Talk:Freeganism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

where it says theres no examples of being totaly dependent on free food: what about bums who live in the street with no jobs? they eat garbage and free church food

I'll take that out

Contents 1 Web hits 2 HOW TO SAFELY BE A FREEGAN? 3 It should be added that... 4 What about.... 5 Sources needed 6 The F word 7 FNB and CNN 8 Intro 9 On "Popular mostly among North American anti-capitalists" 10 This whole "article" is asinine 11 vegan responses 12 Intro again 13 In France 14 Costing the Earth 15 Reorganization 16 Buddhism 17 Theft 18 Criticisms section 19 problems

[edit] Web hits

This term has ZERO hits on Google! Freaganism and neo-freaganism both have a bunch of mentions, but not in this sense... they seem to be philosophical/logical theories. I vote that this page be deleted as garbage. KJ 01:37 Feb 20, 2003 (UTC)

Further to that, 'freeganism' has 25 google hits and seems to be what the OP was aiming at. However it also seems to be an invented term with little backing. KJ

Try "freegan." It's got some hits but not a lot. I've heard it, anyway, in the SE U.S., and not from wikipedia. Koyaanis Qatsi

I just got 1590 hits for "freeganism", and 3780 for "freegan", all on Google. Thats hardly zero, I'd say. --El.tula 11:44, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I run the website freegan.info, and we've gotten as much as 70,000 hits in a single day. 4.250.36.56 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Fregganism was featured on Rocketboom, it's not a major new program, but as far as vblogs go it is significant. Jon513 21:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Google hits update: "about 93,300 for freegan", "about 31,000 for freeganism." Seems like the terms are experiencing a significant rate of growth in usage. —GrantNeufeld 17:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It was mentioned on Gordon Ramsay's F Word, that well known friend of Veganism ;-) but that probably exaplins why there was a lot more interest (its where I heard the term and am thus reding about it having seen a repeat) Ant

[edit] HOW TO SAFELY BE A FREEGAN?

I am somewhat confused as to how you can do this safely? Eg eat by dates etc and the possible consumption of meet!Could someone answer this query or at least point me into the right direction as to where I can get these answers???? YOU CAN EMAIL ME AT: SEANWHITE100@AOL.COM

There is no way to "safely" be a freegan. Eating trash is unhealthy and disgusting. - Stancel 20:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

... Not if the "trash" is consumed before it reaches the garbage -- say, food from a buffet that at the end of the day was going to the dumpster. This is an excellent example of freeganism -- literally, consuming food that would otherwise be completely wasted. There is nothing unhealthy about the above example; if the food was safe for customers an hour ago, it's safe for a freegan before it reaches the garbage can. Lobsterkins 22:56, 29 June 2005 (UTC)

How brainwashed are you? Most trash cans aren't that dirty, especially big corporate dumpsters. And best before dates are more cautious than necessary because we live in an age of lawsuits. Most food is good past the date. I had a soda that "expired" 2 years ago last night and I'm fine. A lot of our "rules of hygiene" are ridiculous. It's not easy to deprogram the voice in your head that says gross, but most things we consider unhygienic aren't gonna hurt you. Think of the 5 second rule. How do you justify eating food off the ground but not out of a trash can (not to say you practice the 5 second rule, but many do)? And like I said, most trash cans aren't that bad, depending on what it thrown in there. BTW, I'm not even freegan, but I do practice occasional freegan behaviors. I got a york peppermint patty out of the trash at my job. It was still wrapped and perfectly good, the only reason it was thrown out was because it was smashed. Wow, how horrible huh? I ate that a month ago and am fine. And to use an old cliche, "one man's trash is another man's treasure".

Supermarkets routinely throw away produce that is perfectly good but is perhaps no longer attractive enough to sell, or even if they simply have too much of a certain item to sell before it'll spoil. It is entirely possible to get this before it goes in the dumpster, simply by befriending someone in the produce department and asking nicely. --Mumblingmynah 09:10, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Here is a webpage on freegan food safety: http://freegan.info/?page=safety

all this ignores the fact that food can be washed. if that apple is in a dirty dumpster, just wash it before you eat it. no big beal. Murderbike 20:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It should be added that...

