Picky guest. Rude and ill-mannered or within his rights?

[AddToBasket]

Gah. I am throwing a themed dinner party for friends from a particular interest. (A bit like a medieval feast for people from a 12th Century interest group.) The menu is complicated and of the 'Take one plucked flamingo' school of recipes. It's a massive deal and will require military-like organisation to pull off but I'm looking forward to it.

It's at my house but I have a co-host. The partner of the co-host will not eat anything on the menu. There are four options for starter, five for main course, four for pudding. My co-host tells me he eat won't eat any of them.

He's not vegetarian or allergic, he just doesn't like vegetables or anything 'complicated'. I've been asked to serve a plain chicken breast. The menu includes a roast chicken salad (offensive because of watercress) and a plain couscous.

I think it's rude. AIBU?

Jassy no my goal isn't to change everyone, much as I wish people were more open. It's for people to be more tolerant and to not project NT assumptions onto everyone. That seems reasonable doesn't it?

But it doesn't affect them directly - I am not stopping them eating or doing what they want to do. It only affects people because I am not doing what THEY want ME to do. Surely you agree it's not a good idea, or fair, to base your contentment on whether someone else acts in the way you want them to?

I just don't see why the person with ASD had to bow down to the overlords who are NT (okay that was melodramatic but that's how it feels sometimes) all the time

Precisely, Jassy. Lashes is quick to say everyone else is rude, or even nasty , but can't see that if she buggers up evenings out - even requiring friends to hang about waiting for her to eat somewhere else - then that might be rude too. Far from being kindly give and take, her behaviour just sounds self-centred.

How is this thread still running...seriously, can't most of it be boiled down to "everyone is different and that's ok"?

So hard for friends to wait for someone who has a condition...wow much effort such hardship /s

If you honestly think waiting for someone to get food is "rude and self cantered", then you're exactly the sort of person who causes problems in society for anyone who's in the slightest bit different from your idea of normal.

Of course everyone is different. That's ok - but don't go to a bloody roasted peacock evening if you don't like food.

I just don't see why the person with ASD had to bow down to the overlords who are NT (okay that was melodramatic but that's how it feels sometimes) all the time

No it wasn't melodramatic. It was unfortunately a perfect example of your reasoning as well as the rest of the 'them and us' brigade.

Weebirdie the people creating that mentality are the people without ASD. How many times on this thread has

1. food issues don't exist
2. intentional awkwardness (even when myself and other people with ASD have explained how ASD behaviour can look like that)
3. suggestions of excluding the person with ASD
4. claiming ASD is a modern phenomenon
5. calling names because people don't agree
6. suggesting that people with ASD should tell everyone, otherwise it's their fault

Happened? So sorry if I get annoyed when people make such ridiculous comments. Many people in this thread have no desire to understand it. So don't expect me to be pleased with it

It's for people to be more tolerant and to not project NT assumptions onto everyone. That seems reasonable doesn't it?

By the same token, it must be reasonable for ND people not to project ND assumptions onto everyone, mustn't it?

But it doesn't affect them directly - I am not stopping them eating or doing what they want to do. It only affects people because I am not doing what THEY want ME to do. Surely you agree it's not a good idea, or fair, to base your contentment on whether someone else acts in the way you want them to?

Unfortunately (or not), that's the way our society operates. Someone else's behaviour has an impact on how I feel. It's how I've been socialised, perhaps. There are interesting evolutionary arguments for why a lot of co-operative socialisation has come about and the advantages it confers to further social survival.

And so I modify my behaviour, on pretty much a daily basis, because I want other people to have a nice time, or because I want to achieve a particular outcome. . There is usually a conscious or unconscious cost benefit analysis involved. How much do I want to modify my behaviour to take account of theirs? A lot of that will depend on the ultimate goal.

Equally, other people's behaviour will have an impact on me and how I feel. It's something I examine pretty regularly, because sometimes you'll decide the impact of someone's behaviour is too negative (ie being around X always makes me feel bad about myself) that the sensible thing to do is to remove yourself from that situation. Other times it might lead me to think about my own behaviour or assumptions. Again, it depends on what the end goal is. But the bottom line is that we are all constantly modifying our behaviour to try to reach an equilibrium, and understanding how our behaviour affects others.

I may not always feel that someone's response to my behaviour is rational, or the way I would respond. However, I don't think an appropriate response in that situation is 'they're stupid, I'll behave how I want regardless even if they find it negative or upsetting'. I'll try to figure out why it matters to them and proceed accordingly.

And so we're back at your assumption that because you don't think something affects a person directly, it doesn't. You're negating their emotional response because you don't think it's valid. Can you see that it's not very nice to do that?

By the same token, it must be reasonable for ND people not to project ND assumptions onto everyone, mustn't it?

In the context of the subsequent posts that happened while I was composing my epic one, this sounds unreasonably flip and I apologise for that.

I think what I was trying to get across was that I think there should be give and take by everyone - increased understanding and empathy on all sides.

Also worth remembering that there's not a single NT way to behave. There is a broad social framework - but not all NT operate within that framework for various reasons, and that framework allows for a huge swathe of behaviours and assumptions.

Particularly in an increasingly multicultural society.

If we can get the OP discussed from the feminist and transgendered point of we'll have scored a MN hat trick.

limited I'm lolling because when saying that some people with AS could go along with the rules, even if they don't understand them, is just completely in contradiction with what AS is. (Wasn't laughing at you btw, just at the idea!)

As soon as you learn a rule it changes. I'm not diagnosed but definitely have tendencies and when a new work colleague mentioned her husband has Asperger's I could predict things he does so was asking her, "So what order does he iron in?" knowing that he would have an order because, well it's wired not to.

