On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 02:16:58 GMT, Rhonda Anderson wrote:
>
> We don't disparage people who only like science fiction movies for
> example, and don't want to watch movies of any other genre. We don't
> disparage people who only like bourbon and don't want to drink other
> spirits. Why is it different with foods?

i'm not so sure it's all that different from other realms. i'm pretty sure
i've heard 'oh you will like *this* - it's not like the other science
fiction/teen comedies/slash movies.'

but then again, some people who rule out *all* of a certain genre or
vegetable end up missing the boat. *c'est la vie*.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 02:16:58 GMT, Rhonda Anderson wrote:
> >
> > We don't disparage people who only like science fiction movies for
> > example, and don't want to watch movies of any other genre. We don't
> > disparage people who only like bourbon and don't want to drink other
> > spirits. Why is it different with foods?
>
> i'm not so sure it's all that different from other realms. i'm pretty sure
> i've heard 'oh you will like *this* - it's not like the other science
> fiction/teen comedies/slash movies.'
>
> but then again, some people who rule out *all* of a certain genre or
> vegetable end up missing the boat. *c'est la vie*.
>
> your pal,
> blake

That's a good reason to not force kids to eat stuff.

The other day (on my birthday), I was over at my sisters, (she'd made me
those lovely tempura veggies) and my oldest nephew did not want to try
them. I dipped one of the tempura green beans into the dipping sauce
Sunny had made (teryaki, soy, fish sauce, ginger and garlic that was
utterly divine) and said "here, just one bite, if you don't like it you
don't have to eat it".

He took a bite, said "that's good" then proceeded to pig out on the
green beans and other stuff with the dipping sauce. :-)

Both my nephews respond well to that and there are few foods they won't
eat. Dyson does not like mashed potatoes, and so far, that's about it.

He'll be turning 7 here in a couple of months...
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

> I don't eat offal - I've
> tried liver and disliked it, and no desire to try the rest.
[snip]
> Provided someone actually tries things, I don't think it's a failing
> that there are a lot of foods they don't like.

I think there is a contradiction there somewhere...

Victor

sf wrote:

>>I can't find "teutlophobe" in a dictionary and I think you made it up
>>and you can just stop that right now, okay? Beta vulgaris seems like an
>>apt description (see Wiki on beets).
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&e...phobia&spell=1
>
> Fear of German or German things.

No, you spelled it wrong. There's an "l" in there which you omitted, i.e.
it's "teutlo" rather than "teuto."

"Teutlo" is the Greek word for "beet." With "phobe" attached, the word means
"one who fears or hates beets."

Bob

(Victor Sack) wrote in
news:1ixznmq.k83mlzqsdggeN%
:

> Rhonda Anderson >
wrote:
>
>> I don't eat offal - I've
>> tried liver and disliked it, and no desire
to try the rest.
> [snip]
>> Provided someone actually tries things, I
don't think it's a failing
>> that there are a lot of foods they don't
like.
>
> I think there is a contradiction there
somewhere...
>
> Victor
>

Maybe - but I think there's a distinction
between "tries things" and
"tries absolutely everything".Mabe I should
have written "tries most
things" :-). I think there's a difference
between someone who never
tries _anything_ they've never had before, and
someone who perhaps has a
stumbling point with one particular item.

I don't wish to try offal other than liver
(think I may have had some
kidney once in something, but not sure). I
don't know why exactly. There
are a few things I wouldn't try - balut for
example - but I don't think
that makes me fussy/picky.


--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the
rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back
threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904

In article >,
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:

> Kimberly's reply in Jill's thread, "Let's Talk About Picky Eater's Again
> <G>" got me to wondering if there is a difference between picky and
> fussy.

OK, let's try another one. I don't think this guy is either one, but
we'll see what people say. I'll call him G, because his name is Gordon.

My wife has been cooking for a church activity called Coming of Age this
year. There are about six churches involved, all within about 50 miles.
There are about fifty people, forty kids and ten adults. It is
celebrating the passage from childhood to adulthood. The kids are
mostly 13 and 14. There were three main events, all through the year.
The last event for the program just finished this past weekend, and was
a campout. All events were from Friday after dinner to Sunday before
lunch. Although that's not many meals, at that age, the kids eat
constantly and a lot.

My wife got an Email a couple of weeks ago from an adult volunteer, G.
About half the adults are parents who just attend one event. This guy
said he realized that he would have to bring his own food, but wondered
what was planned, so he would know what to bring to supplement what
would be served. He said, "I've needed to eliminate grains, bread,
pasta, potatoes and fruit from my diet. That pretty much leaves me with
meat, a limited amount of legumes and nuts, and lots of vegetables,
mostly greens. How does that compare with the menu planning? (I'm aware
that there won't be any meat, I'm more concerned with the availability
of greens.)". OK, that's pretty tough.

So, my wife responded, "Let me know what you think, so we can make the
food work for you.", after explaining what was planned, which included
lots of meat. We have lots of vegetarians in our churches, maybe 5%,
but my wife likes meat, so she does vegie options along with, but not
instead of, the meat.

So, he responded with some words, and then added, "I appreciate your
effort, but I really think the simplest way of dealing with this (and
the healthiest way) is for me to cook some greens and meat dishes ahead
of time.". My wife was peeved. I didn't see why, since he had been
clear, and wasn't asking for anything but a little information so he
could plan.