This is viewed by most (including me) in the vegan and vegetarian community as some kind of stupid joke. I think that freeganism is so stupid and disgusting and there are other ways to make a difference than eating trash. Perhaps you could add this under a "criticism of freeganism" section. - Stancel 18:17 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

First, its unclear what you mean by a joke. Do you mean you disapprove of the practice? Or do you see it a hoax. If the latter, I can assure you that freeganism is very much a real thing. Second, what is your basis for saying "most?" Please don't confuse personal biases with factual information 4.250.36.56 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Great, you think something is stupid. Hardly makes it "most of the community." Most vegans I know, even if they're not freegan themselves, support freeganism. --Teri

In my experience, the term more often refers to those who simply aren't strict vegans. They won't directly buy anything non-vegan, but (for example) would eat a non-vegan dinner at a friend's house without raising a fuss. Dumpster diving and trying to get all your food for free is a whole different thing.--Mumblingmynah 09:06, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

This is an incorrect definition of freeganism, one of several floating around. The definitive work on the subject is Why Freegan? (http://freegan.info/?page=WhyFreegan), which is largely responsible for popularizing the term. Unfortunately years of misuse by detractors have led to lots of misconceptions as to the acutal meaning of the term. 4.250.36.56 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I would put it that, through years of misuse, a new definition (that is, "almost-vegan") has become part of popular usage (in vegan/vegetarian circles, anyway), and this ought to be better acknowledged in the article. Although this new usage isn't the 'original' sense of the word, it is common enough that writing it off as simply 'incorrect' isn't very helpful. 66.185.0.211 05:42, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

what's incorrect is the definition offered by adam weissman, who runs freegan.info and who seems to have created an entirely new definition for the word all by himself. he wants to include the term to describe practices that have nothing to do with food -- such as squatting, train-hopping, and other subcultural practices he seems to know little about, other than they're "free." the idea that "freegan" no longer has anything specifically to do with the word "vegan" is just plain wrong, and no one else has ever used the term to describe anything other than food.

further, weissman seems to be promoting his new definition as part of a campaign of self-promotion -- of which his complete altering of this very wikipedia page, on more than one occasion, is a part of. after all, it's great advertising for his website. weissman's agenda strikes this reader as highly suspect, and i see no reason why this one man should be allowed to redefine the term just because it's convenient for his own self-aggrandizement.

[edit] What about....

.....Shoplifting? I would consider that freegan if you get by on shoplifting, but then again, you are still taking a good that would not have been thrown away. It depends on your idea and reason. But do others consider that a part of it?

I would say no, if one is freegan in order to avoid supporting the production and sale of non-vegan foods. Stealing food still creates an economic demand for it. If you just want free food, on the other hand, then go for it. --Mumblingmynah 07:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

yeah, you do create demand for the product, but at the same time, you are inflicting economic damage on the corporation. As the person below states, it's a grey area.

Again, refer to Why Freegan, which suggests that this is a grey point.(http://freegan.info/?page=WhyFreegan) 4.250.36.56 02:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't see how shoplifting or other theft could be considered freegan since not only does it possibly increase costs to consumers, exacerbating the exploitation of the working individual, companies are not beyond increasing prices beyond reason under the guise of recouping costs incurred by shoplifters.

[edit] Sources needed

Some of this info needs sources:

• They are also concerned about the enormous volume of waste generated by a society that produces more than it actually uses.
• Freegans see the pressure to maintain employment in order to purchase commodities and pay for necessities like food and shelter as a form of oppression. They view the advertising-driven push to constantly purchase new commodities as a form of manipulation for profit.

