Page 17 | Husband fed me a food he knows I have never eaten and never willingly will

Anon39 · 2023-10-07T09:22:15+00:00

I came back from taking our son to training and as I walked back in my husband asked me if I wanted a sausage sandwich I immediately said yes started eating it and he said do you know what those sausage are? And I replied in the negative and he started to chuckle and said “do you like it?” So my hackles were up I stopped eating and asked for the package of sausage he started getting defensive and I just knew it was black pudding (which I do not eat and have never eaten and he knows how I feel I have no feelings if you do eat it and that’s not the point of my post) I found the package and it was black pudding sausage I was so upset he knew I would never have willingly eaten black pudding. I feel so betrayed and I’ve ended up crying and he has basically told me to grow up and stop being so dramatic he can’t understand why I’m so upset it’s not really about the food it’s about the breaking my trust I would never think to question him about what type of sausage they were because I trusted him not to drip feed I am Autistic so I am aware I have issues around food yes you’re being unreasonable and should have checked (after 20 years of marriage) no - your partner deliberately betrayed your trust

EightChalk · 07/10/2023 15:55

Food aversion is not rational! It doesn't matter if it doesn't make logical sense. That's not how disgust, and emotions in general, operate. Liking or disliking things is not decided rationally. If you sneakily gave me something that I find the idea of disgusting, like kidney or lung or eyeball, and I enjoyed the taste, I would STILL be disgusted that I'd eaten it and would refuse to eat it again.

And as for "unnecessary" tears... crying is not usually a choice!

TomatoSandwiches · 07/10/2023 15:56

PandaExpress · 07/10/2023 14:59

The taste didn't bother you? So is this food aversion that you have to black pudding is just based on what it's made from? That's the thing that is confusing to me. Because of what goes in to lots of sausages (especially if you're buying supermarket ones) So it's a strange line to draw.
While I agree it's a bit shitty of your DH, I think you are completely over reacting.

Show quote history

You and her husband don't need to understand why op doesn't want to eat any particular thing, all you need to know is her choice should be respected and not be tricked into ingesting something she doesn't want to.
What is hard about understanding that?

quantumbutterfly · 07/10/2023 16:00

Sadly, what he is saying is that he has no respect for your feelings, which is less than ideal in a life partner.

Is this the first time he's tested you like this?

When someone says no, you listen, maybe there is a discussion to be had but taking away your choice, (as a grown woman - before the hit-pickers arrive), like that, is wrong.

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:04

Hersecretserviceyourmaj · 07/10/2023 15:54

The OP's DH took control away from his wife by not stating what was in the sausage. He knew she wouldn't like it and didn't give her the chance to say yes or no. It may come across as harmless banter etc but think about the following

A woman gives her friend a gold necklace but doesn't tell her it's been stolen. The friend continues to wear the necklace in the belief its been purchased. She's had her choice/control taken away from her and that is abuse. You may think it hysterical but it's a misuse of trust. It's playing mind games with the friend. Imagine knowing you've been wearing a stolen item.

Show quote history

Well, this is quite the leap.

How about this -

Imagine a woman gives her friend full fat coke instead of Diet Coke. Friend drinks it thinking it’s Diet Coke yet the entire time it’s full fat. Friend thinks it’s hysterical she can’t tell the difference.

It’s the same scenario in each case but with vastly different levels of seriousness. Which is my point - yes the husband did something that he shouldn’t have done but in the grand scheme of abusive behaviour - it doesn’t even really register.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:08

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 15:11

It’s not the food. It’s the malicious intent and the lack of understanding of the betrayal of trust. If a consenting adult has made a conscious decision not to eat something then it should be respected, not mocked. If my partner did something like this, I’d be rethinking the relationship.

Show quote history

To me it’s not malicious if the only reason somebody is opposed to eating something is because they don’t like it. There are foods I don’t like the taste of but honestly, if somebody fed me one of those foods within a meal without me knowing and it turned out that I liked it I genuinely wouldn’t care. I certainly wouldn’t feel ‘betrayed’ or like the act was malicious, in fact if somebody can help me to widen my food tastes and realise that some foods I think I dislike can actually be pleasant to eat I would say that is the opposite of malicious because it will actually help me have a more varied diet. It wasn’t even like the husband cooked her up a plate of black pudding, it was just an ingredient within the sausages. If I told someone I didn’t like strawberries and they then made a cake with strawberry jam in the middle and thought ‘it’s only a minor part, they probably won’t even taste it’ and fed it to me I just wouldn’t see that as malicious or a betrayal, especially if it turned out I was enjoying the cake and didn’t even dislike the jam.

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:09

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:04

Well, this is quite the leap.

