News: IT'S THE 2ND ANNUAL GUATEMALA LIBRARY PROJECT BOOK DRIVE!    LOOKING FOR DONATIONS OF SCIENCE BOOKS THIS YEAR.    Check it out in the "Extending the Hand of Kindness" folder or here: http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=139832.msg3372084#msg3372084   

  • December 17, 2017, 06:14:00 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?  (Read 28652 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

iridaceae

  • Boring in real life as well
  • Member
  • Posts: 3573
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #90 on: January 05, 2016, 07:22:53 AM »
Not for the entirity of the wedding they don't.
Nothing to see here.

HannahGrace

  • Member
  • Posts: 1291
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #91 on: January 05, 2016, 07:33:35 AM »
Not for the entirity of the wedding they don't.

But we have no evidence that the menu was dictated for the guests for however long they were at the resort. 

Hmmmmm

  • Member
  • Posts: 8917
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #92 on: January 05, 2016, 07:37:13 AM »
Not for the entirity of the wedding they don't.

Why are people so convinced that the only food available to guests for the 4 days were the food offerings at the planned breakfasts, lunch, and dinners. It was a resort, not a deserted island. I've never been to a resort that didn't have some type of restaurant or snack stand available during most of the day.

I've attended many a management/business seminar that were multi-day events with all meals catered as part of the event. Daily "continental breakfast" of juice, coffee, muffins, bagels and fruit does not meet my preference as breakfast foods, but that's the standard. So if I need protein in the morning that doesn't come in the form of overly sugared yogurt or cream cheese, then I go get it. I would have much preferred her offerings of the juice bar and the bliss balls (which when I looked at the recipe I found to be high protein snacks). A carrot/kale juice and a bliss ball sounds like a great way to start the day with the necessary protein with carbs that aren't just sugar and flour.


shortstuff

  • Member
  • Posts: 423
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #93 on: January 05, 2016, 10:07:26 AM »

And I think it would be very rude and seem PA or even hostile for a bride's parents to serve, say, nonhalal food at the reception when they know the groom's family eats only halal, even if an alternative is available; it ignores that this is an important family event for them, too, even though they're not hosting. 

Question about this quote and what I bolded: does the alternate mean that a halal option was available, but the entire reception wasn't halal?  Because if that is the hypothetical situation, I'd think it's perfectly reasonable.  If I'm not understanding right, then apologies for assuming, but I still think providing the option is considered acceptable good hospitality.

For me, personally, my idea of good hospitality is providing lots and lots of options.  My wedding had entrees of chicken, beef, salmon, and eggplant (veggie option).  I had healthy food, naturally gluten free, naturally veggie, naturally lactose free, plus the entrees could be changed to accommodate allergies. 

A vegetarian friend chose to have both veggie and meat options at her wedding.  I wouldn't have minded 1 veggie meal, but I was honestly surprised how much meat was around!  I assuming this, but it appears she planned the majority of the food for the majority of the guests, but had many options for the few other vegetarians attending. 

This could maybe relate to the healthy wedding in the OP, but this last wedding story reminded me: is it rude to not somehow tell people what they're eating?  At my friend's wedding, the vegetarians had to look up the menu online to figure out of there was meat in dishes, since there were no menu cards, and the servers did not explain the food.  Would it be rude not to tell someone what is in a bliss ball, for the healthy wedding? 

magicdomino

  • Member
  • Posts: 5806
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #94 on: January 05, 2016, 10:38:01 AM »
I Googled bliss balls.  Essentially, they are raw cookies.  Nuts or seeds are ground up with something sticky like honey or dates, then shaped into balls.

http://www.foodmatters.tv/articles-1/chocolate-bliss-balls-recipe

Nut warnings would be needed, since recipes can vary a lot.

Lynn2000

  • Member
  • Posts: 8322
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #95 on: January 05, 2016, 11:22:32 AM »
This could maybe relate to the healthy wedding in the OP, but this last wedding story reminded me: is it rude to not somehow tell people what they're eating?  At my friend's wedding, the vegetarians had to look up the menu online to figure out of there was meat in dishes, since there were no menu cards, and the servers did not explain the food.  Would it be rude not to tell someone what is in a bliss ball, for the healthy wedding?

I think it's one of those things that's on a spectrum. If you know a specific guest has nut allergies, I think it's pretty easy to print up a little card saying "caution, contains peanuts" for the applicable dishes, or in some other way make sure that specific person has the information available. If they're coming to your wedding and you know this medical information about them, I'm guessing they're someone fairly close to you and you would naturally want to help them out regardless of etiquette.

