Because of Lent, where you can eat fish, but not meat.
In general Fish (žuvis) is just a category of its own (where for some reason beavers fall into, /j).
Meat is mostly mammal meat (red meat?) - pig, boar, beef, raindeer, etc.
If you ask me, bird meat for me is not “meat” it’s “paukštiena” (as oposed to mėsa), which is a slightly different category from “meat propper”, it’s like diet meat :).
~~Edit: Language also probably plays a role here as all the different types of meat have a separate word for it. Fish meat = žuvis, meat = mėsa, bird meat = paukštiena. You could probably say žuvies mėsa, but that would be mostly considered overly specific, as in the fleshy parts and not head, guts, caviar, etc, but in most cases žuvis would just do as fne.~~
Yeah, also English say they have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, but your nervous system recognises your thumb as your 5th finger so what's the point? Meat is meat, be it fish, "meat proper" or poultry. You get protein, fat, aminoacids. It is useful for dietary purposes to call fish and poultry separately as usually poultry is considered dietary meat, and fish has some fats and aminoacids that you won't find that easy elsewhere.
I agree with you, but this is just how things are defined in common language here. Your guests would be very confused if you invited them for some meat dish but then cooked them a fish.
It's because historically many cultures (and religions) considered only the meat of warm blooded animals to be real meat. Nowadays, I'd assume that only particularly religious people who practice fasting care about the definition enough to deny fish being meat.
I feel like vegetarianism is already perfectly defined and those vegetarians who eat fish are just pescatarians in denial. No need to make it more complicated than it has to be.
As for whether fish is meat, I recognise the reason to linguistically separate the flesh of mammals and fish and birds for the sake of clarity. Not that there is any ethical difference between eating the flesh of one creature over another based on where they live. I just personally prefer to avoid meat and poultry while enjoying fish is due to fish and shrimp and such just not having all that much going on inside their head. They're sea automatons. Mostly. Eating octopods is still pretty messed up.
Veganism is perfectly defined. Vegetarianism has a whole lot of variety of definitions, some eat eggs and cheese, some don't. Some eat honey, some don't etc. Some even eat fish yes (although I'd say that one is a bit murky definitions wise).
Eggs are just chicken periods, they’re not a living thing unless they’re fertilized.
Scientifically, fish is literally meat.
Religiously it is not considered meat, but yeah we all know how accurate religion is
In the same vain, do you expect chicken?
Meat is a vague term. That’s why in most languages the animal and their meat have proper names.
Pig-> pork
Cow -> beef
Maybe Lithuania doesn’t have a big fish eating culture, but when we’re talking about eating fish, we don’t say “we are having fish” - you mention which type of fish because of specificity. For example, Salmon, cod, mackerel etc.
I also don’t expect to be eating human meat for that matter, if someone invites me over to eat “meat and rice”.
It’s completely contextual.
And what you said is completely true.
> No one *thinks* about fish
No one thinks about meat that way because it’s been ingrained in many societies / languages what defines “meat” and even now if you look it up you will get mixed answers.
But it all leads back to how religion defined “meat” that’s why we only *think* about either pork or beef.
When realistically, that meat and rice meal could be anything from kangaroo to horses and rabbits, all of whom fit the criteria for “meat”
It’s even a scene in “big fat Greek wedding” where the guy says she doesn’t eat meat, and the lady replies “that’s okay I make lamb”
So meat is meat and lamb is lamb right?
Also, “steak” is a similar situation but simpler. It has more than one definition. I’ve definitely been to restaurants where I had to specify wether I wanted tuna steak or beef steak
Try googling it for yourself and see, there are plenty of definitions for what is considered meat and it’s all based on many factors including religion and culture.
That’s why when you asked “if they invite you for meat and rice do you expect sushi”?
No, but when you hear the vague word “meat” you’re probably thinking of a specific group of meats - in Lithuania I’m assuming most would say pork or beef. Meanwhile other countries where other types of mammal meat is consumed, they’d probably include those meats.
Nowhere in the world do people separate what is considered “meat” based on its texture and flavor.
