To wonder how much of the 'penis portion' complaint is due to women on average needing less calories?

[Carla786]

The competitive undereating thread on here recently got me thinking: I haven't come across this 'penis portion' (men being served more than women) issue in my life, so I may be misunderstanding..

I can see it being sexist if the woman is being served a huge amount less, the man gets the nicest bits etc. But if it's more that both get a full serving but the man gets slightly more, maybe it's partly due to the host thinking (correctly) that the average woman might need slightly less?

Penis envy originated in a scientific context though, from Freud. It wasn't just random slang.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_envy

This.

Dates are wrong re penis envy

Colloquial use of the word penis 17th century
The origin of the word penis is Latin for “tail,” and was adopted by the English in the seventeenth century to refer to the male sex organ. (Sample text for Skin flutes & velvet gloves : a collection of facts and fancies, legends, and oddities about the body's private parts / Terri Hamilton. Library of Congress)
Penis ’the Latin word for “tail,” was not introduced to the English language until 1676.´

Penis Envy- Colloquial use in 1922
First coined by Sigmun Freud in 1908 ‘Penis envy was first described by Sigmund Freud in 1908.´ https://link.springer.com/rwe/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_616
published widely in1914/1918 translated from the German
enters colloquial English usage in 1922
Oxford English Dictionary adds ´penis envy’ as a noun in 1924.
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/penis-envy_n

I believe you've missed one out...

And, tbh, the etymology of both 'penis' and 'penis envy' are utterly irrelevant to this thread!

? You stated:
Your dates are wrong re 'penis envy'. Please cite your sources..

I gave you the dates and sources for penis envy. I agree it’s not really relevant and did wonder why you were zooming in on the dates for penis envy but was kind enough to acquiesce to your request for the dates and sources showing they are correct,

Correct, ‘penis envy’ started as scientific.
But as I said the word penis was not originally a scientific term. HTH.

No. It is the height of rudeness. A social meal like a family Sunday roast should be dished out equally by the host or be self-serve.

I need more calories than DH because I run 20k a week. You wouldn't know this unless you asked me.

But were working class families around the 1900s using 'penis' as a slang term? 'Penis portion'? It just sounds unlikely to me.

You say you've seen articles mention this term being used in the 1970s & 1980s. Are you able to link to these articles?

Yes it obvious overall but irrelevant if you are hosting guests for one meal of the day. You don't know how they manage their overall food intake and it would be rude to assume that a male guest needs more food than a female guest at that meal - as she may have skipped breakfast for example.

How do you know they’ve left with a full belly? If I went to your house and you served me less than DH I’d know full well that you were insinuating that I shouldn’t be eating as much as my DH. I’d finish my meagre portion and feel shamed into refusing any further offers of food.

I’d probably stop and buy snacks on the way home, and complain to my nearest and dearest about your rudeness behind your back.

If you are so concerned with waste - why can't you let your guests serve themselves? It's pretty standard these days and many people prefer that approach. Even your hungriest eater may have days they are less hungry and vice versa.

Yes.
You know fuck was used as a slang term in the 1400s?
You also should know that what was spoken wasn’t often written down, especially by working classes with high levels of illiteracy.

Yes penis portion first showed up in sociological studies on food in the 1970s/1980s because the working class were seen as the new exotics.
These are usually in printed books that haven’t been digitised. It was used repeatedly until it entered colloquial use similar to how penis envy did:
Arthur J. Taylor (ed.), The Standard of Living in Britain in the Industrial Revolution (London, 1975).
Joel Mokyr, ‘Is There Still Life in the Pessimist Case? Consumption During the Industrial Revolution, 1790–1850’, Journal of Economic History, xlviii (1988)
Dale Edward Williams, ‘Were “Hunger” Rioters Really Hungry? Some Demographic Evidence’, Past and Present, no. 71 (May 1976); Alan Booth, ‘Food Riots in the North-West of England, 1790–1801’, Past and Present, no. 77 (Nov. 1977).
Carole Shammas, ‘Food Expenditures and Economic Well-Being in Early Modern England’, Journal of Economic History, xliii (1983).
John Burnett, David Vincent and David Mayall (eds.), The Autobiography of the Working Class: An Annotated, Critical Bibliography, i, 1790–1900 (Brighton, 1984).

