I recently read something from an animal activist that struck me, and have been thinking about it a lot since then.
They were referring to someone questioning a well-known person’s veganism, saying that the person said they eat fish. The activists response, in supporting the person calling themselves vegan, was that people have different definitions of veganism.
For me, there is just one definition of veganism: consume no animal products. That covers it for me. Yes, it also includes for me not wearing animal products, and really trying every day to do the least amount of harm possible to all living beings. Yet at the very basic sense of the word it means not consuming animals or their by-products.
I think when people who consume animals, their by-products, and/or fish call themselves vegan, not only are they wrong, they confuse people about what veganism is, and what being a vegan is. There is no need for this, as folks who consume animal by-products but not flesh can simply call themselves vegetarian.
No judgement here. Just clarity. I don’t want the term vegan to be used when the person is not vegan. No matter who they are. It does no good for anyone, especially the animals suffering that we are trying to help.
I am vegan for the animals. I am vegan because I do not want to be part of the cruelty that animals go through to become food. I am vegan because I firmly believe that animals do not want to die to become a meal for us.
This post originally appeared on Dan Hanley's website The Gay Vegans. Republished with permission.