How about this -

Imagine a woman gives her friend full fat coke instead of Diet Coke. Friend drinks it thinking it’s Diet Coke yet the entire time it’s full fat. Friend thinks it’s hysterical she can’t tell the difference.

It’s the same scenario in each case but with vastly different levels of seriousness. Which is my point - yes the husband did something that he shouldn’t have done but in the grand scheme of abusive behaviour - it doesn’t even really register.

Show quote history

You’re missing the point. In your examples, yes, the levels of seriousness of the actual deceptions are different. But the basic fact of the deception and the betrayal of trust is the same for all.

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:12

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:08

To me it’s not malicious if the only reason somebody is opposed to eating something is because they don’t like it. There are foods I don’t like the taste of but honestly, if somebody fed me one of those foods within a meal without me knowing and it turned out that I liked it I genuinely wouldn’t care. I certainly wouldn’t feel ‘betrayed’ or like the act was malicious, in fact if somebody can help me to widen my food tastes and realise that some foods I think I dislike can actually be pleasant to eat I would say that is the opposite of malicious because it will actually help me have a more varied diet. It wasn’t even like the husband cooked her up a plate of black pudding, it was just an ingredient within the sausages. If I told someone I didn’t like strawberries and they then made a cake with strawberry jam in the middle and thought ‘it’s only a minor part, they probably won’t even taste it’ and fed it to me I just wouldn’t see that as malicious or a betrayal, especially if it turned out I was enjoying the cake and didn’t even dislike the jam.

Show quote history

It’s malicious because she made a conscious choice not to eat something, and he was aware of that choice, chose to disregard her wishes and fed it to her anyway, disguised as something else. Then dismissed her as over reacting when she got upset. Really surprised you don’t get that. It’s her choice, and one he doesn’t get to argue with. Unless he’s underhand about it. That suggests control.

TomatoSandwiches · 07/10/2023 16:13

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:08

To me it’s not malicious if the only reason somebody is opposed to eating something is because they don’t like it. There are foods I don’t like the taste of but honestly, if somebody fed me one of those foods within a meal without me knowing and it turned out that I liked it I genuinely wouldn’t care. I certainly wouldn’t feel ‘betrayed’ or like the act was malicious, in fact if somebody can help me to widen my food tastes and realise that some foods I think I dislike can actually be pleasant to eat I would say that is the opposite of malicious because it will actually help me have a more varied diet. It wasn’t even like the husband cooked her up a plate of black pudding, it was just an ingredient within the sausages. If I told someone I didn’t like strawberries and they then made a cake with strawberry jam in the middle and thought ‘it’s only a minor part, they probably won’t even taste it’ and fed it to me I just wouldn’t see that as malicious or a betrayal, especially if it turned out I was enjoying the cake and didn’t even dislike the jam.

Show quote history

To the op it was malicious.
You don't do this to people, especially people with Autism who have food adversions it can trigger AFRID and restrict their diet even more affecting their health in a serious way.

Consent is the issue here, her husband did not aquire her consent.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:14

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:04

Well, this is quite the leap.

How about this -

Imagine a woman gives her friend full fat coke instead of Diet Coke. Friend drinks it thinking it’s Diet Coke yet the entire time it’s full fat. Friend thinks it’s hysterical she can’t tell the difference.

It’s the same scenario in each case but with vastly different levels of seriousness. Which is my point - yes the husband did something that he shouldn’t have done but in the grand scheme of abusive behaviour - it doesn’t even really register.

Show quote history

It’s not even like this because there is at least a logical reason to want to avoid sugar, for example if on a diet.

Its like someone saying they hate onion. They’ve never even tasted it but don’t like the idea of it so they always cook meals such as spaghetti bolognaise without onion. One day their friend offers them lasagne, they start eating the lasagne and think it tastes nice, but then their friend confesses there is actually onion in it.

In my mind it’s such a non-issue it shouldn’t even register.

Person is given a meal where one of the ingredients is something they thought they didn’t like but which they actually didn’t even notice until pointed out. Total non-issue.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:15

TomatoSandwiches · 07/10/2023 16:13

To the op it was malicious.
You don't do this to people, especially people with Autism who have food adversions it can trigger AFRID and restrict their diet even more affecting their health in a serious way.

Consent is the issue here, her husband did not aquire her consent.

Show quote history

Well I disagree. I have autism and I would be happy if people could help me widen my diet!

Hersecretserviceyourmaj · 07/10/2023 16:15

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:04

Well, this is quite the leap.

How about this -

Imagine a woman gives her friend full fat coke instead of Diet Coke. Friend drinks it thinking it’s Diet Coke yet the entire time it’s full fat. Friend thinks it’s hysterical she can’t tell the difference.

It’s the same scenario in each case but with vastly different levels of seriousness. Which is my point - yes the husband did something that he shouldn’t have done but in the grand scheme of abusive behaviour - it doesn’t even really register.

