Maybe I’m not creative enough, but I’m having trouble imagining why the waiter would lie about the presence of a fork in the restaurant. I can imagine him being clueless, no problem, but lying about it? Is he saving the fork for his own dinner?
Daniel
Sometimes restaurant owners are weirdos, and it’s the waitstaff who bears the brunt of it. I worked at a place where the owner had a hard-on about lemon wedges in every water glass. Occasionally a customer would specifically request “no lemon” in their water but the boss was staked out in kitchen watching every water glass like a hawk and if he caught you with a water glass without a lemon in it you were in trouble and if you said “but the customer…” it was a losing deal. Customers need lemon! You lazy slacker, you’re fired!"
Sometimes servers get stuck in that place between pleasing the customer and not getting fired over something really stupid by their weirdo boss who won’t actually talk to his customers and verify their desires.
It’s possible this waiter was told “no forks! I send you back to China to work on commune!”
I’m glad you’re pulling away the real message here: Employees in the foodservice industry are not real people.
The cook gets paid more, and the server splits his/her tips with the others.
Can we please quit with the minstrel act?
You’ve never waited tables, I guess.
Not in yellowface, at any rate.
Ha!
If by “waited tables”, you mean “continued your racist mockery after others have asked you to stop”, then no, I haven’t.
Racist? ::checks forum::
Put the crack pipe down. Last time I checked, China was a communist country.
But hey, by all means try to corner me into something racist. I look forward to it.
In this day and age, you should know that it is racist to imply that non-native English speakers have anything less than perfect mastery over the proper usage of definite articles and future auxiliary conjugations.
You… racist.
Who’s implying? Does anyone here actually still think that tired “look at me, I’m typing in a mock Chinese accent” crap is funny? It’s like starting every post with “Yo mama” and not being able to figure out why someone would get tired of it.
Meh. I just don’t get the outrage. I deal with non-native English speakers every day, mostly from Europe and Asia, and they nearly all mangle their syntax - as would I were I to try and speak their native tongues. For most people, unless learned growing up, foreign languages are hard to perfect.
Yeah, Margaret Cho is so yesterday. Get over yourself. Like she’s never banked on the Asian thing. :rolleyes:
Wow, I may be a Hoosier Hick from a small town but even I have chance to interact with a lot of English-as-a-second-language people. Now it might be racist to assume that everybody of Asian decent speaks Chinglish, or that everybody of Spanish decent speaks Spanglish (I even work with some people from Cuir who cannot understand our techs unless they are spoken to in Frenglish) but to assume that is also the point is equally racist, or at the very least asinine.
Yes, a minstrel act in any language is racist but refering to broken English is not.
And if it is then I feel sorry for anybody who hears me speak Spanish, I mangle the shit out of it and blatently don’t care. As long as the person I’m speaking with understands me that’s all I care about.
And anybody who does not understand an Englishman’s need for a knife and fork is clearly working from a different original culture.
I haven’t read Wansink’s paper, which I don’t feel a need to because the author of that work wrote the article he’s citing. I have read parts of Obese Humans and Rats as part of a Motivational Psychology class, but not the entire thing. The entire point of the book is that more effort = less food intake, and the section referenced in the book confirms that. I see no reason to research that in further detail.
I don’t shy away from it, I clarify your misunderstanding of what I said. Although this hasn’t been tested across cultures, I would suspect that from what I know of the rest of food psychology, a person equally proficient in both would be influenced to eat less if using chopsticks, simply because of the amount of food that can be put into your mouth in one bite, which is unrelated to ability.
I wasn’t aware that you wanted me to provide one, since you said you accepted what I wrote as accurate. You really need it, or are you just going to make me jump through more hoops to satisfy your ludicrous need to be convinced in a way most convenient to you?
“Couldn’t be arsed”? yeah, I guess I couldn’t be arsed, in the same way I can’t be arsed to drive to the airport when I don’t need to. After not being able to find it, I figured I’d throw in a quick reference to the book in general in the small case anyone doubted me. Never did I imagine someone would be so ridiculously offended at the idea they would demand a photocopied version of the signed original edition taken with the author holding a newspaper. But nonetheless, I have found such a person, and done the proper amount of research in providing an answer.
No, when did you stop beating your wife?
Absolutely it is. You claim restaurants have no vested in reducing the amount of food customers eat. My cite backs up my claim that many restaurant owners try to reduce the amount of food customers eat. It specifically supported my two claims for why a restaurant would use chopsticks (a) increased perception of authenticity and (b) decreased food cost. The chopstick claim in specific was supported by the owner of many Chinese buffets, the exact style of restaurant I am talking about.
If you can’t see the connection, I have to wonder aloud when the functionally retarded learned how to work message boards (no offense intended to the functionally retarded reading this board who have thus far done a better job of concealing it).