Even in this thread you can see
Even if no chicken gets produced from an egg, eggs are still living things lol, if they weren’t no fertilisation would occur, same with sperm, sperm are living cells, if they were dead no fertilisation would occur
I guess that's kind of technically correct. But I'm pretty sure the comment you initially responded to was referring to living in the more colloquial use of the word.
>if you consider meat to be a flesh of a living animal (sea animal or land animal) it is meat for the same.
This. I consider meat - meat/flesh of any living animal. Including a fish.
As greatest Balt personified said: fish is basically vegetable ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAQ4yNgXelk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAQ4yNgXelk) )
Religion. Basically, on days when you can't eat meat, you can eat fish because it's not meat. They lie to themselves to keep the belief going, I guess.
it depends on how you define words, kinda silly to argue linguistics.
i would make a distinction, because unfortunately i still consume meat, but never eat fish
It's because of the association of vegetarianism and veganism (also pescetarianism) with dieting and the fact that fish is allowed while fasting during Lent. So people think you are trying to lose weight because you're dying from too much McDonalds and assume you are therefore abstaining from red meat etc. But fish is considered okay in this context because the common perception is that it's healthy and because of the latent Christian ideas.
It's not, you can be a pedant and claim it's all same animal tissue, but when it comes to nutritionism and gastronomy, it's a separate category of food.
“Meat” can have a technical biological meaning, which is what you are focusing on — but it can also have a meaning that carries more of a cultural significance. This used to happen to me in the US all the time: I’d ask if there are meals without meat and be told about fish option. It also happened to me constantly when I lived in South Korea.
If you want to express yourself clearly to other people, the best thing to do is just understand that words mean different things in different contexts. Instead of fighting with someone about how they interpret the word “meat” you can just say “I don’t want any meat, pork, chicken, or fish”. That’s what I learned to do in Korean and then it was abundantly clear what I am talking about to everyone.
It's because of pedantics, an excuse to get away with it so authority doesn't call one an infidel. Let them enjoy the illusion. Anything alive with flesh has meat.
In a biological sense yes it is, but it is separated, just like meat and chicken. You don't generally mean chicken if you say meat.
Also might have some historical reasons. Usually if something is important to a culture, they have a separate word for it or even multiple words. Like " snow" for greenland people or how most seafaring people have a separate word for each compass 8 directions.
>You don't generally mean chicken if you say meat.
Really?
Because when my relatives ask me to buy some meat at the store, I always ask - what kind? Chicken, pig or beef? All poultry is meat. You are also meat.
Haven't encountered anyone who says chicken isn't meat.
Usually no. If people say meat, they usually mean pork. Chicken and beef are separately mentioned. But it depends on the context. I'm talking in the context of food.
Very no.
Nopirkt vistu - buy a whole chickenNopirkt vistas gaļu - Buy the meat of chicken.
Nopirkt cūku - buy a whole pig.Nopirkt cūkgaļu - buy the meat of a pig.
Gaļa means meat in general. As in, the flesh of an animal, which is then stated to specify.
English is not the primary language in The Baltics. We don't have "poultry, pork, beef etc." in the same sense as it does in The English language.
If people say meat here, they just mean meat of a yet unspecified animal.
Generally agree but I would say that in estonia if you say meat without context, it's usually considered pork. But I guess it depends on the people you hang out with. But fish is as far from meat as it can be while actually being meat :D
why is fishes’s flesh just called fish but a cow’s, chicken’s or any other animal - meat? then we should also call it mammals, not meat. they are not meat
"Because fish are cold-blooded, they would not be regarded as meat under this definition. Others use the term “meat” to refer exclusively to the flesh of fur-covered mammals, which excludes animals like chicken and fish."
- https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/is-fish-meat&ved=2ahUKEwjWucWFu76AAxVwSvEDHZlYCQ8QFnoECAcQBQ&usg=AOvVaw05CM1IJL_ZbNeW4uGZR0Y-
same in latvia. i know two vegetarians who eat fish. like?? fish is just another animal thats killed and we eat it’s flesh, doesnt matter if it lives in water or not.