Show quote history

How about we call it deceitful behaviour then. Lying/economical with the truth. I can accept whether it constitutes abusive behaviour, is open to interpretation. I guess the psychological effect the 'joke' has had on its recipient, is what matters. Shrugs.

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:15

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:09

You’re missing the point. In your examples, yes, the levels of seriousness of the actual deceptions are different. But the basic fact of the deception and the betrayal of trust is the same for all.

Show quote history

I’m not missing the point, that’s my point 😂 I’m acknowledging the fact the deception is there, and also the betrayal of trust. Neither of these are ok but does it mean the OP is married to an abusive monster? OP has come on here explaining she’s upset by this and she’s being met by scores of posters telling her she’s in an abusive and manipulative relationship based on this one event. People are getting themselves whipped up into a frenzy. Was her husband a bit of an arsehole by doing this? Yes you could argue he was. Is he an abusive manipulator? Calm yourselves.

TomatoSandwiches · 07/10/2023 16:16

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:14

It’s not even like this because there is at least a logical reason to want to avoid sugar, for example if on a diet.

Its like someone saying they hate onion. They’ve never even tasted it but don’t like the idea of it so they always cook meals such as spaghetti bolognaise without onion. One day their friend offers them lasagne, they start eating the lasagne and think it tastes nice, but then their friend confesses there is actually onion in it.

In my mind it’s such a non-issue it shouldn’t even register.

Person is given a meal where one of the ingredients is something they thought they didn’t like but which they actually didn’t even notice until pointed out. Total non-issue.

Show quote history

Your logic reads awfully like some sort of abelist bullshit.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:17

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:12

It’s malicious because she made a conscious choice not to eat something, and he was aware of that choice, chose to disregard her wishes and fed it to her anyway, disguised as something else. Then dismissed her as over reacting when she got upset. Really surprised you don’t get that. It’s her choice, and one he doesn’t get to argue with. Unless he’s underhand about it. That suggests control.

Show quote history

But he didn’t even feed her black pudding. It was a sausage where black pudding was just part of the flavour. Her conscious choice not to eat it was because she thought she wouldn’t like it, but nowhere did OP suggest she didn’t like the sausage, so actually in this case surely her husband was helping her to be less restrictive in her food and showing her that actually, the food is okay.

Hersecretserviceyourmaj · 07/10/2023 16:19

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:17

But he didn’t even feed her black pudding. It was a sausage where black pudding was just part of the flavour. Her conscious choice not to eat it was because she thought she wouldn’t like it, but nowhere did OP suggest she didn’t like the sausage, so actually in this case surely her husband was helping her to be less restrictive in her food and showing her that actually, the food is okay.

Show quote history

Thank goodness for the bloke to have educated his 'mrs' even though she didn't realise it was a lesson 😀 🙄

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:20

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:15

I’m not missing the point, that’s my point 😂 I’m acknowledging the fact the deception is there, and also the betrayal of trust. Neither of these are ok but does it mean the OP is married to an abusive monster? OP has come on here explaining she’s upset by this and she’s being met by scores of posters telling her she’s in an abusive and manipulative relationship based on this one event. People are getting themselves whipped up into a frenzy. Was her husband a bit of an arsehole by doing this? Yes you could argue he was. Is he an abusive manipulator? Calm yourselves.

Show quote history

Without knowing what else is happening to signify other controlling behaviour it’s difficult to know what’s going on. But other posters are correct when they say that this incident could be a symptom of a wider issue and indicative of abuse. The incident itself is concerning enough, but to my mind, not as concerning as his reaction when the OP got upset.

Winnading · 07/10/2023 16:21

ClassicCremeAnglaise · 07/10/2023 13:33

don't let common sense and obvious facts get away from a good thread of angry posters.

Even cut in tiny pieces, it's pretty obvious it's black pudding!

Show quote history

Ok I just looked up some black pudding flavoured sausages
They look a little darker than your average sausage. Not hugely noticeable.
I will agree they will taste rank different as black pudding is strong tasting.

Still, he shouldnt have done this, OP Is right to be angry and if something equivalent happened to me I too might cry. No shame in that.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:21

TomatoSandwiches · 07/10/2023 16:16

Your logic reads awfully like some sort of abelist bullshit.

Show quote history

How is it ableist? I have autism myself and logically i can’t see a reason to be upset if someone feeds you a food containing an ingredient you don’t like if actually it turns out you like it! Logically if your reason to not eat something is you don’t like it, but it turns out you like it, there’s no reason to be upset you ate it? I understand being anxious about trying something new, but once you’ve tried it and it was nice I don’t get why you would be upset about it afterwards.

