Bad Restaurant Review - WWYD?

[foodcritic]

NC for this on the off chance someone works out who we are and decides to do someone similar...

We have a small independent restaurant, been established over 10 years, lots of lovely regular customers, and always grateful for new customers. Many of these come due to our good reviews on various sites such as TripAdvisor, Google, etc. Also we do a fair bit (probably weekly) on local community Facebook pages which also attracts new people and reminds existing customers of what we are doing by way of Chef Specials etc.

Last week a Google review went on with 2 stars - and a comment along the lines of 'sad to see xxxxx on the menu'. (xxxx being a dish that some people find unacceptable, others specifically come to our restaurant to eat as it's difficult to find in supermarkets or other restaurants)

There is a name so I know exactly who has written this, and she's a local person who has never eaten at our restaurant. She has on occasion also used a crying emoji when she sees posts for certain dishes on Facebook that i have posted. (Suspect she's not a meat eater)

So - I have responded to the review with a similarly short comment, basically saying how disappointing someone has given a review based not on eating in the restaurant and experiencing our food/service, but based on a specific menu item.

Reviews are so important to small businesses, we can't afford massive advertising campaigns, and although this one hasn't really put a dent in our overall rating it's so frustrating. But I'm now wondering if I shouldn't have responded as I've made us look as petty as her. What would you have done?

No I would not say it was rape, I would say that consent is formed through an animals body-language, vocalisation and scent marking in the wild. As animals
do not have the vocal ability to consent.
Comparing mating in the wild to a human penetrating an animals anus and vagina with a rod and arm seem relatively far apart in my opinion.
Can you now answer my question?

It should be noted that for successful conception through AI to take place the cow (or whichever female animal) will have been scanned as being 'in heat' or 'in season' so would be likely to be receptive to being mated by a bull if one were around. Cows at the wrong point of the oestrus cycle to conceive wouldn't be inseminated as it would be a waste of bull semen.

(Incidentally monsteramunch pedigree bitches are increasingly bred using AI, as it's a way of breeders to access semen from dogs across the world, and so widening the gene pool with the aim of producing healthier dogs less prone to breed-related health conditions.)

@Coffeeandcake15 indifferent

You’ve asked me to explain something to you and you’ve answered my question with, indifferent?

Can I ask how you feel about the murder, abuse and rape of humans and the removal of a human baby at birth from a human mother?
Do you also feel indifferent about that?

Absolutely not

You asked me how I felt about that video - I answered.

You've explained how you distinguish between rape for AI and not rape for wild animals, thank you for answering my question

I’m aware they only inseminate cows at their peak time, I'm also aware they’re impregnated more than they would in the wild in order to reproduce at much faster levels for humans to drink their milk and eat their flesh.

You’re not willing to expand on why you’re indifferent to animal suffering?

Nope

I'm only asking from a place of ignorance and watching David Attenborough programmes, but it often looks like the male animals take what they want and then bugger off

OP, despite appearances and despite the males often being bigger, stronger, more colourful or whatever, in mammals at least it's the female who almost always controls when sex takes place, by coming into season. Mammals have an oestrus cycle, just like our menstrual cycle minus the menstruation part (in most other mammals, anyway) and the females are in heat for a short time each cycle, which is when sexual activity takes place. If a hopeful male approaches when a female is not in season he will find himself bitten / kicked / scratched / rejected in some forceful, often physical way.

For example, if you watched a group of, say, feral horses consisting of a stallion and a few mares, you'd see that for most of the time they just grazed peacefully. Every so often, usually beginning in spring, there'd be a burst of sexual activity and the stallion would repeatedly mount and cover one (or more, depending if a couple came into season at the same time) of the mares over a course of roughly three days...then on day four or thereabouts you'd see the mare bare her teeth at him or threaten to kick him when he got too close, because the 'heat' part of her cycle was now over. This would repeat until all of the mares had been covered and they'd all go back to grazing peacefully together either for the eleven months that is the gestation period of a foal, if all the mares were now pregnant, or until about three weeks later when a mare reached the 'in season' part of her cycle and was receptive to the stallion again.

Busy running a restaurant and hoping for some good reviews from my current customers

It’s hypocritical to be indifferent to the suffering of animals and not humans.
I guess this highlights the selfishness and greed of a lot of humans.

@Coffeeandcake15 disagree because I believe there is a distinct difference between animals and humans, however I respect your view and understand you don't feel this way. Have a great day

A distinct difference because one can speak out and one can’t? Surely that makes animals more vulnerable?
Or their ability to feel pain? Yet we both have working nervous systems.
They are cognitively aware emotionally, this is reflected in their body language and communication when their babies are stolen from them.

I realise that because you make money from animals, it’s easier to mentally separate the two but it doesn’t make it morally right. How can we as a species agree it’s wrong to abuse, rape and murder humans but accept it amongst the animal species.

@foodcritic Just got to say you’ve kept your cool better than I would regarding the baiting on the thread from some.

Hope your reviews are fabulous today 🤞🏽

I don’t see baiting, I see questioning someone’s thinking. It’s no different from trying to see someone’s thinking when they have an opposing view.

@Coffeeandcake15

if your child grew up (presumably you’d raise them vegan) but decided to turn meat eater and infact a passionate meat eater… would you disown them?

What gives you the impression id disown a child of myn who chose to eat meat, everyone makes their own ethical choice based on what they feel is best.

Baiting? She was asked questions, answered them and then the asker did the "too cool to care" response.

If anyone was baiting, it was OP. If she doesn't give a shit about the answers, why did she ask?

So that’s a no then

you would accept there decision to become a meat eater without any judgement?

I remember you from another thread @Coffeeandcake15

I say get rid off a lot of humans, the world would thrive without us.

I guess you’re not including yourself in the “a lot of humans” 😂

”You’re not willing to expand on why you’re indifferent to animal suffering?”

Baiting. Equivalent to “Did you start beating your wife before or afterwards you were married.”

”How can we as a species agree it’s wrong to abuse, rape and murder humans but accept it amongst the animal species.”

Emotive, accusatory language in place of factual language: rape = inseminate, murder = humanely slaughter. Animal abuse does occur on farms, but abusive behaviour exists in all settings and is illegal on farms, just as it is in children’s homes, family homes, hospitals and old people’s homes.

Your language and framing is abusive. Have a nice day.

Abusive, hmmm ok! Again, I was stating facts and questioning someone’s thinking which was clearly contradictory, it’s what people also do in the real world.

I think we all know the answer

Who says I’m judging those who eat meat? I’ve asked questions and stated facts.