Awesome post, go vegheads! I'm a vegetarian too, although I am part of the exact demographic you were speaking of (white and privileged). I'm glad you posted about this because recently I've been having sort of an inner-battle with myself about vegetarianism and privilege. Because, really, if I lived in poverty or had a low-income, I would most likely not have the privilege of eating healthy, meat-free meals. I would have to eat whatever I could afford. So I guess as proud as I feel for standing up for the animals, a part of me feels bad because I feel like by being a vegetarian, I'm involuntarily sticking up my nose up at people who still eat meat, rather they choose to or not. Even though I do not actually feel that way and I do not believe in judging others for their lifestyles, I feel like it will come across that way no matter what.

Grace! So great to see you on Feministing.

As a white, fairly privileged vegetarian, I often think about my choice to identify as 'vegetarian'. I actually eat fish and eggs and cheese, and am comfortable with using my own label 'vegetarian' to cover my dietary choices.

But even being able to choose that label is privileged. I usually don't need to explain myself when I do eat fish, and though it is difficult to find vegetarian options everywhere, I know I can ask for something without meat without serious reprocussions.

I find ths intersection between privilege and labels fascinating, and vegetarianism adds yet another layer.

Heron

I'm sorry that you had to go through that trouble. I am lucky that I have been a vegetarian my whole life (my mother decided to become one when she was pregnant with me). I am white and...middle class; however, I come from a multi-ethnic background (Iranian/Irish) and it is hard to dine out with my father, due to the fact that he loves Persian cuisine.

Being a vegetarian is very healthy, and I wish the best for your journey!

Heron, that's Pescatarian.
Fish are animals. That is meat. You may be happy with using Vegetarian to include eating fish, but it actually kind of screws the rest of us in the Veg community. You see, a community is about everyone, not just one person feeling comfortable about it! People saying that Veg includes fish means that I get to explain why it isn't ok, and makes for embarrassing moments.

If you use the common definition of vegetarian, which requires no meat consumption period, and further that you avoid meat out of choice instead of necessity, it is easy to see how that would correlate with education level. However, if you rate vegetarianism on a scale instead, based solely on what you actually eat instead of what you'd like to, I'm pretty sure you'd find that the poor are a lot more vegetarian than the middle and upper classes, simply because of how much cheaper vegetarian diets are.

As for me, I avoid meat by choice, but for purely anthropocentric reasons, namely resource allocation in the production of food, for which meat is extremely wasteful. I can't use the common definition of vegetarian, though, because I don't turn down meat I'm served, purely as a matter of politeness, and so do eat it from time to time on social occasions. However, being a physicist I'm used to taking a much more pragmatic approach to things than the moral absolutes of common labels, so since 99+% of my calorie intake is from plants, I'd call myself "vegetarian to 2 significant figures."

Halo:
I know I'm really an ovo-lacto-pescatarian. It's all about labels. I choose to say I'm a vegetarian, because people can make some base assumptions about me that are generally correct. I say I'm a vegetarian for the same reason I say I'm bisexual, because choosing a label, despite the awkward fit, helps other people make quicker decisions about me, and allows me to quickly identify myself in situations where I want to avoid lengthy explanation. I like Alice's idea - I guess I'm a vegetarian also a vegetarian to two significant figures, although I would say that 85% of my calorie intake is plant matter.

Well, hold on now. "To two significant figures" is a well-defined, technical phrase. Being a vegetarian to two significant figures means being at least 99.5% vegetarian. Indeed, you're not even a vegetarian to 1 significant figure, which would require being at least 95% vegetarian. 85% plant matter is probably closer to what nutritionists would recommend for an ordinary meat-inclusive diet

I am not a vegetarian [sorry!], but for political and social reasons I am very interested in the way that vegetarianism and feminist intersect. I read a really awesome piece in a Feminist Philosophy course lat semester that touched on this, and I found it fascinating. I will see if I can find the resource and perhaps post the info here. I would love any suggestions for what to read to learn more!