My wife said it went well, and G found some food to eat. He also
brought little containers of food with him, which he ate cold. My wife
talked to him a little about his diet, and suggested some resources.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:29:05 +0200, (Victor Sack)
wrote:

>Rhonda Anderson > wrote:
>
>> I don't eat offal - I've
>> tried liver and disliked it, and no desire to try the rest.
>[snip]
>> Provided someone actually tries things, I don't think it's a failing
>> that there are a lot of foods they don't like.
>
>I think there is a contradiction there somewhere...
>
Not to me (although I don't turn my nose up at liver). I tried menudo
once. It was very tasty and a do over - except for the tripe and
there is no way I'll ever even look at brains or feet on my plate.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> I repeat my question: Is there a difference between a fussy eater and a
> picky eater? How would you describe the differences?

I'd say a fussy eater probably eats a larger variety of foods albeit
with rules about them than the picky eater who just wants a limited diet
of acceptable foods.

Omelet wrote:

> <lol> If I am serving some specific dinner guests, I'll happily discuss
> the menu with them (usually via e-mail) prior to their visit, and cook
> according to their wishes.

At what point in that process are you the hostess rather than just a
cook at the home-restaurant they agreed to eat at that night??
Do you let them dictate the entire menu, dining hour, drinks and dessert?

cshenk wrote:

>> But what you describe is NEED-based, either medical or religious, not
>> capricious picky for the sake of being indulged.
>
> That's true. We have only one person who sometimes comes who's 'picky' and
> her Mom brings something she knows that teen will eat. The Teen isn't *too*
> terribly picky and is polite about it. She may ask what's in something and
> turn a delicate nose up, but she often will try a tiny nibble if it is
> vegetarian.

>
Nothing of what you describe in all these long posts is a "dinner party"
to me. It is a pot luck, or casual family style dinner or bbq or some
other casual function. Rules of engagement are different for these
events, IMO.

"sf" wrote

> Sounds like those with special diets also may bring a dish they can
> eat. That's practical and neighborly!

Sure! We kinda expect any dish a person brings, fits their diet needs. The
one kid who's 'picky' may not eat the dish her parents bring, but that's
because she pigged out on my rice balls (grin). They rest of us eat the
dish her parents brought and it's always good.

Meantime, cook out in swing here! Came in to check messages as I tend the
easter eggs boiling.

On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:45:29 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 01:24:33 -0500, "modom (palindrome guy)"
> > wrote:
>
>>You do make frequent use of your dictionary, and I've often been
>>grateful for that.
>
> If you use firefox, you can add merriam webster to the search engines.

though i don't like that dictionary that much, it's very handy in the
search engines.

your pal,
blake

"cshenk" wrote
> "Nexis" wrote

>> What time should we arrive? ;-)
>
> Hehehe, about 11am for the next one! Saturday if weather holds. Bring an
> extra chair for each of ya and a mug of some sort as Jamie is a little
> short on chairs and mugs for hot drinks.

We moved it to my place due to weather but the rain held off. I'm the only
one with a big roofed porch. We finished up about 30 mins ago. Last 15
been people packing their coolers etc full of the leftovers and wandering
off.

>> You seem to have the same take on it as I do...it's easy enough to make
>> small adjustments to many dishes so that they are suitable to various
>> restrictions. Like the rice you mentioned, for example.
>
> Easy as can be. Just make multiple dishes and ensure a few suit each
> person.

Just like Jaime (the origionally planned host before we saw the weather), I
too am mug challanged but everyone brought something suitable or drank from
a can. Paul left a 12 pack of Sam Adams for the next one (sans 2 or 3).
Sadie left a box of Don's favorite rasberry tea. Joho dropped off charchol,
more than needed. Jaime donated 'forever' 3 plastic chairs as he got new
stuff just recently. Joe brought 15 plastic easter eggs filled with candies
which we hid and let the kids find. Ghiselle brought a box of 24 'peeps'.

Meal as follows:

*Smoked Bangus (Milkfish, I checked the english name this time)
Chicken thighs in BBQ mop ( a vinegar mustard sort, hard to describe but
good)
*Rice balls
coleslaw (an oniony sort, not sweet)
Cantalope
Watermelon
Spinach salad with mushrooms, carrots, and radishes (dressings at side of
choice, 5)
Dill and sweet pickles, also watermelon rind pickles
Green Beans (steamed then with a drizzle of white cheese sauce)
*Fresh bread from breadmaker (rye-white mix)
Fresh water mussels steamed open on the grill and served with garlic butter
Grilled eggplant
Chilled 'gazpacho soup' with fresh herbs and sour cream on the side
Apple crumble pie and a pecan pie
Cheese plate

We decided since no one knows for sure, that Bangus is kosher ;-)

I tucked a * by what I provided but there's a slight cheat as I didnt smoke
the bangus. Another did that for us all from some fish I had handy.

Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

Something seems to have happened with your line-length settings. Could
you check them, please? Too-short lines are nearly as hard to read as
too-long ones.

> I think there's a difference
> between someone who never
> tries _anything_ they've never had before, and
> someone who perhaps has a
> stumbling point with one particular item.
>
> I don't wish to try offal other than liver
> (think I may have had some
> kidney once in something, but not sure). I
> don't know why exactly.

I do not think "offal" is anything but an arbitrary term for internal
organs and certain external ones. It does not necessarily indicate that
the "items" in question have much in common with each other or are at
all comparable taste- or texture-wise. So, any stumbling point with a
particular item should not really apply to any other one, as they really
are mostly unrelated in any culinary sense. They are sweetbreads,
kidneys, tripe, chitterlings, lights/lungs, ears, tails, trotters,
cheek, tongue, brains, heart, giblets, fries/testicles - all considered
to be offal/awful. They have very little to do with each other,
culinarily.

So, your "offal" generalisation for refusing to try certain things does
not really make sense culinarily - it must lie somewhere else, in
semantics perhaps. Which makes you at least a somewhat picky, but not
necessarily fussy, eater, I am afraid.