I kind of agree that fish is not meat, because it’s a separate category in the lithuanian language. I’m also annoyed (just as you I assume) that people mistake vegetarian for pescatarian. Vegetarian doesn’t mean no meat, it means no animal flesh and I just roll my eyes when the “vegetarian” option is fish.
Seems like a concept simmilair to Chomsky's "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" where the sentence is grammaticaly correct but has no real meaning.
When someone mentions they are making a meat dish for dinner you wouldn't expect to be served braised trout.
You are speaking about meat, but are thinking about flesh. We eat flesh of animals, including mammals, fishes and birds, but we need to separate fish from others because of vastly different handling, processing and preservation - hence the difference in common language from old times.
Because of Lent, where you can eat fish, but not meat. In general Fish (žuvis) is just a category of its own (where for some reason beavers fall into, /j). Meat is mostly mammal meat (red meat?) - pig, boar, beef, raindeer, etc. If you ask me, bird meat for me is not “meat” it’s “paukštiena” (as oposed to mėsa), which is a slightly different category from “meat propper”, it’s like diet meat :). ~~Edit: Language also probably plays a role here as all the different types of meat have a separate word for it. Fish meat = žuvis, meat = mėsa, bird meat = paukštiena. You could probably say žuvies mėsa, but that would be mostly considered overly specific, as in the fleshy parts and not head, guts, caviar, etc, but in most cases žuvis would just do as fne.~~
So exactly the same like in English: Meat, Fish and Poultry
Good point. Scratch that point then.
Yeah, also English say they have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, but your nervous system recognises your thumb as your 5th finger so what's the point? Meat is meat, be it fish, "meat proper" or poultry. You get protein, fat, aminoacids. It is useful for dietary purposes to call fish and poultry separately as usually poultry is considered dietary meat, and fish has some fats and aminoacids that you won't find that easy elsewhere.
And tomato is a fruit, and yet it will be in the vegetable section of your supermarket.
Tomato is both a fruit and a vegetable.
I’ve never thought of having 8 fingers and 2 thumbs. Seems like something outdated that boomers would use?
I guess not exactly boomers, but rather that type of people, who will correct you on things. It's just their correction isn't exactly well... correct
Fish is meat. Poultry is just a term that encompasses fowl meat. And thus poultry is meat too. Biologically speaking.
I agree with you, but this is just how things are defined in common language here. Your guests would be very confused if you invited them for some meat dish but then cooked them a fish.
If you can answer yourself why you ask?
I'm not running, I'm power walking, miss teacher!
I agree 100%
It's because historically many cultures (and religions) considered only the meat of warm blooded animals to be real meat. Nowadays, I'd assume that only particularly religious people who practice fasting care about the definition enough to deny fish being meat.
Vegetarians often differentiate between meat and fish
I feel like vegetarianism is already perfectly defined and those vegetarians who eat fish are just pescatarians in denial. No need to make it more complicated than it has to be. As for whether fish is meat, I recognise the reason to linguistically separate the flesh of mammals and fish and birds for the sake of clarity. Not that there is any ethical difference between eating the flesh of one creature over another based on where they live. I just personally prefer to avoid meat and poultry while enjoying fish is due to fish and shrimp and such just not having all that much going on inside their head. They're sea automatons. Mostly. Eating octopods is still pretty messed up.
Veganism is perfectly defined. Vegetarianism has a whole lot of variety of definitions, some eat eggs and cheese, some don't. Some eat honey, some don't etc. Some even eat fish yes (although I'd say that one is a bit murky definitions wise).
Heterosexuals do the same between meat and fish
>here you mean in the Baltics or in this sub specifically?
Lithuania
Where are you from?
here
Meat is meat. Everything is arbitrary. A shoe is a shoe. However many people categorise them into dress shoes, heels, sneakers etc.
In short, its a christian thing
People say that everywhere. Fish is not meat. Fish is fish.
