I feel like there's a big difference between accidentally or mistakenly eating an animal product and choosing one out of convenience. When I began as a vegan, sometimes I didn't know all of the names of the ingredients in my food that were animal-derived. I'd eat something with mono- and diglycerides, not knowing if they were animal-derived or not, or even really know that was a risk. Or I'd eat a vegetable soup when I wasn't 100% sure the stock was veggie-based. I just didn't know and I went with what appeared to be something I could eat. I slipped up a lot, and I got pretty sick when I did as I became more and more 'pure' of a vegan.

Now that's not how I work. If I'm reading ingredients in a grocery store and there's something I don't recognize, I either whip out my phone and google it, or put it back on the shelf and get something else to eat. If I'm at a new restaurant, I ask a lot of questions or I simply eat a plain salad without dressing, croutons or cheese, and get a more substantial meal when I'm home. Sometimes it means skipping a meal, sometimes it means I need to pack something in advance for myself or eat a big meal before I go out. But basically, even on an as-close-to-100%-as-possible vegan diet, there's no time when I absolutely have no options.

This guy could at least pick off the turkey if he absolutely has to have a sandwich on the go. His article really reads as a justification to himself, not to others. It kind of reminds me of my former vegetarian aunt; I thought she and I could sort of identify on this point, but over time I learned that she was a 'fish-eating' vegetarian, and then that she apparently ate white and even red meat on occasion to 'make sure she got her protein', and because she didn't like turning down food which was offered to her.

I think that it's really sweet to respect people who have made you a meal, but I also think that if the meal is something which is distressful for you to consume, you should speak up so that it doesn't happen again, instead of meekly encouraging the behavior to continue. My parents have repeatedly asked me why I don't eat 'just a little' eggs and milk because it wouldn't hurt, and my answer is that if I didn't draw a clear line for myself, I'd always be crossing it. That's what it feels like with this 'practical vegetarian'. He's set an extremely low bar for himself and he's going to meet his effortless goal of eating meat whenever it's easy and patting himself on the back for being more practical than the rest of us.

"And when that choice is not available she is open to eating whatever food is indeed available and does so with gratitude."

i feel like the addition of "and does so with gratitude" implies that the rest of us impractical vegetarians are ungrateful when Aunt Bertha makes us pot roast and we won't eat it.

Not only is the assertion of "practical vegetarianism" a way to categorically allow meat in a vegetarian diet without the feeling that some rule had been broken, but it seems like a way for the author to divide themselves from the rest of/stereotype of vegetarians. i.e. i'm not picky, i'm not impractical, i'm not ungrateful for the "vegetarian" fish you made me. I mean, if a vegetarian feels the pressure, they always have vegans to label as "no, THOSE people are strict."

Thanks, Amymylove. :3

"And when that choice is not available she is open to eating whatever food is indeed available and does so with gratitude."

i feel like the addition of "and does so with gratitude" implies that the rest of us impractical vegetarians are ungrateful when Aunt Bertha makes us pot roast and we won't eat it.

Not only is the assertion of "practical vegetarianism" a way to categorically allow meat in a vegetarian diet without the feeling that some rule had been broken, but it seems like a way for the author to divide themselves from the rest of/stereotype of vegetarians. i.e. i'm not picky, i'm not impractical, i'm not ungrateful for the "vegetarian" fish you made me. I mean, if a vegetarian feels the pressure, they always have vegans to label as "no, THOSE people are strict."

Totally agree. This movement is not helping, even a little bit.

And, vegans get so much crap, seriously!  >:( I keep seeing articles which basically say that vegetarianism is okay, but being a vegan is way too extreme and if you cross the eggs-and-milk line, you're basically dooming yourself to death and being a total asshole forever.

Fair enough. That being said, I asked you a question and did not attack your views. I see no reason for you to insult me.

Cubist Olympian, I understand your point and I don't think Catski was attacking you but referencing statements in your post to better get her point across.