I'm not disputing the accuracy of these statements, but without references, it sounds like a personal opinion. --Mumblingmynah 07:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The F word

There was a 5-minute slot on freeganism on Gordon Ramsey's The F word on the UK's Channel 4, Nov 4, 2005. (Should be available as a torrent.) A food journalist in conversation with a freegan, and then they went and found some discarded food from the sandwich shops in central London, and then had a picnic in the park with this food. The food journalist was from the Times - I expect he wasn't used to eating food from dustbins! Trious 00:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FNB and CNN

I added a link to an article on CNN.com and I am about to put Food not bombs back into the see also list. I don't know how to comment on the history page to say why, so I'm doing it here. If anyone knows how to comment on the history page, tell me. But yeah, FNB is relevant since a large amount of the food FNB serves is dumpster-dived, at least in my town. I am pretty sure that is the case all over too. So I am adding it back in.

[edit] Intro

I reverted the recent changes to the intro by 24.62.190.143 back to the previous edit. It was not very descriptive and was not in line with the most common definition of freeganism.

Freegans are people who employ alternative strategies for living based on limited participation in the conventional economy and minimal consumption of resources. Freegans embrace community, generosity, social concern, freedom, cooperation, and sharing in opposition to a society based on materialism, moral apathy, competition, conformity, and greed..

This describes a whole lot of people who are not freegans. The definition must include reference to the fact that "freegan" comes from the words "free" and "vegan", and why. Mycota 20:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On "Popular mostly among North American anti-capitalists"

Hi all,

I just thought I'd add a comment about freeganism being primarily a movement by North American anti-capitalists. In fact, my first exposure to what is here called freeganism was a film by Agnes Varda whose English title is "The Gleaners and I". The film begins with the Jean-Francois Millet painting of women gathering wheat after the harvest, showing that there is a long history of people collecting what is discarded by others. Then she continues with an exploration of those in the French countryside who search already-reaped fields for discarded vegetables, and moves on to those who search the markets and dumpsters in urban centres (especially Paris) with the same objective.

"Gleaning" is protected by French law and has been for a very long time. I am sure that many other countries also protect the rights of citizens who wish to gather food that is unwanted by the owners of the fields or of the market stalls.

Of course, freeganism is not only about food. It is also about gathering other useful objects that society has cast off. Varda also explores this phenomenon in her documentary. This is a wonderful film and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in freeganism beyond North America's borders. Essie Ash 02:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This whole "article" is asinine

It should be removed. Anyone who really believes the bullshit they're selling is running a commune somewhere. The article is pure bullshit.

What's wrong with communes? Just b/c you don't like the politics of these (intelligent) people doesn't mean an article on a notable cultural phenomenon should be removed. Anyone who really believes the Bullshit justification for the war in Iraq is probably not very thoughtful, but that doesn't mean the article on the war in Iraq should be deleted. The Ungovernable Force 01:24, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, the article has merit and will grow over time. The number of people choosing to drop out of the "system" via freegan means is growing. Freeganism could be called simple living libertarianism instead, but it is a bit of a mouthful. --86.133.21.82 08:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vegan responses

added a short paragraph on some typical vegan responses. this is not meant to be hostile and was done in the spirit of npov. opted not to put it under its own criticisms sub heading as it is v. short. included reference to derogatory term "opportunivore" because it is in wide usage. frymaster 20:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Intro again

The current intro is wrong; freeganism is not "commonly understood as the practice of abstaining from any consumer goods". The previous intro, and the one to which I reverted, is correct:

Freeganism is commonly understood as the practice of abstaining from the consumption of foods that contain animal products, except in those cases where the food is obtained for free. The word "freegan" is a portmanteau of the words free and vegan.