Are you confused? I said the women don't finish what I give them. If there's still food left on the plate they aren't leaving hungry, because they are full, because they have been given more food than they could eat.

My mother in law always serves me and the other DILs a smaller portion than her sons. She is obsessed with her weigh, always on a diet, and always talking about being fat (she’s a 12/14). I feel really sorry for her and usually just help myself to seconds if I want it.

Because then we have to get the serving dishes out, put everything out of pans and baking trays into serving dishes instead of onto plates, doubling the washing up and mess. Also, by the time a whole family has made their way round every dish, ummmed and ahhhd over how much of each thing they should take, done the performance of "oh I don't want to be greedy am I taking too much!?" at three separate dishes and the finally sat down it's taken around 10 minutes, it's started going cold and we can all eat hot food quicker with less washing up if we just put the food on the plate. And just putting the food on the plate has never been a problem so why would we make a song and dance of it when I can just give my family their dinner? At big events like Christmas sure, make it feel special. Every Sunday? No way. Also some people feel awkward serving themselves and worry about looking greedy or taking too much then not eating it etc. a lot of people would prefer to just be given a plate of food.

I asked you to cite your sources for all dates in your post. You conveniently missed one out.

Of course I’m not confused. I was talking about myself. I can eat as much as most men, so I’m obviously not one of the sparrow women at your table. I generally only eat one full meal a day so I like it on the generous side!

Do you leave food on your plate if you're hungry?

You’re being deliberately obtuse. This isn’t about your friends, it’s about you saying that you serve less to women because they’d leave it if you gave them as much as a man. Your friends may do, but not all women would. You are making assumptions about all women. It’s presumptuous, and quite rude.

No. You are being deliberately obtuse. I clearly said the women don't finish the food I give them, so I won't be giving them any more just to prove a point so it can go in the bin. I know they are full because they leave food on the plate. It's really not rocket science. The one being rude is you.

Thank you for the references. I'm studying history & those books sound very interesting.

Otoh are you sure they are correct? I've just checked the 2 books (Taylor and Burnett) on Open Library. I did a word search for 'penis'. The results were zero. I will check the other references.

But it sounds like you are talking about a very specific circumstance where you have the same guests every Sunday so of course you know them well. If you had new friends around would you still serve the women less than the men?

Just because your overall calorie intake is less than your DH's it absolutely doesn't follow that you'd eat less at every meal. Perhaps he has a bigger breakfast, lunch, snacks. I'd consider it very rude to assume you should get less if serving up a single "snapshot" meal to you. Particularly when the meal is a focus of entertaining/socialising.

It really doesn't; I wouldn't serve a five-two size 8 woman the same as a six foot three heavy man. It would make no sense to give the huge plate for such a man to a small woman. Back when I was very thin and didn't eat much, I'd have heaved at the sight of so much food being put in front of me. However, I'm talking about family, really. If I was hosting (which I don't tend to do) but if I was, I'd put everything in self-serve dishes except sliced meat, portions of salmon etc. But I'd make it clear that there was more in the kitchen and that everyone was welcome to seconds. And thirds! I certainly would make sure that no woman left my house hungry! But I wouldn't want to overload her with a huge man-portion at the start either.

I would, because if you give all the women portions the size of those for six foot three, 15 stone men, there would be an awful lot of food wasted. I'd give what I thought, but would make it very clear that there is plenty more for seconds/thirds. And I'd have all the potatoes/veg in self-serve dishes anyway, and plenty of it. There are ways to ensure that smaller guests are not left hungry without the waste of food that would probably occur if you give them man-size portions.