Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that >>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far cry. >>> >>>You're right. >> >>No, he isn't. >> >> >>>The thing is though, >>>he thinks that all vegans have it. >> >>They do. >> >> >>>His quotes don't word it that way, >> >>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. > > Do you believe that you had an > eating disorder back when you > identified as vegan? My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. >>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one >>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental >>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a >>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with >>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter >>being orthorexia). >>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 >> >>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why >>people become "vegans" in the first place. >>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 >> >>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as >>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme >>form of orthorexia. >>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 >> >> >>>but Usual has made it very clear >>>that he considers all vegans to >>>be 'orthorexic'. >> >>Correct, and they are. >> >> >>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear the >>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to their >>>>food. >>>> >>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also > > sick? > >>>Usual himself has bragged about >>>being a good cook and therefore >>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. >> >>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, >>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from >>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). > > You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. |
|
|||
|
|||
Scented Nectar wrote:
> You have a serious case of fear > of non-conformity. I have no fear of anything, much less one of non-conformity or non-conformists. Given the nature of my own family, I'm quite comfortable with non-conformity. You, otoh, have plenty of fears. You have your agoraphobia thanks to your fear of reality which causes you to smoke pot. Your fears cause you to seek out other diversions from reality as well, including veganism (and bullshit "veganics") and probably even this arrested development (non)sense of "non-conformity" which you say I fear; I suppose it's one of your defiant still-adolescent refuges you take to keep from facing up to reality. Indeed, your entire life -- the entire forty-two years of nothingness -- has been that of a wastrel because you're afraid to face the real world, and afraid to live your life. You're a prisoner and a slave to fear. Your greatest fear is ultimately yourself, and who wouldn't be afraid of your nothing-ness reality. > All the below quotes prove that. Stop top-posting if you're going to use your lame signature. Decent newsreaders, like mine, won't quote sigs or what's below them. Nothing I wrote takes issue with non-conformity, nor implies any fear of it. It was all about orthorexia, which defines an eating disorder rather than lack of conformity. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family >>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I >>>>normally don't. >>> >>>You DO turn down such meals >> >>No, I don't refuse anything. I accepted the rum cake and shared it with >>friends and family who like that kind of thing. As far as my brother >>goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I wouldn't eat it, so he >>won't offer it. We respect each other that way, something which appears >>to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque dysfunctional family. Did you >>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? > > Ohhh, You and Dreck are both self-crippled. His is physical, yours is mental and emotional. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . Just an aside to your 'support our troops' bit, why don't any of the members of the Young Republicans enlist? Why haven't YOU enlisted? > Skanky wrote: > >>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that > >>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far cry. > >>> > >>>You're right. > >> > >>No, he isn't. > >> > >> > >>>The thing is though, > >>>he thinks that all vegans have it. > >> > >>They do. > >> > >> > >>>His quotes don't word it that way, > >> > >>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. > > > > Do you believe that you had an > > eating disorder back when you > > identified as vegan? > > My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've > stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong > to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights > part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. > The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from > them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. Nonsense. For many vegans, it's purely about food. The modern definition is based on food, and the original one based soley on animal rights. http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finition/vegan > >>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one > >>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental > >>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a > >>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with > >>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter > >>being orthorexia). > >>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 > >> > >>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why > >>people become "vegans" in the first place. > >>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 > >> > >>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as > >>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme > >>form of orthorexia. > >>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 > >> > >> > >>>but Usual has made it very clear > >>>that he considers all vegans to > >>>be 'orthorexic'. > >> > >>Correct, and they are. > >> > >> > >>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear the > >>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to their > >>>>food. > >>>> > >>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also > > > > sick? > > > >>>Usual himself has bragged about > >>>being a good cook and therefore > >>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. > >> > >>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, > >>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from > >>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). > > > > You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. > > So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try > to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. No Usual, you are pretty ****ed up. I suspect that in your case you truly were/are orthorexic. Why else would you so strongly assume that all other vegans are? