It all comes down to how the whole exchange is carried out, IMO. It’s possible to encourage someone to try something new in a way that isn’t being rude or pushy, just as it’s possible to politely decline trying something new without being a judgemental asshole.
As long as we’re playing the snooty response game, perhaps I just know people who tend to be openminded and display more intellectual curiosity rather than being stubborn and provincial.
Blast, I can’t argue with that. :mad:
Perhaps. The impression I get from your posts is not one of openmindedness, though. I don’t think calling people “tedious” is openminded. Nor is “boring” openminded.
Of course, no one can be utterly openminded. To use a trivial example inspired by this thread, how about if a teetotaler started accosting you at a party, wanting to know why you drink? Why are you resistant to not drinking?
The thing is, I would find that teetotaler utterly bizarre. You are not a puzzle to be solved, or a convert to be won, no matter how wonderful the world of not drinking is to our ostensible not drinker, no matter how delicious the not alcoholic beverage.
You would, I’m guessing, begin to resent the hell out of someone who wanted you, so politely, to justify yourself to them, who pushed fruit juices and club sodas and apple ciders and claimed you couldn’t taste the not alcohol.
I’ll tell you right up front that if you say you’d find that person’s efforts perfectly charming, I’ll think that you aren’t being honest. No one would find that person’s efforts perfectly charming. That person is an ass. He’s the in person equivalent to a telemarketer.
Only on the dope would those who don’t like to push their beliefs on others be considered stubborn and provincial. This board is special.
Actually, I think you misread. Guns was saying that the people knows tend to be openminded, so she’s used to being able to push new things on people without them getting affronted. In other words, she wasn’t calling the pushers (or non-pushers) stubborn and provincial, just potential pushees.
Hmm. Okay, that’s just as or more plausible a reading of it, but it pretty much comes down to the same thing. She’s calling me snooty for saying that people really have a right to their own tastes, as if insults like stubborn, provincial, tedious, and boring aren’t their own form of elitism and superiority.
But then, we all think we’re superior or else we would change.
Actually, not a comparable situation. Guns already partakes of non-alcoholic beverages, and I presume enjoys them.
Asking someone to try something new is different to asking someone to stop doing something - the two just aren’t comparable in the way you seem to think they are. Now if someone has a religious, medical, or indeed any other reason for not drinking, it is their own business. But “I don’t like the taste” can be quite easily taken as a statement that the person would have a drink if they found something they liked. Indeed, drinking when there are benefits involved (such as a woman’s breasts) also seems to me like an indication the person would be willing to drink alcohol if they found a drink they liked the taste of.
On another point, I am amazed at a work event people would ask why someone doesn’t drink. That’s a huge potential HR problem. Reminds me of the time my boss asked me why I wouldn’t give blood.
You probably don’t give a 110 percent either 
If you genuinely think so, ask them. “Would you be interested in trying to find something you like the taste of? It might be possible.”
A friend of mine doesn’t like the taste of chocolate. Would you keep offering him chocolate?
ETA: And Guns isn’t currently a teetotaler, so a teetotaler is completely justified in suggesting that, hey, wouldn’t she like it better being a teetotaler? How about now? Now? How about now? And now? How about now? 'Cause a person’s opinion can change, you know. Now? How about now? It doesn’t matter if she’s tried it in the past and didn’t like it. Now? Because this time could be different. Now? Now? Gosh, it’s just like a challenge! How about now?
You mean the guy who has admitted that he has a problem with alcoholics, for good reason I might add? The guy who admits he has issues? Are you sure you understand the word you just used there?
I’ll follow your interpretation then. No one has to know she is a drinker if she attends such a party. Unless she is going to some sort of temperance league get together where all they discuss is how to ban alcohol, that is. It is essentially the reverse of what those of us who don’t drink deal with when we go to parties where there is alcohol. In other words, she doesn’t like to deal with what we have to put up with frequently. Honestly, I have no problem with that attitude if that is all there is to it because I emphasize with it.
I think you need to go to AA.
(Just joking, ha ha. What? Don’t you think it is funny?)
This doesn’t seem analogous to me at all with regards to drinkers trying to share the joy, as the teetotaler is trying to take something enjoyable away, not share something enjoyable.
It’s like someone who hates chocolate hiding their spouses stash-o-chocolate because it’s ‘good for them’.
This just shows that you aren’t openminded. The teetotaler very much enjoys the not drinking. The teetotaler knows it’s the secret to happiness!
Well, this did make me laugh, so I shall go forth to work on being more ‘open minded’. 
Isn’t that the same thing as “have you tried…”?
No - because there is a taste to chocolate that I recognize. I can conceive of someone not liking the taste of all forms of chocolate because there is a common theme running through there. As I have said, I simply cannot detect that common theme in alcoholic beverages. That could be my failing, I admit.
On the other hand, if I was with your friend at a Mexican restaurant, and I was enjoy Chicken Mole, I would not have any problem with offering them a taste of it. Because, in my experience, the common taste link between the chocolates isn’t present there.
But the person who says “I don’t like the taste” isn’t a teetotaller. By stating they don’t like the taste, they have announced a willingness to drink if the taste is right - especially if they are willing to choke down the foul brew in order to see boobies.
If someone says “I don’t drink because I hate the feeling even one unit of alcohol gives me” I would never offer them a drink. Similarly with “I am a recover alcoholic,” “Allah forbids it,” “I don’t feel like it,” or, indeed “I don’t drink.” But “I don’t like the taste” is a fundamentally different thing to say, and opens the door to follow up.
No, it’s an extra step of courtesy. It’s asking if it’s okay to ask “Have you tried…” Considering I don’t find it hard to interpret “Have you tried…” as being presumptuous and inconsiderate in certain circumstances, it doesn’t seem like a bad idea to me.
Personally, I’d suggest you poke such a person with a stick. 
Holy God. Shouldn’t I then ask you if it is OK to ask you if it is OK to ask you if you have tried something? That you misinterpret it really is your problem not mine.
I don’t like sushi. When I say that, people often ask me if I have tried whatever the non-fish sushi stuff is. Rather than pouting about the whole situation and having a hissy fit, I realize they are trying to share what they find a pleasureable experience with me, and I tell them that it isn’t the fish I dislike, it is the mouth feel of the rice. And that I will eat sashimi, though I am not the world’s biggest fan of it. There’s nothing presumptuous and inconsiderate in any circumstances about their question, and taking it that way would reflect badly on me not them.
Christ on a crutch, what’s with the overreaction? It’s not like I said I’d kill your dog if you didn’t say please. All I said was that I can see how it can come across as rude in certain circumstances. Don’t be so goddamn defensive.
It’s really not any different from “Could I trouble you for a glass of water?” I mean, why not just say, “Give me a glass of water”? Courtesy and etiquette.
No.
I really can’t understand why “I don’t like X” is taken as an invitation to offer X.
Oh, and the friend who doesn’t like chocolate doesn’t like mole. When you like a flavor, it’s hard to taste it. When you don’t like a flavor, it permeates every taste.
There is nothing in courtesy or etiquette that requires me to pander to the overly sensitive nature of people looking to be offended by a well meant, completely innocent comment. On the other hand, courtesy and etiquette, at least when I was taught it, requires a person to presume where possible that an offer was made in good faith, and to grant people the benefit of the doubt rather than seekign reasons to be offended.
And then the appropriate response would be “thanks for the offer, but I don’t like mole either.” All part of living in a civilized society, as opposed to wetting oneself when someone offers you something you don’t like.