Grace,

I am not certain where you live (mostly like in the US or Canada), but from my experience living in what is considered a Western country (Australia), there ARE people of colour who are vegetarians. Because I know a lot of Chinese, Southeast Asians like Vietnamese, Thai, Indians and to a lesser extend the Japanese, they have vegetarian restaurants around the city and in the suburbs. Some of these are for fine dining as well. Most of them are vegetarians for religious purposes, but many of them are also vegetarians due to the philosophy and health benefits behind it

I am not familiar with Vegetarian in relation to South Koreans, however, but that is merely because I hardly know any South Koreans.

It’s surprising that there are not many vegetarian people of colour at your place.

Alice commented at July 22, 2008 1:04 PM: "However, being a physicist I'm used to taking a much more pragmatic approach to things than the moral absolutes of common labels, so since 99+% of my calorie intake is from plants,"

Curious nitpicker time: mushrooms (fungi and yummy), kelp (protist and I haven't tried it yet), etc. still count as "vegetarian food" even though they're not plants, right?

Mina: Curious nitpicker time: mushrooms (fungi and yummy), kelp (protist and I haven't tried it yet), etc. still count as "vegetarian food" even though they're not plants, right?

Yes. I don't eat much of those, though, so it slipped my mind to include them.

LlesbianLlama, if your curious about vegetarianism, something you should know right away is that there is very little that vegetarians actually agree on, so it's not a unified philosophy, movement, or attitude, even less so than feminism, which I'm sure you know is a very diverse set of beliefs already.

I, for instance, don't particularly care about the welfare of animals, but am vegetarian because meat production disrupts the environment and consumes more resources than other foods. Yet even then, I don't particularly care about the welfare of the Earth's biosphere, either, except insofar as it affects us. It does affect us, so I care, but beyond I wouldn't even mind if Earth became an ecumenopolis. Like I said, purely anthropocentric motivation here. Indeed, when someone says they're vegetarian, you can't even so much as assume that they aren't Hitler. All you can take from that is that they probably don't consume animals much, as is evident by herong here who will tell you they're vegetarian even as they eat a swordfish steak.

I avoided calling myself vegetarian for a while because I'll eat fish (but try not to eat farmed fish). However, people kept calling me vegetarian so I started to think of myself as that. Still, I generally just say, "I don't eat meat". I don't like labels.

As for the privilege thing, one of the advantages of vegetarianism is that it's cheaper! Meat can be expensive. In season vegetables and fruits can be pretty cheap.

I'll eat fish (but try not to eat farmed fish)

Care to elaborate on why? It would seem to me that farmed fish would be preferable, since farming can be sustainable, while harvesting wild populations is not. Indeed, the tuna is currently at risk of extinction from over-harvesting, and what is their last hope of survival? Domestication. If we can breed and grow them in captivity, we can have as many as we want! But if we just continue catching them in the wild, they're pretty much done for.

I'm sure some of you know about her, but Carol Adams has written extensively on the similarities of the oppression of women and the oppression of animals. Her books The Sexual Politics of Meat and The Pornography of Meat (among others) are interesting reading for those of you who indicated you wanted to know more about this topic. It really is amazing to see the parallels. Unfortunately, organizations like PETA often exploit women in their attempts to get their messages across when they should be working in tandem with feminists. . . . But that's another issue.

LlesbianLlama, try reading "An Unnatural Order" by Jim Mason or "Sexual Politics of Meat" or "Pornography of Meat" by Carol Adams. I prefer Mason's book because it takes an anthropological look at how speciesism, sexism, and racism developed through hunting culture. Adams' books are a little redundant, but the photos on her website are really shocking.

Alice, most farmed fish isn't sustainable because of farming practices - bad things released into the water, higher mercury levels in the fish.

On the vegetarian/feminism intersection it's worth noting that I know several female married vegetarians who cook themselves vegetarian meals and their husbands separate, non-vegetarian meals.