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>Claire's self-crippled and morbidly obese Uncle Dreck wrote: >> >>>>>>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family >>>>>>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I >>>>>>>>normally don't. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You DO turn down such meals >>>>>> >>>>>>No, I don't refuse anything. >>>>> >>>>>You TURNED THEM DOWN, >>>> >>>>No >>> >>>Your >> >>No, fatso, I don't refuse anything. I gratefully accepted the rum cake >>and shared it with friends and family who like that kind of thing. As >>far as my brother goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I >>wouldn't eat it, so he won't even offer it. We respect each other that >>way, something which appears to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque >>dysfunctional family. I find it amusing that you object more to sharing >>a rum cake than sharing your wife with your own twin brother. Did you >>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? Why do you object to >>sharing rum cake but not to other blokes -- much less your own brother >>-- shagging your wife? > > You snipped the evidence That wasn't evidence. I admit I shared the rum cake with family and friends. The real question is, What would Dreck do if someone were to offer him the same cake? Bear in mind he's such a twit that he shunned black olives because he was misinformed about the brine in which they're cured. I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to maintain my ethical standard. -- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3 Would his "ethical standard" preclude him from eating a cake which contained eggs and other ingredients of animal origin, or just olives which he ignorantly believes "swim around in squid ink"? Would his sanctimonious ethics preclude him from giving that cake to people whose morals were a little looser than his own (like, maybe, his brother and wife)? > You seem to have a preoccupation with fatness. It's not a preoccupation. Dreck has been kind enough to admit his weight and even to post pictures of him sleeping with his dog (nothing untoward shown in the pics or intended in my remarks). He further has admitted to his insatiety when eating. As a result of his gluttony and lack of exercise, he's become one of the world's fattest vegans. He's evidence that veganism isn't inherently healthier than any other diet, only that it comes with a lot of hollow sanctimony. I like to point to him when people talk about how veganism is healthier or that vegans are slim and trim. Vegans who don't over-eat may be, but so, too, are those non-vegans who are sensible in diet and exercise. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
> I think we have a serious case > here of 'do as I say but not as > I do'. So says the **** who stubbornly refuses to practice what she preaches about "killing animals is wrong." |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky wrote: > >>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family > >>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I > >>>>normally don't. > >>> > >>>You DO turn down such meals > >> > >>No, I don't refuse anything. I accepted the rum cake and shared it with > >>friends and family who like that kind of thing. As far as my brother > >>goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I wouldn't eat it, so he > >>won't offer it. We respect each other that way, something which appears > >>to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque dysfunctional family. Did you > >>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? > > > > Ohhh, > > You and Dreck are both self-crippled. His is physical, yours is mental > and emotional. Well, looky here! Usual snipped out this: "Ohhh, so it's ok when YOU and some non vegan respect each others differences, but not ok when others do it." Why did you snip what you're replying to? Don't want to answer that? Or are you just imitating Rudy's most common non-answer? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Scented Nectar wrote: > > You have a serious case of fear > > of non-conformity. > > I have no fear of anything, much less one of non-conformity or > non-conformists. Given the nature of my own family, I'm quite > comfortable with non-conformity. Unless you explain what you're talking about, I will choose not to believe you. > You, otoh, have plenty of fears. You have your agoraphobia thanks to > your fear of reality which causes you to smoke pot. Your fears cause you > to seek out other diversions from reality as well, including veganism > (and bullshit "veganics") and probably even this arrested development > (non)sense of "non-conformity" which you say I fear; I suppose it's one > of your defiant still-adolescent refuges you take to keep from facing up > to reality. Indeed, your entire life -- the entire forty-two years of > nothingness -- has been that of a wastrel because you're afraid to face > the real world, and afraid to live your life. You're a prisoner and a > slave to fear. Your greatest fear is ultimately yourself, and who > wouldn't be afraid of your nothing-ness reality. You couldn't be more wrong. My mild dislike of crowds is nothing. Maybe you're projecting. You are definitely assuming things if not outright lying. I have no problems accepting reality, in fact my reality is a very nice one. > > All the below quotes prove that. > > Stop top-posting if you're going to use your lame signature. Decent > newsreaders, like mine, won't quote sigs or what's below them. Nothing I > wrote takes issue with non-conformity, nor implies any fear of it. It > was all about orthorexia, which defines an eating disorder rather than > lack of conformity. Sorry to hear that you have a non-working newsreader, but real ones don't cut out parts of the postings. As for your fear of non-conformity, it shows in all of your posts. Hey, you don't get to complain about missing parts of posts at all in my view, since you sometimes snip out the very sentences you're replying to. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Bob, the Bumbling Twit, wrote:
