There isn’t really a verbal distinction though. “Vegan” is an overloaded word that has multiple definitions, and you can very validly use it to describe your diet. “Correcting” people by telling them they should say “plant based” instead is just pedantry.
The fact that most people don’t think about it critically doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be explained and telling people who belong to a group that they can’t tell you what their group specifically is about is entitled and absurd.
Veganism is not a diet and there are a number of diets you may adopt while being vegan.
I can accept that the harm reductionism that Danielle is advocating for is good compared to the lack of restraint we have as a culture, but this does not make it vegan.
And the fact that you assume people “aren’t thinking critically” when they use a word in a way you don’t like says a lot about you. Makes you seem like the entitled one, actually.
If you can’t accept that saying “I eat vegan” or “I follow a vegan diet” is just as valid as someone saying “I’m vegan” in the context of taking about food/diets, you’re gonna have a tough time, because that’s just how our language is used.
I’m sure you can get away with telling trans people what they are without trans people or defining atheism without atheists. But sure. Sound off like the ignorant ass you are.
They’re comparing your ignorance about veganism to ignorance about other groups of people. You argue with vegans about the definition of veganism, while vegans in general are in agreement about this definition. This is like ignoring trans people describing what it means to be trans, or atheists describing what it means to be athiest.
There isn’t really a verbal distinction though. “Vegan” is an overloaded word that has multiple definitions, and you can very validly use it to describe your diet. “Correcting” people by telling them they should say “plant based” instead is just pedantry.
The fact that most people don’t think about it critically doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be explained and telling people who belong to a group that they can’t tell you what their group specifically is about is entitled and absurd.
Veganism is not a diet and there are a number of diets you may adopt while being vegan.
I can accept that the harm reductionism that Danielle is advocating for is good compared to the lack of restraint we have as a culture, but this does not make it vegan.
And the fact that you assume people “aren’t thinking critically” when they use a word in a way you don’t like says a lot about you. Makes you seem like the entitled one, actually.
If you can’t accept that saying “I eat vegan” or “I follow a vegan diet” is just as valid as someone saying “I’m vegan” in the context of taking about food/diets, you’re gonna have a tough time, because that’s just how our language is used.
I’m sure you can get away with telling trans people what they are without trans people or defining atheism without atheists. But sure. Sound off like the ignorant ass you are.
Uh I’m sorry, what the fuck are you talking about now? Did you respond to the right person?
They’re comparing your ignorance about veganism to ignorance about other groups of people. You argue with vegans about the definition of veganism, while vegans in general are in agreement about this definition. This is like ignoring trans people describing what it means to be trans, or atheists describing what it means to be athiest.
Thanks. That’s a pretty dumb comparison to make, but thank you for translating.