Louisa

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People who really like fish go to Sopers.. Those > who claim to like fish go to Moxham's cos its more > expensive and in East Dulwich. > > DulwichFox After spending so long on this forum with detailed analysis of people's opinions, I'm in total agreement foxy. It seems ironic that so many newcomers praise the value of shopping the indies and supporting the local economy (whilst bemoaning chains etc), and yet numerous local establishments (including Ayres and Soper's) who have been around for generations are shunned in favour of more expensive and more recent arriving businesses. councidence? I think not. Just supports my argument that blow in's would rather transform a neighborhood than support existing local establishments. Louisa.

jacks09 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you are knocking it. > > "snot in wannabe ash trays" > > Just be consistent. and try and be nicer. I'm knocking the Oyster yes, I'm not knocking people's reasons for eating them though. I'm simply suggesting the taste isn't the only reason ALL people eat them, I think any reasonable person would accept that as fact. I am 100% consistent with my argument (as always), and yet people seem to take some sort of imagined or contrived offence at my expression of that opinions. Bizarre. BTW how would you recommend me being nicer? Shall I tag a patronisingly smiley at the end of each sentence? Louisa.

edcam Wrote > I don't need to prove it. It clearly is foolish > to generalise about people in the way you do. > You've been shown that oysters are not always > expensive or "status symbol" food, yet you carry > on making a fool of yourself because you are too > proud to back down, grow up and admit that you are > wrong. I'm sorry edcam but your argument is on shakey ground here. You are saying my generalising needs justification but your reasons for not generalising do not? It's not always about the price of an item as you imply. You are pretty much of the opinion that there is no class related issues associated with Oysters (and the implication would be the same for any food I imagine?), and therefore I am making a fool of myself for even suggesting so. If you want to take that point of view, that's fine, but at least try and prove your point and don't assume the reasons are purely about taste and nothing else. Food snobbery does exist. > > You are though. That's abundantly clear in your > posts on the subject. I'm patronising people by suggesting that there may be reasons over and above the taste of something for someone loving it? If that's the case, are they not patronising me by suggesting the same about shopping at Iceland? > I haven't said that, yet you seem to be perfectly > happy bundling me in with the perceived food snobs > that you think those who eat oysters are. Haven't bunked you in with anyone. Just expressed my honest felt opinion about SOME peoples reasons for eating certain things. It works both ways btw, I deal with food snobbery on a daily basis on this forum. > As someone said above, you can be highly amusing > on this forum and many of your posts are fun to > read but when you behave like this, I'm afraid you > just come across as a troll or an idiot. I'm only amusing when I'm discussing something that people don't take personal offence to. We can't all agree on everything, and I'm not tempering my views just because a few people enjoy certain things I do not. This opinion is just because I don't like something and you and others do, it's more profound than that. It's about the reasons for people choosing to eat certain things. Louisa.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Firstly you're wrong - a lot of people actually > enjoy the flavour, so your statement is > incorrect. I have at no point stated some people don't enjoy the taste of these things. God knows why, but yes I concede that is true. Equally, a sizeable number, will be choosing to eat them purely for aesthetic and imagined superiority reasons. I'm not privy to the percentages here, but I wouldn't mind guessing that the numbers of people who consume these things are higher in gentrified neighbourhoods than elsewhere. Can someone pull up some facts for me here please? > Secondly you ARE knocking it, your previous posts > made that pretty clear. > > Seeing as you mentioned it, why don't you stroll > down to Jason at Sopers one day and ask him what > kind of people buy his oysters, his lobster, his > crab and so on? You might get an interesting > answer. I'm not doing anything other than stating an opinion about something. Simple as that. I'm a fairly regular visitor to Soper's of Nunhead, so I will take up your challenge and ask Jason directly on my next visit and report back. I reckon unlike our continental cousins, class is a big indicator of the type of customer who buys these things. Louisa.

BNG unfortunately it appears there may be a correlation. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3252611/Why-catch-food-poisoning-oyster-haven-t-eaten.html As this article exposes. The type of hidden danger you find in an Oyster can be passed on to those that haven't even eaten the food. Frightening stuff. All my critics should take a read. Louisa.

Fox similarly I have had many kebabs and curries over the years and without exception (to date), I have no contracted any viruses or bacterial infections through food poisoning. Those facts you provide are from a verified source and expose the common sense of people who choice not to eat something which statistically is more likely to cause food poisoning than any of the shunned cheaper foods we refer to. Says it all really. Louisa.

http://m.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Shellfish-study-reveals-oysters-posh/story-24419548-detail/story.html Interesting Cornish article about why people eat Oysters. Worth a read. Louisa.

