I agree with Shades and Lynn, maybe even putting it a little stronger. I recently started eating meat after 20 years of being a veggie, and during that time, my favorite place to eat was high-end steak houses, because the side dishes and salads were so yummy. It's not good hosting if the menu makes one person happy and 7 feel deprived.
OP mentioned she's known for her yummy meat dishes, so I have to say I don't get why she'd reconfigure the menu that much to begin with.
Mikayla, I was referring to the bolded statement in your quote. I showed that in a subsequent post.
Did the hostess serve an adequate meal? Yes? Then she was not rude. She's not obligated to serve a meat dish or any other signature dish. It's her choice to do so or not.
In the interests of full disclosure, I am a vegetarian. But what I find rude about the attitude that the hostess "deprived" the majority of her guests is that hints at entitlement on the part of any of the 7 who are offended. The first hint I got that someone felt they were entitled to or would feel deprived of my signature dish, would be the time I'd stop making it for parties altogether. We could insert any other dietary need/choice and I'd feel the same: low fat meal, low carb, gluten-free, low sugar or salt, etc.
I'm another one chiming in because my post was quoted. O'Dell, in the first bolding, I never said or implied the hostess was rude, for the simple reason she wasn't. I just said I would not configure my menu for one person, and that's just a statement of fact. It doesn't mean I'm saying anyone who makes different choices is rude. (I realize someone else used the actual term "rude" but I didn't like being lumped in with that).
On the second part, I strongly disagree that "feeling deprived" means a person is offended or, even worse, entitled. It's just disappointment that a signature dish wasn't there. This is hardly bad etiquette, because we aren't judged on feelings. I've walked into dinner parties where a cook didn't serve one of her sig dishes, and been very disappointed with the menu. Does that make me rude? Not even a little bit. Rudeness comes into play in how I handled it, and I handled it fine, just as I'm sure Snooks did.
You didn't use the word rude, but you did imply that her hosting was not adequate if "7 (of the
feel deprived" because of not having one of her signature dishes. I stand by what I said. If the hostess serves an adequate meal, saying that it's not good hosting because of the lack of one dish is entitled thinking.
Definition of deprived via Google: Suffering a severe and damaging lack of basic material and cultural benefits.
(of a person) Suffering a lack of a specified benefit that is considered important.
Do you really mean to say that *one* dish hoped for dish at a gathering is a basic material and cultural benefit and someone is justified in feeling deprived? Or that the *one* dish is so very important? Or that not getting it is suffering? Unexpressed disappointment is one thing. Feeling deprived over it is something else.
We read about so many examples of bad hosting here. IMO, it's overblown and offensive to suggest that a situation like this is not good hosting because a few people are bummed that a hostess didn't make a dish that they hoped for.