However, there may be allergies etc. in the crowd that the HC doesn't know about. I don't think they're obligated to post an ingredients list for every single dish. I think there should be a way for a guest to find out the information if they need to know, like by asking a server, but that may not be entirely under the HC's control. Ultimately if a guest has restrictions, it's the guest's responsibility to prepare for that (like by bringing their own snacks to eat discreetly), and their responsibility to make reasonable decisions about whether they can eat something.

To me it's a balance. If you have restrictions, more information helps you to make good choices, meaning there's less chance you'll "bother" the HC with your questions (or a medical emergency!), and more chance you'll eat what you can and have a good time. But food served at a reception is not always entirely under the HC's control, so there's a limit to what they can do even when they want to.
~Lynn2000

Celany

  • Member
  • Posts: 1661
  • the soul of a cat, in the body of a person...
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #96 on: January 05, 2016, 11:44:56 AM »
I found the food options to not be objectionable and overall agree w/PPs that said it's not rude to display your food tastes at your wedding. It sounds like they had a range of options that sounded tasty as well as healthy.

Honestly, I took more umbrage with the parts spliced in from Amanda Blair and her rejection of eating healthy on your wedding day. A direct quote:

“Go hard on the Tiramisu, rip into the lamb cutlets, knock yourself out on the profiteroles, eat sliced white bread and if you want to eat nothing but Jatz crackers and an entire tub of Kraft French Onion Dip, today is the day my friends,”

I'm going to try to put this delicately, but on my (theoretical) wedding day, when I'm (presumably) wearing a giant dress that is not easy to take off or lift up, and I'm dealing with wedding jitters, nerves about everything going well, and potentially having guest personalities clash, I'm not going to eat a whole pile of things that could cause a queasy stomach and might create some embarrassing after effects. If nothing else, the healthy eating suggestions that Jessica Sepel is promoting would help to settle a stomach and have a better chance (for many people) of being...processed well.
I have studied many philosophers and many cats. The wisdom of cats is infinitely superior. ~ Hippolyte Taine

Spring Water on Sundays

  • We will never rest, fighting the battle of who could care less.
  • Member
  • Posts: 1987
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #97 on: January 05, 2016, 11:52:43 AM »
I found the food options to not be objectionable and overall agree w/PPs that said it's not rude to display your food tastes at your wedding. It sounds like they had a range of options that sounded tasty as well as healthy.

Honestly, I took more umbrage with the parts spliced in from Amanda Blair and her rejection of eating healthy on your wedding day. A direct quote:

“Go hard on the Tiramisu, rip into the lamb cutlets, knock yourself out on the profiteroles, eat sliced white bread and if you want to eat nothing but Jatz crackers and an entire tub of Kraft French Onion Dip, today is the day my friends,”

I'm going to try to put this delicately, but on my (theoretical) wedding day, when I'm (presumably) wearing a giant dress that is not easy to take off or lift up, and I'm dealing with wedding jitters, nerves about everything going well, and potentially having guest personalities clash, I'm not going to eat a whole pile of things that could cause a queasy stomach and might create some embarrassing after effects. If nothing else, the healthy eating suggestions that Jessica Sepel is promoting would help to settle a stomach and have a better chance (for many people) of being...processed well.

I really enjoy the hypocrisy of her above suggestion. She's saying, "Eat whatever you want because it's your day!" while mocking a bride who is doing exactly that.

Kimblee

  • I look good in white....
  • Member
  • Posts: 6170
  • "Hugs don't go Boom." "They don't? Since when?"
    • My Blog
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #98 on: January 05, 2016, 10:05:47 PM »
A friend of mine and her daughters have onion allergy. Very serious ones (the oldest girl looks like someone slit her throat, because someone did. She had a reaction and due to the school brushing it off when she finally got medical care they had to cut the skin of her neck open to find where to put in a breathing tube. She was in a coma at the time so at least she doesn't remember it. The scar is pretty noticeable though.)

Their aunt asked Friend and the girls to be a bridesmaid and flower girls in her wedding. They agreed but Friend reminded the bride of the girls' allergies, was told it's fine. Things would be taken care of.

Friend hurried over to the bride and told her the food had onion and got a blank shrug, So What? Friend said she would have to leave and feed her girls and was told "Okay that's fine, they already did their job."

