Veganism = no animals "used" to make food or whatever (soap, shoes, invivo testing...)
Many people here seems to make the confusion that veganism is about the food. It's not, it's about the animals.
> What is the purpose of the word vegetarian if one uses it to mean consuming some animals but not others?
Languages are not like mathematics, one word can convey many meaning and nothing is stone-defined (dictionaries are only an interpretation of a language). In the Indian context there's a BIG part of the population that have a diet that does not have a definition in the Official Oxford Dictionary.
> In the Indian context there's a BIG part of the population that have a diet that does not have a definition in the Official Oxford Dictionary.
How does omnivore not cover most people’s diets in India? (in the context of a discussion about populations of people that avoid eating animals)
It seems like Indians use vegetarian to describe frequency or proportion of one’s diet that is animals. Seems like there could be better terminology used to avoid confusion.
Omnivore word does cover post people diet and is indeed more accurate, but how is it useful to know that 99.9% of Indians are omnivore? « 40% avoid eating meat most of the time buy may consume it once a month » is more informative but not very practical to repeat each time someone ask your diet.
By the way its the same for veganism : most vegans have at least once washed their hand with animal glycerin in a public bathroom soap or used a non vegan cloth washing soap while traveling. Are they less vegan? For some dictionary maybe, but most people don’t care about definition absolutism and prefer focus on the motivations and the results.
> How does omnivore not cover most people’s diets in India?
The dimensions of dietary regimes are even more complex in India than "omnivore" can capture. Some very religiously orthodox groups won't even eat onions and garlic because they are believed to encourage behavioral and spiritual "tendencies" that they seek to avoid.
Some meat eating Hindus will avoid eating an animal that hasn't been killed with a single strike (in contrast to the Islamic Halal practice of bleeding animals when slaughtered).
> It seems like Indians use vegetarian to describe frequency or proportion of one’s diet that is animals.
Vegetarianism has a strong group-identitarian function in India. When it is used as a self-description, it generally is a claim to be 100% vegetarian (per the traditional definition).
The extent to which vegetarianism is proportional to an omnivore's diet is often based on social context, not percentage. For example, in religious contexts most Hindus adhere to vegetarianism, even if they are not vegetarian in secular and daily life contexts. There is a fair amount of dietary code-switching, and it's considered normal in the contexts where it occurs.
This is quite similar to the pattern seen in many other countries from Asia through to Christian Europe and Africa, where fasting often involves abstention from meat consumption.
India also has major differences in vegetarianism rates by region. The peak rates of vegetarianism are in the west and northwest (~70% in the states of Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Punjab), and the lowest rates are to be found in the south and east of India (~2%).
Many people here seems to make the confusion that veganism is about the food. It's not, it's about the animals.
> What is the purpose of the word vegetarian if one uses it to mean consuming some animals but not others?
Languages are not like mathematics, one word can convey many meaning and nothing is stone-defined (dictionaries are only an interpretation of a language). In the Indian context there's a BIG part of the population that have a diet that does not have a definition in the Official Oxford Dictionary.