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?

I know it was rude.

But why was it different to the issue the OP has raised?

Both have been called social norms, yet the OP has come under fire for expecting her guest to conform to them, yet the poster who said that has come under fire for not following them.

My point wasn't that it wasn't a rude comment, but why is it different to the OP's situation if both are a question of social norms?

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.

Yes, that's exactly it.

NT people are communicating telepathically. And we do it to exclude anyone we don't like.

If only you could read my thoughts right now.

I dont think there is a social norm that says you should accept every invite to every event, regardless of whether you enjoy that activity or share that interest, and then try to change the event to something else to suit you!

Imagine if I got invited to the school golf event, and I accepted the invite saying "but I dont play golf, can we make room for some badminton for me?"

This is not a social norm either!

I think you could describe someone as a "difficult" guest (SN aside) if it was something like a games/cards/films evening where the food was incidental. In that case they could bring their own food or eat beforehand so it wouldn't be an insurmountable problem.

It's when the evening is all about the food and it's specially prepared to a theme that it crosses into "rude" territory to refuse it and insist on special provision. The conversation will be about the food, the purpose of the evening is the food - that particular food. Of course people will be looking at what everyone else is eating, checking that they are enjoying it, comparing it to other things they've had, congratulating the chef etc. Sitting eating a plain chicken breast in this case is going to severely limit participation in the evening.

I remember my lectures on ancient greek and roman food, the fun in sourcing and translating the recipes (from an archaeological perspective), and how much my lecturer had enjoyed trying to cook the meals.

I cant see how this person is going to enjoy partaking in this feast with a bland chicken breast, if he wont even taste the dishes!

Can I come instead?

Lashes, it is not whether you accept it as a good idea or not. It is a fact you cannot deny.
Your not eating food your host has spent time and money does affect them for the reasons of time and money. Again, undeniable fact.
Your actions do affect others

Addtobasket, YANBU. Your menu sounds gorgeous and I'm willing to be that you are a terrific host/ess.

I suggest you ignore the comments of the people who want to make your life / meal difficult and that enjoy yourself at your upcoming banquet.

Lashes, if you accept people as being genuine, why will you not accept that for the majority a gust behaving like this is a genuine issue?

"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.'"

So true. It's a sad fact of life that not everything suits everyone, so face up to it.

Just to clarify my position.

I think it's rude to ask my host, who is already cooking thirteen separate dishes for a large amount of people, to cook different, extra food just for me because I don't like any of the things she's already making.

And the reason I think it's rude because she's already going to a great deal of time, trouble, and expense, to put together a menu which allows everyone to try a particular style of food. The entire point of the party.

So on the occasion someone made me a meal containing coriander, which I can't stand the taste of, I ate it without complaint because it was the right thing to do, the polite thing to do. The social norm for someone who is a guest at someone else's table.

And at the big family occasion when the only food available was a hog roast, and I don't eat pork because I don't like it, I quietly had a bread roll with coleslaw and left out the pork, and nobody noticed because it was polite not to make a fuss.

I also think it's rude to refer to someone as "that X person" rather than just as "X" and so I wouldn't say it myself. It's not the social norm for most people, and people objected to it. Including the person being referred to in that way, even though she has accused the OP of trying to force someone else to conform to the social norms of dinner parties when they shouldn't have to and said expecting this was nasty behaviour on the OP's part.

And that, I find odd. Because to me, one is no more different to the other. You don't ask for different food at a specialist dinner party just because you don't like what's already on offer, and you don't refer to people as "that X person" instead of by their name, because neither is polite.

And politeness seems to be defined by social norms. So you can't object to someone expecting a guest to conform to one but then also object to a poster on here not conforming to the other.

It's like expecting to have your cake and eat it. Or not having your cake and asking for trifle instead because you don't like cake and you don't see why people have a problem with that.

Hygge, you sound a lovely guest and I would be happy to invite you to any social gathering.

Thank you Crocodopolis

I must have done something right with the coriander meal, because my friend has made it several times since and commented that she knows I like it. And oddly enough, each time I've eaten it I've liked it a little bit more. Thinking about it now, trying it rather than fussing about it has possibly converted me to a coriander liker now, without me even noticing.

So another good reason for the OP's guest to give things a try rather than asking for special food. He might actually find he likes it after all.

He might find it difficult to incorporate peacock into his daily diet though!

I've only read half of this thread but there is one thing i want to ask, did the request come from the guest themselves or from the co-host on his behalf? Is this picky guest even aware of the menu or has the co host made the determination that he cannot eat it without guest even knowing?
I have had this happen to me where requests that i was not even aware of were made on my behalf - and then someone will be angry at me because of the assumed 'entitlement' of a simple request that i would have handled totally differently if i was making it, or even them going to some trouble to accommodate me but then discovering that i would have been able to eat one of the options without the trouble.