edcam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Louisa, I have tried to rise above it but the fact > that you're criticising people for liking > something but trying to imply that there are > "underlying" reasons for someone liking a > particular foodstuff is, frankly, foolish. > > Why do you think it's ok to patronise and insult > people and then play the victim? > And how can you prove or disprove it is foolish edcam? Are you suggesting EVERYONE who eats expensive or status symbol food is doing so because they genuinely enjoy it? Or could there perhaps be some underlying class related issue going on here? Take a horse to water and well, you know the rest. I am not patronising or insulting anyone, just calling them up on why they like certain things, as THEY do to me. "Why does Louisa shop at that dreadful Iceland buying cheap nasty food?" Etc etc Maybe myself and others shop there because they have to, maybe they genuinely enjoy the decent value for money prices. MAYBE they shop there because they have a chip on their shoulder and want people to think they're working class so they can fight against the system and be down with the commoners. Who knows??? Louisa.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Oh hum, it's no too hard to explain > > You (and him) goad people with your troll like > 'class' posts, regularly making people out to be > 'you stupid/we clever' Once again you miss the point entirely. The class related posts are grounded in fact, not fiction (as I see it anyway). Sorry to 'goad' you, but sometimes the truth does hurt. I'm not making you or anyone else out to be stupid, just expressing my opinions, as you are. What's wrong with that? > Are you not suprised that people will rip into you > and expose the stupidity of the argument ? I could fire the same argument straight back at you, and have done on this very thread. Be honest now, why do you like oysters? (This is an example btw don't take it literally). > Trouble is you do it again and again, so you're > going to get it harsher and harder Same applies to you too. Hence my responses. > And it's not that your opinion aren't valid, as it > goes I agree that people across the board do > things 'for show' and that includes eating > (oysters et al) and and other crimes against the > fragility of being a human being > But really, what is your thing, what's your chip > about people? Is it an inferiority thing, is that > what get's you going. The way I see it, I have no chip. I am just reflecting upon various stereotypes which I believe do have a factual grounding and need exposing ocassionally. As I said before, I'm not judging you, and I'm sure you're not judging me (with regards class or food or anything else). It's an opinion, one you might disagree with and get at, but there you have it. > > In general and when it's kept in polite (and > clever) measure, much like swearing, your posts > are funny and I often laugh. But when the lid > comes off it's the opposite, and you loose any > creditability built up > > Still, you seem to like it. So good luck I am not seeking credibility, nor am I concerned about whether people like me or my opinions, I don't care either way! If I have an opinion I will state it, good or bad. You're exactly the same Seabag. If you agree with some of what I say that's great, can we not have some opinions we agree on and some we disagree on? Is the EDF opinion police out enforcing a clamp down on any opinion which doesn't fit with the general agreed consensus? (To be fair obviously they are, hence my confinement here in the lounge whilst other serial offenders are trawling the general issues section genuinely trolling unlike myself who just says it as it is). Louisa.

Admin decided to ban 'blow in' because it was offensive to multi millionaire incomers who like oysters and 12 quid burgers. Diddums. Louisa.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > But Louisa, that may be your opinion, but can you > not see that it is a gross generalisation and > basically just ridiculous? Sue of course I concede it is a generalisation. But if the cap fits. The way I see it is simple, if certain people feel the need to brag about specific food items on here, then they should be open to direct criticism and not take offence to being called up on their reasons for eating those foods. It's no different to me being stereotyped for shopping at certain supermarkets or eating/drinking certain things. And as you know, this does happen. All the time. This is a forum where we can pull people up on the ridiculous and not have to feel ashamed for doing so. Particularly when it is a celebrated sport on this forum to ridicule and pull myself and others with similar beliefs on a regular basis. > > Can people not eat something just because they > like it? They may be eating it because they can > afford to, but that's a completely separate > issue. > I'm sure some people do eat things because they enjoy them, it's not a one way street. But who is to say they don't do it for reasons of social climbing too? Yes it's a generalisation, but sometimes generalisations are correct. BTW I agree about cavier, although I'm 50/50 on champagne. Recent studies have shown grape varieties grown in Kent/Sussex are on a par with the champagne region because of the similar temperate climate, and yet they are not celebrated as much. Go figure! Louisa.

Edcam it really is lamentable hearing yet another regular play the 'trolling' card, simply because you refuse to appreciate someone's honest reflection on the underlying reasons for others liking certain things. I'm disappointed in you. You imply I am a fool for these beliefs, and yet others who have similar opinions in role reversal are congratulated on their opinions. If I and foxy were not consistently goaded perhaps we could have these adult debates without them being taken back to the bare bones, every single time. It really is just plain consecending, and boring. Louisa.

Sue come on now. Lots of people on here dig me and others out for using Iceland over the years because it's cheap and has special offers on certain items. They know nothing about me, other than I was regular shopper there so didn't understand or appreciate good food. That's fine if they want to have that underlying belief, therefore, don't see a problem with me having a similar belief that they go to certain shops and restaurants for the same reasons, to feel good about spending more on food, with some sort of (misguided IMO) view that they are getting something better than someone like me who 'doesn't understand food', and guess what that's fine too. Whatever floats your boat. Oysters are eaten to make the person feel good, they enjoy the process of eating it and the price, that's my opinion. I'm not knocking it, for different reasons I get gratification from BOGOF deals at supermarkets! Louisa.