Victor

In article
>,
Dan Abel > wrote:
(snip)
> So, my wife responded, "Let me know what you think, so we can make the
> food work for you.", after explaining what was planned, which included
> lots of meat. We have lots of vegetarians in our churches, maybe 5%,
> but my wife likes meat, so she does vegie options along with, but not
> instead of, the meat.
>
> So, he responded with some words, and then added, "I appreciate your
> effort, but I really think the simplest way of dealing with this (and
> the healthiest way) is for me to cook some greens and meat dishes ahead
> of time.". My wife was peeved. I didn't see why, since he had been
> clear, and wasn't asking for anything but a little information so he
> could plan.

Hmm. I don't know why she was peeved, either, unless her telling him
what was planned was going to let some surprise loose. Maybe he just
re-thought and decided it would be less fuss <g> for all if he simply
brought his own vittles.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - good news 4-6-2009
"What you say about someone else says more
about you than it does about the other person."

In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
>
> > <lol> If I am serving some specific dinner guests, I'll happily discuss
> > the menu with them (usually via e-mail) prior to their visit, and cook
> > according to their wishes.
>
> At what point in that process are you the hostess rather than just a
> cook at the home-restaurant they agreed to eat at that night??
> Do you let them dictate the entire menu, dining hour, drinks and dessert?

Why not? I'm serving THEM, not me!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

(Victor Sack) wrote in
:

> Rhonda Anderson > wrote:
>
> Something seems to have happened with your line-length settings.
Could
> you check them, please? Too-short lines are nearly as hard to read as
> too-long ones.


My line length is set at 76 and I haven't changed it at all - not sure
what happened there. Will keep an eye on it.

They are sweetbreads,
> kidneys, tripe, chitterlings, lights/lungs, ears, tails, trotters,
> cheek, tongue, brains, heart, giblets, fries/testicles - all
considered
> to be offal/awful. They have very little to do with each other,
> culinarily.

Mm, tails, trotters, cheek, ears - I probably wouldn't class those as
offal in my own internal ramblings. While I don't know that I'd go out
and buy any of those any time soon, I wouldn't necessarily pass up an
opportunity to try them - though ears I'm more familiar with as a
rawhide treat for dogs so not seeming so appetising :-). I have seen
some recipes for cheek that looked very good.

>
> So, your "offal" generalisation for refusing to try certain things
does
> not really make sense culinarily - it must lie somewhere else, in
> semantics perhaps. Which makes you at least a somewhat picky, but not
> necessarily fussy, eater, I am afraid.

I would think more of internal organs as offal. Not necessarily
testicles, but don't particularly think of those as appetising either.
As I said, I have no desire to try these things so I'm not going to go
out and buy them. If someone asked if I ate them I would honestly answer
that I hadn't tried them and don't think of them as particularly
appetising. However, if I was at someone's house for dinner and they
served them, it doesn't mean I would flat out refuse to eat them. I like
to think I would at least attempt to eat them.

As to why I have this stumbling block over internal organs, don't know.
When I was studying agriculture we did 3 weeks of studying various
systems on the one sheep's carcase - not as well preserved as it should
have been, things weren't smelling or looking too good after the 3rd
week of yanking it out of the fridge - perhaps that's the key :-)
Perhaps having seen some very graphic photos of diseased organs doesn't
help. Though I didn't find apparently healthy kidneys, heart etc. any
more appetising when gutting a just slaughtered sheep.

The testicles - I can tell you they stick in your hair when other
students think it's funny to throw them (during a session of lamb
marking) at one of the few females in the course. Don't know what they
taste like.


Anyway, if that makes me picky, I'm picky. Would have to think it's at
the very low end of the scale though :-)

--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904

On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:12:03 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:
>
>man, what a drag that would be! dictionaries are almost as much fun as the
>english language is.
>
>(modom - i ordered "the professor and the madman' yesterday, used from
>amazon. i knew of the book, but the library didn't have it the last time i
>was there.)
>
Winchester is a fine writer. I enjoyed the book a lot, and so did my
wife.

OBFood: an Asian-style beef salad with leftover steak, cabbage,
avocado, cherry tomatoes and a dressing of nouc mam, ginger-infused
oil, lemon juice (out of limes), sugar, mint, cilantro, sambal oelek,
and cilantro. A few roasted peanuts sprinkled on top. Dinner
--
modom

ambitious when it comes to fiddling with meat

"Omelet" ha scritto nel messaggio
> Goomba wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>
>> > <lol> If I am serving some specific dinner guests, I'll happily discuss
>> > > the menu with them (usually via e-mail) prior to their visit, and
>> > cook according to their wishes.
>>
>> At what point in that process are you the hostess rather than just a cook
>> at the home-restaurant they agreed to eat at that night??
>> Do you let them dictate the entire menu, dining hour, drinks and dessert?
>
> Why not? I'm serving THEM, not me!

Om, that's not how entertaining generally works. Hosts generally make what
they want, what they can afford, what interests them and what they are
capable of cooking. Other than life threatening allergies, guests don't
really have a say in menus.
Do you remember the brouhaha over how a "hostess" assigned someone from
here to bring a scaldingly expensive dish and wine to a party? And that no
one here thought she was hosting a party, just gouging some neighbors? Your
"order it up right here" take on it sort of asks for that.
I cook for money. I ask restrictions ahead of time but I make up the menus.
Most of my clients now know enough about Italian cookery to have input, but
when I started people would suggest what sounded like the menu at Olive
Garden or some other chain. Of course any of us can cook that, but why? I
would think the same of your guests. You know a lot more about what you do
very well than they can. You know what's in season, whatìs in the markets,
what you personally can do with those things.
As I read this thread I imagined someone from here getting invited to the
White House and trying to tell Michelle Obama what to serve them and what
they didn't like.