>>> And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear >>> the term "Kosher"? >> >> Yes. >> >>> Are they sick too? >> >> Yes. >> >>> They pay special attention to their food. >> >> And to the extent that observant Jews have two sets of cookware and a >> list of rules about what can and can't be eaten together, it is >> orthorexic. > > So your an anti Semite too. Wrong. I've defended a variety of religions in this very newsgroup, including an unfounded attack on the Hare Krishnas by Jon Lindsay (aka "Mr Falafel"). For example: http://tinyurl.com/ac4h7 I merely stated the extent to which I believe kashrut can be orthorexic. And there are many Jews who believe as I do about it. The passages with the dietary laws are short and simple. The rules rabbis have imposed on others are long and nitpicky -- they go far, far beyond the Scriptures. For instance, the text says not to cook a calf in its mother's milk. Sounds easy enough, but rabbis go from that and make another rule beyond it (i.e., no dairy and meat together, even if it's not beef; except fish can be eaten with dairy) and yet another (meat and dairy cannot be cooked in the same pots, even at different times). The simple rule -- don't cook a calf in its mothers milk -- is a religious tenet. The kashrut requirements of not mixing dairy with some meats and of having two sets of pots is orthorexic. > Hitler would agree with you. Invoking Godwin. Again. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
. .. > Skanky wrote: > >>Claire's self-crippled and morbidly obese Uncle Dreck wrote: > >> > >>>>>>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family > >>>>>>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I > >>>>>>>>normally don't. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You DO turn down such meals > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, I don't refuse anything. > >>>>> > >>>>>You TURNED THEM DOWN, > >>>> > >>>>No > >>> > >>>Your > >> > >>No, fatso, I don't refuse anything. I gratefully accepted the rum cake Fatso? I'm detecting a fear of weight problems. Is that why you used to be vegan and think all other vegans have eating disorders? > >>and shared it with friends and family who like that kind of thing. As > >>far as my brother goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I > >>wouldn't eat it, so he won't even offer it. We respect each other that > >>way, something which appears to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque > >>dysfunctional family. I find it amusing that you object more to sharing > >>a rum cake than sharing your wife with your own twin brother. Did you > >>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? Why do you object to > >>sharing rum cake but not to other blokes -- much less your own brother > >>-- shagging your wife? > > > > You snipped the evidence > > That wasn't evidence. I admit I shared the rum cake with family and > friends. The real question is, What would Dreck do if someone were to > offer him the same cake? Bear in mind he's such a twit that he shunned > black olives because he was misinformed about the brine in which they're > cured. What would you do if you were given a dish with a huge steak and a tiny bit of potatoes? In this example, you are at the table with others and can't give it to someone else behind their backs. > I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but > stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or > something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to > maintain my ethical standard. > -- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3 > > Would his "ethical standard" preclude him from eating a cake which > contained eggs and other ingredients of animal origin, or just olives > which he ignorantly believes "swim around in squid ink"? Would his > sanctimonious ethics preclude him from giving that cake to people whose > morals were a little looser than his own (like, maybe, his brother and > wife)? You seem awfully preoccupied with Derek's brother and wife, and their alleged affair. Still haven't lost your virginity have you? > > You seem to have a preoccupation with fatness. > > It's not a preoccupation. Dreck has been kind enough to admit his weight > and even to post pictures of him sleeping with his dog (nothing untoward > shown in the pics or intended in my remarks). He further has admitted to > his insatiety when eating. As a result of his gluttony and lack of > exercise, he's become one of the world's fattest vegans. He's evidence > that veganism isn't inherently healthier than any other diet, only that > it comes with a lot of hollow sanctimony. I like to point to him when > people talk about how veganism is healthier or that vegans are slim and > trim. Vegans who don't over-eat may be, but so, too, are those > non-vegans who are sensible in diet and exercise. I still think you are overly concerned with weight. Especially since you use it as an insult by calling Derek fatso, and morbidly obese. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
--
"usual suspect" > wrote in message . .. > Skanky wrote: > > I think we have a serious case > > here of 'do as I say but not as > > I do'. > > So says the **** who stubbornly refuses to practice what she preaches > about "killing animals is wrong." ****? A little anger management course might help you out a bit. SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that >>>>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far cry. >>>>> >>>>>You're right. >>>> >>>>No, he isn't. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>The thing is though, >>>>>he thinks that all vegans have it. >>>> >>>>They do. