Pesctarians. vs. Vegetarians

Options
modernfemme
modernfemme Posts: 454 Member
in Food and Nutrition
This thread is mostly for vegetarians/vegans, but anyone is welcome to join in.

I've been vegetarian for about 2 years now for purely animal rights reasons. I was one of those people who was really annoyed when fish eaters would call themselves vegetarian - if for nothing else that it confused the terminology. When I go to restaurants, lox cream cheese is listed as a vegetarian option. Or fish. Obviously non-vegetarians are confused.

With that being said, I'm human. Every now and then I will cave and snag something with fish in it. Up until last week, I probably had fish a handful of times in 2 years. I never considered myself a pesctarian because deep down I know that fish are animals - and I felt guilty despite my cravings.

So - why am I considering eating fish now? What about the industry is less traumatizing than the butchering of cows and the downright horrible conditions chickens are kept in? I have seen a few horrible things in Japan - but do we import from Japan?

A couple things to keep in mind when responding:

a) All the respect for vegans - but avoiding wool and not eating honey I think is unnecessary. Although I don't buy leather products that stem from animal death, I just don't personally agree with all of your opinions on animal by products.

b) I think we're supposed to eat meat as a species, but I chose not to due to the treatment of the animals - I didn't want to support the industry

I guess i'm looking for reasons why I should remain vegetarian - because to me it seems like fish are caught in their environment, where they have lived a life, and then we eat them.

Thoughts? (And of course lets keep this civil)
«134

Replies

  • fteale
    fteale Posts: 5,310 Member
    Options
    I believe very strongly that eating fish is wrong because fishing practices are unsustainable and many species are being fished to extinction. Trawling means huge nets scoop up anything and everything, and often damage the sea bed, and corals etc that grow there. Then because of fishing quotas a lot of what is caught is dumped back in the sea, but by that time it's mostly dead.
    Fish stocks and marine health are huge environmental issues that most people seem quite happy to ignore. I am a vegetarian, and fish would be absolutely the last meat I would consider eating.
  • koosdel
    koosdel Posts: 3,317 Member
    Options
    I figure if I wasn't meant to eat them, I wouldn't be able to catch them. Of course, its way easier to catch a carrot than a fish. Though I've never had to battle a rabbit for a fish.
  • killagb
    killagb Posts: 3,280 Member
    Options
    It's ok to eat fish, cause they don't have any feelings.
  • Troll
    Troll Posts: 922 Member
    Options
    I don't eat fish because i don't enjoy the taste, but i won't go fishing because they have a nervous system and i imagine a hook through the mouth hurts. Being caught in a net and suffocating probably sucks too. So, ethics or flavor, i don't care for it either way :)

    I also don't really like the dairy industry because it indirectly affects the veal industry, which i think is aweful.

    But then again, that's just ym two cents :)
  • hefinator
    hefinator Posts: 260
    Options
    talk about vegetarians reminded me of my vegetarian friend who shared this video..... funny, even for people who don't eat meat!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmK0bZl4ILM
  • modernfemme
    modernfemme Posts: 454 Member
    Options
    I don't eat fish because i don't enjoy the taste, but i won't go fishing because they have a nervous system and i imagine a hook through the mouth hurts. Being caught in a net and suffocating probably sucks too. So, ethics or flavor, i don't care for it either way :)

    I also don't really like the dairy industry because it indirectly affects the veal industry, which i think is aweful.

    But then again, that's just ym two cents :)

    Yeah - I really wish I knew what veal was when I was younger - else I would have told my parents a word or two!

