Semi-vegetarian, flexitarian, pesco-vegetarian, pollo-vegetarians?

Question

Are they all just desperate for a label? Or do you think they are legitimate and informative terms? What are your views?

Answer 1

i am a pescatarian i am not desperate for a label. i don't even tell people i don't eat mammals or poultry. then you get a million and one questions a lot of criticism and "well i guess we can find a place to eat with good salad" as if all i eat is salad. anyways i am hoping to eventually transition. the reason i stuck with fish is because i live in monterey bay, california and all our fish is caught right out of our oceans. the fish were not tortured or mutilated. i am not against eating meat i am against torturing animals. but i do believe a vegan diet is healthy and i plan to become fully vegan within the next few years.

Answer 2

So called semivegetarians, flexitarians, pescovegetarians, and pollo vegetarians- they are all meat eaters. The Vegetarian Society calls such people 'meat reducers' because they are reducing, but not eliminating, meat from their diet.

The prefix is contradicting the suffix:

Vegetarian = Somebody who doesn't eat meat

Pollo- vegetarian = complete contradiction of terms.

Legitimate? I think they are more confusing. People spreading misinformation, calling themselves veggies when they eat meat- they make it harder for REAL vegetarians to eat out because some restaurants have adopted the false notion that veggies eat meat when they don't.

Answer 3

Desperate for a label gets my vote.  They want to be junior members of your club without really going through any of the work.

Answer 4

They are all rubbish.  You can't be something that doesn't exist.

Answer 5

Semi and flex=want label

pesco-pollo=informative

it describes what they're willing to eat, and what they're not willing to eat.  Semi=what?  in whose eyes?  Some vegans don't see lacto-veg as full veg, and flex=what?  temporal?  As in will eat in restaurants, but not at home?

As long as it tells you something, go for the labels.

Answer 6

Not desperate for a label, it is actually an easy way to tell of a persons food preferance.  It could be a ethical choice of simply a dietary necessity, being a chef it allows me to easily and simply determine a clients eating preferances.

Answer 7

Desperate for a label.  Pesco- and pollo-veg are complete contradictions in terms.  Vegetarians don't eat the flesh of animals.  Fish and chicken are animals.  Ergo, vegetarians do NOT eat fish and chicken.

Before I went veg, for a while, the only meat I ate was chicken.  And that's what I said:  I don't eat beef or fish.  I do like the term meat reducer for someone who's trying to work towards vegetarianism.  It's a fair label--someone who eats mostly vegetarian, but meat once in a while.

But until someone stops eating meat--and, yes, that includes special occasions--one should not call himself/herself vegetarian.

Answer 8

They aren't very informative terms.  If you go to a restaurant and ask for a flexitarian or pesco-vegetarian meal they aren't going to know what you're talking about.  Then again, they might also serve you chicken broth based soups that are "vegetarian".  Most people have no idea what these words mean because they don't deal with them on a daily basis.  

They are legitimate in that people actually follow those diets, but they aren't very informative.  Actually, while I'm fine with the word pescetarian (sp?), I don't like the word pesco-vegetarian because that implies that it is a part of vegetarianism.

Answer 9

Informative. I am a flexitarian. That's four words. I eat mostly vegetarian, but I allow myself one meal including fish or chicken a week. I allow myself one meal including red meat (beef or pork) every month. Therefore, I eat 20 vegetarian meals a week and 1 omnivorous meal a week. That's 80 vegetarian meals a month and a possible 5 omni meals a month. That takes a lot longer to say (and type). It is easier to buy vegetarian recipe books and peruse vegetarian sites, b/c I eat predominately vegetarian meals.  As you can see, most people never see me eat any meat. They wonder if I am a vegetarian. They ask. I say no, I am a flexitarian. I don't consider it vegetarianism at all. It's a completely different thing. I think it has a lot to do with your reasons for being flexi or veggie. My reasons are my own health and the environment. I don't like animals being treated cruelly however, that is why I get my meat from a organic grass fed free range farm that I have personally visited and approve of. It kinda of pisses me off when vegetarians and vegans get mad at flexitarians. Are we not eating less meat than average people. So shouldn't you be encouraging us instead of bitching and whining. I promise I am not trying to steal your title. I don't want to be called a vegetarian. I am not one. That's why the term flexitarian was invented. As for the other words: Semi-vegetarian is an oxymoron. It makes no sense. The others are quite unnesesary and are not really vegetarian any way. There is the term pescatarian which takes care of that. I suppose you could also say pollotarian.    