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>His quotes don't word it that way, >>>> >>>>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. >>> >>>Do you believe that you had an >>>eating disorder back when you >>>identified as vegan? >> >>My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've >>stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong >>to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights >>part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. >>The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from >>them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. > > Nonsense. No, I'm correct. > For many vegans, it's > purely about food. Liar. It's about irrational, misguided concerns for animals, usually with a heaping hatred for one's fellow man. > The modern > definition is based on food, and > the original one based soley on > animal rights. > http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finition/vegan Liar, from your own link: Vegans use as their primary motivation the concept of reducing animal suffering. What part of that has to do with diet? Nothing. Let's continue: Rooted in utilitarian philosophy, as expressed by authors such as Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer, ethical veganism is the belief that humans have a moral obligation to avoid causing suffering to any other living creature. Animals are seen to have the same inherent rights as humans to a life as free from suffering as possible. Therefore ethical vegans not only avoid eating meat and dairy products but also avoid the use of any product whose production involves the suffering of animals. Depending on one's level of commitment this can include not using certain medicines because they are tested for safety on animals. Some feel so strongly about it that they avoid buying film made from gelatin and buy digital film instead. While there continues to be a debate within the vegan community regarding these issues, the overall goal of veganism is to reduce animal suffering to the greatest extent possible. It's NOT about food, Skanky, it's about animal rights. >>>>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one >>>>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental >>>>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a >>>>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with >>>>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter >>>>being orthorexia). >>>>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 >>>> >>>>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why >>>>people become "vegans" in the first place. >>>>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 >>>> >>>>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as >>>>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme >>>>form of orthorexia. >>>>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>but Usual has made it very clear >>>>>that he considers all vegans to >>>>>be 'orthorexic'. >>>> >>>>Correct, and they are. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear the >>>>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to > > their > >>>>>>food. >>>>>> >>>>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also >>> >>>sick? >>> >>> >>>>>Usual himself has bragged about >>>>>being a good cook and therefore >>>>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. >>>> >>>>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, >>>>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from >>>>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). >>> >>>You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. >> >>So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try >>to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. > > No Yes. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>You have a serious case of fear >>>of non-conformity. >> >>I have no fear of anything, much less one of non-conformity or >>non-conformists. Given the nature of my own family, I'm quite >>comfortable with non-conformity. > > Unless you explain I already have. >>You, otoh, have plenty of fears. You have your agoraphobia thanks to >>your fear of reality which causes you to smoke pot. Your fears cause you >>to seek out other diversions from reality as well, including veganism >>(and bullshit "veganics") and probably even this arrested development >>(non)sense of "non-conformity" which you say I fear; I suppose it's one >>of your defiant still-adolescent refuges you take to keep from facing up >>to reality. Indeed, your entire life -- the entire forty-two years of >>nothingness -- has been that of a wastrel because you're afraid to face >>the real world, and afraid to live your life. You're a prisoner and a >>slave to fear. Your greatest fear is ultimately yourself, and who >>wouldn't be afraid of your nothing-ness reality. > > You couldn't be more wrong. No, I'm spot on. > My mild dislike of crowds is nothing. Liar. You even noted it to that group you wanted to meet: Knowing that a friend was waiting for me at my place combined with my tendency towards agorophobia [sic] and made me go home [sic]. You used it as an excuse for escaping a situation, and probably as the primary (if not only) reason for your hasty departure. > Maybe you're projecting. No, and that's your most tiresome line. >>>All the below quotes prove that. >> >>Stop top-posting if you're going to use your lame signature. Decent >>newsreaders, like mine, won't quote sigs or what's below them. Nothing I >>wrote takes issue with non-conformity, nor implies any fear of it. It >>was all about orthorexia, which defines an eating disorder rather than >>lack of conformity. > > Sorry You should be. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>>Claire's self-crippled and morbidly obese Uncle Dreck wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family >>>>>>>>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I >>>>>>>>>>normally don't. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You DO turn down such meals >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No, I don't refuse anything. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You TURNED THEM DOWN, >>>>>> >>>>>>No >>>>> >>>>>Your >>>> >>>>No, fatso, I don't refuse anything. I gratefully accepted the rum cake > > Fatso? Yes, he's morbidly obese. > I'm detecting a fear Then try getting out in a crowd and overcoming it, dummy. >>>>and shared it with friends and family who like that kind of thing. As >>>>far as my brother goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I >>>>wouldn't eat it, so he won't even offer it. We respect each other that >>>>way, something which appears to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque >>>>dysfunctional family. I find it amusing that you object more to sharing >>>>a rum cake than sharing your wife with your own twin brother. Did you >>>>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? Why do you object to >>>>sharing rum cake but not to other blokes -- much less your own brother >>>>-- shagging your wife? >>> >>>You snipped the evidence >> >>That wasn't evidence. I admit I shared the rum cake with family and >>friends. The real question is, What