Seabag, long before the food snob Home Counties blow ins and such like moved into the area and spread the word about snot in an ashtray. We lived very happily eating fresh, and I do mean fresh, seafood from vans and fishmongers locally which had been present in London for generations. Stewed eels, fresh from the Thames. Cockles and muscles, haddock (not dyed yellow either), cod loin. You don't need to teach working class person who grew up in London and is getting on about about the values of fresh fish. If you go to Sopers in Nunhead on a Saturday morning you'll see many of these 'sort of the earths' not buying "pinks", but buying fresh kippers for breakfast served with poached eggs. My mum gave that to me for breakfast as a kid, and in those days it didn't 'come in a bag with a knob of margarine' either! I wouldn't be seen dead eating 'crab sticks' or those other things you refer to. But you keep living that stereotypical dream. Louisa.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Even after it has been clearly demonstrated that > oysters aren't necessarily expensive, the nonsense > continues. If you can afford a couple of pints or > a pack of fags now and again, you can afford > oysters. > > Seabag - thanks for your small injection of fact, > amongst all the made up nonsense. Lots of things aren't necessarily expensive, you can buy a pie from the frozen department in Iceland for under a quid or a gourmet one at a specialist deli for over ?20. It's all relative. My point is the connotation associated with certain foods. Oysters are a classic example, of pointless grandstanding because of the believed and undeserved stereotype that they are something magnificent. I genuinely believe people eat them because like it or not, there is a strong link between grandiose living and eating such things. Undeserved, yes. But it exists. People like to eat them for those reasons, whether we all agree or not. As for the small injection of fact by Seabag, really? Calling fox a mange ridden sidekick? Little bit petty but there you go. Louisa.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Live and let live I say, but that seems to upset > those who want to spit out a load of old clap trap > prejudice about oysters/class and the likes One minute we get the above... Then... Your own prejudices rear their ugly head with this little cracker: > Yellow haddock is dyed and not actually smoked > (the real stuff is near white btw). And good > kippers don't come in a bag, with a knob of > butter, that's just the crap you've been fobbed > off with for years So you see, in reality, you don't "live and let live" do you?, you take great pleasure in denouncing any opinion which isn't in line with your own, and then to top it off you get personal about the specific food someone wants to eat. Consistency Seabag, that's all I ask for! > > Again you and that mange ridden sidekick take > great pleasure in your guff, riding around the > thread on the same old "we clever, you stupid" > scooter Didn't say I was clever and you or anyone else was stupid, don't think fox did either? I've read through it all twice now and nope still don't get that vibe. Think it's you disagreeing with us and then playing the same old card of fox and Louisa are talking rubbish again yada yada yawn. > > What you fail to acquire is the knowledge of that > particular 'food staple' which covers the globe > and thousands of years. Yet you and him act as if > you've uncovered the greatest conspiracy on > earth. Think you think this all through with way too much complex analysis. I've tried Oysters, they taste like crap, and seem pointless. Simple as that really. I don't care how many thousands of millions of years they've been on the earth tbh. > > All the while and right under your noses you've > been sold short by you and yours. Those lovely > fish food traders that sell pinks, crab sticks, > and the rest are the real con > Why are fishmongers a con? They sell something I like, I buy it because I like the taste. They sell something you like, you buy it because of the price. Simple as that really. > > Really, it's quite tragic that in this day and age > of the Internet at your fingertips, you and yours > can't get to grips with these things > > But for comedy value, you both are up there with > UFO abductees and Chem trailers > > And you walk among us > > Heaven help Oh I've got to grips with it all. I've been on the earth long enough to get to grips with a lot of things, it's just sad that I can't have an opinion without being shouted down and made to look stupid for that opinion. That's all. Louisa.

And JoeLeg try telling this lot food is above snobbery. They're like a rat up a drainpipe when it comes to thumping the fox and I back into our circus tent when we feel the need to express an opinion about food. YES snobbery works both AND equally SOME people but, eat and share their experiences about CERTAIN food types not because they genuinely enjoy them, but more because they enjoy being gratified at the thought of the amount of lolly they've spent on said food. Louisa.

Yeah because kippers and smoked haddock are disgusting in comparison to a tonne of snot inside a wannabe ashtray shell. Maybe being working class, I should start embracing this old tradition. Or is it only the preserve of the pretentious foodies nowadays? Louisa.

Bentley's it's called apparently. Louisa.

But rah what is there to love about them? You neck it after squeezing lemon and maybe tabasco on it, and that's that. Louisa.

What's that phrase, "first world problems"? Some kids both home and abroad are starving and would be happy to just have a hot meal. I find it difficult to sympathise, sorry! Louisa.

Jez exactly! It's an imagined branding exercise in which people want to believe that certain food types are more exclusive than others (whether they are in fact or not!). I've seen people buy branded products in supermarkets for much the same reason, despite their dubious claim to being any different to equally non-branded similar products. Louisa.

Who cares how much they cost. They're a pointless food article regardless. No flavour or taste, just an excuse for people to pontificate the imagined exclusivity of the process in which you consume these things. Louisa.

Absolutely agree foxy. That's always been my gripe. Louisa.

Not keen. Went to Galway many years ago and a pub in salt hill sold them with Guinness and soda bread. The black stuff was spot on but the other things tasted like slime mixed with sand and salt. Louisa.