Maybe the problem doesn't lie in changing what we call omnivores since they are already living true to the definition of the term? Maybe we should be calling ourselves omni-vegetarians and omni-vegans.
This is spot on if our goal is indeed accuracy.
Different name for Omnivores
- Thread starter Dropkick
- Start date
This is spot on if our goal is indeed accuracy.
Maybe the problem doesn't lie in changing what we call omnivores since they are already living true to the definition of the term? Maybe we should be calling ourselves omni-vegetarians and omni-vegans.
No, that doesn't work. Vegetarian is a sub group off of omnivore and vegan is a sub group off of vegetarian. So all you've actually done is add an unneeded heading to vegetarian. We still don't have a name to differentiate the meat/veg eater subgroup from the vegetarian subgroup (not to mention the omnivores that might only eat meat - ignore them though as they are a side issue) .
Blobbenstein
.......
'Omnie' could be short for 'omnivore' or maybe, taking the word part, omnia, meaning "all"....it could mean that the person actually eats all, rather than being short for 'omnivore'.
Blobbenstein
.......
It's funny how there can be a need for a new word, yet no word comes forth. Like what is this decade called, for instance.....word formation is sort of a meme emergence, you can't always force it. I think you can if you are an authority, and responsible for the thing with the new word, like a scientist who discovers a new chemical, or a planet etc...but no one is in a position of responsibility over a word for meat eating omnivores.
I made this simplified chart to hopefully clear up any confusion. The descriptive term we need takes the place of underlined meat/veg eater.
notes:
I probably should have left the (human - other than human) subgroups off the chart as it just distracts from the rest and adds little. You can ignore them and pretend (omnivore) goes directly to (meat - meat/veg - vegetarian).
Vegan, if included, would have been in a new subgroup leading off from vegetarian, as vegan is a type of vegetarian i.e. (vegan - ovo - lacto - ovo/lacto - raw foodist - etc.)
Last edited:
There are always aberrations. The occasional herbivore eating meat, or a carnivore eating vegetation (my cat used to eat dead leaves off of some of my house plants). But what makes a herbivore a herbivore is that it's digestive system is intended to digest vegetation and not meat, just as a carnivore's digestive system is geared for meat. This is why you can feed an omnivore such as a dog a vegetarian diet and it can thrive on it, while if you try the same thing with a cat, which is a carnivore, it will slowly starve and die.
People are omnivores, their digestive system can take nutrients from both meat and vegetable matter. We don't have a choice in whether we are or aren't omnivores, any more than we have a choice about being mammals.
Last edited:
Clueless Git
Plant powered
peacefulveglady
Forum Legend
semantics
se·man·tics [si-man-tiks]
noun (used with a singular verb)
1. Linguistics .
a.the study of meaning.
b.the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.
2. Also called significs. the branch of semiotics dealing with the relations between signs and what they denote.
3. the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.: Let's not argue about semantics.
We have studied and discussed the semantics of the word omnivore, and found it's being used incorrectly.
Now we need a correct word.
Blobbenstein
.......
Blobbenstein
.......
The point of language is that words have meaning. We don't use words, say in a blog, to give a word meaning, as such, we use a word that already has meaning, and in this case 'omnie' has a meaning to a lot of veg*ns.....
If you want a new word to take its place then come up with one, and start using it, but other people might not follow.
Anyway, if the word is wrong, that isn't really any individual's fault.
If you want a new word to take its place then come up with one, and start using it, but other people might not follow.
Anyway, if the word is wrong, that isn't really any individual's fault.
Clueless Git
Plant powered
We really don't.
This is as silly as a bunch of one legged men arguing that we need a new word (other than biped) for two legged people.
For the time being, I think "non-vegetarian" is the best term, or "non-veg" for short. I tend to use that instead of omnivore.
Maybe once veg*nism is adopted by a more substantial ratio of the population, the non-vegs will start to feel the need for a term to describe themselves.
Maybe once veg*nism is adopted by a more substantial ratio of the population, the non-vegs will start to feel the need for a term to describe themselves.
Mr Crunchy
Forum Legend
I refer to them as "carcass breath", but of course, you know, not out loud.
As I've said before, Vegetarians are Omnivores, therefore it is a misleading and incorrect usage. And using it can only confuse those that aren't familiar with this misuse.
If needed, how would you refer to them outside the Veg*n community? What if you're writing an article? Or posting to an open blog?
If that isn't enough of a reason for you, what about the fact that it can make us appear somewhat ignorant or just plain stupid to anyone outside the Veg*n community?
I would say practicing omnivore then, with the understanding that if someone is veg*n it means they don't practice omnivorism (is that a word?) but rather they practice veg*nism. 
But I like IS's non-vegetarian or non-vegan.
But I like IS's non-vegetarian or non-vegan.