would Dreck do if someone were to >>offer him the same cake? Bear in mind he's such a twit that he shunned >>black olives because he was misinformed about the brine in which they're >>cured. > > What would you do It wouldn't happen. >> I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but >> stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or >> something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to >> maintain my ethical standard. >> -- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3 >> >>Would his "ethical standard" preclude him from eating a cake which >>contained eggs and other ingredients of animal origin, or just olives >>which he ignorantly believes "swim around in squid ink"? Would his >>sanctimonious ethics preclude him from giving that cake to people whose >>morals were a little looser than his own (like, maybe, his brother and >>wife)? > > You seem awfully preoccupied with > Derek's brother and wife, and their > alleged affair. It wasn't alleged. David mentioned it (http://tinyurl.com/n292) and Dreck has confirmed it. >>>You seem to have a preoccupation with fatness. >> >>It's not a preoccupation. Dreck has been kind enough to admit his weight >>and even to post pictures of him sleeping with his dog (nothing untoward >>shown in the pics or intended in my remarks). He further has admitted to >>his insatiety when eating. As a result of his gluttony and lack of >>exercise, he's become one of the world's fattest vegans. He's evidence >>that veganism isn't inherently healthier than any other diet, only that >>it comes with a lot of hollow sanctimony. I like to point to him when >>people talk about how veganism is healthier or that vegans are slim and >>trim. Vegans who don't over-eat may be, but so, too, are those >>non-vegans who are sensible in diet and exercise. > > I still think No, you never have. Your drug-addled mind is incapable of thought. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Skanky wrote: > >>>>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that > >>>>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far cry. > >>>>> > >>>>>You're right. > >>>> > >>>>No, he isn't. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>The thing is though, > >>>>>he thinks that all vegans have it. > >>>> > >>>>They do. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>His quotes don't word it that way, > >>>> > >>>>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. > >>> > >>>Do you believe that you had an > >>>eating disorder back when you > >>>identified as vegan? > >> > >>My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've > >>stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong > >>to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights > >>part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. > >>The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from > >>them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. > > > > Nonsense. > > No, I'm correct. > > > For many vegans, it's > > purely about food. > > Liar. It's about irrational, misguided concerns for animals, usually > with a heaping hatred for one's fellow man. No, it's just you they hate. > > The modern > > definition is based on food, and > > the original one based soley on > > animal rights. > > http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finition/vegan > > Liar, from your own link: Go to the link again and trying reading this time. The prime definition is food only. The specialty definition is all the other stuff. > Vegans use as their primary motivation the concept of reducing > animal suffering. > > What part of that has to do with diet? Nothing. Let's continue: > > Rooted in utilitarian philosophy, as expressed > by authors such as Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer, ethical > veganism is the belief that humans have a moral obligation to > avoid causing suffering to any other living creature. Animals > are seen to have the same inherent rights as humans to a life as > free from suffering as possible. Therefore ethical vegans not > only avoid eating meat and dairy products but also avoid the use > of any product whose production involves the suffering of > animals. Depending on one's level of commitment this can include > not using certain medicines because they are tested for safety > on animals. Some feel so strongly about it that they avoid > buying film made from gelatin and buy digital film instead. > While there continues to be a debate within the vegan community > regarding these issues, the overall goal of veganism is to > reduce animal suffering to the greatest extent possible. > > It's NOT about food, Skanky, it's about animal rights. > > >>>>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one > >>>>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental > >>>>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a > >>>>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with > >>>>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter > >>>>being orthorexia). > >>>>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 > >>>> > >>>>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why > >>>>people become "vegans" in the first place. > >>>>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 > >>>> > >>>>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as > >>>>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme > >>>>form of orthorexia. > >>>>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>but Usual has made it very clear > >>>>>that he considers all vegans to > >>>>>be 'orthorexic'. > >>>> > >>>>Correct, and they are. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear the > >>>>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to > > > > their > > > >>>>>>food. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also > >>> > >>>sick? > >>> > >>> > >>>>>Usual himself has bragged about > >>>>>being a good cook and therefore > >>>>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. > >>>> > >>>>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, > >>>>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from > >>>>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). > >>> > >>>You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. > >> > >>So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try > >>to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. > > > > No > > Yes. Snip and run, snip and run. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Too much snipping and running.
