian dishes. More restaurants and grocery stores are catering to vegetarians than ever before; it's veganism that can be a bit tricky though because often milk and eggs are put into vegetarian dishes but likewise, there are also beginning to be more options for vegans. (Ex: Red Robins first had a veggie burger, but now has a vegan burger as well.)

I don't want this to sound rude or holier than thou, but I don't think someone that is simply "cutting back." on meat for animal or environmental reasons really deserves too much credit. I hear it all the time, believe me, "I'm flexitarian." or "Well, I don't eat much meat..." when people are around me, and I think it's kind of a way to soothe over a guilty conscious without really having to do too much about the issue. I'm not rude to these people though (at least I hope I don't come off that way to them >.>), and I encourage them to make the switch and offer them more insight about factory farms.

I think people who simply give up red meat are either doing it for health reasons or they think a cow is more sentient than a chicken, but I don't know everyone's whole story. Sometimes, people also have confidence issues about making such a switch in their lifestyle. Some people may be really busy or not have too much time to really look into vegetarian or veganism health, so they may eat just a little bit of meat because it's what they have always known and they don't know likewise how to go about it veggie style. Reminds me of a teacher I had who's wife was vegetarian but when she was pregnant, she consumed little bits of chicken from the dinner table. It was understandable and I get that she was worried, but it's troublesome when people don't have much trust and faith in their own lifestyle choices. But I understand the pressure because she may have been pressured by her peers to make sure the baby was healthy, and it she didn't have a "healthy" baby, people most likely would have blamed it on her vegetarian lifestyle, rather than about maybe just ignorance about staying healthy while pregnant, or a whole nother myriad of issues that may not have even been about the mom's lifestyle.

That's just my two cents.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by thcause View Post

You have to realize that we are raised in a dollar menu society. It seems extremely hard to completely cut out meat, and it can be. Any effort they put into it, is effort that is headed in the right direction.
I applaud any and all efforts to reduce meat consumption. However, my frustration has partly to do with the definition of the term. A "vegetarian" does not eat animals, not even sometimes. Granted, accidents happen or people may lapse for any number of reasons. But "partial vegetarian" is an absurd term and anyway a useless one, as either "omnivore" or "flexitarian" should suffice.

So, do flexitarians deserve some credit? Sure. But I think part of being any kind of veg*n is knowing that you can always do better. It seems like a bit of a cop-out if you're aware of the issues, but stop half way.
 
#16 ·
My opinion is if someone is a 'partial vegetarian'...then they aren't.

They could use say..."I don't eat alot of meat" but just using the word vegetarian to me, isn't being honest with themselves *or* other people.

It causes alot of confusion.

Also the "moral omnivore"...to me is an oxymoron. Key word...*moral*...I think someone using this term is a contradiction to themselves.

Not only that but what would that really mean?

Is this someone who only buys meat from a farm where "the animals are treated with love & compassion"?

Ummm...raising them from babies, talking to them, spending time with them, caring for them & then slaughtering them isn't kind or compassionate.

Aren't those 2 of the reasons that alot of people become vegetarian in the first place?

As for 'pescatarians'? Same as above. I think just not labeling themselves in the first place would be more honest.

Maybe take a different viewpoint on it..."I no longer eat other animals but still consume fish". Just leave the labels out of the discussion.
thinking.gif


Now having said all of that...

I think anyone who consumes even one meal a day without any type of meat is AWESOME! Whether they are doing it for their health or for the animals.

This is how alot of vegetarians are born...one meal at a time, one day at a time.

I applaud any step in this direction. I also think that as vegetarians/vegans we should let our family members/friends know this. Let them know that even if they aren't 'doing it for the animals' & only for their health that is good enough.

I hate the mentality of the 'holier than thou' vegetarian. Why can't we all just be accepting of any reason why there is one more meat free meal being consumed?

I've heard from alot of former vegetarians who feel like they are complete & utter 'failures' for once being a vegetarian but have stopped doing it for whatever reason.

We can't let people feel this way...vegetarianism should be a positive, wonderful transition for whatever reason people decide to do it. And as vegetarians/vegans we need to be the ones to step up & help to encourage them no matter where they are in their journeys.

Just my thoughts.
bow.gif
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by flvegnewbie View Post

My opinion is if someone is a 'partial vegetarian'...then they aren't.

They could use say..."I don't eat alot of meat" but just using the word vegetarian to me, isn't being honest with themselves *or* other people.

It causes alot of confusion.

Also the "moral omnivore"...to me is an oxymoron. Key word...*moral*...I think someone using this term is a contradiction to themselves.

Not only that but what would that really mean?

Is this someone who only buys meat from a farm where "the animals are treated with love & compassion"?

Ummm...raising them from babies, talking to them, spending time with them, caring for them & then slaughtering them isn't kind or compassionate.

Aren't those 2 of the reasons that alot of people become vegetarian in the first place?

As for 'pescatarians'? Same as above. I think just not labeling themselves in the first place would be more honest.

Maybe take a different viewpoint on it..."I no longer eat other animals but still consume fish". Just leave the labels out of the discussion.
thinking.gif


Now having said all of that...

I think anyone who consumes even one meal a day without any type of meat is AWESOME! Whether they are doing it for their health or for the animals.

This is how alot of vegetarians are born...one meal at a time, one day at a time.

I applaud any step in this direction. I also think that as vegetarians/vegans we should let our family members/friends know this. Let them know that even if they aren't 'doing it for the animals' & only for their health that is good enough.

I hate the mentality of the 'holier than thou' vegetarian. Why can't we all just be accepting of any reason why there is one more meat free meal being consumed?

I've heard from alot of former vegetarians who feel like they are complete & utter 'failures' for once being a vegetarian but have stopped doing it for whatever reason.