I read about a non verbal child with autism. He had learned the 'rule' that he couldn't help himself to biscuits but if he stood quietly and pointed at the barrel he would be given a biscuit.

So far so good, until dad was gardening one day and glanced in through the kitchen window to see his child getting more and more upset because he was standing there pointing but not being given a biscuit.

The rule had changed but no one had told him, "if there is no one in the kitchen then pointing won't work".

That is a fairly extreme example but it happens all the time, rules change slightly and everyone else suddenly understands the new rule, as though there has been a telepathic message sent to all the NT people.

OP

Maybe you should put this person on trail for heresy or witchcraft, it would fit with your theme. You could perhaps get some stocks and all throw leftovers at him.

you are totes nbu. you're bending over backwards for this guy who, it seems to me, is making absolutely no effort at all. i would buy a white roll, cook him chicken the night before give it to him on the side. he can try the main dishes if he likes. or suggest to your co-host that he brings his own food.

i've been to dinner parties where someone has brought their own ready meal. slight eyebrows but actually no-one cared.

after all the effort you're going to i think the least he could do is try a few dishes and pick out the stuff he likes. SURELY there'll be something - a tomato???

Lashes you are saying
But it doesn't affect them directly

Read again what I wrote earlier. It DOES affect people. Not because you are not doing as they expect but because they are interpretating your actions in a different way than you are.
They are reading
not eating = not a good host.
And also, friend saying everything is fine = No it's not fine. I hate it but I won't be so rude to tell you.

Of course, you can say that the way they are interpretating is wrong but the thing is, just as you are asking NTs to be a bit more flexible, you also need to be a bit more flexible and agree that NT have a different way of doing things.
It might not make sense to you. But what is important is not do something even though you know it's going to upset someone.

So no you don't say to someone woth AS that you won't cater for their food sensitivities.
But you also don't tell an NT that you don't want to make an effort so that they don't feel unconfortable either.

Actually (If you like ) we could add in some feminist/trans points to the discussion. Because we've been discussing accessiblity and inclusion, and it certainly crossed my mind that similar behaviours can occur across the trans/feminist spectrum of viewpoints and all that - people who are incapable of understanding that they are not always welcome everywhere and that sometimes other people want to engage in a social activity that doesn't suit everyone, and have a right to do so undisturbed by some attention-seeking whinyarse going 'well if I can't join in then it Shouldn't Be Allowed To Happen.'

OK, this isn't troll hunting BUT

On Monday when this thread started Lashes stated that s/he wouldn't discuss her issues with food as people don't understand and s/he finds the questions intrusive, today s/he is saying that s/he'll happily respond to questions. Which is it Lashes?

I'm not saying troll - but I am calling GF.

Lashes, for somebody preaching tolerance and seeing the other side of a situation, you seem awfully unable to want to see another perspective than your own! Do you always interpret others and situations from only one standpoint, namely your own?

I would not have said something, had not SolidGold already gone their, and I do wholeheartedly agree with her.

You dont want "NT people" to view you out from their "NT assumptions", but you are equally unable to view NT people from your own "not NT assumption it seems to me" How about tolerance going both ways?

When you insist to tag along to a restaurant where you will not order food, two things may actually be happening:

1. While you are sitting there partaking in conversation happy and oblivious to other peoples eating, you are at the same time making a point that you cannot/will not eat. You are making the situation about YOU.

1. When the evening, from the perspective of the rest of the group is over and they are ready to call it a day, they are in fact just half way through, as now it is their turn to socialize while you eat, making yet another point about your needs.

My vegetarian (NT) friend was an expert on this, we would go out to eat, he did not like anything on the menu, he was happy to nurse a tea/coke/wine while we were eating, and then we just HAD to go somewhere he could eat afterwards. The evenings out with him became very long, and very expensive, and ruined the next day for me as I got to bed much later and more knackered than I had anticipated. In the end I stopped going. I would have been happy to go to a vegetarian restaurant, but I think he really enjoyed long evenings out with multiple stops and various places to eat!

Lashes, for somebody preaching tolerance and seeing the other side of a situation, you seem awfully unable to want to see another perspective than your own! Do you always interpret others and situations from only one standpoint, namely your own?

If you understood ASD you'd know Its called 'theory of mind' and its something those who are on the autism spectrum have great difficulty with.

Theory of mind (often abbreviated ToM) is the ability to attribute mental states — beliefs, intents, desires, pretending, knowledge, etc. — to oneself and others and to understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions, and perspectives that are different from one's own.
Theory of mind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mindWikipedia

Solidgold thank you for that.

Weebirdie yep I agree it's an issue with the theory of mind.

Wow sashh - did you mean to be so incredibly rude to the OP or was that just unfortunate phrasing?

"Add I'll reply to this in length later but you just seem really annoyed he won't eat your food and so determined to force him to conform to your norms, or else exclude him. Nasty behaviour."

If this is a question of social norms, there's been another example of that on this thread.

Someone referred to Lashes as "that Lashes person" and a couple of posters, including Lashes, spoke up and said they had found that rude.

Why? It wasn't name-calling, it wasn't swearing, it was just not the more socially normal/polite way of referring to someone talking part in a conversation.

If we can agree that this was a rude way to refer to Lashes, can we explain why in any way other than that it's just not the usual (and therefore more polite) way to refer to someone?

Because the social norm is that we would just refer to the person by name, rather than call them "that X person" when speaking about somebody else.

Everyone seems to be in agreement with that, including Lashes, so why is this any different to feeling that someone asking for their own special food to be made at a themed dinner party, the point of which is to try the style of food already being made, is rude?

HYgge, it was rude, very rude, and I reported the post.

It wasnt just rude, it displayed a total lack of manners and understanding of social norms.

Im off now for the weekend