Vegan Practically

In recent years, you’ve probably noticed the rise of the term “plant-based.” What’s the difference between “vegan” and “plant-based”? Does it even matter? As a philosopher, I may be more prone to seeking significance in distinctions that others might consider simply a matter of semantics. But in this case, there is a difference in both the scope of the label and its social meaning.

With respect to scope, vegan extends beyond diet alone. Yes, a large preoccupation among those who subscribe to a vegan lifestyle is about the food they eat. If you go to the Vegan Society website you’ll see that they emphasize that veganism goes beyond diet. The definition they provide makes that clear:

“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.” (from the Vegan Society website)

So while vegans do eat a plant-based diet, not all who follow a plant-based diet would consider themselves vegan. There are a few different reasons why plant-based eaters might not all consider themselves vegan. Some might adopt a plant-based diet for its health benefits alone, not engaging with further ethical concerns about exploitation of or cruelty towards animals. There is good evidence that plant-based diets have all sorts of health benefits, some even going so far as to believe they can reverse heart disease.

In addition to the difference in scope between the label “vegan” and the label “plant-based” is the difference in social meaning. Where words might have literal meanings, they also have additional social meanings that depend on the social context in which they are used. In our social context, “vegan” is a much more politicized word than “plant-based,” and lots of people consider those who claim the label to be difficult, angry, self-righteous, and even militant, as if all vegans are extremists and activists. None of that is built into the literal definition of what it means to be vegan. And certainly not all vegans display all or even any of those qualities. But most people who embrace the label are ethically-motivated in their choice.

In much the same way those who claim the label “feminist” are public about their social justice commitments with respect to gender and intersecting lines of oppression, vegans aren’t hiding their ethical or political commitment to doing what they can to reduce animal suffering. Those who believe these things but prefer to the “plant-based” self-descriptor might not want to associate themselves with the raft of negative social meaning attached to being labelled a vegan. Similarly, restaurants that offer plant-based menus or menu options might seek to appeal to a broader range of folks and to distance themselves from the associations many have with “the V-word.”

My own stance is obvious — I opt for “vegan” because it takes those extra steps of explicitly rejecting the exploitation of and cruelty to animals. These are major ethical issues that ought to command people’s attention, given the massive amount of animal suffering behind the vast majority of animal products consumed, whether as food or as other products. To say simply that I follow a plant-based diet would be both to limit the scope of my practice and to cloak my ethical concerns with euphemistic language that can easily render them invisible.

Do I wish “vegan” didn’t call up so many negative qualities for so many people? I do. But I don’t think the answer to that is to set aside the ethical issues about exploitation and cruelty that motivate many people to change not just their diets, but also many of their other choices. My hope is that over time, as more ordinary folks feel moved to action, the negative social meanings will fall away and vegan practice, even if undertaken imperfectly, will be considered compassionate and kind.