    FYI to everyone: Keep in mind, despite whatever our opinion are, those who choose not eat meat in some capacity are still making a difference for animals and the environment.
  • degausspdx
    degausspdx Posts: 25 Member
    Options
    OK, just from a cruelty perspective..catching a fish is no less or IMO more traumatic than other options. How do I come to this conclusion? Well it's like this, I'm a happy go lucky fishy guy swimming around,eating living wh all the sudden I eat something and it grabs me by the lip and next thing I know I'm dead on some ones plate. Or, same scenarion but instead of dragged by my ip from my home, I'm scooped up in a giant web of stuff with all my family and we all end up in the same place. No disrepect intended but if mamals have feelings, so do fish. The treatment is no less cruel at the end.
  • killagb
    killagb Posts: 3,280 Member
    Options
    FYI to everyone: Keep in mind, despite whatever our opinion are, those who choose not eat meat in some capacity are still making a difference for animals and the environment.
    That's a debatable point, but I'll leave it at that :bigsmile:
  • 1smemae94
    1smemae94 Posts: 365 Member
    Options
    Personally, i dont eat animals because i recognize that we do not need them to live. They feel pain and suffer just like anything else with a nervous system. Fish are animals. They hurt. Some species are being fished into extinction. They "live" in a small area with little parasites that end up eating their flesh off. They become a bloody mess. This is fish farming and it sucks. If you decide to go back to eating fish, tell people that you're not a vegetarian, just so they aren't confused.
  • merimeaux
    merimeaux Posts: 304 Member
    Options
    modernfemme, have you heard of the program Vanguard? I think you would enjoy it. This thread reminds me of one of the episodes, "Sushi to the Slaughter."

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/249645/vanguard-sushi-to-the-slaughter-trailer
  • modernfemme
    modernfemme Posts: 454 Member
    Options
    FYI to everyone: Keep in mind, despite whatever our opinion are, those who choose not eat meat in some capacity are still making a difference for animals and the environment.
    That's a debatable point, but I'll leave it at that :bigsmile:

    Like I said, this is a civil thread. Make your point or go away. Since my family has went vegetarian, we have saved at least 3 pounds a week for 112 weeks. If 100 people in our community did that, our grocery store would absolutely stop buying as much, and thus, put less strain on chicken farms, etc, to produce = less chickens dying.
  • xLyric
    xLyric Posts: 840 Member
    Options
    With that being said, I'm human. Every now and then I will cave and snag something with fish in it.

    Then you're not doing it for the reasons you wrote, maybe. Who am I to tell you how you think, but the fact that you go back and forth makes me think your convictions aren't all that strong. Which is fine, I'm just saying, maybe at this point you're just trying to convince yourself to stay vegetarian when you'd be happier otherwise?

    Although I don't buy leather products that stem from animal death

    What? What do you mean here? Unless it's fake, all leather, as far as I know, by definition is made from killing animals.
    I guess i'm looking for reasons why I should remain vegetarian - because to me it seems like fish are caught in their environment, where they have lived a life, and then we eat them.

    The fish comment here... Okay, so you've lived a happy life, now it's okay to kill and eat you? I honestly have a hard time believing you're a vegetarian for animal rights reasons. Maybe it's because fish aren't as cute, I don't know, but to say it's alright to kill them just because they've lived free and then say you're vegetarian for animal rights doesn't make sense to me.

    I am a vegetarian because I don't like to eat things that have had to be killed, to me, it's not nice or necessary. So when I hear people say they're vegetarian for rights, I think of my viewpoint, and maybe that's why this doesn't make sense to me. I'm really trying not to come off as aggressive or argumentative, so I'm sorry if I did.
  • modernfemme
    modernfemme Posts: 454 Member
    Options
    OK, just from a cruelty perspective..catching a fish is no less or IMO more traumatic than other options. How do I come to this conclusion? Well it's like this, I'm a happy go lucky fishy guy swimming around,eating living wh all the sudden I eat something and it grabs me by the lip and next thing I know I'm dead on some ones plate. Or, same scenarion but instead of dragged by my ip from my home, I'm scooped up in a giant web of stuff with all my family and we all end up in the same place. No disrepect intended but if mamals have feelings, so do fish. The treatment is no less cruel at the end.