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> > Why not? I'm serving THEM, not me!
>
> Om, that's not how entertaining generally works. Hosts generally make what
> they want, what they can afford, what interests them and what they are
> capable of cooking. Other than life threatening allergies, guests don't
> really have a say in menus.
> Do you remember the brouhaha over how a "hostess" assigned someone from
> here to bring a scaldingly expensive dish and wine to a party? And that no
> one here thought she was hosting a party, just gouging some neighbors? Your
> "order it up right here" take on it sort of asks for that.
> I cook for money. I ask restrictions ahead of time but I make up the menus.
> Most of my clients now know enough about Italian cookery to have input, but
> when I started people would suggest what sounded like the menu at Olive
> Garden or some other chain. Of course any of us can cook that, but why? I
> would think the same of your guests. You know a lot more about what you do
> very well than they can. You know what's in season, whatìs in the markets,
> what you personally can do with those things.
> As I read this thread I imagined someone from here getting invited to the
> White House and trying to tell Michelle Obama what to serve them and what
> they didn't like.

Well, what I did last time was make suggestions based on what was
available and affordable. :-) I simply let them make their suggestions
from there. _I_ still chose how it was going to be cooked.

And they made their choices based on that. Shark steak is one of the
cheaper meats and they requested fish or poultry.

The important thing to ME is that my guests truly enjoy the meal!

And I've known these people for a few years. Their dietary guidelines
are similar to my own so that made it even easier.

I will, however, prepare special dishes for guests on request. I happen
to ENJOY doing that and cannot understand anyone that does not feel that
way.

Please explain your selfish attitude???

What was most amusing was one of his e-mails where he stated that maybe
he was too picky to be invited for dinner. <g> I had to reassure him
that that was just not so. Not to ME anyway!

If I'm going to cook for guests, I'm going to cook for the guests, not
myself!

I guess it comes from cooking for family for so long. It's not unusual
for me to prepare a separate meal for myself if what they want does not
accommodate MY picky tastes and requirements!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Omelet wrote:

> Well, what I did last time was make suggestions based on what was
> available and affordable. :-) I simply let them make their suggestions
> from there. _I_ still chose how it was going to be cooked.

I don't know if that would entice me to come to dinner. It sounds a
little sad and as a guest I'd feel awkward telling the hostess what to
prepare. There would be no element of surprise or pleasure if all I felt
was that I was at a restaurant where I had to order what *I* wanted. No
pleasant anticipation of the meal to be discovered there. No feeling of
being pampered by someone taking care of me.

>
> And they made their choices based on that. Shark steak is one of the
> cheaper meats and they requested fish or poultry.

Did you ever go out on a date with a guy and feel obligated to order the
cheapest thing on the menu so he didn't spend too much money? But what
you REALLY wanted was Lobster.

>
> The important thing to ME is that my guests truly enjoy the meal!

I bet they'd enjoy not being expected to plan the meal. Being a GUEST
and not having to make ANY decisions. It is just as pampering as making
them pre-order their meal. Entertaining means sharing your home, your
style, your tastes with others, and hope that they find it pleasing too.
It is for MUTUAL pleasure.

>
> And I've known these people for a few years. Their dietary guidelines
> are similar to my own so that made it even easier.
>
> I will, however, prepare special dishes for guests on request. I happen
> to ENJOY doing that and cannot understand anyone that does not feel that
> way.

Some people like being doormats too. Does that make it appropriate for a
dinner party? A dinner party is something a bit more special than some
backyard get together or a "combined resources" group meal. If one
expects the guest to dictate the meal, why should they bother to get
dressed up and drive over if they could just as soon stay at home or go
to a restaurant and get the same thing?
>
> Please explain your selfish attitude???

Please explain why you don't trust your tastes to be able to plan an
attractive, tasty menu on your own?
>
> What was most amusing was one of his e-mails where he stated that maybe
> he was too picky to be invited for dinner. <g> I had to reassure him
> that that was just not so. Not to ME anyway!
>
> If I'm going to cook for guests, I'm going to cook for the guests, not
> myself!

Maybe they sense you have limited social and entertaining experience,
and feel they are trying to make it easy for you since you don't appear
confident enough to pull it off otherwise? <shrug>
>
> I guess it comes from cooking for family for so long. It's not unusual
> for me to prepare a separate meal for myself if what they want does not
> accommodate MY picky tastes and requirements!

In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
>
> > Well, what I did last time was make suggestions based on what was
> > available and affordable. :-) I simply let them make their suggestions
> > from there. _I_ still chose how it was going to be cooked.
>
> I don't know if that would entice me to come to dinner. It sounds a
> little sad and as a guest I'd feel awkward telling the hostess what to
> prepare. There would be no element of surprise or pleasure if all I felt
> was that I was at a restaurant where I had to order what *I* wanted. No
> pleasant anticipation of the meal to be discovered there. No feeling of
> being pampered by someone taking care of me.

If they are good friends, I can talk to them with comfort and
confidence. :-)
>
> >
> > And they made their choices based on that. Shark steak is one of the
> > cheaper meats and they requested fish or poultry.
>
> Did you ever go out on a date with a guy and feel obligated to order the
> cheapest thing on the menu so he didn't spend too much money? But what
> you REALLY wanted was Lobster.

Yes actually.

>
> >
> > The important thing to ME is that my guests truly enjoy the meal!
>
> I bet they'd enjoy not being expected to plan the meal. Being a GUEST
> and not having to make ANY decisions. It is just as pampering as making
> them pre-order their meal. Entertaining means sharing your home, your
> style, your tastes with others, and hope that they find it pleasing too.
> It is for MUTUAL pleasure.

You don't know this particular couple. <g> They are comfortable
discussing this kind of thing with me. It's no different than
discussing what guns to bring to the range to decide if we are going go
skeet shoot or not.