Try again and maybe I'll respond further. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ "usual suspect" > wrote in message .. . > Skanky wrote: > >>>You have a serious case of fear > >>>of non-conformity. > >> > >>I have no fear of anything, much less one of non-conformity or > >>non-conformists. Given the nature of my own family, I'm quite > >>comfortable with non-conformity. > > > > Unless you explain > > I already have. > > >>You, otoh, have plenty of fears. You have your agoraphobia thanks to > >>your fear of reality which causes you to smoke pot. Your fears cause you > >>to seek out other diversions from reality as well, including veganism > >>(and bullshit "veganics") and probably even this arrested development > >>(non)sense of "non-conformity" which you say I fear; I suppose it's one > >>of your defiant still-adolescent refuges you take to keep from facing up > >>to reality. Indeed, your entire life -- the entire forty-two years of > >>nothingness -- has been that of a wastrel because you're afraid to face > >>the real world, and afraid to live your life. You're a prisoner and a > >>slave to fear. Your greatest fear is ultimately yourself, and who > >>wouldn't be afraid of your nothing-ness reality. > > > > You couldn't be more wrong. > > No, I'm spot on. > > > My mild dislike of crowds is nothing. > > Liar. You even noted it to that group you wanted to meet: > > Knowing that a friend was waiting for me at my place combined > with my tendency towards agorophobia [sic] and made me go home > [sic]. > > You used it as an excuse for escaping a situation, and probably as the > primary (if not only) reason for your hasty departure. > > > Maybe you're projecting. > > No, and that's your most tiresome line. > > >>>All the below quotes prove that. > >> > >>Stop top-posting if you're going to use your lame signature. Decent > >>newsreaders, like mine, won't quote sigs or what's below them. Nothing I > >>wrote takes issue with non-conformity, nor implies any fear of it. It > >>was all about orthorexia, which defines an eating disorder rather than > >>lack of conformity. > > > > Sorry > > You should be. |
|
|||
|
|||
Too much snipping and running.
Try again -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ "usual suspect" > wrote in message .. . > Skanky wrote: > >>>>Claire's self-crippled and morbidly obese Uncle Dreck wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>>I've not turned down meals prepared for me by family > >>>>>>>>>>members or my friends just because they use foods I > >>>>>>>>>>normally don't. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You DO turn down such meals > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>No, I don't refuse anything. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You TURNED THEM DOWN, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No > >>>>> > >>>>>Your > >>>> > >>>>No, fatso, I don't refuse anything. I gratefully accepted the rum cake > > > > Fatso? > > Yes, he's morbidly obese. > > > I'm detecting a fear > > Then try getting out in a crowd and overcoming it, dummy. > > >>>>and shared it with friends and family who like that kind of thing. As > >>>>far as my brother goes, the issue was framed with "IF." He knows I > >>>>wouldn't eat it, so he won't even offer it. We respect each other that > >>>>way, something which appears to be foreign in your Jerry Springer-esque > >>>>dysfunctional family. I find it amusing that you object more to sharing > >>>>a rum cake than sharing your wife with your own twin brother. Did you > >>>>hear David's belly slapping against Belinda's? Why do you object to > >>>>sharing rum cake but not to other blokes -- much less your own brother > >>>>-- shagging your wife? > >>> > >>>You snipped the evidence > >> > >>That wasn't evidence. I admit I shared the rum cake with family and > >>friends. The real question is, What would Dreck do if someone were to > >>offer him the same cake? Bear in mind he's such a twit that he shunned > >>black olives because he was misinformed about the brine in which they're > >>cured. > > > > What would you do > > It wouldn't happen. > > >> I used to eat black olives up until a few months ago, but > >> stopped after realising they swim around in squid ink, or > >> something close to it. I'm always ready to make changes to > >> maintain my ethical standard. > >> -- Derek Nash, http://tinyurl.com/dcyr3 > >> > >>Would his "ethical standard" preclude him from eating a cake which > >>contained eggs and other ingredients of animal origin, or just olives > >>which he ignorantly believes "swim around in squid ink"? Would his > >>sanctimonious ethics preclude him from giving that cake to people whose > >>morals were a little looser than his own (like, maybe, his brother and > >>wife)? > > > > You seem awfully preoccupied with > > Derek's brother and wife, and their > > alleged affair. > > It wasn't alleged. David mentioned it (http://tinyurl.com/n292) and > Dreck has confirmed it. > > >>>You seem to have a preoccupation with fatness. > >> > >>It's not a preoccupation. Dreck has been kind enough to admit his weight > >>and even to post pictures of him sleeping with his dog (nothing untoward > >>shown in the pics or intended in my remarks). He further has admitted to > >>his insatiety when eating. As a result of his gluttony and lack of > >>exercise, he's become one of the world's fattest vegans. He's evidence > >>that veganism isn't inherently healthier than any other diet, only that > >>it comes with a lot of hollow sanctimony. I like to point to him when > >>people talk about how veganism is healthier or that vegans are slim and > >>trim. Vegans who don't over-eat may be, but so, too, are those > >>non-vegans who are sensible in diet and exercise. > > > > I still think > > No, you never have. Your drug-addled mind is incapable of thought. |
|
|||
|
|||
Scented Nectar wrote:
> Too much Evasion noted. |
|
|||
|
|||
Skanky wrote:
>>>>>>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that >>>>>>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far > > cry. > >>>>>>>You're right. >>>>>> >>>>>>No, he isn't. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>The thing is though, >>>>>>>he thinks that all vegans have it. >>>>>> >>>>>>They do. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>His quotes don't word it that way, >>>>>> >>>>>>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. >>>>> >>>>>Do you believe that you had an >>>>>eating disorder back when you >>>>>identified as vegan? >>>> >>>>My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've >>>>stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong >>>>to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights >>>>part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. >>>>The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from >>>>them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. >>> >>>Nonsense. >> >>No, I'm correct. >> >> >>>For many vegans, it's >>>purely about food. >> >>Liar. It's about irrational, misguided concerns for animals, usually >>with a heaping hatred for one's fellow man. > > No, Yes. You've shown this faux "compassion" when wishing others unwell yourself. >>>The modern >>>definition is based on food, and >>>the original one based soley on >>>animal rights. >>>http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finition/vegan >> >>Liar, from your own link: > > Go to the link I did. It refutes your claim that veganism is about food. >>Vegans use as their primary motivation the concept of reducing >>animal suffering. >> >>What part of that has to do with diet? Nothing. Let's continue: >> >>Rooted in utilitarian philosophy, as expressed >>by authors such as Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer, ethical >>veganism is the belief that humans have a moral obligation to >>avoid causing suffering to any other living creature. Animals >>are seen to have the same inherent rights as humans to a life as >>free from suffering as possible. Therefore ethical vegans not >>only avoid eating meat and dairy products but also avoid the use >>of any product whose production involves the suffering of >>animals. Depending on one's level of commitment this can include >>not using certain medicines because they are tested for safety >>on animals. Some feel so strongly about it that they avoid >>buying film made from gelatin and buy digital film instead. >>While there continues to be a debate within the vegan community >>regarding these issues, the overall goal of veganism is to >>reduce animal suffering to the greatest extent possible. >> >>It's NOT about food, Skanky, it's about animal rights. Established. >>>>>>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one >>>>>>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental >>>>>>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a >>>>>>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with >>>>>>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter >>>>>>being orthorexia). >>>>>>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 >>>>>> >>>>>>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why >>>>>>people become "vegans" in the first place. >>>>>>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 >>>>>> >>>>>>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as >>>>>>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme >>>>>>form of orthorexia. >>>>>>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>but Usual has made it very clear >>>>>>>that he considers all vegans to >>>>>>>be 'orthorexic'. >>>>>> >>>>>>Correct, and they are. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear > > the > >>>>>>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to >>> >>>their >>> >>> >>>>>>>>food. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also >>>>> >>>>>sick? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>Usual himself has bragged about >>>>>>>being a good cook and therefore >>>>>>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. >>>>>> >>>>>>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, >>>>>>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from >>>>>>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). >>>>> >>>>>You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. >>>> >>>>So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try >>>>to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. >>> >>>No >> >>Yes. > > Snip You know I'm right, dummy. |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
. .. > Skanky wrote: > >>>>>>>>You said he called it an eating disorder. He did not. He said that > >>>>>>>>people with eating disorders can hide behind a vegan diet. A far > > > > cry. > > > >>>>>>>You're right. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, he isn't. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>The thing is though, > >>>>>>>he thinks that all vegans have it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>They do. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>His quotes don't word it that way, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I believe I've written that all vegans are orthorexic. > >>>>> > >>>>>Do you believe that you had an > >>>>>eating disorder back when you > >>>>>identified as vegan? > >>>> > >>>>My identification was based on one of the same misconceptions you've > >>>>stubbornly refused to give up that veganism is about food. I was wrong > >>>>to have assumed that veganism could be divorced from the animal rights > >>>>part of it (which I never embraced). The two, though, are inseparable. > >>>>The difference between you and me is I admit my mistakes and learn from > >>>>them while you incessantly and ridiculously repeat yours. > >>> > >>>Nonsense. > >> > >>No, I'm correct. > >> > >> > >>>For many vegans, it's > >>>purely about food. > >> > >>Liar. It's about irrational, misguided concerns for animals, usually > >>with a heaping hatred for one's fellow man. > > > > No, > > Yes. You've shown this faux "compassion" when wishing others unwell > yourself. Everyone dislikes some people, no matter what they eat. For instance, I find your narrow mindedness unlikeable. > >>>The modern > >>>definition is based on food, and > >>>the original one based soley on > >>>animal rights. > >>>http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finition/vegan > >> > >>Liar, from your own link: > > > > Go to the link > > I did. It refutes your claim that veganism is about food. Hello, is anyone home? The main definition is about food only. The SPECIALTY definition is about the other stuff. Get with the times. > >>Vegans use as their primary motivation the concept of reducing > >>animal suffering. > >> > >>What part of that has to do with diet? Nothing. Let's continue: > >> > >>Rooted in utilitarian philosophy, as expressed > >>by authors such as Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer, ethical > >>veganism is the belief that humans have a moral obligation to > >>avoid causing suffering to any other living creature. Animals > >>are seen to have the same inherent rights as humans to a life as > >>free from suffering as possible. Therefore ethical vegans not > >>only avoid eating meat and dairy products but also avoid the use > >>of any product whose production involves the suffering of > >>animals. Depending on one's level of commitment this can include > >>not using certain medicines because they are tested for safety > >>on animals. Some feel so strongly about it that they avoid > >>buying film made from gelatin and buy digital film instead. > >>While there continues to be a debate within the vegan community > >>regarding these issues, the overall goal of veganism is to > >>reduce animal suffering to the greatest extent possible. > >> > >>It's NOT about food, Skanky, it's about animal rights. > > Established. Why do you feel the need to reassure yourself of the views you've already posted? > >>>>>>...[Vegans are] also out of touch with reality (which is one > >>>>>>reason why I suspect AR/veganism are symptoms of deeper mental > >>>>>>illness; perhaps it will one day be used diagnostically as a > >>>>>>syndrome capturing those who are anti-social, out of touch with > >>>>>>reality, and who have a peculiar eating disorder -- the latter > >>>>>>being orthorexia). > >>>>>>usual suspect: Jun 5 2004 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Imbalanced people don't make balanced decisions. That's why > >>>>>>people become "vegans" in the first place. > >>>>>>usual suspect: Dec 4 2004 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Veganism is a mental illness. I realize it isn't treated as > >>>>>>such at the moment, but it eventually will be. It's an extreme > >>>>>>form of orthorexia. > >>>>>>usual suspect: Jun 12 2004 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>but Usual has made it very clear > >>>>>>>that he considers all vegans to > >>>>>>>be 'orthorexic'. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Correct, and they are. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>And as far as people take unusual attention to food, have you hear > > > > the > > > >>>>>>>>term "Kosher"? Are they sick too? They pay special attention to > >>> > >>>their > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>food. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>What about Italian cooks who delight in their foods? Are they also > >>>>> > >>>>>sick? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>Usual himself has bragged about > >>>>>>>being a good cook and therefore > >>>>>>>must enjoy it. Maybe he's sick. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I am a good cook and I do enjoy cooking. I have a balanced approach, > >>>>>>though, about what I'll eat, etc., which distinguishes me from > >>>>>>orthorexics and vegans (who are all, 100%, orthorexics). > >>>>> > >>>>>You're pretty ****ed up, Usual. > >>>> > >>>>So says the clueless urban nitwit who thinks farmers will eventually try > >>>>to corner the "veganic" market, which doesn't even exist. > >>> > >>>No > >> > >>Yes. > > > > Snip > > You know I'm right, dummy. You know that I don't believe that. You find that hard to handle though so you had to claim that I think you are right. Pathetic. Why did you snip and run? Are you unsure of yourself? Can't take the heat? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Scented Nectar wrote: > > Too much > > Evasion noted. The evasion is all the stuff you snip. What are you afraid of? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky wrote: > > Too much > > Evasion noted. The evasion is your snipping and running. What are you afraid of? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > . .. snippage... >> >> I did. It refutes your claim that veganism is about food. > > Hello, is anyone home? The > main definition is about food > only. ============================ No, delusional fool, it isn't. It is, and has been about a lifestyle. Diet is no more or less a part of it. "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" http://www.vegetus.org/honey/honey.htm "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." http://www.vegetus.org/honey/nomenclature.htm The SPECIALTY > definition is about the other > stuff. Get with the times. > ================== Your 'times' are only from lazy loons, like you, that want to pretend they are doing something when all they really accomplish is the death and suffering of more animals than they save. snippage... > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > Ignorance and stupidity on display. > > |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|