Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thinking ahead here, if you are going to defend the croissant in response to my irrational rage thread gripe, please do it here as the positive thread for lovers of this patronising French breakfast snack already exist in general issues, and I don't want to be accused of hijacking the irrational rage thread. Hell why I am even having to explain myself.


Louisa.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/75983-croissants-what-is-the-point/
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand how a croissant can be patronising, or indeed pointless. What next - an aggressive pork pie? A bashful kebab? Or perhaps a hopelessly misguided strawberry yoghurt?


Alternatively, someone is drunk and/or talking out of their.......


OK, mystery over.

Had some great croissants in France recently (Castries, near Montpellier). Went to the 'boulangerie' nearly every morning for them. Packed with non-middle-class French people it was. The croissants were delicious - had them with apricot jam and a strong coffee on the side.


I suppose they're pointless, though, as are most things I enjoy.

I do like the occasional Almond Croissant but they are not really permitted on my low GI Carb diet..


Plain butter croissants a bit dull. Most of them just turn to dust when you try to eat them..


Empty carbs. No nutritional value. Poor breakfast choice..


Decent bread toasted with peanut butter (no added sugar)will set you up for the morning.


Foxy

DaveR Wrote:

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

> I'm trying to understand how a croissant can be patronizing



I have to say, that was my first thought on the matter too.



I love a pain au chocolat. And if I'm feeling a bit dirty I like a chocolate croissant from Tescos (not even close to being the same thing).

They're unhealthy, they are made up of pretty bland and basic ingredients most of the time. Pointless food article. They're patronising primarily because they're French, you could spray a turd in Chanel no.5 and because it's French it would be superior to any other turd. You get the idea. Muck.


Louisa.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> I'm sure DF is right about dubious nutritional

> value of croissants... but "turn to dust"? No no

> no no...


Ahh..I think he's been eating the straight version (made with margarine)


The butter one's are curved and the others made with 'good ol'marge, wos wrong wiv that' aren't


I've never had a proper croissant that 'turns to dust', but then being an non-undercover guardianista, i'm unlikely too


I like the Observer and croissants

Louisa Wrote:

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

> They're unhealthy, they are made up of pretty

> bland and basic ingredients most of the time.

> Pointless food article. They're patronising

> primarily because they're French, you could spray

> a turd in Chanel no.5 and because it's French it

> would be superior to any other turd. You get the

> idea. Muck.

>

> Louisa.


Oh yes we get the idea

I have to agree with comments in the other thread. I think the doughnuts served up in Lidl are actually very tasty and full of flavour. Far superior to anything offered in sainsburys/tesco et al in store bakeries. A croissant is fundamentally a pastry, and not being French, I was brought up with the expectation of pastry covering a pie not something you eat as a breakfast item. It seems futile to me. A doughnut on the other hand, is filling and contains lots of sugar so it's tasty (nutritional value 0). Doughnuts are not patronising either. When I say patronising let me give an example. If I go into a supermarket to get a sandwich meal deal, I usually go for the basic sandwich option which adds up to roughly 3 quid. It fills me up, does the job and is cheap. Some people go into a supermarket and don't care if they have the meal deal, they'd rather go for the 'extra special' or 'finest' or whatever patronising phrases are used to get an extra couple of quid out of you by the supermarkets. The sandwich is NO different to the basic one, other than the wrapper and wording for the filling using. It's patronising. The same goes for a croissant, if I saw a bacon sarny for 2 quid in a caf it would fill me up and set my day off without patronising me. If I go into a supermarket or posh cafe and pay the best part of a fiver (including coffee and fruit juice etc) I'm being patronised by what is in effect a bit of pastry.


Louisa.

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

    • You're being a little disingenuous here. It is simply not true that "the area should remain suburban 2/3 storeys maximum" because: -> the area the development is in isn't 2/3 storeys maximum today - as evidenced by the school on the lot adjoining the development to the south, as well as the similarly-sized buildings to the north and east.  -> the SPG doesn't preclude this type of development anyway. This "genie in a bottle" stuff is desperate barrel-scraping. Now you're raising the spectre of a 9 storey building on the Gibbs & Dandy site (the chance would be a fine thing) but also arguing Southwark is too slow to approve things and opposed to development more than 2-3 storeys!
    • The sites in question though are not comparable to the builders yard by the station and less likely to be granted planning permission for 9 storey buildings. The builders yard fronts on to the railway line on one side and virtually no residential property surrounding on the other sides. The Gibbs & Dandy /Kwikfit and ED trading trading estate are surrounded at close proximity by residential, and in the case of the latter a Grade II building, so there would more stringent height restrictions. Both these sites are tired and sad looking, and in need of development to provide much needed housing.
    • Not sure if this is any help but was initally told to use google chrome as the browser and the code was the reference. However the person at Southwark parking took pity on me and did it for me 
    • I can see how it could've worked 20 or 30 years ago, when you couldn't swing a pool cue in the Foresters without hitting a sparks, a plumber or a chippy, but the area has changed somewhat. I'm not sure people around here have such trade-able skills these days. Have a word with someone in your local and you'll see. People are always going to need their boiler fixed, a damp patch sorted or their dimmer switch dimmed, but I can pretty much guarantee I'm never going need my corporate policy complied with, my social media planned, my data mined, my green transport tsared, my information architected or my analytics analysed. It reminds me of the great DIY con of the mid to late seventies. My Mum bought into it, my Dad didn't. Anyway, my Mum won out and we let the gardener go (he went on to be TV's Timmy Mallett, so that's a warning from history), but my Dad shorted the house out and singed his head when he cut through the flex on his new Black & Decker hedge trimmer. We all laughed, of course, but he got his own back when, because we didn't use a qualified electrician to do things properly, she electrocuted herself when she pulled the back of the plug off her Carmen heated rollers while it was still in the socket. Keep things professional, say 'No!' to this sort of nonsense. We pay people a decent rate of pay because they're specialists at these things. I did once barter my sister's space hopper and roller skates for twenty-odd square foot of crazy paving, though. That was a birthday present my Mum never forgot, and not in a good way.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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