Planet Green and Veganism

Perhaps my rants are becoming arduous, but I like to critique things and find out how something, say a television show or a network, relates or could relate to veganism.

On Planet Green I've noticed that very few programs talk about veganism or even vegetarianism.  So I wonder why, given the fact the veganism, which to me is synonymous with being green, is not given more attention on Planet Green.  Of course vegans may choose to not eat non-gmo and/or organic foods.  But the fact that vegans consume in anyway no products based on the remains of dead animals, their contribution to the environment is positive and thus green.  By not eating or wearing dead animals they are lowering the demand, even if only by a teeny tiny percent, for such products and I believe they are improving the overall carbon footprint.

Now, there are those who argue that if the demand for vegan foods increases while the demand of animal flesh decreases, we'll have to creat more farms, which means clear cutting large areas to make room for the increased demand of crops for food.  But I think that what people are forgetting (or perhaps they don't know) is that the demand for biofuels is really what is increasing the demand for crops of plants specific to making biofuels and is a larger factor in having to clear cut new areas to grow these crops.  I believe that if other alternatives are found, the need for biofuels would decrease and the land that we currently have can be used to create food crops and so diminishing the need for clear cutting.

This is my take on things. What do you think about such issues?

The Meaning of Strict

Today I was listening to Emril Lagasse's Emril Green, a green cooking show on Planet Green.  Because it's simply background noise as I sit here typing, communing and working, I miss a lot of what's happening.  But in the episode I was listening to I heard the words strict vegetarian.  I was intrigued because I was curious to know what the hell Emril was going to make for this "strict vegetarian."  As it turns out, although she and her mother consider her to be a strict vegetarian, she's not.  She eats seafood.   So to be pricise, then, she's a pesco-vegetarian.  So my question is this.  What is the meaning of strict vegetarian?

Yes, this is a blog about veganism.  So my contention is that she is not a strict vegetarian or for that matter a vegetarian.  But then I thought about vegetarianism as a concept.  Although there is debate, especially from vegans, about the kinds of vegetarianism--vegans would say that there is only one--I decided to examine these definitions.



The following is a list of the commonly known types of vegetarianism:

1. Vegetarian
2. Pesco-Vegetarian (or pescetarian)
3. Ovo-Lacto Vegetarian and these variants:
1. Ovo Vegetarian
2. Lacto Vegetarian
4. Strict Vegetarian
5. Vegan

Now we could state that there is no difference between a strict vegetarian and a vegan, but I make the distinction by describing a strict vegetarian as someone who consumes nothing whatsoever from an animal, and by consume I mean eat and drink.  This does not preclude wearing (or using in some other way than eating and drinking) things made from animals.  I don't actually know anyone in this category or if this is even a category of vegetarianism.

And of course we know that a vegan is a strict vegetarian is one that eschews anything made from animals, whether it be for health reasons and/or moral reasons.  Of course one could argue that a vegan for health reasons only is not a vegan, but rather simply a strict vegetarian.

So the point of all of this is that when one is describing herself as a vegetarian, she should qualify this so that we can be clear and then decide for ourselves whether her assertion is true or false given whatever meaning of vegetarian you choose.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Kick It Up a Notch with Planet Green Tonight: Emeril Green Premiers!
• Vegetarianism and Your Health
• Vegetarianism Has Many Benefits
• Vegetarian and Vegan Websites

Living in a Non-Vegan Family

One thing I struggle with is how to cope with my non-vegan family, both my wife and puppies as well as my parents, brother and sister. My ideas on veganism and vegetarianism are probably not shared by those who are one or the other. In fact, if we look at the definition of each in the New Oxford American Dictionary, we find the following definitions:

Vegan
noun
a person who does not eat or use animal products : I'm a strict vegan | [as adj. ] a vegan diet.

Vegetarian
noun
a person who does not eat meat, and sometimes other animal products, esp. for moral, religious, or health reasons.

adjective
of or relating to the exclusion of meat or other animal products from the diet : a vegetarian restaurant.

I, however, consider veganism synonymous with activism, animal rights as well as a strict vegetarian diet. In other words, veganism is a much broader characterization of its meaning. But vegetarianism, in my opinion, has meaning that is much more specific. I think that it only has to do with one's diet. Thus the various categories in which it falls: strict, ovo-lacto, etc. As a vegan, when I say that mine is a vegetarian diet, I mean a strictly no-animal ingredients whatsoever diet, which is synonymous with what is termed a vegan diet.

So I've been pondering some questions and ideas, one of which has to do with the questions of living in a non-vegan home. I wonder to myself if being vegan means that if you cannot convince your family of its virtues then you let one another live as each wishes. But also, I wonder, does it mean that if you are the primary cook in the family, should you cook non-vegan dishes for them? That is, if my wife wants a "juicy" steak or fried chicken, should you have her make her own?

Now, given my definition of vegetarianism, whether or not you are a strict vegetarian, if you don't consider yourself a vegan, would there be a problem or some invalidation of your vegetarianism if you cook non-vegetarian dishes for your family? I think the key here is the fact that this kind of vegetarian does not consider themselves a vegan. If you don't hold to the definition of vegan, thus considering yourself, perhaps only for reasons of health and taste, a vegetarian, then perhaps it is okay to cook non-vegetarian for your family since you hold no notion, necessarily, of the cruelty to animals to which a non-vegetarian diet contributes.

So as a vegan, I might recommend to other vegans to try to find for yourself a vegan mate or accept your non-vegan mate and refuse to contribute to suffering by holding to your values and refusing to cook non-vegetarian them. This might cause some level of consternation between the two of you, but, as I am discovering, if you can talk your mate into enjoying with you every so often a vegan meal, things between you might be less of a headache.