That's really great that you guys can rationalize using labels that are somewhat inappropriate for you, but I think you've missed my point.
Which was that it isn't about just you, or how well you rationalize what you feel like being called. That "label" is attached to a whole hell of a lot of people, and those people generally do not appreciate the misuse and weakening of their word.
Seriously, just say you don't eat "meat".

It sounds awful anyway. Kind of like (for example) being 99% feminist, except for the fact that you don't believe in ideal x or y, even though those ideals are central to the movement- but it's good enough that you try as hard as you do, so you call yourself a feminist...

People who identify themselves as vegetarians yet eat fish always irk me.

It's as if they think fish are vegetables or something. Somebody should slap them all and point out the fact that fish are animals that live in the water.

As a vegetarian I need to take tranquilizers because I find myself always agitated and irritated about something. As you know, a vegetarian diet cause high amounts of flatulence and an irritable demeanor as our bodies lurch into hunt/kill-something mode.

Still, I'll take flatulence and shrieking at idiots over lopping the heads off of little animals for food any day.

Speaking of shrieking at idiots, get a load of this bunch:
http://www.VegetariansAreEvil.com

Like now they're telling us that Hitler, Pol Pot, Charles Manson, Genghis Khan, Joseph Stalin and George W. Bush are vegetarians? That's what did it to them?

What about Hillary? She's a vegetarian. Does that make her evil too?

As the one who stepped forward and admitted that I eat fish and call myself a vegetarian, I can certainly sympathize with vegans who are insulted by my food choices.

Again, I bring it back to bisexualism. I feel pretty strongly that most people are not located on either extreme of the continuum of sexuality. I can appreciate, however, the simplicity that labels can afford someone who would like to avoid saying 'well, I mostly like women, but I've kissed a man once and I have occaisional dreams and I was in love with my male professor in college.' It's easier to say 'I'm straight' or 'I'm gay' or 'I'm bisexual', while in fact, all of those lables cover HUGE areas of ground and can describe millions of people who all have very different experiences.

Same with vegetarianism. I choose that label because, yes, it's easy. The truth is, there are 'meat eaters' who rarely eat any animal matter, and simply choose not to call themselves vegetarians. There are vegans who still eat gelatin. There are vegetarians, like myself, who aren't vegan and eat the occasional tuna sandwich.

There have been a couple other strings going on about how a label is just that - an imperfect description of sort of who you are.

Halo: I doubt that I am the only vegetarian who eats fish. If I were, I would probably not call myself vegetarian. Just like there are feminists of all flavors (thank god) and bisexuals of all flavors, so there are vegetarians.

Gee whiz, Heron- since you aren't the only person doing it, it's a-ok to be part of the problem!

Great attitude! Thanks for being yet another "But I know a vegetarian, and they eat fish..."

Something being easy isn't an excuse to do it, you obviously know better.

Do you run around telling people you are Bisexual, but wouldn't "do anything gay"? It's sounds about as logical and a Vegetarian eating an animal.

you're not the only vegetarian that eats fish because you're not a vegetarian. you're a pescatarian.

I'm black and a dietary vegan. I live in Chicago, and there are a lot of vegan/vegetarian restaurants here. One of the best is Soul Vegetarian East, an all vegan soul food restaurant. It's in a low-income, mostly black neighborhood, which shows that not only white and /or priveleged people have access to good, healthy food--at least in the south side of Chicago...

I'm a vegetarian, but I eat fish.

Yes, I know that I'm really a pescatarian. The problem with that is that only vegetarians know what pescatarians are.

Therefore, when I'm in the middle of Texas and trying to explain to a waitress that I don't want the queso if it was made with beef stock, I go ahead and call myself a vegetarian. "Pescatarian" will only get me a weird look from the waitress until I say, "Vegetarian who eats fish."