We can't let people feel this way...vegetarianism should be a positive, wonderful transition for whatever reason people decide to do it. And as vegetarians/vegans we need to be the ones to step up & help to encourage them no matter where they are in their journeys.

Just my thoughts.
bow.gif
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote.

I just realized that someone will probably read the bolded and call you a hypocrite based on the ideas you wrote above it. I think it's worth it to point out that the frustration you/many of us express with the misuse of the term "vegetarian" or "vegan" doesn't stem from a sense of superiority or some desire to maintain exclusivity of our super best-friends no meat club. It's got to do with a misuse of a term and trying to ensure that all veg*ns are taken seriously and treated with respect. It's difficult to build up that sort of social credibility when people who do not understand the terms use them inappropriately. It creates misunderstandings and leads to the mistreatment of actual veg*ns. The frustration with--even hate of--those who describe themselves as "veg*n" but are not, is more of a hate for the spread of misinformation and the constant distrust and disbelief veg*ns are subjected to on a daily basis from family members, restaurant servers, bosses, et al. that have all known people who are veg*n ...but they still "sometimes eat meat."
 
#18 ·
Pescitarians are not vegetarians although many many people think that fish arent animals. If there not animals than what are they? There certainly not a plant. Any one that cuts out some meat and doenst replace it with another meat is awesome. People that just cut out red meat and eat more chicken and those fish plants are not doing any good. There sparing the life of one cow for like 5 chickens or fish. There not helping anyone. A vegetarian consumes no dead animals. Plain and simple. If you want to help the animals than stop eating them all togther.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbrien View Post

I think it's worth it to point out that the frustration you/many of us express with the misuse of the term "vegetarian" or "vegan" doesn't stem from a sense of superiority or some desire to maintain exclusivity of our super best-friends no meat club. It's got to do with a misuse of a term and trying to ensure that all veg*ns are taken seriously and treated with respect. It's difficult to build up that sort of social credibility when people who do not understand the terms use them inappropriately. It creates misunderstandings and leads to the mistreatment of actual veg*ns. The frustration with--even hate of--those who describe themselves as "veg*n" but are not, is more of a hate for the spread of misinformation and the constant distrust and disbelief veg*ns are subjected to on a daily basis from family members, restaurant servers, bosses, et al. that have all known people who are veg*n ...but they still "sometimes eat meat."
I agree with this.

Although I'm all for people cutting any amount of meat from their diets, I don't think they should be called any type of vegetarian even if they very rarely eat meat.

It's these kind of incorrect uses of the term that have people broadcasting vegetarians can eat fish.
 
#20 ·
I fell off the band wagon of full veggie the last few months sand was part and flex vegeterian because due to various areas of my life.

However, since I need to watch what I eat and what I need to put in my mouth and I need more fruits and veggies and plant base items,

I am in process of going fully Vegetarian. I am going for sure veg for the animals, the environment, health reasons and weight loss, I

do want to say that the meat and poultry today does't taste like it did a few decades ago and I can tell the difference. Last night I am being

honest we grilled chicken breasts something from our ministry thing we got a few months back , at least it was food for the belly anyhow , the

chicken was so salty and I almost was gagging on it. So I am taking this week to adjust my diet around and turn fully veg.

yes I agree that people that eats fish and seafood are not vegeterians, A vegeterian I agree doesn't eat meats, I have repented from what I had

hate the last few months but, i am starting up this week. I am going through the recipes and looking stuff online and getting healthy things.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Persephone104 View Post

I agree with this.

Although I'm all for people cutting any amount of meat from their diets, I don't think they should be called any type of vegetarian even if they very rarely eat meat.

It's these kind of incorrect uses of the term that have people broadcasting vegetarians can eat fish.
I agree.

It's wrong to think that vegetarians will eat anything that has parents
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrsk View Post

How do you all feel about this? Does someone who reduces their meat consumption for animal rights reasons deserve moral "credit"? How about if their reasons are environmental?

In the same vein, how do you feel about people who cut red meat out of their diets, but continue to eat poultry and fish? And are pescetarians vegetarians?

Thanks in advance for all of your help! I really value any insight you can offer.
To be honest, I really hate people who go half way. They really piss me off and they make the rest of us look bad. I don't give them any moral credit. I don't view them as different than meat eaters. The whole "vegetarian once a week" or "vegetarian everyday except the weekends" really drives me up the wall.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlainWinthrope View Post

To be honest, I really hate people who go half way. They really piss me off and they make the rest of us look bad. I don't give them any moral credit. I don't view them as different than meat eaters. The whole "vegetarian once a week" or "vegetarian everyday except the weekends" really drives me up the wall.
I think it's a good thing as long as they don't call themselves vegetarians.
Although I would love for everyone to go all the way, asking for an immediate all or nothing doesn't always appeal to people. They are making a difference, whether intentional or not, to help the cause we're all fighting for. If the demand for meat decreases, then so does the "necessity" for factory farms.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Persephone104 View Post

I think it's a good thing as long as they don't call themselves vegetarians.
Although I would love for everyone to go all the way, asking for an immediate all or nothing doesn't always appeal to people. They are making a difference, whether intentional or not, to help the cause we're all fighting for. If the demand for meat decreases, then so does the "necessity" for factory farms.
You keep beating me to it on these comments.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Persephone104 View Post

I think it's a good thing as long as they don't call themselves vegetarians.
Although I would love for everyone to go all the way, asking for an immediate all or nothing doesn't always appeal to people. They are making a difference, whether intentional or not, to help the cause we're all fighting for. If the demand for meat decreases, then so does the "necessity" for factory farms.
Agreed with this person! As long as people recognize the benefits of cutting back on meat consumption, I think that's great! They definitely should not be criticized for not becoming full vegetarians -- at least they are putting in some effort (unlike most people).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top