Been a long time since I pitted another poster. Usually, if I have a disagreement with someone on the boards, I try to keep it in the thread what spawned the disagreement. But this… oh, this needs to be shared. Because it is so exquisitly stupid. It comes from this monstrosity of a thread, which already was not lacking for idiocy, a fact for which I myself am more than a little responsible. It’s a dumb thread, ladies and gentlemen, and it’s really not worth slogging through eleven pages (and counting) to get the whole context. I don’t think it’s necessary, anyway, because the post really stands on its own.
Check this shit out:
It’s almost… beautiful, in its perfect idiocy. It’s like the Platonic Ideal of a dumb post. Not only does it fail to prove the point he’s trying to make, it actually supports the other side, and it makes him look like a shallow, immature asshole for sharing it in the first place. Congratulations, Shagnasty! You hit the trifecta!
I dunno, maybe I’m missing some oomph and oughta read thru the eleventy-seven posts to gain some context?
I’m not seeing that in any way but how Shag portrayed it, there’re certain expectations of sophistication that accompany adulthood. This is startling news?!
I always liked that story and most people get a kick out of it when it comes up. Even Suzie laughs about it now. I think that it could be the basis for a cute Saturday Night Live skit. Oh well, some people can’t see the ridiculous because they are living it themselves.
No, that would take too long…let me sum up: One side (which includes Miller and myself, as well as the OP) believes that people should all be allowed to eat whatever they want, without being judged by other people for their idiosyncrasies - be it that they have allergies, gag when they taste certain flavors, or simply don’t like a particular food. The other side (which really doesn’t include most of the pittees…) believes that we “non-foodies” should shut up and eat everything, anywhere, anytime, regardless of whether we like it, or even if it would make that person ill. It’s rude to turn down food offered by a host, regardless of the reason.
Miller is saying that Shag’s post actually shows how goofy the foodie argument is by saying that someone who drinks milk at a bar and is subsequently “dumped” for being unsophisticated does not prove the point of the “foodie”. It proves the point of the people who say “food is food, I eat what I want to eat, why do you care?” The guy was a jerk for not wanting to see her again based on that one thing.
~reads post~
Yeah…it’s a really bad thread. I hope I summed it up properly.
You’re right, drinking this or that doesn’t equal sophistication, but there’s undeniably a certain opinion that goes 'long with ordering sodeypop at a martini bar, no?
Yes, folks should eat and drink whatever the hell they want, it’s silly to think otherwise, but it’s also wishful thinking to pretend that sometimes impressions won’t be formed by the choices one makes, fair or unfair it just is.
Well, I prefer milk to beer or wine. I don’t know if I’d order it at a bar (I can get milk at home) but if someone ordered milk on a date I’d think it was really awesome and would probably date the person again based on that alone. The courage to rebel against convention and all.
I wouldn’t order milk in a bar unless I was sure they did a big business in White Russians or something. But to use that as a sign of sophistication? Yeah, right, whatever.
If an otherwise wonderful and suitable person is dumped just because they drink milk instead of something more “sophisticated,” then the dumper is a MORON. If, however, the milk thing was the tip of the iceberg and pointed to many other things that were incompatable about the person, fine. But milk by itself? Totally ridiculous.
A person is well rid of someone who will dump them over just milk.
So basically, the sophisticated thing to do would be to prefer a man with a lot of money over a man who wouldn’t see her as an uncultured hick for not caring to drink alcohol.
There’s a shorter word for that kind of behaviour, I believe.
The only way I can see her behavior being problematic is if she chose, or had an equal hand in the choosing of, the venue for the date. Otherwise the way I see it she was being obliging by not objecting to a locale her date obviously liked–all she did was order something she’d prefer over the usual fare. If her date’s night was spoiled because she chose to drink something she liked, so be it. She’s better off without him.
Nah, but if you’re suddenly in Eve-movie territory and Cary Grant or Deborah Kerr invites you into swankville, you’re not quite hanging with your pals, eh?
I’m utterly clueless about both wine and beer and would likely look like an utter boob ordering, but at least I’m acknowledging my boobness if I ever find myself timewarped and sitting opposite Mr.Grant.
I’m guessing the heat from that thread is still too fresh, this is the definitive worst anecdote in all of SDMB history?
Yeah. Like this one time my cousin was dating this really rich guy, and she invited him to my parents annual fish-fry. Imagine her embarrassment when he asked for a glass to pour his beer into! Can you imagine? Of course, she dumped him immediately.
:rolleyes: <—closed captioned for the sarcasm-impaired.
My mother tells the following story about her passage to the Mother Country from New Zealand way back when. Invited to drinks with the ship’s captain, she is asked what she’d like by a waiter: “Milk”, says the ingénue. “Me too”, says the perfect gent of a ship’s captain.