    A huge difference from an animal cruelty standpoint is that a fish are caught, suffocates, and is eaten. (Waiting to be convinced otherwise - I want to make an informed decision) whereas a chicken is kept in horrible conditions, IMO tortured for months before it's killed:

    http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/05/the-difficult-lives-and-deaths-of-factory-farmed-chickens/

    But like I said, I don't eat chicken not because I think we shouldn't, but because how we process meat is gross and inhumane. Do we do the same to fish?
  • killagb
    killagb Posts: 3,280 Member
    Options
    FYI to everyone: Keep in mind, despite whatever our opinion are, those who choose not eat meat in some capacity are still making a difference for animals and the environment.
    That's a debatable point, but I'll leave it at that :bigsmile:

    Like I said, this is a civil thread. Make your point or go away. Since my family has went vegetarian, we have saved at least 3 pounds a week for 112 weeks. If 100 people in our community did that, our grocery store would absolutely stop buying as much, and thus, put less strain on chicken farms, etc, to produce = less chickens dying.
    I was trying to be civil by not chiming in...but fine. If you honestly think a few vegetarians really impacts the demand for meat and animal by products....you are seriously deluded. If anything you're helping out either a local farmer or Monsanto(depending on what your veggie choices are). If EVERYONE changed, sure it would make a difference...but the fact is, it's FAR from a majority and the demand is still so huge for meat that I'm sure they don't feel the so called 'dent' that vegetarians and vegans are putting in their business.
  • xLyric
    xLyric Posts: 840 Member
    Options
    I figure if I wasn't meant to eat them, I wouldn't be able to catch them. Of course, its way easier to catch a carrot than a fish. Though I've never had to battle a rabbit for a fish.

    I worked at a daycare where I was very handy at catching children. Does your theory apply here? :bigsmile:
  • killagb
    killagb Posts: 3,280 Member
    Options
    OK, just from a cruelty perspective..catching a fish is no less or IMO more traumatic than other options. How do I come to this conclusion? Well it's like this, I'm a happy go lucky fishy guy swimming around,eating living wh all the sudden I eat something and it grabs me by the lip and next thing I know I'm dead on some ones plate. Or, same scenarion but instead of dragged by my ip from my home, I'm scooped up in a giant web of stuff with all my family and we all end up in the same place. No disrepect intended but if mamals have feelings, so do fish. The treatment is no less cruel at the end.

    A huge difference from an animal cruelty standpoint is that a fish are caught, suffocates, and is eaten. (Waiting to be convinced otherwise - I want to make an informed decision) whereas a chicken is kept in horrible conditions, IMO tortured for months before it's killed:

    http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/05/the-difficult-lives-and-deaths-of-factory-farmed-chickens/

    But like I said, I don't eat chicken not because I think we shouldn't, but because how we process meat is gross and inhumane. Do we do the same to fish?
    Look up fish farms.
  • Elizabeth_C34
    Elizabeth_C34 Posts: 6,376 Member
    Options
    I am doing a Ph.D. in fisheries management at the moment.

    Not all commercially harvested fishes are being overharvested on a regular basis, although, unfortunately, many of the commonly available species are. The recommendations and status changes with each assessment year (annually for commercially important species, biannually for some others, and every 5 years for low-grade fisheries) usually by NOAA or ICCAT.

    NOAA has a great website about the current status of American fisheries: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/fishwatch/

    Most commercially harvested fish are caught by the following three methods: long line, purse seine, or gillnet.

    Long line fisheries are mostly for tuna, swordfish, and halibut species. This involves a line of hundreds of baited hooks that are suspended in the water column. The biggest issue with this method is not to the fish but bycatch from turtles, some marine mammals, and birds.

    Purse seining is a method used by commercial fisherman that involves the deployment of a net around an entire group of fish then hauling it up. This method also has bycatch issues, but is much less damaging to birds and marine mammals than longlining. This method is mostly used on mackerel, sardines, and anchovies (basically small surface baitfishes).

