... to not tell my militantly vegan friend she ate fish sauce?

[Snuffalo]

I am a relaxed vegan, as are one of my kids, the other kid and my partner are mostly vegetarian. Basically what that means for me is that I would never spend my own money on animal products, and I wouldn't use them in my own cooking, but if someone else prepares food for me or I'm a guest in someone's home I'll eat what's put in front of me, for the most part - I won't have a sausage or a burger at your barbecue, but I'll eat the pasta salad even if has cheese in it, and I'll have some of your birthday cake even if it's made with eggs.

Anyway, my friend Alice- who is a militant, rather than a relaxed, vegan

• was over and I heated up what I confidently thought to be vegan sweet potato and black bean chilli that my partner had made earlier in the week. I know the recipe backwards and forwards because one of us makes it at least once a month with zero animal products so I had no reason to suspect otherwise. I must say it was especially delicious this time - because, as it turns out, my partner added some fish sauce because he'd read somewhere that it's good in chilli. I didn't find out until today and now I'm wondering if I should tell Alice? I can't decide if, in her shoes, I would want to know or not. Would you?

I believe the correct term for someone who eats a mostly vegan diet is plant based.

Well said @HiJenny35

I am definitely not a vegan so I’m not fanatical or bullying etc but I understand what a vegan is and it means not eating animal products ever! A vegan would go without a meal rather than eat an animal product.

@Dorsetdays You're really forcing this aren't you. Adopting an animal from a concrete box to save it from being euthanised doesn't make someone not vegan.

I know some deeply annoying vegans, so I can't believe I'm defending them - but I think the people saying that the OP shouldn't call herself a vegan (even a relaxed one) have a point.

If someone tells her friends "I'm a vegan, but I'm not militant about it" and then eats cheese and eggs in front of them, the friends may come away thinking that it's only the extremist vegans who don't eat animal products. When a real vegan comes to their house, they may serve them a non-vegan meal because "vegans can eat a bit of cheese now and then". If the vegan friend refuses to eat it, the host may think she's some kind of crazy, militant vegan, when actually she's just a normal one.

I had childhood friends who called themselves vegetarians even though they ate fish. I didn't realise for years that vegetarians don't eat fish!

Words have meanings. They're how we communicate. Look at what's happened with sex and gender - we've now reached the stage where educated adults are claiming that the word "woman" has no definition. If everyone makes up their own definitions of words, words become meaningless.

@Dorsetdays

You're one of those posters

Who knew there were so many angry vegans?

(Spoiler: I suspected)

“One of those posters” 😂😂😂

If you mean, pointing out the obvious flaws in your argument, then yes I guess I am.

I'm not angry. I am actually probably the least angry person you'll meet.

I do however think words have meanings and that the OP isn't a vegan.

The tern plant based would be a more accurate term for the OP's diet.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant-based_diet

No, why would you??

Valanice1989 - you have it spot on. People are free to eat less meat, and shout about it if they want. But when they claim to be vegetarian or vegan, and then eat things that are not, people come to think that's normal.

And then it's difficult for those of us who are actually vegetarian or vegan to get served what we can actually eat. I've lost count of the number of waiters who've tried to tell me that fish is vegetarian.

No don’t do it, you didn’t deceive her because you didn’t know.

I don’t know why people are hammering at you for calling yourself a vegan, your diet sounds 98% vegan but you’re not militant and don’t ‘miss out’ on situations just because your friends aren’t vegan.

The OP's friend doesn't sound like a militant vegan either. She just sounds like a vegan.

You must realise that there's an enormous difference between using manure to grow organic veg and eating animal flesh, yes?

Yes there is. However, vegans eschew the use of animals, not just the eating of them. So they won't wear wool or leather because animals kept to provide those things are exploited. So if sheep are turned out onto a crop field to fertilise the ground, which is common practice, you are making use of a product from the sheep. You're not wearing the wool but you are using something they produce. They're not being kept purely to fertilise the ground. They're kept for meat and wool and to make the most of everything they produce their manure is used as well.

And if I were the OP I would say she's a part-time vegan and her friend is a vegan. Yes, it's great she's trying to reduce consumption of animal products. However, describing herself as a "relaxed vegan" confuses omnivores trying to cater for actual vegans. Describing her friend as a "militant vegan" is adding fuel to the fire. And it's worked - it's brought out all the people who dislike vegans and led to them mocking veganism. The friend isn't militant, she's just a vegan and therefore didn't want to consume fish.

Surely keeping any animal captive, making it wear a collar, putting it on a lead, training it etc is exploiting it for your own personal benefit

Not to mention chopping its balls off

It would likely be deeply upsetting for your friend and I can't see any benefit of your friend knowing it now, after the event. I like your approach a lot more than your friend's, it's pragmatic and considerate.

Making a big fuss about the exclusive & precise meaning of vegan... does that actually work, achieve what you want?

Does it mean you definitely avoid eating foods you don't want? OP respects the word, did her best & still fed her friend the wrong food.

The other part I know for sure is that when folk are so incredibly pedantic what is vegan or vegetarian... it puts me off joining those clubs. If you wanted to gain more converts by having a tight definition... total fail with me.

So why IS it so important to have a strict definition, given it can't ever guarantee the perfection you want? And it ends up making you seem like loons.

Keep quiet.

Excuse me?? 'Obvious flaws'...where exactly?

I'm not a militant vegan at all, live and let live and all that. But I do get increasingly fucked off when people who are completely unaffected by my way of life feel the need to pick it apart.

There are some things even really quite vegan vegans would disagree on.

e.g. prescription drugs. All tested on animals. Consuming them encourages the exploitation of animals. Some people who are vegan would take them. Some wouldn't. I'm sure those who wouldn't might well say the people who would weren't vegan.

Or what about non organic vegetables? Some people who are vegan would eat them. Some wouldn't. I'm sure those who wouldn't might well say the people who would weren't vegan.

The production of pretty much all vegetables results in animal deaths: rabbits are shot to keep populations down, or are killed in the harvesting process.

Obviously humans have got to eat something so it can ultimately only really be a case of minimising harm, but I'm not sure all the current things deemed vegan or non vegan overall minimise harm/suffering to animals as much as possible and I'm not convinced therefore that the vegan philosophy is wholly internally consistent.

I think for the sake of mainly being served food people are happy to eat, describing oneself as a relaxed vegan seems a sensible compromise. (Even if I do find it frustrating to make an effort to prepare a meal for someone including the buying of substitutes when that person then picks up a piece of cheese that the non vegans were having mid meal and say they really fancy some. Not that that's what Op is doing.)

So why IS it so important to have a strict definition

Because words have meanings?

red, hopeful, high, few, dark, love, nuance...: these are words we use lots even though they have fuzzy boundaries on their meaning.

Mygastis. Yet you’re completely unaffected by the OPs way of life surely but that hasn’t stopped you commenting. Seems a little hypocritical.

I was talking about keeping animals as pets. The vegan society themselves clearly state their aim is to have no animals kept in captivity of any sort (including guide dogs) so arguing that keeping pets is fine is a contradiction.

Definitely don't tell her now but omg my face would have blown up like a puffa fish due to allergies... Be more careful with common allergens as well as veganism ffs

Pickle. Allergies is very different to a dietary or lifestyle choice

Being vegan is about avoiding animal products 'as far as humanly possible'. Vegans do realise that it's impossible to live entirely free from it.

Re prescription drugs. I'm on strong medication which I know will have been tested on animals. If I didn't take it I would die, simple as. To me it's a no brainer.