And indeed, that is what has been decided in other countries, most obviously in the US - the decision that the county clerk could not allow her religious principles to permit of her refusing to issue a marriage licence to a gay couple, for example. That's a line of authority with which I agree, but wonder how others see the application of that to this instance. At least some seem to consider that her religious beliefs gave her the right to refuse to shake hands.
There is the obvious distinction that refusing to issue a marriage licence impacts a person who is meant to be obtaining a service; I'm not entirely sure what the would-be hand shakee loses by a individual refusing to do so.
@lilbuddha, can you not see how obvious Deanoright is being about trying to push buttons? It was a clumsy troll, even for xem. Don't waste any cycles worrying about the content of the troll, as that's xyr whole parasitic purpose.
I recommend that everybody ignore pretty much everything Thatherdeano posts, other than to reflect on the nature of purely parasitic trolling.
Ahhh. Shows I got the comment about drinking correct,
See, was that so hard? Finally bothering to put some effort into your trolling.
The shit-weaselly word-origami used to conflate individual respect with invading armies is still a bit of a reach, but then preposterous bait is your whole reason for being here. So it's hardly fair to expect you to be any more subtle than that.
The French would probably say that if she were truly ready to become naturalised, she'd instinctively know she'd be shaking hands.
Ha. "Instinctively know". The assumption which is the bane of my life.
Tell me about it. You get told "this is the rule". You apply the rule. Then one day it turns out you're supposed to intuit that *this* time you do the opposite, because of something you had no way of knowing and it would be impolite to ask.
Social rules divide more often than that unite. Take cutlery, for example. The very few times I've had a 'posh' dinner, I've been fucking clueless as to the order of use, and that's before we get to which glass is for which liquid.
And those who apparently do know, neither explain what's what, nor offer any reason for the bizarreness of the ritual, they merely observe the prole getting it 'wrong' and count themselves superior.
Which is why the last time it happened, I deliberately and gloriously ignored all convention, drank what the hell I wanted from whatever containers came to hand and kept hold of as much cutlery as I could between courses.
If she doesn't want to shake hands with someone, how about a bow, or a dap, or a slight incline of the head and a grunt of "alright?". Vive le difference.
<in helpful mode> when presented with ranks of cutlery either side of a place setting, the rule is to start at the outside and work in. Pudding (dessert) utensils are often at the top of the place setting</helpful mode>
I can't help with the glasses because I don't do this normally, but I have had to set the tables for others - and cook the starters, veg and any last minute pudding bits behind the scenes
Social rules divide more often than that unite. Take cutlery, for example. The very few times I've had a 'posh' dinner, I've been fucking clueless as to the order of use, and that's before we get to which glass is for which liquid.
And those who apparently do know, neither explain what's what, nor offer any reason for the bizarreness of the ritual, they merely observe the prole getting it 'wrong' and count themselves superior.
Which is why the last time it happened, I deliberately and gloriously ignored all convention, drank what the hell I wanted from whatever containers came to hand and kept hold of as much cutlery as I could between courses.
If she doesn't want to shake hands with someone, how about a bow, or a dap, or a slight incline of the head and a grunt of "alright?". Vive le difference.
I just grab stuff with my fists and jam it in while talking, then I blow my nose on the table cloth and ask the waiter in a loud voice, 'where's the shitter'. Then I fart, and turn around to my coarse companions who are all falling about laughing.
Yes, I am Ozzie Osborne.
This is not true, but fair dinkum, why worry? You're paying through the nose for the meal, and everyone around you is a bastard corporate type or a foodie who doesn't give a shit about you or what you do. Be inventive, just don't make a fuss. That's the cardinal sin in a good restaurant.
You're paying through the nose for the meal, and everyone around you is a bastard corporate type or a foodie who doesn't give a shit about you or what you do. Be inventive, just don't make a fuss. That's the cardinal sin in a good restaurant.
I think you're making a category error with assuming that such dining situations happen because of a restaurant's preference. Much more likely is that it is the purpose of avoiding offending ones dining companions - and this kind of cultural scrutiny seems more keen when the occasion is at a private residence.
You're paying through the nose for the meal, and everyone around you is a bastard corporate type or a foodie who doesn't give a shit about you or what you do. Be inventive, just don't make a fuss. That's the cardinal sin in a good restaurant.