I have a picky diet because many things that taste just fine to others can taste bitter to me. Alcohol tastes like nail varnish remover, watercress is peppery and bell peppers taste like vinegar to me, and I am very sensitive to bell peppers - to the point that I can taste transfer from using the same chopping board.

ASD is not a prerequisite for sensory difficulties - There is a compound called phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) that tastes bitter to about 50% of people and another one called propylthiouracil (PROP) that tastes bitter to 5-10%, these compounds have been used to identify ?supertasters? with no correlation to ASD

As for past times there is no comparison, people had a much less varied diet, most things would be seasonal and people would have simply avoided anything they didn?t like, much like they do now.

I've had peacock. It tastes like chicken.

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

This is the most extraordinary statement.

This is a specially prepared, gourmet feast. The focus is on the food, there will be discussion of the food, it's all about the food. So not taking part is being a wet blanket over the whole thing.

A group meal is an occasion for friends to get together - so if everyone is being sociable, why does the food really matter? Do people even look at what others are eating? This is new to me, I've never known people to do that. Seems very strange!

No, it really isn't. I live in a country where food is really, really important; the provenance, how it's cooked and so on. Setting yourself apart at a meal is making yourself outside the group. I find it astonishing that you are unable to see this.

Strange, this thread has alerted me to some people do actually look and take notice of others eating. I can't understand why they do, but apparently they do it.

I see food as a practical thing. I eat because I'm hungry. Couldn't give a toss what anyone else eats. Didn't know others were so interested in others eating habits.

I think some other people posted saying the same thing but I can't find the posts to reply to, so sorry! I'm not ignoring anyone's posts

I see food as a practical thing. I eat because I'm hungry.

But why are you then unable to eat when the others eat, but have them join you for a separate meal after they have eaten?

Quint I don't have them join me, we just stop somewhere else like a local shop and I buy myself something to eat or cook at home.

The only reason I won't eat when they eat is if there's no food I can eat

"we just stop somewhere else like a local shop and I buy myself something to eat or cook at home."

If it's for you to eat or cook at home, why wouldn't you cut that bit out by already having some food at home to eat? Surely you don't buy each meal as and when you get hungry, but have food at home already that you can eat.

Grunt because sometimes after meals we go to a different persons house. If everyone's going to mine or were all going home then I'll just eat something that's in. Sometimes I'll eat before I go.

It comes down to an issue of purpose.

The invitation was not simply "Would you like to come for dinner?" but "Would you like to come to a dinner where we are all trying interesting foods?". If you are a fussy eater then you might say yes to the former but you would say no to the latter as you don't want to try the interesting foods.

The purpose of the normal dinner is being sociable and the food merely facilitates that. The purpose of the special dinner is to eat specific foods.

It would be like accepting an invitation to a dinner sailing out to sea on a yacht, and then asking if the boat could stay in the harbour instead as you get sea-sick. If you don't want to eat under sail, then don't accept the invitation. And if your friends only ever meet on the boat, then get new friends, don't try to change them.

Lashes Noticing what others eat is context-dependent.

I couldn't tell you what my work colleagues had for lunch - I don't care enough to take note of its composition or their enjoyment of it.

Had I cooked said lunch for my work colleagues, that would be different. I'd be looking for signs of satisfaction (or not), I'd perhaps note which elements they didn't seem keen on, we'd probably discuss the recipes if they were unusual.

When I cook meat for my husband, I am annoyingly fascinated with his dinner.

If I choose the restaurant for a group of friends, I will note their choices, their enjoyment, and so on.

If I attended a gourmet dinner party, the food is centre stage and I'd expect most of the conversation to be focused on food and related themes.

If I'm gobbling down a quick pasta dinner with husband, in silence, in front of the TV, his enjoyment matters less because we are not eating to enjoy, we are eating to live.

Functional eaters have a very different attitude to meals.

I'd be looking for signs of satisfaction (or not), I'd perhaps note which elements they didn't seem keen on, we'd probably discuss the recipes if they were unusual.

This makes me feel uncomfortable, I hate being watched eat and now I KNOW NT people are doing it :/ I now Feel as if I have to watch my facial expressions, make sure I look happy but not overly happy, make sure I don't look sad, eat the exact right amount, smile at the right time, comment on it, argh. It's so forced and makes me feel uncomfortable.

Get a grip, I'm not fucking staring at you as you move your fork from plate to mouth.