The girls were hurt that their aunt couldn't care less about whether they got to enjoy the reception and Bride is furious because the girls refused to come back the next day and pose for wedding party pictures.

Could've been avoided by either picking an entree without onion in it, or just buying three plates of something else. But some of the family is taking Bride's side because she shouldn't have to cater to everyone's preferences and Friend should have made the girls dress up again for the pictures. They had an obligation when they agreed to be flower girls.

 :o >:( :o  What?!

"Preferences" : last time I checked, having an allergy, and a potentially life ending one at that, is not a "preference". Wow. I have no words for the bride or the relatives taking her side. (Well, I do have words, but they're not appropriate for use here).

I don't agree with the Bride. (Don't know her all that well but I'm still seeing the fallout on the book of faces.)

But if it makes a difference, the oldest girl's reaction that led to the neck cutting wasn't at the wedding, it was a year or two beforehand at school. (She goes to a different school now) But the bride did know about the severity of the allergy and its cause.

Kimblee

  • I look good in white....
  • Member
  • Posts: 6170
  • "Hugs don't go Boom." "They don't? Since when?"
    • My Blog
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #99 on: January 05, 2016, 10:12:56 PM »
Quote
Since they are getting married it seems not a stretch to assume her husband loves her, knows about her food preferences, respects them.  My BIL is vegetarian, his GF is not, but I am pretty confident that due to his moral issues with meat consumption they would have a vegetarian reception. 

Because of my strong beliefs, beyond having a vegetarian wedding, we have a vegetarian home.  The husband eats whatever he wants out of the house, but our house is meat-free.  Everyone who comes over gets plenty to eat.  Nobody ever leaves hungry. 

It's best if people give you good, tasty food, but again a wedding is not a Michelin starred restaurant.  The point of it is not the meal.

That is really true and it's why I'm surprised to seem a lot of discussion of 'options' for guests who have food limitations.  No caterer that I talked to offered more that 2 entree options and while I'm sure some would accommodate it, it would doubtless throw the cost of the reception through the roof.

It seems we sometimes go back and forth by saying sometimes that a couple should throw they wedding they can afford and not start the marriage with a boatload of debt, and then when limited food and drink options are discussed we too easily decide it's 'rude' to not have a menu that leaves 100 guests fully satiated and pleasantly tipsy.

I still think if you KNOW a person coming to your wedding has a absolute food limitation (like an allergy) you should try to give them options.

A friend of mine and her daughters have onion allergy. Very serious ones (the oldest girl looks like someone slit her throat, because someone did. She had a reaction and due to the school brushing it off when she finally got medical care they had to cut the skin of her neck open to find where to put in a breathing tube. She was in a coma at the time so at least she doesn't remember it. The scar is pretty noticeable though.)

Their aunt asked Friend and the girls to be a bridesmaid and flower girls in her wedding. They agreed but Friend reminded the bride of the girls' allergies, was told it's fine. Things would be taken care of. The wedding was exhausting, the wedding party were there when it was still dark outside and the wedding wasn't until afternoon with a long ceremony going into the late afternoon. But the groom's mom brought bagels for their breakfast and assured Friend that they were onion free and she had asked about cross contamination at the shop. (They were indeed fine) That was all they had until evening, but the girls did fine and were waiting patiently for dinner.

At the reception Friend took a bite of her entree (one choice, a chicken dish) and immediately felt her mouth start itching. No sign of onion but her husband when he took a bite went white in the face and ran to keep the girls from trying it.

Friend hurried over to the bride and told her the food had onion and got a blank shrug, So What? Friend said she would have to leave and feed her girls and was told "Okay that's fine, they already did their job."

The girls were hurt that their aunt couldn't care less about whether they got to enjoy the reception and Bride is furious because the girls refused to come back the next day and pose for wedding party pictures.

Could've been avoided by either picking an entree without onion in it, or just buying three plates of something else. But some of the family is taking Bride's side because she shouldn't have to cater to everyone's preferences and Friend should have made the girls dress up again for the pictures. They had an obligation when they agreed to be flower girls.

Er, that's a tracheotomy. No need to call it slitting someone's throat.

Tracheotomy, that's the word I couldn't remember. (I tried googling it but I guess I wasn't using the right words because all I got was stuff about plastic surgery) Although in this case it really was close to slitting, at least visually. They had to cut the skin from one side to the other because they couldn't actually "feel" what they were doing otherwise. (Not sure I'm making sense, this is how it was explained to me when her mother asked me not to make a big fuss when I saw her new stitches.)