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:22

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:17

But he didn’t even feed her black pudding. It was a sausage where black pudding was just part of the flavour. Her conscious choice not to eat it was because she thought she wouldn’t like it, but nowhere did OP suggest she didn’t like the sausage, so actually in this case surely her husband was helping her to be less restrictive in her food and showing her that actually, the food is okay.

Show quote history

If he had told her what he was doing then I’d agree. But he didn’t, and in not doing so, he went against something he knew was a conscious choice and therefore important to her. That’s not his decision to make. It’s hers, and she’d already made it.

Meadowflower2023 · 07/10/2023 16:24

I'm just so shocked at the amount of times I've read on this thread that this is abuse. I mean, I think the DH was perhaps having a bit of a stupid joke which backfired as OP didn't find it funny but abuse?? Really?

I've also just read another thread where this word was thrown about a lot too, a couple had fallen out and one partner was giving the other the silent treatment... so many replies about it being abuse. Surely when people argue they can go quiet for a while whilst they calm down, come around .... no? Abuse to me is such a massive statement yet thrown about on MN so easily, in my eyes it undermines the poor people truly being abused.

Missing the point of the thread yeah I know but what kind of cotton wool world do a lot of you live in?

OP's husband is was silly, yes and stupid, definitely... but abusive ???

Leave a solid 20 year marriage for this, like heck you would...

Lolabear38 · 07/10/2023 16:25

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:20

Without knowing what else is happening to signify other controlling behaviour it’s difficult to know what’s going on. But other posters are correct when they say that this incident could be a symptom of a wider issue and indicative of abuse. The incident itself is concerning enough, but to my mind, not as concerning as his reaction when the OP got upset.

Show quote history

Without knowing what else is happening to signify other controlling behaviour it’s difficult to know what’s going on.

Which hasn’t stopped a large amount of posters labelling him as an abusive and controlling partner. Which is dangerous and highlights my point about hysterical responses.

EightChalk · 07/10/2023 16:25

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:21

How is it ableist? I have autism myself and logically i can’t see a reason to be upset if someone feeds you a food containing an ingredient you don’t like if actually it turns out you like it! Logically if your reason to not eat something is you don’t like it, but it turns out you like it, there’s no reason to be upset you ate it? I understand being anxious about trying something new, but once you’ve tried it and it was nice I don’t get why you would be upset about it afterwards.

Show quote history

Because the reason might have been disgust, not thinking she wouldn't like the taste. I happen to agree with OP that I would not eat black pudding. For me, that's because the IDEA of eating black pudding is disgusting, same as eating offal. If I was deceived into eating it and it tasted nice, I would still be disgusted that I had eaten it. The taste is irrelevant.

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:25

Rosscameasdoody · 07/10/2023 16:22

If he had told her what he was doing then I’d agree. But he didn’t, and in not doing so, he went against something he knew was a conscious choice and therefore important to her. That’s not his decision to make. It’s hers, and she’d already made it.

Show quote history

But if he’d told her she likely wouldn’t have tried it because she would have (wrongly) assumed she didn’t like it!

When I was little the only way my parents got me to try new foods was to hide them in other things, blend vegetables in sauces and then gradually blitz them less small until I got used to the lumps and eventually pieces etc. There were foods I refused to try on principle but that I happily ate when I didn’t know what they were. If they hadn’t done that I’d probably still be living on toast and cereal!

Lovelysausagedogscrumpy · 07/10/2023 16:26

MolkosTeenageAngst · 07/10/2023 16:21

How is it ableist? I have autism myself and logically i can’t see a reason to be upset if someone feeds you a food containing an ingredient you don’t like if actually it turns out you like it! Logically if your reason to not eat something is you don’t like it, but it turns out you like it, there’s no reason to be upset you ate it? I understand being anxious about trying something new, but once you’ve tried it and it was nice I don’t get why you would be upset about it afterwards.

Show quote history

She was upset about the control being taken away from her. It wasn’t the food, it was a betrayal of trust. And it’s really concerning that so many people seem to think it’s OK for a partner to behave like this, and are trying to explain his actions away as ‘helping her’. It also seems clear to me that most people are missing the fact that the OP hasn’t said she doesn’t like black pudding. She said she would never eat it. Two different things. It’s a blood product and she clearly has issues with it and made a conscious choice not to eat it - possibly for ethical reasons. Why do you think her partner has the right to take that choice away from her ?

Hermittrismegistus · 07/10/2023 16:27

How is it ableist? I have autism myself and logically i can’t see a reason to be upset if someone feeds you a food containing an ingredient you don’t like if actually it turns out you like it!

Just because you have autism is doesn't mean you understand how others people's autism affects them.

I won't eat certain foods because the very thought of them turns my stomach. If I liked a food and I found out it had some disgusting thing in it I would be immediately put off. It's not always about taste.