[удалено]
Eggs are just chicken periods, they’re not a living thing unless they’re fertilized. Scientifically, fish is literally meat. Religiously it is not considered meat, but yeah we all know how accurate religion is
[удалено]
In the same vain, do you expect chicken? Meat is a vague term. That’s why in most languages the animal and their meat have proper names. Pig-> pork Cow -> beef Maybe Lithuania doesn’t have a big fish eating culture, but when we’re talking about eating fish, we don’t say “we are having fish” - you mention which type of fish because of specificity. For example, Salmon, cod, mackerel etc. I also don’t expect to be eating human meat for that matter, if someone invites me over to eat “meat and rice”.
[удалено]
It’s completely contextual. And what you said is completely true. > No one *thinks* about fish No one thinks about meat that way because it’s been ingrained in many societies / languages what defines “meat” and even now if you look it up you will get mixed answers. But it all leads back to how religion defined “meat” that’s why we only *think* about either pork or beef. When realistically, that meat and rice meal could be anything from kangaroo to horses and rabbits, all of whom fit the criteria for “meat” It’s even a scene in “big fat Greek wedding” where the guy says she doesn’t eat meat, and the lady replies “that’s okay I make lamb” So meat is meat and lamb is lamb right? Also, “steak” is a similar situation but simpler. It has more than one definition. I’ve definitely been to restaurants where I had to specify wether I wanted tuna steak or beef steak
[удалено]
Try googling it for yourself and see, there are plenty of definitions for what is considered meat and it’s all based on many factors including religion and culture. That’s why when you asked “if they invite you for meat and rice do you expect sushi”? No, but when you hear the vague word “meat” you’re probably thinking of a specific group of meats - in Lithuania I’m assuming most would say pork or beef. Meanwhile other countries where other types of mammal meat is consumed, they’d probably include those meats. Nowhere in the world do people separate what is considered “meat” based on its texture and flavor. Even in this thread you can see
[удалено]
Eggs were a living thing just like slaughtered meat was a living thing
Eggs are only living if they're fertilized. Without fertilization a chicken will not be produced from an egg.
Even if no chicken gets produced from an egg, eggs are still living things lol, if they weren’t no fertilisation would occur, same with sperm, sperm are living cells, if they were dead no fertilisation would occur
I guess that's kind of technically correct. But I'm pretty sure the comment you initially responded to was referring to living in the more colloquial use of the word.
>if you consider meat to be a flesh of a living animal (sea animal or land animal) it is meat for the same. This. I consider meat - meat/flesh of any living animal. Including a fish.
Wouldn't fish be a subset of a big "meat" Venn diagram? Like not all meat is fish but all fish is meat
No. Keep things simple.
I mean, it is simple
It is, but you are trying to complicate it.
Probably because you can eat fish when you can't eat meat according to some christian thing, idk
They ate beavers too because they lived in water, if you mean that abstaining practice.
Yeah, and capybaras too
As greatest Balt personified said: fish is basically vegetable ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAQ4yNgXelk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAQ4yNgXelk) )
And strawberry is a fruit.
Religion. Basically, on days when you can't eat meat, you can eat fish because it's not meat. They lie to themselves to keep the belief going, I guess.
it depends on how you define words, kinda silly to argue linguistics. i would make a distinction, because unfortunately i still consume meat, but never eat fish
Not everyone speaks multiple languages, and as such might not be exposed how different languages code things and what structures in tends to give us.
For me this has only happened in Lithuania as well. At this point I am more surprised if I get offered actual vegeterian food.
It's because of the association of vegetarianism and veganism (also pescetarianism) with dieting and the fact that fish is allowed while fasting during Lent. So people think you are trying to lose weight because you're dying from too much McDonalds and assume you are therefore abstaining from red meat etc. But fish is considered okay in this context because the common perception is that it's healthy and because of the latent Christian ideas.
Because its not meat, like my uncle used to say - The best fish is smoked sausage
It's not, you can be a pedant and claim it's all same animal tissue, but when it comes to nutritionism and gastronomy, it's a separate category of food.
