Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So Huganit doesn't bother to 'jump through hoops' when he/she has dinner guests. Most of us try a little harder to cook well and use nice ingredients. I think I may have seen Hangonit on That C4 Dinner Party program was he the one with the rusty tins and frozen food?

Ain't serving fish or ain't serving them fish? It's an important subtlety.


Having grown up suffering vegetarian xmas imposed on the meat eaters (I was seventeen before I was finally able to substitute nut roast for some good old fashioned goose), I'll happily prepare a veggie some alternative, but never let them dictate what everyone else can eat.

I was only having a bit of fun :)


Although somewhere in this there is a point about there being a big difference between good manners to cater for your guest, and vegetarians having a sense of entitlement that you must cater to their whims.


As for the point about looking for the slightest infraction, I was actually remembering when I had guests who refused to eat food cooked in pots that had once had meat in them.


When referring to combing through the ingredient list, I was recalling guests who would go through the fine print on condiments to find ingredients that may possibly at some extreme stage removed may have been sniffed by a chicken.

No harm, no foul - I know Hughie would never suggest that I'm in any way spineless, out of the highest respect in which he holds me (or the fear of my kicking his poncey ass all over Singapore).


To be fair, these veggies have requested nothing of the kind, and they're certainly not evangelical. As far as I understand. First meeting you see - just trying to be nice. And while being nice, want to make something that I might actually want to eat!

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was only having a bit of fun :)

>

> Although somewhere in this there is a point about

> there being a big difference between good manners

> to cater for your guest, and vegetarians having a

> sense of entitlement that you must cater to their

> whims.

>

> As for the point about looking for the slightest

> infraction, I was actually remembering when I had

> guests who refused to eat food cooked in pots that

> had once had meat in them.

>

Thats crazy - do they object to water out of the public water supply since it might have been recycled after boiling a lobster !

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It’s a 4 year old on a bike do you really think he is going 15mph. Grown adults complaining about a child who probably isn’t able to string a few sentences together says a lot about the people in this forum. If this member was hit from behind the father was probably walking behind the bike so I don’t get the point of stretching out an overreaction from a child in Nursery bumping into you. Grow up Obviously a four year old should be cycling on the pavement.
    • Malumbu,  if none of us were there, does that mean that nobody should post anything on here unless they have witnesses from the EDF? Why would someone post something like this if it  wasn't true? This is not about whether children should or should not be cycling on the pavement. There are specific issues. a) the child was out of sight of the person supposed to be caring for him b) he appears to have been  either not looking where he was going or was out of control of the bike c) if he did see that he was about to hit someone  he apparently did not give them any kind of warning  d)  a person was unexpectedly hit from behind whilst just walking along, which in my view makes him a victim e) does the title of the thread really matter as the issue was described in the first post?  f) nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? The OP was not complaining about the 4 year old. They were complaining about an adult's lack of supervision of a 4 year old who was not capable of riding a bike and who hit someone from behind with no warning. Also, apart from reading the OP more carefully, perhaps also choose your words more carefully. Jobless? Lunatic? Charming.
    • Completely jobless and lunatic behaviour coming on a forum and complaining about a 4 year old and the child’s bike riding skills. Honestly grow up
    • I have to say, I too am upset about the passing of DulwichFox. He was a real local character, who unlike me, managed to stick with ED despite all of the nauseous yuppification of the last three decades. R.I.P to foxy    Louisa. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...