Poor Veggies. :(

[chicken]

I'm not attributing it to anyone in particular, I'm just trying to say, what does it matter if the person eats fish? If they walk into a shop and buy a non-meat product it will say "Suitable for Vegetarians", if they walk into a resaurant they will look at the "Vegetarian" menu, if they're at a friend's BBQ they will let them know they are "Vegetarian" so they don't get given meat.

If they want to eat fish then fine, their diet is Vegetarian + fish. Trying to create extra divisions is pointless, if a meal is suitable for Vegetarians then it is suitable for people who eat fish too. I don't see what all this fuss is about?

[Splash]

Because it causes confusion when it makes people think that all vegetarians eat fish. Can you see my point now? See my post a few pages back regards being served "vegetarian pasta" with ham in it for more evidence.

[kalniel]

I agree chicken. I think the point was some people don't like other people calling themselves vegetarian when they eat fish. My viewpoint is that it doesn't matter, and in any case there are several countries where fish are considered strictly vegetarian.

[kalniel]

Because it causes confusion when it makes people think that all vegetarians eat fish. Can you see my point now? See my post a few pages back regards being served "vegetarian pasta" with ham in it for more evidence.

*nods* but that confusion does exist worldwide - as long as no-one claims to have a universal definition, and people are aware of the potential for differences, then it's fine. You just have to clarify, which is exactly the case when you go abroad.

[Splash]

My point was that I wasn't abroad. Hell, I wasn't even in another county.

It's irritating having to go through the rigmarole whenever you tell anyone that you're a vegetarian "do you eat fish? do you eat chicken? how about crisps?"

[kalniel]

*shrugs* then the confusion exists here as well - that's fine, as long as you are aware that there is no universal definition, which was my point Saying there is a universal definition might mislead you into expecting everything to be the same, when it's not

[Splash]

In which case perhaps places should state that it's vegetarian *for vegetarians who eat ham only* pasta.

The term vegetarian for me is there as a convenience so I don't end up eating food that might make me ill. The confusion that you speak of occurs because people inappropriately use the term without seeing reason to clarify that they exclude less from their diet than most who would use the term do. And that's why it gets my (sacrificial) goat.

How would people feel if someone were to sit in a bar after the smoking ban comes in and light a pipe, then argue that under their definition smoking is a term that only applies to cigars and cigarettes?

[arbitor]

Did some1 remove one of my posts?

[Splash]

Yes, it was me. Erm, hold on - I can't.


No idea mate.

[arbitor]

pretty sure i posted something, well crazycricket said that what he replied to was no longer there..

what is wrong with you admin? why do you do this?

[Crazy Cricket]

Did some1 remove one of my posts?

One of your posts is no longer there, yes.

As to it being removed I can't say, I would expect a mod to just remove the body and mention why it wasn't allowed if it was edited. [Edit] In addition, I can't see any reason for removing what was said in that post, none of it seemed out of line.

Which in turn leads me to think it's just a glitch.

[arbitor]

possibly, we shall see

[Brucelles]

That's cool (personal choice again) but she's not a vegetarian.

I know, that's why I used the past tense.

[chicken]

Because it causes confusion when it makes people think that all vegetarians eat fish. Can you see my point now? See my post a few pages back regards being served "vegetarian pasta" with ham in it for more evidence.

Then the problem is with the restaurant, not people who eat fish.

The term "Vegetarian" to describe food should never include ham, chicken, fish or any other meat. It is the fault of the menu-writer/labeller if it does. It's the Vegetarian section of the food that needs monitoring, not the people who claim to be.

[Splash]

Then the problem is with the restaurant, not people who eat fish.

The term "Vegetarian" to describe food should never include ham, chicken, fish or any other meat. It is the fault of the menu-writer/labeller if it does. It's the Vegetarian section of the food that needs monitoring, not the people who claim to be.

As Kalniel has pointed out - there is no universal definition, so we can't blame the terminology. In such a situation I can only suggest that people stating that they are vegetarian whilst then going on to order fish or whatever are causing confusion. Hell, my Mum asks me if I eat fish from time to time. MY MUM. And I've been vegetarian for almost 14 years now.

[kalniel]

Start an e-petition