I don't actually know what the appropriate term for it (the cut) is, but from what her mother told me it's not usually necessary to do so in a normal tracheotomy and the younger girl also had one placed but didn't have to be cut as much. (She has no scar at all, her sister still has a very noticeable scar across her neck but it's faded a bit now.)

gellchom

  • Member
  • Posts: 3731
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #100 on: January 05, 2016, 10:33:34 PM »

And I think it would be very rude and seem PA or even hostile for a bride's parents to serve, say, nonhalal food at the reception when they know the groom's family eats only halal, even if an alternative is available; it ignores that this is an important family event for them, too, even though they're not hosting. 

Question about this quote and what I bolded: does the alternate mean that a halal option was available, but the entire reception wasn't halal?  Because if that is the hypothetical situation, I'd think it's perfectly reasonable.  If I'm not understanding right, then apologies for assuming, but I still think providing the option is considered acceptable good hospitality.

I would agree for guests in general.  As long as they will be able to get something good to eat, that's adequate hosting.  But I was thinking about the close families.  For example, say the wedding is hosted by the bride's parents.  The groom comes from a family that eats only Halal meat.  If I were the host in that situation, I'd have all the food be either Halal meat or fish or vegetarian. 

Why?  Because this is not just a party, and it's not just a question of everyone being fed well.  Even though, in my example, the bride's parents are the only hosts of the reception, the wedding is equally a major event for the groom's family as for the bride's.  I would not want them to feel like outsiders or even slightly less important or central than our family at such a time.  And in my opinion and experience, even one appetizer with bacon on it will do precisely that.  At the other end of the spectrum, serving pork ribs as the main course, even with a pasta choice available, would get everyone fed, but do you see how it could send a very uncomfortable message?

Quote
For me, personally, my idea of good hospitality is providing lots and lots of options. 

Many people feel this way.  But it isn't a requirement for good hosting or hospitality. Every party need not be, in essence, a buffet or offer a menu of choices or alternate drop, the same as it is perfectly hospitable to offer only one main dish at a dinner party at home.

People with real food restrictions know how to take care of themselves.  We've hosted many events.  Vegetarians and people with allergies or religious restrictions either call or email us ahead to ask if an accommodation is available or else simply eat the things they can, whichever they prefer.  In our experience, too, caterers always are able to improvise vegetarian and these days gluten- and dairy-free plates even if hosts didn't provide choices.

But if you just hate fish or lamb or tofu or don't feel right without carbs or protein at every meal?  It's one meal.  Suck it up, smile, eat what you can, and get a snack on your way home. 

shortstuff

  • Member
  • Posts: 423
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #101 on: January 06, 2016, 10:13:15 AM »

People with real food restrictions know how to take care of themselves.  We've hosted many events.  Vegetarians and people with allergies or religious restrictions either call or email us ahead to ask if an accommodation is available or else simply eat the things they can, whichever they prefer.  In our experience, too, caterers always are able to improvise vegetarian and these days gluten- and dairy-free plates even if hosts didn't provide choices.

But if you just hate fish or lamb or tofu or don't feel right without carbs or protein at every meal?  It's one meal.  Suck it up, smile, eat what you can, and get a snack on your way home.

I agree with this.  Before my group of friends and I were in the position to be able to host each other, I only learned about dietary restrictions when we were out to eat and they asked about allergens, or leaving the cheese off a hamburger.  They never pushed the info onto anyone else, or made it anyone else's "problem."

Of course, once we did start cooking and hosting, I found it super easy to cook a meal that naturally didn't include the allergens.  I've never had a GF friend insist on using the GF substitutes, for example, but then again I never insisted on serving pasta.  I'll even choose to suck it up and miss having meat or carbs at a meal I'm cooking in order to make a guest a great meal. 

Lynn2000

  • Member
  • Posts: 8322
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #102 on: January 06, 2016, 10:24:50 AM »
I would agree for guests in general.  As long as they will be able to get something good to eat, that's adequate hosting.  But I was thinking about the close families.  For example, say the wedding is hosted by the bride's parents.  The groom comes from a family that eats only Halal meat.  If I were the host in that situation, I'd have all the food be either Halal meat or fish or vegetarian. 

