SC - re: accommodating at feasts

[Micaylah]

- -----Original Message-----
From: kat <kat at kagan.com>


>Sometimes, however, it *is* necessary to tell little white fibs about
such
>things in order to spare hurt feelings.


This is inherantly wrong. You are lying no matter whose feelings are
going to be hurt and perpetuating the intolerance in Cooks (myself
included) for whiney people who have false allergies (inevitably it
will come out) and then endangers people who have real allergies. As
well, I have as yet, to encounter a cook who takes it personal when
someone claims they don't like X ingredient.

>So really, it's all in how you handle it.  I think that it's
acceptable for
>Royalty, or anyone else in an "on-stage" position, to claim allergy
in
>order to avoid the appearance of rejecting the cook's offerings in
full
>public view.  I also think that handling it with grace and good humor
is a
>necessary element.


How you handle it? Yes I agree. But I think you have the angle wrong.
It shouldn't be how you handle your food preferences. Shouldn't it
read, how COOKS handle being told a person doesn't like (whether it be
a mild dislike or projectile dislike) a food. I still can't figure out
why one would take it personally. Now, if there are
preferences/dislikes/allergies present in the reigning Royals then I
feel it is up to the Cook to find these things out BEFORE compiling
her/his menu from the chamberlain/royal liasion/whatever. Its not like
Tin Hats pop up at events unannounced.

Micaylah

============================================================================

To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".

============================================================================