]
That’s it? Your entire beef with what I have to say is over the sloppy use of “only?” Fuck, I’ll gladly take it back if that’s the best you’ve got. What I meant, which I explained in my next post, was that there aren’t any better reasons for chopsticks than “increased profit.” I was explaining that default chopsticks have no relation to food quality.
Having worked in a Chinese restaurant for a year and another that sold sushi, thus stocking chopsticks, for a year, I can tell you with confidence that chopsticks cost more than disposable or rewashable silverware.
There are only two possible reasons for why a business would want to increase these costs: (1) it increased their profits or (2) they are bad at math. You increase profits by lowering the cost and/or raising the price. Chopsticks may provide “authenticity”, which means you can raise the price. Chopsticks may influence customers to eat less, thereby lowering food cost.
Bullshit, that waiter deserved no tip. That’s why tips are tips, for good service. Getting utensils are part of service, not getting them is part of bad service.
THen you’re unclear on what your cite is supposed to show. You’ve lost track.
My question was whether you’ve watched people shovel noodles into their mouths with chopsticks, and if so, whether you hold to your claim. I have, and I do not believe a fork is more efficient in this context.
“Offended”? You made a silly claim on a message board, and I called bullshit. Yeah, I’m spending way too much energy on this silly claim of yours; it’s kind of a hobby of mine to knock down stupid claims on messageboards. Offense doesn’t enter into it.
Heh. You really have no idea what the implication of that classic question is, or else you wouldn’t use it here; it’s a total non sequitur. In no way did I ask a leading question. I asked if you were ready to back away from an inane claim; apparently not. [Edit: later you do back away from it, which is appreciated.]
I claim nothing of the sort.
These things are all true and all uncontroversial.
Nice try at insults. Keep practicing, you’ll get the hang of it.
At any rate, lemme help you out here. If I cite an “unusual” (the author’s word) incident in which a violinist plays his fiddle with the back of his bow, I may not then use it to claim that the only reason violinists use bows is to play with the back of them. You may not go from the specific to the general like that. The fact that one restaurant owner tries something out comes nowhere near proving that all restaurant owners have only this one motive for taking a similar action.
Yes, that’s been my beef (essentially) since I started taking you to task for it. I’ve repeated that over and over, and given you alternative phrasing that would make your point valid. You’re just getting that now, after god knows how many posts? (This is why my hobby is rewarding, I guess). You emphasized that “only” with “nothing more.” It’s an idiotic claim.
I don’t especially believe you, but I’ll stipulate that it’s true, since it’s irrelevant.
There’s a third possible reason: it’s what they’re used to doing, how they’re accustomed to running business.
Even if we stipulate that Chinese restaurants are limited to the two reasons you list, disregarding cultural norms, your claim is STILL stupid, since the “authenticity” argument exists and is so strong. The fact that non-buffets use chopsticks AND tend to serve humongous portions demonstrates amply that there must be a reason for providing chopsticks besides convincing the customer to eat less.
One more point: in your cited anecdote, the owner of the Chinese buffet chain noticed that skinny people tended to be the ones using chopsticks, and concluded that he ought to make chopsticks the default in order to get people to eat less. This is a classic fallacy: association does not imply causation. It may well be possible that westerners who take the time to learn to use chopsticks efficiently are also the ones who are more concerned about fitness. Without further research, figuring out the causal relationship between these two facts is very difficult.
At any rate, you’ve backed away from your inane claim and made it more nuanced, and given cites. Well done! If your future posts start off with such rigor, you’ll be a valuable member of the board.
Daniel
I made this exact point earlier. Probably the waiter was just doing what his boss told him to do. Unfortunately, this caused him a significant financial penalty with the OP.
Which is one of many reasons why people should just be very, very reluctant to withhold the tip altogether. Tip less, sure. Complain to the manager, sure. Never go back, sure. But please don’t stiff the tip without really extreme provocation.
In the U.S., tips are expected. NOT something extra for “good service.” Expected. That’s how it is.
Edit: No, I have not forgotten the OP is in the UK.
It’s not even rural areas which the truth must be questioned. Even in Tokyo, outside of certain areas, the number of restaurants who have a sizable percentage of business from non-Japanese is minimal. Unless you’re setting up shop in Narita, then you will not be losing any money.
I eat with whatever utensils I’m given so I’ve only rarely had to ask for forks, and only when I’m taking someone around with me. I’ve ran into regular restaurants in Tokyo which only have chopsticks.
I haven’t followed all the stupic arguments on why chopsticks will help you lose weight.
Recent study on why that’s bullshit.
I’m fascinated to know what that’s supposed to link to. This study, perhaps?
Daniel
I just hope that sodding waiter realises what a can of worms he opened by not getting me a K&F when I asked for it the first time.
Anyways and still on the subject of restauarants.
I don’t know about the USA but here in Merrie England it is extremely rare if not impossible to encounter female waitresses in an Indian restaurant. Why is this?
In a Chinese rest. there are some but very few, again why?