Answer 10

Desperate for a label. I mean, vegetarianism is simple. No eating meat. So I don't understand why people this that fish and chicken aren't flesh. And as for "semi-vegetarians", that's stupid. That's an omnivore. No one eats only meat. Pfff.

Answer 11

I can understand pesco- and pollo-vegetarians.  For some people, it is very hard to live with an unsupportive person and continue to be a "full-blown" vegetarian/vegan.  

I had to be pesco- for a while.  I'm waiting until I can live on my own in college to go vegan.  My dad is a hunter, and the only thing in our freezer is deer meat.  I have to buy a lot of my own food, and as an honor-student with a job, that's not always easy to do.

Yes, I can understand why some people are forced to do it as a transition or as "the best I can do for now" type thing.

There are some people that do it just for a neat title, though....  

Answer 12

I do not think that they are desperate for any label.  Those words do seem to me to be descriptive terms.  Words are morphed all the time and I see those as no different.  I personally would not use them but others might.

edit Silver If only more veg*ns had your sense of perspective.

Answer 13

they're desperate for a title.

i know that a lot of people are in a situation where it's difficult to give up all meat (for example: kids who say their parents make them eat fish) but they shouldn't call themselves any type of vegetarian when they're not one.  why not just tell people that you're a "vegetarian in training" or that you're working towards going veg but haven't given up chicken yet......i don't see why they want to label it so badly.  when someone offers you a steak just say, "no thanks...i only eat chicken."  what's so bad about that?

i don't like words like flexitarian, semi-vegetarian, pollo-vegetarian, etc. because they mean NOTHING.....it's just a fancy word for, "i still eat meat, but only certain kinds or only when i really want it."  it's completely ridiculous.

they only term that is valid in my eyes is "pescetarian" so long as they don't claim that it's a type of vegetarian.  IMO, pescetarian is valid because a lot of people have religious beliefs that lead them to look at fish differently than they look at other meats.  catholics, for example, don't view fish as meat.  in instances like these i think pescetarianism is perfectly acceptable, but it's still not vegetarian.

Answer 14

I'm a full vegetarian these days, but i think you should get over yourself. it might be a label to you, but other people are interested in describing their diet when necessary, and you should get a life and let them do that.

Answer 15

desperate for a label. I dont even know what half those things are. lol  

Answer 16

I deleted all my text, when i see people who are so convinced that the preffixes are ok i should have realised there was no discussing it with them.

So, here's why its all wrong....

Using the prefixs creates confusion and leads to nonsense like this:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

and it also leads to nonsense like this:

TUESDAY: I went to the "Trotting Mare" resturant in Shropshire last night. The 2 "veggie" options were Trout and Salmon.

I don't need to say any more about why these preffix corruptions cause damage and confusion, those real-world examples says it all.

Its strange how people seem to want to associate themselves with the word vegetarian and yet by doing so they seem willing to damage it. Very strange.

If people cannot be bothered to use the english language correctly then good luck to them, they will continue to be at the butt end of vegetarians comments forever. I know they will never learn or change, i should have realised that.

I used to give people the "benefit of the doubt" when i saw the preffixs. But even when the learn the correct defintion of vegetarian they still try to corrupt it...I would say they are either desperate for a label or careless and ignorant. and its clear they have no interest is preserving the values inherent in being a vegetarian.

If we say pollo and pesco are ok, then surely pork and beefy are ok, right ?

so...where does it stop, If we don't have the right to say poll-vegetarian si wrng then no-one has the right to say beefy-vegetarian is wrong, do they ? Perhaps a pork / beef / chicken / fish eating person is a Pollo-pesci-porky-beefy-vegetarian.