>
> >
> > And I've known these people for a few years. Their dietary guidelines
> > are similar to my own so that made it even easier.
> >
> > I will, however, prepare special dishes for guests on request. I happen
> > to ENJOY doing that and cannot understand anyone that does not feel that
> > way.
>
> Some people like being doormats too. Does that make it appropriate for a
> dinner party? A dinner party is something a bit more special than some
> backyard get together or a "combined resources" group meal. If one
> expects the guest to dictate the meal, why should they bother to get
> dressed up and drive over if they could just as soon stay at home or go
> to a restaurant and get the same thing?

I'd rather be used than useless, thanks.

> >
> > Please explain your selfish attitude???
>
> Please explain why you don't trust your tastes to be able to plan an
> attractive, tasty menu on your own?

Peoples tastes vary widely! I see it HERE all the time. I'd rather
cook to please the individual palate.

> >
> > What was most amusing was one of his e-mails where he stated that maybe
> > he was too picky to be invited for dinner. <g> I had to reassure him
> > that that was just not so. Not to ME anyway!
> >
> > If I'm going to cook for guests, I'm going to cook for the guests, not
> > myself!
>
> Maybe they sense you have limited social and entertaining experience,
> and feel they are trying to make it easy for you since you don't appear
> confident enough to pull it off otherwise? <shrug>

Okay, I'll confess to that. :-) I don't entertain all that much,
granted.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> > Well, what I did last time was make suggestions based on what was
> > available and affordable. :-) I simply let them make their suggestions
> > from there. _I_ still chose how it was going to be cooked.
>
> I don't know if that would entice me to come to dinner. It sounds a
> little sad and as a guest I'd feel awkward telling the hostess what to
> prepare. There would be no element of surprise or pleasure if all I felt
> was that I was at a restaurant where I had to order what *I* wanted. No
> pleasant anticipation of the meal to be discovered there. No feeling of
> being pampered by someone taking care of me.

Ps, I'd fed this particular couple before and they rated my cooking 5
stars. They actually _asked_ to be invited over for a Christmas dinner.
<g>

I consider that to be a serious compliment!

I discussed what to serve with them last time too. I grilled spatcocked
cornish game hen over mesquite last time and grilled some of the veggies
as well.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

> (Victor Sack) wrote:
>
> > They are sweetbreads, kidneys, tripe, chitterlings, lights/lungs, ears,
> > tails, trotters, cheek, tongue, brains, heart, giblets, fries/testicles
> > - all considered to be offal/awful. They have very little to do with
> > each other, culinarily.
>
> Mm, tails, trotters, cheek, ears - I probably wouldn't class those as
> offal in my own internal ramblings. While I don't know that I'd go out
> and buy any of those any time soon, I wouldn't necessarily pass up an
> opportunity to try them - though ears I'm more familiar with as a
> rawhide treat for dogs so not seeming so appetising :-). I have seen
> some recipes for cheek that looked very good.

Ears are not to everyone's taste, as they tend to be cartilagineous.
Testicles tend to be bland. Trotters, if served by themselves, rather
than used as a gelatinous ingredient, are a rather fussy dish and one
requiring long cooking. Cheek is very good for gelatinous stews akin to
oxtail ones.

You seem to have missed the best part of them all, offal or no offal:
tongue. Nothing is better in the whole wide world, meatwise. Nothing.

Then there are those delicate sweetbreads... And Tammy's kidneys in
mustard sauce... And menudo or sopa de mondongo... And
andouillettes... Ah!

Victor

In article >,
(Victor Sack) wrote:

> Rhonda Anderson > wrote:
>
> > (Victor Sack) wrote:
> >
> > > They are sweetbreads, kidneys, tripe, chitterlings, lights/lungs, ears,
> > > tails, trotters, cheek, tongue, brains, heart, giblets, fries/testicles
> > > - all considered to be offal/awful. They have very little to do with
> > > each other, culinarily.
> >
> > Mm, tails, trotters, cheek, ears - I probably wouldn't class those as
> > offal in my own internal ramblings. While I don't know that I'd go out
> > and buy any of those any time soon, I wouldn't necessarily pass up an
> > opportunity to try them - though ears I'm more familiar with as a
> > rawhide treat for dogs so not seeming so appetising :-). I have seen
> > some recipes for cheek that looked very good.
>
> Ears are not to everyone's taste, as they tend to be cartilagineous.
> Testicles tend to be bland. Trotters, if served by themselves, rather
> than used as a gelatinous ingredient, are a rather fussy dish and one
> requiring long cooking. Cheek is very good for gelatinous stews akin to
> oxtail ones.
>
> You seem to have missed the best part of them all, offal or no offal:
> tongue. Nothing is better in the whole wide world, meatwise. Nothing.
>
> Then there are those delicate sweetbreads... And Tammy's kidneys in
> mustard sauce... And menudo or sopa de mondongo... And
> andouillettes... Ah!
>
> Victor

I totally adore sweetbreads. ;-d They are good marinated and grilled or
boiled fresh and served with a cream sauce over toast or scrambled eggs.

Trotters are good as a single item cooked in a stew with miripoix. They
don't require long cooking if you use a pressure cooker. One hour and
you are good to go. Calves feet or chicken feet, same same.

Cheek meat has a LOT of applications. Best in tacos (imho) but also good
as a basic stew meat. I generally cook those the day ahead of time tho'
so the resulting stock/broth can be defatted overnight in the
refrigerator.

I've never eaten ears. Not yet.

Tongue is a delicious delicacy.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Rhonda Anderson posted:

> I wouldn't necessarily pass up an
> > opportunity to try them - though ears I'm more familiar with as a
> > rawhide treat for dogs so not seeming so appetising :-).