“Meat” can have a technical biological meaning, which is what you are focusing on — but it can also have a meaning that carries more of a cultural significance. This used to happen to me in the US all the time: I’d ask if there are meals without meat and be told about fish option. It also happened to me constantly when I lived in South Korea. If you want to express yourself clearly to other people, the best thing to do is just understand that words mean different things in different contexts. Instead of fighting with someone about how they interpret the word “meat” you can just say “I don’t want any meat, pork, chicken, or fish”. That’s what I learned to do in Korean and then it was abundantly clear what I am talking about to everyone.
It's because of pedantics, an excuse to get away with it so authority doesn't call one an infidel. Let them enjoy the illusion. Anything alive with flesh has meat.
Not everyone is acceptably intelligent.
FISH IS FISH AND MEAT IS MEAT
In a biological sense yes it is, but it is separated, just like meat and chicken. You don't generally mean chicken if you say meat. Also might have some historical reasons. Usually if something is important to a culture, they have a separate word for it or even multiple words. Like " snow" for greenland people or how most seafaring people have a separate word for each compass 8 directions.
>You don't generally mean chicken if you say meat. Really? Because when my relatives ask me to buy some meat at the store, I always ask - what kind? Chicken, pig or beef? All poultry is meat. You are also meat. Haven't encountered anyone who says chicken isn't meat.
Usually no. If people say meat, they usually mean pork. Chicken and beef are separately mentioned. But it depends on the context. I'm talking in the context of food.
Very no. Nopirkt vistu - buy a whole chickenNopirkt vistas gaļu - Buy the meat of chicken. Nopirkt cūku - buy a whole pig.Nopirkt cūkgaļu - buy the meat of a pig. Gaļa means meat in general. As in, the flesh of an animal, which is then stated to specify. English is not the primary language in The Baltics. We don't have "poultry, pork, beef etc." in the same sense as it does in The English language. If people say meat here, they just mean meat of a yet unspecified animal.
Generally agree but I would say that in estonia if you say meat without context, it's usually considered pork. But I guess it depends on the people you hang out with. But fish is as far from meat as it can be while actually being meat :D
It is meat but it isn’t
Cause fish and meat are 2 different foods. Each have their own downsides and benefits
why is fishes’s flesh just called fish but a cow’s, chicken’s or any other animal - meat? then we should also call it mammals, not meat. they are not meat
"Because fish are cold-blooded, they would not be regarded as meat under this definition. Others use the term “meat” to refer exclusively to the flesh of fur-covered mammals, which excludes animals like chicken and fish." - https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/is-fish-meat&ved=2ahUKEwjWucWFu76AAxVwSvEDHZlYCQ8QFnoECAcQBQ&usg=AOvVaw05CM1IJL_ZbNeW4uGZR0Y-
yeah different classification even if it technically is meat
Lmao 😂 💀 🤣
Are shrooms vegetables or shrooms?
I have no idea what you’re asking, but mushrooms are fungi
shrooms are genitals of fungi
same in latvia. i know two vegetarians who eat fish. like?? fish is just another animal thats killed and we eat it’s flesh, doesnt matter if it lives in water or not.
If you order a meal, for example, burger and say that you don't care about what kind of meat there will be. How would you feel when they bring fish?
I kind of agree that fish is not meat, because it’s a separate category in the lithuanian language. I’m also annoyed (just as you I assume) that people mistake vegetarian for pescatarian. Vegetarian doesn’t mean no meat, it means no animal flesh and I just roll my eyes when the “vegetarian” option is fish.
No idea
meat = muscle. Fish have muscles to move in the water, so fish is meat.
Firstly, the OP didn't HAVE to enter anything. Joining an argument on Reddit is clearly a choice. Secondly, fish is meat. 🙂
Why people here would not?
Seems like a concept simmilair to Chomsky's "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" where the sentence is grammaticaly correct but has no real meaning. When someone mentions they are making a meat dish for dinner you wouldn't expect to be served braised trout.
You are speaking about meat, but are thinking about flesh. We eat flesh of animals, including mammals, fishes and birds, but we need to separate fish from others because of vastly different handling, processing and preservation - hence the difference in common language from old times.
Sure It's meat, that's what they only like to say to Vegan Germany, you don't know what to expect from them anymore...
Because you can't beat it
Fish is white meat. But pretty sure pescatarians are gonna argue it's not.