Catski, I agree that certain countries have more limited access to clean water, vegetables, and even any food for that matter and eating any nutritional diet (especially a vegan one) in the presence of an omnivore their world environment can be challenging. I understand that different people fold under different amounts of pressure and it's easier for some to have the "if I can't beat them, join em" mentality. Extreme cases of visiting third world countries where the option is to eat meat or die should hopefully be rare, if existent at all but proper preparation before going to such a place is key. Would I deep sea dive without enough of air to return to the surface? If the availability of ambrosia or vegan food in developing countries is similar to the availability of air down there, then I ought to go prepared huh. If I was visiting a village of cannibalism and I had to eat people or starve, I don't see myself chowing down just to appease my host. If being myself and living righteous is being an impolite guest, then so be it. How can I conform my higher understanding to please  ignorance and the masses, it should be the other way around. If the Mongolian friend hates me because I won't shove their pot roast in my face, then maybe they weren't my friend to begin with. A proper vegan diet can be difficult some places, actually, lack of vegetation is what started mankind to eat meat in the first place during a period of dark ages, so I overstand when the survivor mode kicks in, desperate times call for desperate measures. But come on, this guy in the article is a fugazi and his new terminology intentionally or unintentionally attempts to undermines the term of vegetarianism. I don't have a lack of compassion for his diet of aligning himself with vegans as closely as possible but he shouldn't reinvent terms or imply that REAL vegetarians are impractical.

Tiny lights, I agree that we receive get a lot of crap. All of the blatant lies that describe the vegan diet as unhealthly, unholy, and crazy, is all an attempt to justify the poison eating ways of the masses and to dis-credit us, like calling us impractical, lol. No matter what, you're going to have pawns that defend being plugged into the matrix because of their ignorance and heads of the dragon defend it for power and profit.

TFYOV, I perfectly agree, or I could call myself a practical Muslim and only practice Islam when I travel to the middle east or a practical atheist Monday-Saturday.

This, in a nutshell, is the point which the majority of the posters in this thread cannot grasp: there are places where there are no supermarkets. There are places where fresh fruit and vegetables are a luxury. There are places where finding water which will not make you ill is a much higher priority than whether or not your tomatoes are organic.

If most posters means me, since you called me out, you misunderstand.  I don't care what he eats or if he's vegetarian, omni, or survives solely on clubbed baby seals.  If he eats meat, he's an omni who eats very little meat, not a vegetarian.  He works at Google where it's probably trendy to be vegetarian and he wants to be with the "in" crowd.  He's making it seem acceptable to put  a bit of meat in veg*n food, which is wrong.  He can do whatever he wants, but I'd prefer it if he didn't compromise the rest of us in the process by associating his choices with vegetarianism.  Call it something else - he basically made up a name for what already exists as flexitarian.  "Flexitarian" works fine, "practical vegetarian" does not.

HH, I wasn't calling anyone out specifically. I do see what is problematic about the term "practical vegetarian" but I see it as a way of allying himself with vegetarians rather than undermining "better" veg*ns as so many are reading it. I look through the end of that article and there is, to me, a clear love of food there and a thoughtfulness about his diet despite the meat element. He's certainly more mindful about his food than the average junk food vegan, anyway. We don't know how he represents himself to the people close to him: perhaps he says "vegetarian" out of habit and is just elaborating on his stance in an article. I don't feel like I can comment on that because I don't know the guy.

What I am railing against so strongly in this thread is the preponderance of people who are hugely privileged to live somewhere where veganism is an option and one they can practice healthfully and (relatively) easily, and who are subsequently placing themselves morally above the inhabitants of countries where that is not possible. When the author of the article says that in certain places in rural Mongolia the only food available to him was boiled mutton, he probably isn't exaggerating by much. I've been through villages in provincial Russia where "the menu" is "whatever the cook made today". There's no possibility of ordering something different. Shops are open when they're open and if you roll in on the bus at 11pm, you eat what can be found or you go hungry. A few times I made do with bread, cheese and tea but it isn't a viable option outside of the very short term and language can often be a problem.

This to me is arrogant, culturally and personally short-sighted and incredibly uninformed. It goes beyond being uncomfortable with someone representing themselves as vegetarian and veers into morally lording it over a culture where supermarkets, vegan internet forums and soymilk do not exist. This is walking into someone else's house and loudly proclaiming yourself too pure to eat their dirty food.

Fair enough. That being said, I asked you a question and did not attack your views. I see no reason for you to insult me.

+1.

Cat - I'm with you about Mongolia.  I watched a documentary once about a religious group (maybe a subset of Buddhists) that were mandatorily vegetarian, except for those members who lived in the parts of Mongolia where the climate is so severe they don't have a legit growing season, so they live on mutton and cheese.