The dogs sure seem to love them! I fed out the last of a bag of them
yesterday I found laying around and Chelsea the corgie was MOST pleased.

Since dad's been ill and I've taken over feeding the dogs, Chelsea has
dropped some weight so is a lot more active. Dad tends to overfeed the
canned food and she really was getting way too fat. Dad won't listen
when I ask him to cut the daily "treat" food. <sigh>

I saw her tearing around the "race track" in the yard yesterday for the
first time in months.

I free-feed kibbles and killed the canned food completely. All three
dogs now get just one packet of doggie burger daily in addition to the
free choice kibbles. The border collie is looking fine (as is Chelsea)
but the Lab/Chow (Ferocious) is getting a bit chubby. I'll have to keep
an eye on him and maybe remove the free choice kibbles.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> (Victor Sack) wrote:
>
>> Rhonda Anderson > wrote:
>>
>>> (Victor Sack) wrote:
>>>
>>>> They are sweetbreads, kidneys, tripe, chitterlings, lights/lungs, ears,
>>>> tails, trotters, cheek, tongue, brains, heart, giblets, fries/testicles
>>>> - all considered to be offal/awful. They have very little to do with
>>>> each other, culinarily.
>>> Mm, tails, trotters, cheek, ears - I probably wouldn't class those as
>>> offal in my own internal ramblings. While I don't know that I'd go out
>>> and buy any of those any time soon, I wouldn't necessarily pass up an
>>> opportunity to try them - though ears I'm more familiar with as a
>>> rawhide treat for dogs so not seeming so appetising :-). I have seen
>>> some recipes for cheek that looked very good.
>> Ears are not to everyone's taste, as they tend to be cartilagineous.
>> Testicles tend to be bland. Trotters, if served by themselves, rather
>> than used as a gelatinous ingredient, are a rather fussy dish and one
>> requiring long cooking. Cheek is very good for gelatinous stews akin to
>> oxtail ones.
>>
>> You seem to have missed the best part of them all, offal or no offal:
>> tongue. Nothing is better in the whole wide world, meatwise. Nothing.
>>
>> Then there are those delicate sweetbreads... And Tammy's kidneys in
>> mustard sauce... And menudo or sopa de mondongo... And
>> andouillettes... Ah!
>>
>> Victor
>
> I totally adore sweetbreads. ;-d They are good marinated and grilled or
> boiled fresh and served with a cream sauce over toast or scrambled eggs.
>
> Trotters are good as a single item cooked in a stew with miripoix. They
> don't require long cooking if you use a pressure cooker. One hour and
> you are good to go. Calves feet or chicken feet, same same.
>
> Cheek meat has a LOT of applications. Best in tacos (imho) but also good
> as a basic stew meat. I generally cook those the day ahead of time tho'
> so the resulting stock/broth can be defatted overnight in the
> refrigerator.
>
> I've never eaten ears. Not yet.
>
> Tongue is a delicious delicacy.

I haven't had/cooked sweetbreads for SO long. I can only think of
one store that might have them now. Tongue... At least I can get
that. Such a lovely texture.

Oxtails... Gee, remember when those used to be cheap--along with
lamb shanks etc.?

--
Jean B.

Omelet > wrote in newsmpomelet-
:

>
> I free-feed kibbles and killed the canned food completely. All three
> dogs now get just one packet of doggie burger daily in addition to the
> free choice kibbles. The border collie is looking fine (as is Chelsea)
> but the Lab/Chow (Ferocious) is getting a bit chubby. I'll have to
keep
> an eye on him and maybe remove the free choice kibbles.

Labs are pretty voracious eaters and have a tendency to put on weight.In
fact so many pet Labradors are overweight that many people who see the
Labs in our Detector Dog Unit think they're underweight. Um, no, just
fit! I dogsat a friend's Lab (her retired dog from work) and was
standing with her at the local shops when someone asked what breed she
was. When I explained she was a Labrador they said - oh, I've only ever
seen fat ones :-). Not sure about Chows eating/weight gain tendencies.

Probably more portion control for him would be good.


--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904

(Victor Sack) wrote in
:

>
> Ears are not to everyone's taste, as they tend to be cartilagineous.
> Testicles tend to be bland. Trotters, if served by themselves, rather
> than used as a gelatinous ingredient, are a rather fussy dish and one
> requiring long cooking. Cheek is very good for gelatinous stews akin
> to oxtail ones.
>
> You seem to have missed the best part of them all, offal or no offal:
> tongue. Nothing is better in the whole wide world, meatwise.
> Nothing.
>
> Then there are those delicate sweetbreads... And Tammy's kidneys in
> mustard sauce... And menudo or sopa de mondongo... And
> andouillettes... Ah!
>
> Victor

I'll have to look around to see if I can find cheek. Don't think I've
ever seen it at the local butchers. I didn't miss the tongue on purpose!
Not sure about it - what's the texture/taste like? Any possible
comparisons you can give me?

Now, I do like mustard! Tammy can have the kidneys and I'll have the
mustard sauce :-)

--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

> > I totally adore sweetbreads. ;-d They are good marinated and grilled or
> > boiled fresh and served with a cream sauce over toast or scrambled eggs.
> >
> > Trotters are good as a single item cooked in a stew with miripoix. They
> > don't require long cooking if you use a pressure cooker. One hour and
> > you are good to go. Calves feet or chicken feet, same same.
> >
> > Cheek meat has a LOT of applications. Best in tacos (imho) but also good
> > as a basic stew meat. I generally cook those the day ahead of time tho'
> > so the resulting stock/broth can be defatted overnight in the
> > refrigerator.
> >
> > I've never eaten ears. Not yet.
> >
> > Tongue is a delicious delicacy.
>
> I haven't had/cooked sweetbreads for SO long. I can only think of
> one store that might have them now. Tongue... At least I can get
> that. Such a lovely texture.

