[Sca-cooks] What would you advise?

[Philippa Alderton]

--- Rosine <rosine at sybercom.net> wrote:

>    We have a newly-arrived member of the barony who
> insists on eating
> onboard. She doesn't consult with the cook
> beforehand (she and her husband
> also eat as part of the "baronial mess" when we're
> camping), but she has an
> allergy to onions that she says is so extreme that
> her throat will swell if
> she kisses her husband after *he* eats a dish
> prepared with onions.


> Are we going over-board in catering to this
> sigular sensitivity? (I
> must add that at our last event, the feast cook was
> not informed of the
> girl's allergy and was considerably taken aback when
> on the day of the event
> she was treated to stunned disbelief that she'd
> planned a menu that involved
> onions - and the girl made a quietly public scene by
> breaking into tears in
> her husband's arms in the main hall when he left the
> kitchen to tell her
> what the menu was... but that could have been merely
> stress and dismay, and
> not artifice.)I'm at a loss as to how to address
> this, and at some point,
> as the baroness, I'm going to have to. So does
> anyone have any suggestions?

Well, I don't have any sympathy for the girl. Dunno
about anyone else, but it's fairly obvious to me that
the girl is playing power games.

I'm usually perfectly willing to accomodate a person's
allergies- in SPCA camp, for example last year, we had
diabetics to cook for, as well as a wheat allergy, and
Margali's mushroom allergy- although I do get rather
irritated with people who refuse certain foods from
choice, rather than physical necessity.

But, if you have an allergy, it's up to you to deal
with it, not make everyone else change their lives to
suit you.

You said she insisted on eating on board. That's her
choice- if she can't eat anything, too bad. As we've
mentioned in the last couple of days, other folk with
far more extensive allergies have accomodated
themselves- she can too.

Stefan was mentioning a certain lady who went into
such a tizzy because someone else in another camp was
grilling fish, that she sent her husband's squires
over to destroy the gentle's food.

I'm aware of another couple who went to feast, and
informed the cook that the only thing the cook could
use to season the food was parsley, because one or the
other was allergic to or disliked all other spices.

This is not courtesy, this is neurotic behavior.
Courtesy goes both ways, it isn't supposed to be
something where one person gives, and the other takes,
and this is what this person is doing.

In AA and other behavioral modification situations,
there is the addict (alcohol, drugs, violence,
gambling, whatever) and the people around them. People
who "help" the addict with their addiction, by buying
them booze, or making excuses for their unacceptable
behavior, are called "enablers" because they enable
the person to continue with their addictive behavior.

Do you really want to have a barony of enablers?

Sure, there's nothing wrong with making a couple of
onion-free dishes- you shouldn't have any particular
ingredient in everything anyway. But that doesn't mean
you need to encourage and support discourteous
behaviors of this nature. And, a little bit at a time
is how most addicts develop their stable of enablers.

This is the Society for Creative Anachronism, NOT the
Supporters of Compulsive Addicts.

Phlip, who having had her daily rant, will now try to
think up a good joke or two to play on the
undeserving.....


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/