Once "pescatarian" is recognized as an actual word in the majority of places, I'll start using it. Until then, I'm going to have to say, "I'm a vegetarian, but I eat fish." I'll be sure to leave in the qualifier of "but" (or "however," or "yet").

Halo, if I did run around calling myself a bisexual but that I would never do anything gay, would that make my choice of label any less valid? What if I only had dreams about the same sex? What if I had never had any sexual relations with either sex? Would my label be less valid then?

The second problem with labels (besides their imprefect fit) is that there can never be enough. In order to completely describe me in everyway, I would need 100 new words, which each in turn would need explanations and elucidations.

Halo, I love being an ovo-lacto-pescetarian, but would never want to cause a rift in the vegetarian movement. In all seriousness, do you suggest I identify as that (an ovo-lacto-pescetarian)? Or go completely vegan?

Aside from the curent debate - if I am not vegetarian, and the label vegan exists to identify those who choose to eat 100% vegetable matter, what exactly is a vegetarian?

calling yourself a vegetarian while eating fish is like calling yourself a feminist who believes only men should be allowed to vote

Hey Herong.
I understand why you would choose to identify as a vegetarian in dining situations- words like pescetarian, vegetarian, and vegan are not always fully understood in the mainstream, and it can be difficult to communicate the meaning and expectations of one's lifestyle.
Unfortunately, a lot of the confusion in what these words mean come from within the communities of people that label themselves with these words. Vegetarians do not eat fish because fish are not vegetables- they are living creatures. The idea that vegetarians eat fish is a widely spread and deeply frustrating myth that is perpetuated by society and by people falsely labeling themselves as vegetarian.
I don't find it similar to your bisexual argument because although sexuality is a continuum, the lifestyle choice to eat animals or not is less of a continuum. Omnivore, vegetarian, vegan. You may be almost vegetarian, but you're still an omnivore. Almost vegan is still vegetarian. So on, so forth. Also, many (thought not all) people that are vegan or vegetarian cite animal rights for a reason so seeing the label being used so flexibly by others not making the same commitments can be bothersome.
But I am not criticizing you- words are just words, after all, and I think it is great that you have cut down so much on your consumption of animals! But I hope this might clarify why a vegetarian may be upset with your choice of words.

calling yourself a vegetarian while eating fish is like calling yourself a feminist who believes only men should be allowed to vote

Not really an apt comparison.

It's more like saying that no women should vote, but that it's okay for women with annual incomes of $50000-$60000.

My diet is 98% vegetarian and if I couldn't have fish for the rest of my life, I wouldn't shed a tear. I have my reasons for eating fish, though. However, as I stated above, most people that I interact with do not know what a pescatarian is, but do know what vegetarian is (and, no, most do not think that vegetarianism includes fish).

So I use the word that people understand. I'm sorry if that offends, but it is what works for me. Most of the time, if I'm in a situation where some fish is an option, I'll try to be clear that I'm a vegetarian, BUT (HOWEVER, YET, ONLY) I also eat fish.

Ok, for some reason, my first comment didn't show up. If I end up with two posts, I apologize.

There are definitely people of color who are vegan/vegetarian. I'm black and a dietary vegan who goes to school near Chicago. There's a wonderful (probably one of the best) all vegan soul food restaurant in the south side--in a low-income, mostly black area. The fact that it has be open for over 20 years shows that there is definitely a demand for good, healthy food from communities that aren't always represented in the vegan/vegetarian movement.

Ok, so my original post did go through. For some reason my computer has been weird about refreshing websites.grr

Again, I apologize :-)

Dakini,
I totally get your point. Of course, when I'm with other vegetarians, I call myself a pescetarian, a label which, as Ellestar pointed out, only vegetarians understand. Labeling changes with the situation. With other pescetarians, I call myself an ovo-lacto-pescetarian. But as you said, when dining out, or at an awkward family function, it's a hell of a lot easier to say vegetarian.