They are available widely here. :-) Guess I'm lucky.

>
> Oxtails... Gee, remember when those used to be cheap--along with
> lamb shanks etc.?
>
> --
> Jean B.

Oh I know exactly what you mean!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article > ,
Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in newsmpomelet-
> :
>
> >
> > I free-feed kibbles and killed the canned food completely. All three
> > dogs now get just one packet of doggie burger daily in addition to the
> > free choice kibbles. The border collie is looking fine (as is Chelsea)
> > but the Lab/Chow (Ferocious) is getting a bit chubby. I'll have to
> keep
> > an eye on him and maybe remove the free choice kibbles.
>
> Labs are pretty voracious eaters and have a tendency to put on weight.In
> fact so many pet Labradors are overweight that many people who see the
> Labs in our Detector Dog Unit think they're underweight. Um, no, just
> fit! I dogsat a friend's Lab (her retired dog from work) and was
> standing with her at the local shops when someone asked what breed she
> was. When I explained she was a Labrador they said - oh, I've only ever
> seen fat ones :-). Not sure about Chows eating/weight gain tendencies.
>
> Probably more portion control for him would be good.

Yeah. He used to be pretty thin actually, but now that he's getting
older, he's put on weight. I'm watching him and thinking of cutting the
"free feed" and, like you said, portion controlling.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article > ,
Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

> > Ears are not to everyone's taste, as they tend to be cartilagineous.
> > Testicles tend to be bland. Trotters, if served by themselves, rather
> > than used as a gelatinous ingredient, are a rather fussy dish and one
> > requiring long cooking. Cheek is very good for gelatinous stews akin
> > to oxtail ones.
> >
> > You seem to have missed the best part of them all, offal or no offal:
> > tongue. Nothing is better in the whole wide world, meatwise.
> > Nothing.
> >
> > Then there are those delicate sweetbreads... And Tammy's kidneys in
> > mustard sauce... And menudo or sopa de mondongo... And
> > andouillettes... Ah!
> >
> > Victor
>
> I'll have to look around to see if I can find cheek. Don't think I've
> ever seen it at the local butchers. I didn't miss the tongue on purpose!
> Not sure about it - what's the texture/taste like? Any possible
> comparisons you can give me?
>
> Now, I do like mustard! Tammy can have the kidneys and I'll have the
> mustard sauce :-)
>
> --
> Rhonda Anderson

Tongue has a unique texture. I'd say that it's similar to veal maybe?
It's really good stuff! I pressure cook it for about 45 minutes, peel,
slice and serve with a gravy made from the tongue stock. I cook them
with miripoix.

See here (without the gravy topping):

http://i37.tinypic.com/ms21s3.jpg
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Rhonda Anderson wrote:

> Labs are pretty voracious eaters and have a tendency to put on weight.In
> fact so many pet Labradors are overweight that many people who see the
> Labs in our Detector Dog Unit think they're underweight. Um, no, just
> fit! I dogsat a friend's Lab (her retired dog from work) and was
> standing with her at the local shops when someone asked what breed she
> was. When I explained she was a Labrador they said - oh, I've only ever
> seen fat ones :-). Not sure about Chows eating/weight gain tendencies.
>
> Probably more portion control for him would be good.


I have had a few Labs over the years. My last one was close to 150 lb,
but he was not fat. He was a big, muscular dog. My brother has one now
who is pretty chunky and could stand to lose a few pounds, but what he
probably needs is more exercise. He is very energetic and always getting
into trouble. A couple of nice long walks each day kept my guy fit.

In article >,
Dave Smith > wrote:

> Rhonda Anderson wrote:
>
> > Labs are pretty voracious eaters and have a tendency to put on weight.In
> > fact so many pet Labradors are overweight that many people who see the
> > Labs in our Detector Dog Unit think they're underweight. Um, no, just
> > fit! I dogsat a friend's Lab (her retired dog from work) and was
> > standing with her at the local shops when someone asked what breed she
> > was. When I explained she was a Labrador they said - oh, I've only ever
> > seen fat ones :-). Not sure about Chows eating/weight gain tendencies.
> >
> > Probably more portion control for him would be good.
>
>
> I have had a few Labs over the years. My last one was close to 150 lb,
> but he was not fat. He was a big, muscular dog. My brother has one now
> who is pretty chunky and could stand to lose a few pounds, but what he
> probably needs is more exercise. He is very energetic and always getting
> into trouble. A couple of nice long walks each day kept my guy fit.

150 lbs.?

That's a hell of a big dog. ;-)
My pet emu weighs that much and she's as tall as I am!

Ferocious only weighs about 45 lbs. He's a lab/chow cross. 1/4 chow.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Omelet wrote:
>
>> I have had a few Labs over the years. My last one was close to 150 lb,
>> but he was not fat. He was a big, muscular dog. My brother has one now
>> who is pretty chunky and could stand to lose a few pounds, but what he
>> probably needs is more exercise. He is very energetic and always getting
>> into trouble. A couple of nice long walks each day kept my guy fit.
>
> 150 lbs.?
>
> That's a hell of a big dog. ;-)


We was a big one. I got him from the same kennel where I had got the
previous Lab. The first one developed a heart murmur when we was about
two years old and developed a severe heart problem and had to be put
down when he was 5. The breeder offered me a replacement and i got to
pick from two litters of pups,all the same age. I went for the biggest,
most active one. He was really smart, and not just for a Lab. My friends
and family still talk about what a character he was. He was a ton of fun.