As you can see, corrupting words with preffixs desends the original word into nonsense.

Its a shame they do not pause and digest all the comments in other answers. Surely that body of opinion says something ?

Answer 17

As someone who was a flexitarian for a year or so before I realized I hadn't had any meat for several months & wasn't going to I was thrilled to come across the word in an article because it recognized the effort I was making for my diet, animals, the environment, etc. I went from eating at least once a day or so (wasn't really measuring but was a veggie lover stuck in society) to only eating some every few weeks to not ever eating at home.

When I first started on this journey it was mostly for political reasons & I wanted to eat local and support my neighbors. For that reason I also like the locavore label which also recognizes my efforts but also boils it down to a word what could take many sentences to explain. The movement is good.

But finding out more & more is what pushed me into full-time vegetarianism & then later to near-vegan (flexian... JK). I'd probably have been discouraged if someone had come in & said what I was doing wasn't worthy, not good enough or I was being stupid. I surely wouldn't want to discourage someone else & I've seen others get torn down by label police & give up.

However, I do get annoyed with those who say flexitarian means no red meat (or something else that seems made up on the fly). To me it means rarely meat not specific to the kind. I'm not sure eating white meat is better in any way than red meat & I'm still weighing that one given lives involved, ways they are raised, hormones, chemicals, feed, arsenic, etc. It's just all not good.

And, I really dislike pesco/pesci-veg/pollo-veg when if it's anything it should be pescetarian/pollotarian without the veg designation. It's not omni-vegetarian. There are several websites out there though designating them that way including I believe wikipedia. If I had more time I'd join wiki & make a stand there about it. I've written to a couple other websites in protest.

One site I wrote to recently is a cooking show on PBS as she made a big deal about the veg recipe she was showing  then she added chicken broth. That she does that is ignorant & thoughtless plus she makes it seem to non-veg*ns that it's ok so they make that recipe for us or other recipes with animal broths; then also argue with us about the expert on "such & such" saying it was vegetarian, we don't know what we are talking about.

My daughter's been served chicken, shrimp, bacon, & other things & told it's were ok because they're vegetarian...

For that reason alone I support basic diet labels so it's clear that vegetarian is vegetarian & vegan is vegan. Anyone can eat vegan but not everyone can eat fish so pescetarian is a good label & nice to be able to say a diet including fish is pescetarian, not vegetarian/vegan. It also has more authority when explaining to those who don't know.

I do think a person can eat vegan and/or be vegan.

Mostly, I don't see harm in letting people have labels if it helps them feel they belong. We spend much of our lives trying to figure out where we belong from where we live to what we wear to what music we listen to. It takes a lot to figure out how little of the exterior stuff matters; that getting the perfect pants or haircuts aren't going to make you popular.

But the closer they are to a thoughtful diet the more willing they are to listen to the truth about the industrial food complex & make more changes.

==

EDIT TO ADD: At the risk of being chatty... The word vegetarian has not had a clear meaning since 1847. Donald Watson left the Vegetarian Society & formed the Vegan society because he felt eggs & dairy were not vegetarian. Even back then (in 1944) he felt dairy cows & hens were poorly treated. Also, until the word "Vegetarian" caught on outside of England those who didn't eat meat were called Pythagoreans.

http://chinesefood.about.com/od/vegetari...

While flexitarian might not help the chef figure out a meal (other labels surely do) it does help the person who is ordering, being served to be able to say they only eat meat occasionally so people (including chefs, wait staff, relatives, etc) will stop giving them c**p & respect why they are being "difficult" about what's in everything. Also gives those people something to think about that doesn't seem so extreme; sets them on to the path to more thoughtful eating too (I've seen it happen dozens of times in last 5 years). Further, the more people who eat veg*n meals, whether full on themselves or not, the better it makes it for everyone, especially veg*ns.