I see what you mean about the stricter levels of vegetarianism as opposed to sexuality, but I would argue that within each of the labels - omnivore, vegan, vegetarian - are people who eat greater or lesser levels of animal products and bi-products, which is what I was getting at. Everything is a continuum.

"Vegetarians do not eat fish because fish are not vegetables- they are living creatures."

Yeah, I heard the difference between vegetarian diets and vegan diets is that both exclude meat but vegan diets also exclude other animal products like milk and eggs that some other vegetarian diets do include. So vegan is a subset of vegetarian, right?

"The idea that vegetarians eat fish is a widely spread and deeply frustrating myth that is perpetuated by society and by people falsely labeling themselves as vegetarian."

It's also caused by the shrinking definition of the word "meat." I heard that "meat" used to refer to food in general, then referred to edible animal flesh, then in some usages animal flesh apart from fish (a la some people eating lobster on Fridays in order to follow "don't eat meat on Fridays" customs), now lately some people aren't even counting poultry anymore, etc.

Meanwhile, some of the people who think "vegetarian" means "eats everything but meat" also seem to think "fish isn't meat" (and some of them even think "turkey isn't meat") as well as "milk isn't meat" and "eggs aren't meat."

Herong,
I agree that people are at different places in the continuum. Unfortunately the different levels in the veg continuum are not as widely recognized as levels in other examples- for example, the general public not being aware of pescetarianism. I do think people are becoming more aware all of the time though, and I'm hoping that the definitions will become more concise so that we can stop dwelling on the semantics and enjoy life- and suitable food for our lifestyle needs.
I truly do see where you are coming from, though. We all have to adapt to our environments accordingly, and I know that you know the difference. If you're ever interested in expanding plant-based foods, check out a cookbook titled Veganomicon- filled with yummy recipes everyone can enjoy.
Thanks for the civil discussion. :)

Mina,
In my experience, vegetarianism has meant not eating animals but eating animal by-products, such as dairy or eggs. Veganism has meant not eating animals or by-products, and for many vegans excluding consumerism of any animal product (such as beauty products with animal ingredients, leather, etc). I agree that the word "meat" is becoming increasingly ambiguous (as are the contents of the "meat"!)

mmm, label fight...

I guess I'm yet another.

I don't identify as a vegetarian allthough I for the time being eat no animal products, the reason is that I plan to introduce some meat into my diet at a later time, so right now it's more of a political choice than an identity.

It was reading about the porn industry that lost me my apetite for meat. It made me realise that if I find the industry that produce something abhorent, then I shouldn't suport it by any means. Least of all by buying their products.

I ate fish until a couple of weeks ago, and then I found prosessed salmon sausage at my local store, it got me asking around about the condition of the fish at the fish farms and my finds were not uplifting.

-----

In the meantime people should be less concerned about labels. Even though it can be frustrating when the lables get clouded, people will always have their opinions and ideas. And besides, the reason why you dont eat meat is not "because" you're a vegetarian, it's because whyever you chose it. The label will always only be a handy tool to easily convey this information to strangers and find other people of eaqual minds.

It's the way you use it, and it's the way others use it. And the difference is? As long as people don't go around convinsing people veggies eat fish I'd be happy.

I'm in the same boat as ellestar. I eat fish, but no other meat. At first I would tell people/restaurants I don't each meat but I do eat fish and they would label me a vegetarian. Actually the same thing happened when I still ate chicken (stopped 2 years ago)...I know I'm not veggie but it's easier to say I am for food reasons at restaurants, parties, ect so I know there is something I can eat.

I think quarrelling that fish eating people saying they're are veggie is not that important. Sorry if some people think I am trivializing veg issue.

I myself have stopped eating farmed fish and I am thinking about stopping eating fish altogether but I don't think I will ever stop eating scallops and clams because I don't see an issue outside of overfishing with scallops and clams. These are just my rambling thoughts...I know I didn't contribute anything meaningful...