He is not the biggest dog I have had. We had a Bouver des Flandres who
weighed 186. She was a delightful dog, very loyal and obedient, but she
developed arthritis and had to be put down when she was 7.


> My pet emu weighs that much and she's as tall as I am!
>
> Ferocious only weighs about 45 lbs. He's a lab/chow cross. 1/4 chow.

People think my Belgium Shepherd is a big dog, but he is only 50 pounds,
by far the smallest dog I have ever had.

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> "Omelet" ha scritto nel messaggio
> > Goomba wrote:
> >
> >> Omelet wrote:
> >>
> >> > <lol> If I am serving some specific dinner guests, I'll happily discuss
> >> > > the menu with them (usually via e-mail) prior to their visit, and
> >> > cook according to their wishes.
> >>
> >> At what point in that process are you the hostess rather than just a cook
> >> at the home-restaurant they agreed to eat at that night??
> >> Do you let them dictate the entire menu, dining hour, drinks and dessert?
> >
> > Why not? I'm serving THEM, not me!
>
> Om, that's not how entertaining generally works. Hosts generally make what
> they want, what they can afford, what interests them and what they are
> capable of cooking. Other than life threatening allergies, guests don't
> really have a say in menus.

I find Om's way of doing this refreshing. I wouldn't necessarily do it
this way myself, but I like reading about it. Up until now, we are
talking mostly about social events. I understand that it's a job for
you, at least some of the time, and that's different.

> As I read this thread I imagined someone from here getting invited to the
> White House and trying to tell Michelle Obama what to serve them and what
> they didn't like.

We're stretching the word "social" here, now. You can bet that if a
very important visitor came to the White House for a meal, and their
religion, a primary one in their country, held some animal to be sacred
and not to be used for food, that meat from that animal would not be
served.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

In article >,
Omelet > wrote:

> In article >,
> "Giusi" > wrote:

> > Om, that's not how entertaining generally works. Hosts generally make what
> > they want
> The important thing to ME is that my guests truly enjoy the meal!

> I will, however, prepare special dishes for guests on request. I happen
> to ENJOY doing that and cannot understand anyone that does not feel that
> way.

Well, I can at least understand why they don't feel that way. What I
don't understand is the unreasonable hatred people (some on this group)
have for vegetarians, especially vegans. I'm sure part of it is asshole
vegetarians and vegans. My sister was a vegetarian for 13 years, and my
daughter for 8 (plus she was a vegan for some months, until the smell of
her rommate's cookies forced her to give it up). Since they are the
nicest people in the whole world, I find it hard to understand the hate.

> Please explain your selfish attitude???

I don't see it as selfish, just different than yours. There's room for
more than one way of doing things in this world.

> What was most amusing was one of his e-mails where he stated that maybe
> he was too picky

That certainly relates directly to the subject!

:-)

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

In article >,
Omelet > wrote:

> In article >,

> > Did you ever go out on a date with a guy and feel obligated to order the
> > cheapest thing on the menu so he didn't spend too much money? But what
> > you REALLY wanted was Lobster.

Never went on a date with a guy, myself. Did go to my high school
senior prom with a guy, but that doesn't really count.

> Yes actually.

One of my best friends in high school was a year older, and went in the
military. There was a going off party at a fancy restaurant. I don't
think his parents understood just *how* expensive. I looked at the menu
when it came, but don't remember much. The parents were visibly shaken
(and they were paying). There may have been a dozen people. The mom
tactfully suggested the hamburger patty. That worked for me. The
server brought wine. Mom tried to make a fuss, but she had already let
the cat out of the bag by saying her son was leaving for the military.
Mom was trying to say that some weren't of age, but the server said that
if my friend was old enough to be in the military, he could have wine if
he wanted it. It was in a decanter, but it was rotgut red. Mom dropped
all objections when the server said it was complimentary.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

Rhonda Anderson > wrote:

> I didn't miss the tongue on purpose!
> Not sure about it - what's the texture/taste like? Any possible
> comparisons you can give me?

Beef, veal and pork tongues are comparable in taste and texture. Lamb's
tongue is a bit tougher and less juicy. When good-quality tongue is
cooked correctly, e.g. simply simmered (or pressure-cooked) in water or
stock for an appropriate length of time, its one overriding property is
succulence. It is probably the most tender, soft, delicate and juicy
cut of them all. If smoked, again given good quality, it is no longer
juicy or succulent, but is still as tender as any cut of meat and has a
taste all of its own. The texture, too, is hard to describe, being
somehow looser than any other muscle, but still not anywhere like
friable. There are no apparent strings or fibers, so there is no
cutting with or against the grain. It is unlike any other cut.

Victor

(Victor Sack) wrote in news:1iy2llf.jhqc6u1mahna4N%
:

>
> Beef, veal and pork tongues are comparable in taste and texture.
Lamb's
> tongue is a bit tougher and less juicy. When good-quality tongue is
> cooked correctly, e.g. simply simmered (or pressure-cooked) in water
or
> stock for an appropriate length of time, its one overriding property
is
> succulence. It is probably the most tender, soft, delicate and juicy
> cut of them all. If smoked, again given good quality, it is no longer
> juicy or succulent, but is still as tender as any cut of meat and has
a
> taste all of its own. The texture, too, is hard to describe, being
> somehow looser than any other muscle, but still not anywhere like
> friable. There are no apparent strings or fibers, so there is no
> cutting with or against the grain. It is unlike any other cut.
>
> Victor

Thanks Victor. Not heading out tomorrow to buy a tongue:-), but will
keep it in mind. It sounds intriguing. I should see what I can find out
about the anatomy of the tongue.

--
Rhonda Anderson
Cranebrook, NSW, Australia

Core of my heart, my country! Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine she pays us back threefold.
My Country, Dorothea MacKellar, 1904