"The term vegan was coined by Donald Watson in 1944 and was defined as follows:    Veganism is a way of living which excludes all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, the animal kingdom, and includes a reverence for life. It applies to the practice of living on the products of the plant kingdom to the exclusion of flesh, fish, fowl, eggs, honey, animal milk and its derivatives, and encourages the use of alternatives for all commodities derived wholly or in part from animals."

The thing is, inherent in the philosophy is the assumption that animals cannot consent to our use of these things.  It says these things are not vegan because it is irreverent to other living things to take their parts/secretions/bodies without their permission.  If I donate my hair to locks of love, I don't think that it's unvegan of someone to wear that wig because I said, "Here, take this, it's a gift from me to you!"  To me, the philosophy of veganism arose because we cannot interact in this same way with animals, not to ensure that we don't interact with them this way on principle.  But the point is, we CAN'T interact with them this way anyway, so it's kind of moot.  Anyway, we can continue this discussion later AC, or on a different thread.  :)

Back to the bees!

CK, don't give me that plant crap! Enough said.

freals!  You know better than to pull that.  :)

All in good fun and for the sake of a good debate. :)

I just read this: "If you are thinking to yourself, "But I'm a vegan for health reasons" or "I'm a vegan for environmental reasons," please reconsider how you label yourself. Unlike the word vegetarian, the word vegan specifically implies moral concern for animals, and this concern extends to all areas of life, not just diet. If you do not believe in animal equality, please consider referring to yourself as someone who doesn't eat animal products, as one who follows a plant-based diet, or as one who follows a vegan diet. Additionally, anyone who eats honey, yet refers to herself as a vegan, makes life difficult for other vegans--it's like having someone who eats fish and calls herself a vegetarian. When a vegetarian comes along, it is much harder for her to explain that fish is not acceptable for vegetarians."

I'm vegan first and foremost because of the environment. I'm proud that I tread lightly on the planet. I care about them animals, but I guess I can say that's... "secondary." Oh, I don't like how that sounds.

If I found out that local honey was less exploitative (for the environment) than any and all kinds of agave nectar production, I'd probably opt for the honey. I don't know how agave nectar or most other liquid sweeteners are produced, but they could have more "harmful" effects than a tiny organic bee farm. I mean, a huge (and this is really unlikely) company could tear down a forest, killing all the animals and plants inside, to set up an agave factory.

Hypothetical, I know. Incredibly unlikely, yeah.

And all this would be relevant if I bought agave nectar or honey. But I don't.

I like me some maple syrup.

favorite part of the post.  hehe.  it just made me laugh.

I came to the conclusion that eating butter from a small, humane farm would be infinitely better for both the environment and the animals involved than eating palm oil. But I do not want to eat butter. Doing so would make me a  hypocrite (not to mention my belief that all dairy, no matter how "small" is exploitative).  So I don't eat butter or anything with palm oil in it anymore. Both are really luxuries and avoidable....if they weren't, I'd have to think long and hard about which to consume, and my "vegan" label would probably end up going out the window.

I like how you put this.  That's how I feel as well about the honey.
I don't know much about palm oil--thanks for the info!

Honey was the hardest animal product for me to give up. For most people its cheese or steak or something, but being the tea freak I am, I could not let go of my lemon and honey with my tea. That's why it took so long for me to go from vegetarian to vegan. Now I hardly ever think about it, like any other animal product.

Um... ok, sorry to do this, maybe it should be a new thread or something, but this was brought up in chat...
Do people think it's vegan to wear leather shoes if you've already got them? There was some discussion about how it's different than honey, which it is in many ways (bee vs. cow, animal product vs. actual animal, buy vs. already had), but is it vegan? And if one of the concerns is to be portraying a vegan in the proper light to not confuse the world, should you call yourself a vegan and still wear learther?

I myself own 3 pairs of minnetonka leather shoes. I have been vegetarian since I was in the second grade, became vegan (with the exception of greek yogurt) around 12, and bought them somewhere in between. When I was younger I never thought much about the vegan lifestyle as a whole....ex: vegan shoes, clothes, companies, etc. I always just considered it a great way to cut out animal cruelty with my food. Plus, I never liked half the omni food stuffs (meat, cheese, eggs I've never liked). Now that I am much older and have more experience in the world of veg*n, I am much more concious of the choices I make and the products I buy. I don't buy things that are processed on machinery with shellfish and don't buy leather goods. I do wear the shoes occasionally, because I already own them and I do not believe in wasting anything that is already mine. This is the girl who still wears clothes from elementary school (with many adjustments, anyway :P).  If given the choice now I definitely would not purchase them. I have gotten a lot of crap from people who know that im veg*n whenever I wear them, though. "Aren't you vegan? why the hell are you wearing leather shoes then? isn't that a bit hypocritic?" etc, etc. Yes, i would consider it hypocritic if I had just bought them. I hope I don't sounds like I am justifying something cruel to anyone who disagrees with my choice to wear them. I'd like to hear what other people have to say about this, though.

Um... ok, sorry to do this, maybe it should be a new thread or something, but this was brought up in chat...
Do people think it's vegan to wear leather shoes if you've already got them? There was some discussion about how it's different than honey, which it is in many ways (bee vs. cow, animal product vs. actual animal, buy vs. already had), but is it vegan? And if one of the concerns is to be portraying a vegan in the proper light to not confuse the world, should you call yourself a vegan and still wear learther?

my car has leather seats.  it was the ONLY car i could afford (i bought it from my brother so i wouldn't have to take out a loan) and i had no other options, considering my old car had kicked the bucket.  in my craptastic town, ya gotta have a car if ya wanna go get groceries.  i don't really consider this my fault, but i do feel bad about it.  what was i supposed to do?  die of starvation from no car and therefore no groceries and no job? 

i know shoes is maybe different, i just wondered what you guys thought of this.

We've had this discussion before.  I think the consensus is that being vegan is doing the least amount of harm, as it is impossible to do no harm. 

Thanks, HH!  That's the definition I like.  Do the least harm possible. 

I'm sure I have some nonvegan clothing stored away, but I cannot bring myself to wear them and, fortunately, have enough other things to wear that I don't need to wear them.  It makes me sad/disgusted/angry to put these things on my body now that I know where they are from.  I just can't do it.  Which is tough, because I have some awfully nice wool socks that I knit pregan and I'll have to give them away because I can't bring myself to wear them.  And I am HUGE about not conveying mixed messages to the non-vegan community and making myself out to be a hypocrite.  Strictly speaking, I feel the same way about wearing nonvegan clothes (pregan, secondhand, whatever) as I do about honey.  It is not vegan to wear a leather jacket or wool sweater, period.  I don't think animal hides and fur belong on our bodies.  I don't care if I have to pay $400 or $40 or $1 for the item or if it is free or given to me.  That being said, if I had only a couple sweaters to wear in the winter, and they were wool, and I had no means of getting new winter clothes for a while, then I wouldn't feel bad about that.  I would just do my best to replace them when I could.  But, going back to the thread topic, that's sooo different from honey.  Honey is not a necessity like shoes are, and you can't buy secondhand honey.  :P