I was thinking the same thing, too. White Castle as well (though not as nationally pervasive as Burger King.)
Addicts to the dopamine hit of artificial outrage. It’s the only thing that affords these wastes of oxygen a simulacrum of being alive.
Okay, this brings the issue into relief. I see why they are all wound-up over this. If it was marketed by Jimmy Dean and there was no mention of the environment, sustainability, or any of that other pinko-commie hogwash, this wouldn’t even be an issue.
Steve Bannon is already setting new standards in that respect. If it catches on with Trumpists, it will become quite fashionable to be followed around by a swarm of flies.
Yes, but BK is a mass-market, nation-wide (global?) chain.
Cracker Barrel is mass-market also (or so they hope). But they also have a ‘country’ atmosphere - you wouldn’t expect to see a man-bun in a Cracker Barrel, so there is more of an ownership/‘this is our place’ vibe.
IANA Trumper.
That said, I’ve tried plant-based meat substitutes, and they taste terrible.
And smell so bad, my neighbors complained.
Ick.
It’s not really about Impossible meat. Cracker Barrell’s brand is strongly associated with rural conservative communities. They view it as one of “their” brands, a rare corporation that caters specifically to them. Adding specifically vegetarian items means they’re trying to cater to people outside their specific demographic. And if they’re successful, of course, that means that “those people” are going to start showing up in Cracker Barrell restaurants, so a decent Christian can’t go out to a meal any more without having to see them.
Burger King, by contrast, has always catered to people outside the rural conservative demographic. They’ve always marketed themselves to “those people,” and “those people” are already in their restaurants all the time. BK adding Impossible meat to their menu doesn’t represent them trying to change the demographics of their customer base.
I’m an avid meat-eater, and some of the plant-based substitutes, especially those made by Impossible, are pretty damned close to tasting like meat to me, when prepared correctly. I’ve had one Impossible burger at Umami Burger that I would never have guessed wasn’t meat if you handed it to me without telling me anything. The Beyond products I don’t like as much – those have an odd smell to them. And Boca Burgers are nothing at all like meat hamburgers.
I know that you’re being sarcastic, but I have absolutely no doubt that there are some conservatives who believe everything you said.
I ate at a Cracker Barrel when I was in the US, once. It was pleasant, the food was tasty, and the service was fine. Thinking back, though, I have to agree that rural conservative communities would see it as one of “their” brands; it had that kind of atmosphere.
Agreed – the newer ones are a lot closer in texture and flavor to actual meat. To me, they aren’t indistinguishable from beef or pork, but they’re pretty darned good.
The older ones, like Boca, aren’t nearly as close to the actual meat experience. (And, I say that as someone who actually likes Boca burgers.)
Have you had an Impossible Burger? The Impossible Whopper is maybe slightly blander than a regular one, but it’s a close call. Same with the Impossible Umami Burger. If you weren’t looking for the differences, you’d never realize you weren’t eating a burger.
In general, if I’m eating vegetarian proteins, I prefer the ones that don’t even attempt to taste like meat, like falafel, or any of a variety of legume-and-grain dishes. Most of the ones that try to taste like meat, don’t, and don’t taste very good, either. The Impossible Whopper, though, is about as good as any Whopper (which isn’t all that great, but not bad, either).
‘We don’t like you’re kind here…’
There’s plenty to back this up.
I guess it was a while ago now, but Chris Rock’s mother sued Cracker Barrel on racial discrimination grounds, and there’s a sizable history of similar suits regarding racial and gender based discrimination. They, of course, have been trying to do better, if only because it’s not especially good for business for a national chain to be heavily tied to that sort of thing.
But yeah, the reactionary, rural conservative types think that sort of thing is the bee’s knees. No wonder they’d have a knee-jerk reaction to anything that carries even a whiff of diversity or inclusion.
This. They know their demographic. Back in the late 90’s, my girlfriend at the time was of Vietnamese descent (and I’m just some white guy). We asked for a seat by the window but they refused because “we can’t have our other customers seeing you”, strongly implying other customers would throw a fit if they saw a mixed race couple. I haven’t been back to a Cracker Barrel since.
One might get the notion that the Cracker in Cracker Barrel is some kind of clue.
I always assumed that is was some kind of self-mocking humor.
I think back to a vacation in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee. They’ve made a massive tourist trade out of hillbilly culture. Every stereotype you can think of is on full display, played up for entertainment value. Moonshine, crude architecture, caricatures of mountain bumpkins. All done in a kitschy charm.
I always got a similar feeling from Cracker Barrel. And I always inferred the “Cracker” part to be a bit of self-referential humor.
As it happens, Merriam-Webster defines “cracker-barrel” as an adjective “suggestive of the friendly homespun character of a country store.” So, technically, you could say, “I’m looking forward to a cracker-barrel visit to Cracker Barrel.” But why is the country store itself named “Cracker Barrel”?
The answer lies in the logo. The term “cracker-barrel” was first used in 1916, and it emerged from the country stores of the era. Also, actual barrels of crackers. The phrase “cracker-barrel” was inspired by the barrels full of soda crackers that were for sale in the country’s country stores. Each barrel stored the popular soda crackers (much like the Southern-favorite saltine crackers or Northern-favorite common crackers), and visitors to the stores sat around the barrels chatting and catching up on the day’s news, hence the “friendly homespun character” touted by the dictionary definition. That’s why the logo tells the store’s origin story and the history of its traditions. Take a look—the figure sits in a rocking chair and leans on a barrel that’s presumably filled with those eponymous crackers.
It opened in 1969. Might not have been intended as humor.
And yet, they were the ones adding the “woke meat”. So do they know their demographic or not?