Why?  Because this is not just a party, and it's not just a question of everyone being fed well.  Even though, in my example, the bride's parents are the only hosts of the reception, the wedding is equally a major event for the groom's family as for the bride's.  I would not want them to feel like outsiders or even slightly less important or central than our family at such a time.  And in my opinion and experience, even one appetizer with bacon on it will do precisely that.  At the other end of the spectrum, serving pork ribs as the main course, even with a pasta choice available, would get everyone fed, but do you see how it could send a very uncomfortable message?

I think this is a great example, related to the "etiquette vs rude behavior" thread, of how something moves from being an "etiquette" issue to being a "relationship" issue. I think that it's proper etiquette to make sure there are halal meals available, considering the high proportion of guests who practice that. But etiquette would say you can stop there, and serve bacon and pork ribs to everyone else. However our actions don't exist in a vacuum, and "it's proper etiquette" is often cold comfort after feeling offended or hurt. From a relationship point of view, it would be wise to investigate having the entire reception be halal, given the importance of the halal-eating guests (groom and his family). In any particular case, it might prove very difficult logistically or maybe the groom and his family actually wouldn't care; but it shows the bride/her family consider them as equals, even though they aren't actually providing money for this part.
~Lynn2000

kudeebee

  • Member
  • Posts: 2711
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #103 on: January 06, 2016, 11:27:56 AM »

And I think it would be very rude and seem PA or even hostile for a bride's parents to serve, say, nonhalal food at the reception when they know the groom's family eats only halal, even if an alternative is available; it ignores that this is an important family event for them, too, even though they're not hosting. 

Question about this quote and what I bolded: does the alternate mean that a halal option was available, but the entire reception wasn't halal?  Because if that is the hypothetical situation, I'd think it's perfectly reasonable.  If I'm not understanding right, then apologies for assuming, but I still think providing the option is considered acceptable good hospitality.

I would agree for guests in general.  As long as they will be able to get something good to eat, that's adequate hosting.  But I was thinking about the close families.  For example, say the wedding is hosted by the bride's parents.  The groom comes from a family that eats only Halal meat.  If I were the host in that situation, I'd have all the food be either Halal meat or fish or vegetarian. 

Why?  Because this is not just a party, and it's not just a question of everyone being fed well.  Even though, in my example, the bride's parents are the only hosts of the reception, the wedding is equally a major event for the groom's family as for the bride's.  I would not want them to feel like outsiders or even slightly less important or central than our family at such a time.  And in my opinion and experience, even one appetizer with bacon on it will do precisely that.  At the other end of the spectrum, serving pork ribs as the main course, even with a pasta choice available, would get everyone fed, but do you see how it could send a very uncomfortable message?


I think the concept is nice, but should work for both families.

What if the family are farmers, the majority of them pork producers and they enjoy pork at their meals?  While this isn't a religious or cultural objection, should the family not get to enjoy pork at the wedding as well, to feel that their family traditions are important?

If you are bringing together two families with vast differences in religion and culture, there has to be give and take on both sides but one should not get to dominate the other if we truly want both families to feel welcome.  This may mean setting up two buffet lines or having a split at a certain point. It can be done with thought and planning in advance.

Lynn2000

  • Member
  • Posts: 8322
Re: Controversial food choices, is it worth it?
« Reply #104 on: January 06, 2016, 12:11:24 PM »
I think the concept is nice, but should work for both families.

What if the family are farmers, the majority of them pork producers and they enjoy pork at their meals?  While this isn't a religious or cultural objection, should the family not get to enjoy pork at the wedding as well, to feel that their family traditions are important?

If you are bringing together two families with vast differences in religion and culture, there has to be give and take on both sides but one should not get to dominate the other if we truly want both families to feel welcome.  This may mean setting up two buffet lines or having a split at a certain point. It can be done with thought and planning in advance.

Agreed, I think this is why the "relationship" advice would be to discuss the issue between the two families, but not unilaterally make a decision one way or the other, even to err on the side of accommodating the other side. That is, you would still be assuming you know what the other side wants, if you don't actually discuss it, and you may be wrong.

But I think it would be equally wrong for one side to say, "We're providing the money, therefore, we get to have whatever we want to eat." That is, within certain parameters, this would be correct according to etiquette; but would not bode well for future relationships. So it's right in one sense, but wrong in a sense that is arguably larger, more important, and more long-lasting than etiquette.
~Lynn2000


Sorry, this topic is locked. Only admins and moderators can reply.