Philosophical Vegan Forum

Do you ever say carnist? I say it because I don't find it particularly offensive and I think it is more fitting since meat consumption is cultural and we are not obligated to be omnivorous. I said carnist around someone who found it offensive and they got a little mad. I broke down the word to it's latin root words but they thought I meant carnal like a meat fetish. (the same person who make mmm ham jokes all the F*** time) I don't know if I should use it anymore, I certainly would never say blood mouth because it sounds rad as hell. Anyway what do you think? do you say omnivore? how tactful are you in debates? do you say murder or killing? do you call it rape? etc etc... do you really catch more flies with honey (metaphorical flies), or should we speak frankly?

I use the word carnist after a long proces of making clear why it's immoral to continue to eat meat, and the person understands what you're saying and the ethical implications, but still continues to eat meat. So I basically don't use it towards ignorant people that aren't aware of the ethical consequences of their actions—although I actually never really use the term (I prefer 'meat eater'), but if it's an informed and conscious choice you're justified in using it in my opinion.

I also like to stay away from the word omnivore, because it's an biological term. It can confuse people, because even vegans are omnivores.

Like Volenta said, Carnist is more accurate than omnivore, because it reflects that it's a choice.

Meat-eater is perfectly accurate too, since it reflects what they do.

I like the notion of "carnist" being more of an informed choice, representing an ideology that it's OK or good to eat meat.

I would not call a non-human animal or a baby a carnist. Although we do use the term "vegan baby" sometimes, vegan has come to have two meanings, with regards to diet, and ideology, and can be used for the former only, or both. This is because it has become contrasted against "vegetarian" in the domain of diet.
"Pure vegetarian" would be more accurate than "vegan" for babies, though, since it refers only to diet and doesn't carry connotations of principles beyond that.

I don't worry terribly much about what people are offended by, or at least I try not to. There's a place for prudence in rhetoric, but in a situation like this, it's just silly for them to be offended.
The word is useful, descriptive, and it's not something that any honest carnist would have any trouble admitting to.

I think the word 'omnivore' will also trigger people to think they're justified in eating animal products, since so many people use the argument that we're omnivores, therefore it's okay to eat meat, so I avoid that word too. Even 'meat eater' is not good, because only meat is excluded. The word 'non-vegan' or 'carnist' is more accurate, but I don't say 'carnist' a lot for the same reason as Volenta does. Only those who've actually made an informed decision to not be vegan can be called carnist in my view.

Using strong language like murder, rape is probably putting a lot of people off, and they'll just categorize you as a radical vegan and stop listening.

I rarely use the term "carnist". Its not a common term, and if I want to specify someone non-vegan, I will use the term "meat-eater" or "non-vegan" instead.