There are people who may abstain from "any consumer goods", but the term to describe them is not "freegan". Some freegans may also abstain from "any consumer goods", but this does not describe freeganism as a whole. Kellen ^T 09:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

well, then the intro should mention the competing ideas. I've always understood it as trying to not buy anything. The Ungovernable Force 17:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

You've understood it incorrectly then. I know of no term for people who "try not to buy anything", if you know what they might be called, it would certainly be appropriate to compare it to freeganism in the intro. I'm going to revert to the version of the intro that correctly describes freeganism. Kellen ^T 18:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Since this is the first hit on google for "freeganism", I think I probably am not incorrect. The truth is, there are probably two competing definitions (I'm pretty sure the article used to reflect that). I'm changing the intro to reflect that there are two competing definitions and I'm adding a factual accuracy dispute tag until this can be correctly worked out.The Ungovernable Force 04:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

If you read down in the article, you'll see, at the end of the "basic concepts" section:

There is some disagreement about the definition of freeganism. Some freegans consume meat, as long as they don't pay for it; others still abstain from meat even when they find it for free. Some freegans, represented by the freegan.info website claim that "freeganism is a broad-based lifestyle ethic encompassing food, housing, transportation, clothing, and all other necessities of daily life"; however, the addition of many non-food-related items to the definition of freegan does not reflect the most common historical usage of the term.

The term "freegan" in general usage is about diet. The other use of the term is mentioned in the article already, and I would argue, not really representative of reality. Freegans obviously do acquire other items from dumpster diving, but so does anyone else who bothers to look in the trash. In my memory, of the (over 10 but less than 20) self-described freegans I have known personally, all of them purchased consumer goods on a regular basis. What I think sites like freegan.info are doing is trying to push the idea that one can find many useful things in the trash, and this is true, but strictly living based upon that principle is incredibly rare at best.

Lastly, if you were yourself an anticapitalist dumpster diver who never dumpstered food, you would not call yourself "freegan". Likewise if you dumpstered food but had no regard for vegan ethics. Kellen ^T 17:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Can you cite a source that says the term has historically refered to food only? The Ungovernable Force 03:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In France

A three minutes report today about New York freegans on the evening news of the main French television channel, TF1.Hektor 18:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Any links so we can put info in? That's pretty cool. The Ungovernable Force 04:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Costing the Earth

The BBC have just broadcast a 30 hour program on Freeganism on their Costing the Earth Show you can listen again to it. I won't link on main page as the link will only work for the next week. --Salix alba (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganization

I added some subheadings, moved some info around, and fixed a bunch of other miscellaneous minor things. Any comment? Mdotley 20:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Buddhism

It might be nice to make note of the similarity between the historical practice of Buddhist vegetarianism and the Freegan ethical argument.

Are all Buddhists vegetarians?

If meat was what a householder chose to offer, it was to be accepted without discrimination or aversion. To reject such an offering would be an offense against hospitality and would deprive the householder of an opportunity to gain merit -- and it could not benefit the animal, because it was already dead. Even the Jains may have had a similar outlook during the same period of history, despite the strict doctrine of ahimsa.

-Reagle 22:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theft

Since when was stealing considered freeganism? I see shoplifting is mentioned, and later under criticisms theft is used as a basis for critique of the lifestyle. How can anyone calling themselves a freegan steal? It doesn't prevent waste and adds to costs just like buying the good would, only at someone else's expense. Besides that, it's completely unethical. I agree with the critique of theft as a means of freeganism, but I don't think it should even be related to the subject. The subject should be removed from the article unless any credible source can show that shoplifting etc are held to be part of the freegan ethic. Richard001 07:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

while i can't agree that theft if "completely unethical", i definitely agree that shoplifting is not freegan in any way. every freegan i've ever known understands that stealing meat still creates a demand for the meat, therefore not solving the problem that freeganism trys to solve. Murderbike 20:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticisms section

Okay, the criticisms section here has mutated into a point-counter-point argument about freeganism. the purpose of criticisms section should be primarily to present criticism and only secondarily to rebut said criticisms. addressing the criticisms should be done in the main body of the article. i plan on addressing this sometime in the future. -- frymaster 19:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] problems

This article seems to be somewhat abandoned, and has definitely devolved into a mess. The external link section is full of spam, also. I'll probably rewrite later today or tommorow, so nobody freak out. Natalie 16:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)