==

ADD: Michael, I don't think I insulted you so not sure why your response to me is so venomous & hostile but the point is that D. Watson felt vegetarian meant no eggs/dairy & the members were corrupting it by saying those were ok -- no animals hurt from the consumption. Hopefully straight from the sources will make you happy since a general link won't for you:

http://www.vegsoc.org/news/2000/21cv/his...

http://www.vegansociety.com/about_us/his...

====

Our History

The Vegan Society, the world's first, was born in November 1944 - after a lengthy gestation. As early as 1909 the ethics of consuming dairy products were hotly debated within the vegetarian movement. In August 1944, Elsie Shrigley and Donald Watson (a conscientious objector later to be acclaimed as the Vegan Society's Founder) agreed the desirability of coordinating 'non-dairy vegetarians'; despite opposition from prominent vegetarians unwilling to even consider adopting a diet free of all animal products.

====

I am certainly not putting words into the mouth of anyone. Simply reflecting back on what I've seen other people do & say the last 5 years, not even here on Y!A. I'm able to see beyond immediacy of this question. Can you say for certain what I've seen & make that claim about me?

Doesn't seem as if you read my entire response especially before I dared to expound upon how words change/morph... locavore, google, ringtone, spyware, supersize, drama queen, vegan... even vegetarian doesn't come from vegetable but from the Greek word "Vegetas" meaning "Full of the Breath of Life." So is itself a corrupted word to begin with.

==

FINAL EDIT on the "-tarian" terms since I've already done an essay anyway. My apologies. =]

This is an interesting question to me as the discussions on this topic here last couple weeks had me thinking about my own experiences & those I observed elsewhere.

Here's some official type sites using the words pesc*- & pollo-vegetarian:

http://kidshealth.org/teen/food_fitness/...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht...

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/a...

http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/COLUMN...

http://www.veggie123.com/veggie/chapter1...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollotarian...

a terminology discussion from wiki:

http://www.eatoutzone.com/Pesco_Pollo_Ve...

some actual wiki chat on the morphing "vegetarianism" page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vegeta...

Giving the words validity, misleading those looking for belonging -- hopefully we can nurture/show compassion to those who seek advice, focus on questions rather than terminology beyond a gentle correcting comment as they likely came upon the ideas honestly; not to aggravate: http://www.vegfamily.com/vegan-teens/veg...

I hope those most bothered will also contact these sites & register objections w/the mongrel words, the muddling & confusion caused.

Background on the birth of flexitarian:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexitarian...

====

The earliest known use of the term "flexitarian" occurred in the October 17, 1992, issue of the Austin American-Statesman. In this issue, reporter Linda Anthony wrote an article titled, "Acorn serves up 'flexitarian fare'". The article discussed the recent opening of the new Acorn Café and stated that owner Helga Morath calls her fare "flexitarian".

====

For me, when 99% of my meals were meatless I no longer felt I was an omnivore nor did I feel I could call myself vegetarian, until I was which took me by pleasant surprise.

Here's some North American history on the diet & the terminology:

http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/history.ht...

====

Vegetarianism was not very common in the U.S. until 1971, when Frances Moore Lappé's bestseller Diet for a Small Planet was published.

and

Late [19]80's: Diet for a New America and The Birth of Veganism

...

Diet for a New America restarted the vegetarian movement in the U.S., as it launched the vegan movement, and helped introduce the term "vegan" into the American vocabulary. Within two years of the publication of Robbins' book, nearly ten new vegetarian societies formed in Texas.

====

An obituary for Donald Watson because it's intriguing; not something I even knew about until a couple months ago when researching for an article I was writing:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment...

My daughter went vegan but soon adopted what she called "freegan" which meant at her friends houses she would eat dairy as it was nearly impossible to eat even vegetarian. Vegan completely blew other parents' minds (& some friends). To her it meant specifically if she didn't pay for it then it was ok it wasn't vegan. But, freegan means something else to others:

http://freegan.info/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeganism

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3287...

Thanks for the discussion & opportunity to go on