    Gillnetting is a method where a net is deployed and floated at the top (weights on the bottom to hold it vertical). The fish get caught in the net and the whole thing is towed into the boat. Gillnetting has been outlawed in some areas because of the very high probability of bycatch. It's the primary method of fishing for salmon especially in estuaries and riverbeds.

    Long story short, these fish do get killed, and no, it's not pretty. Death isn't pretty, though. Most of the fish we see in stores are wild-caught. About 30% are farmed, although this number varies by where you live quite a bit. Fish farming does introduce a lot of problems in wild populations as most fish farms share a water supply with native wild populations. Diseases in salmon have been proven to bounce from salmon farms to the wild population, for example.

    If you do choose to eat fish, I do suggest you look at the NOAA link I provided above to choose species that are sustainably harvested and are not in a state of dramatic decline.
  • modernfemme
    modernfemme Posts: 454 Member
    Options
    OK, just from a cruelty perspective..catching a fish is no less or IMO more traumatic than other options. How do I come to this conclusion? Well it's like this, I'm a happy go lucky fishy guy swimming around,eating living wh all the sudden I eat something and it grabs me by the lip and next thing I know I'm dead on some ones plate. Or, same scenarion but instead of dragged by my ip from my home, I'm scooped up in a giant web of stuff with all my family and we all end up in the same place. No disrepect intended but if mamals have feelings, so do fish. The treatment is no less cruel at the end.

    A huge difference from an animal cruelty standpoint is that a fish are caught, suffocates, and is eaten. (Waiting to be convinced otherwise - I want to make an informed decision) whereas a chicken is kept in horrible conditions, IMO tortured for months before it's killed:

    http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/05/the-difficult-lives-and-deaths-of-factory-farmed-chickens/

    But like I said, I don't eat chicken not because I think we shouldn't, but because how we process meat is gross and inhumane. Do we do the same to fish?
    Look up fish farms.

    You have probably been the least helpful on the thread. Links, suggestions?
  • koosdel
    koosdel Posts: 3,317 Member
    Options
    I figure if I wasn't meant to eat them, I wouldn't be able to catch them. Of course, its way easier to catch a carrot than a fish. Though I've never had to battle a rabbit for a fish.

    I worked at a daycare where I was very handy at catching children. Does your theory apply here? :bigsmile:

    Of course. I have a great baked toddler recipe, if your interested.
  • Pangea250
    Pangea250 Posts: 965 Member
    Options
    I guess i'm looking for reasons why I should remain vegetarian - because to me it seems like fish are caught in their environment, where they have lived a life, and then we eat them.
    A lot of fish is farm-raised and not wild, so does that throw a hook (pun intended!) in your reasoning?

    I'm not a vegetarian, though I went for a few years without eating red meat for some reason I don't remember until one day I just had to have a mushroom swiss burger. God, that burger was good. But I digress. Even without me being a vegetarian, I point out to you that if YOUR reason for being a vegetarian is based on animal rights infractions, then it should extend to all animals, including fish. If you are trying to reason that wild-caught fish has lived its life in its environment and that makes it okay to eat it, then it would also be okay to eat beef, which is a domesticated animal that lives in its environment (a farm). Or whale meat from an animal that is hunted by high-tech whaling ships and (inhumanely, in my eyes) harpooned.

    Or if it is the manner in which the animal lives and dies that is abhorrent to you, which I can clearly see it is, then how would you feel about a cow that was raised on a nice farm with lovely rolling hills and then gently euthanized while sedated? Only you can answer that (hypothetical) question. If that is okay, then you are only a vegetarian who avoids certain meat. If it's not okay, then your own logic must extend to fish and marine mammals of all types; if it's not okay, then cravings shmavings, eating fish is not okay.

    I am really curious to know what you finally end up decided. Keep me posted?

Categories