i've been curious about this for some time. for those who may not know, a pescetarian is a vegetarian who also eats fish. i am currently a pescetarian for my own reasons, and am getting a lot of shit for it. is it being a lazy vegetarian, or does it hold its own in the realm of diets?

I think a bit of both, i'm kinda liek you, though i'm slowly going towards being a proper veggie, i tend to "slip up" with fish (and earlier this year chicken a few times). But if you're doing it for *your* reasons and you feel that you wish to continue eating fish but no other form of animal dead flesh, then its your business and I commend you for making a choice not to eat red meat or chicken , turkey or pork at least. (Sometimes its a good medium phase before turning into a veggie veggie)

I'm glad you're at least saying you're a pescatarian not a vegetarian who eats fish. thats my pet peeve, 'cause veggies don't eat anything with a face!

No, it's not being lazy. There's no reason that you *need* to be a vegetarian. The best diet is the one that works for your physically and ethically. If you don't consider it unethical to eat fish and you feel physically healthy on this diet then it's good for you. Fish is more beneficial than other types of meat anyways -- lots of people follow diets like this, including myself. I wind up saying "I'm a vegetarian" to people, though, because it gets me out of situations where I would be expected to eat chicken or beef, and it gets confusing explaining to people which animal products I eat and why.

Vegetarians do not eat fish.

I guess it really depends on your reason for "giving up meat".

i dont see the difference between meat and fish for the purpose of abstaining from eating animals...

I think we all know that, thanks.


I've been a pescatarian (is it pesce or pesca?? anyway) since I was 15. I decided back then to continue to eat fish, because my diet was bad enough as it was and I thought I should have some kind of transition. But where I live, vegetarian/vegan products are really expensive and it's just been cheaper for me to continue eating fish. I feel pretty guilty about it, but I think that my health would suffer otherwise.

So in my case, I suppose it is laziness, coupled with concern about my health. Also, I honestly don't think (and someone can disagree with me on this, I don't mind), that fish suffer as much as other animals. I'm not saying that they don't have feelings, but they don't go through as much hardship as cows and chickens etc.

It's all relative to your own situation, I guess.

I don't think it's lazy, it's just pointless to even have a name for it.

I don't like sponge cake, should I have a special name for my eating habits?

__________________
Would you like a cigarette? They're quite exellent.

well who really cares what anyone else thinks about your eating habits and what you "are" and all that stuff?

really makes it seem like you're doing it to impress other people or something. to prove something to the world.

i think it's most important to prove stuff to oneself.

you've got your reasons for eating what you eat. fuck what everyone else thinks.

who cares?

And if they truly give up meat, they don't eat pussy.

Ha, if you're mainly veggie going for reasons that are not connected with ethics then no, its not lazy. I am in a similar dilema, I might eat red meat 5 times in one year, eat white meat about once a month, and eat fish about twice a week. Its all for health reasons but I always look for free range and organic varieties anyway. Because of this I just say, I eat veggetarian dinners for most of my meals but Im not a veggetarian per se (because I eat fish ect whatever)

Yes, hence the thread title saying "pescetarian." No one said they did, no eyerolling is necessary.

That doesn't apply.

Not true. Even dietitians screw it up. When I was in the hospital last June I told them I was vegetarian. They gave me a menu that had fish listed.

On this board, before it got hacked, had threads from people who insisted they were vegetarian but ate fish.

So no, most people don't know vegetarians don't eat fish.

I meant everyone in this thread.

as long as you don't call yourself a vegeterian who eats fish no. in other words as long as you're not hypocritical about it no

Sometimes you have to use language like that to explain it to people, though. I obviously know that I'm not a vegetarian, but when I lived in the south (where voluntary restrictive diets are really uncommon) it always confused people to say that I didn't eat most meat but I did eat fish. They didn't get that it was something I really genuinely didn't do, just like a vegetarian wouldn't eat red meat or chicken. So, if there was no fish around, I'd say I was a vegetarian, because otherwise people just think you're being picky and ridiculous by not eating the beef or chicken, and if there was, I'd just say "I'm a vegetarian but I eat fish occasionally." I don't see anything wrong with it if that's the language it took to get my point across. It's not like I was deliberately lying about my eating habits. Getting all possessive and picky over a word that's convenient to use sometimes is kind of petty.

you're all missing the point. this isn't about labels, it's about the diet itself. it's perfectly okay to be a pescatarian, whoever's giving you shit is a dickhead.

Agreed. I don't have a problem with people eating fish!! Its those which say their veggie and then eat fish, and then the rest of us which are vegan/veggie and don't eat fish get the fish menus in restaurants!

Or fish.