I think you're making a category error with assuming that such dining situations happen because of a restaurant's preference. Much more likely is that it is the purpose of avoiding offending ones dining companions - and this kind of cultural scrutiny seems more keen when the occasion is at a private residence.
Which make it even more fucked up. The interplay between a guest and host should be a mutual thing.
You're paying through the nose for the meal, and everyone around you is a bastard corporate type or a foodie who doesn't give a shit about you or what you do. Be inventive, just don't make a fuss. That's the cardinal sin in a good restaurant.
I think you're making a category error with assuming that such dining situations happen because of a restaurant's preference. Much more likely is that it is the purpose of avoiding offending ones dining companions - and this kind of cultural scrutiny seems more keen when the occasion is at a private residence.
Oh yeah, you're right. I did assume a posh dinner would be at a posh restaurant. I think an ex of mine wanted to have and go to posh private dinners, but she was stymied by having friends who liked to drink and smoke dope. I myself would be giggling like a hyena before the entree was even served.
Which is why the last time it happened, I deliberately and gloriously ignored all convention, drank what the hell I wanted from whatever containers came to hand and kept hold of as much cutlery as I could between courses.
Well, I suppose it's easier than taking five minutes to learn which piece of cutlery goes with which course and which glass goes with which drink.
If you were invited to a formal dinner by some Arabic friends would you likewise deliberately ignore all convention, keep your shoes on, drink water with your main meal, and get food from the serving bowl with your left hand? No, of course you wouldn't, because you would want to be respectful to your host. Shouldn't that principle apply to all hosts though?
Etiquette is all about power and class and who is in and who is not.
Added for the knickers I hear twisting in the background, etiquette ≠ manners or courtesy.
What's the difference between etiquette, manners and courtesy in your view? Because I've got a fiver that says the only difference is which part of society a given social rule comes from.
<in helpful mode> when presented with ranks of cutlery either side of a place setting, the rule is to start at the outside and work in. Pudding (dessert) utensils are often at the top of the place setting</helpful mode>
I can't help with the glasses because I don't do this normally, but I have had to set the tables for others - and cook the starters, veg and any last minute pudding bits behind the scenes
Just use a Swiss Army Knife. Everything you need for moving food to mouth.
What's the difference between etiquette, manners and courtesy in your view? Because I've got a fiver that says the only difference is which part of society a given social rule comes from.
Well, duh. Poor people don't have rules about what fork to use when and what colour cravat goes with what jacket and the like. The rules of etiquette are designed by the rich to separate themselves.
Manners and courtesy are both the host and the quest trying to accommodate each other.
A sibling's house is one in which shoes are removed upon entry. They did not expect me to know this prior and did not demand that I comply. They merely made note that this was their custom. I, not being a complete dick, complied. There are a few foods that I do not eat. They, being courteous, did not serve those during my stay.
Though one could learn about "proper" table settings and use, their existence is a reminder of class and place.
Well, duh. Poor people don't have rules about what fork to use when and what colour cravat goes with what jacket and the like.
There are social norms and expectations in all walks of life, and a posh person would be just as out of place in the local where I grew up as the stereotypical poor person at a posh dinner.
The specific rules are different, but they’re still there.
Social rules divide more often than that unite. Take cutlery, for example. The very few times I've had a 'posh' dinner, I've been fucking clueless as to the order of use, and that's before we get to which glass is for which liquid.
I'm confused - why do you need to know which glass is for which liquid at a posh dinner? The only liquid you'll be pouring into a glass yourself is the port, and by that time it'll be obvious which glass to use.
The specific rules are different, but they’re still there.
So name a specific rule that poor people use to make rich people social pariahs and keep them in their place.
"Hah, ya rich bastard! That'll keep you in your place of wealth, privilege and power. Trying to come 'round here and share in our lack"
Social rules divide more often than that unite. Take cutlery, for example. The very few times I've had a 'posh' dinner, I've been fucking clueless as to the order of use, and that's before we get to which glass is for which liquid.
I'm confused - why do you need to know which glass is for which liquid at a posh dinner? The only liquid you'll be pouring into a glass yourself is the port, and by that time it'll be obvious which glass to use.
You're confused? Imagine what I was like! I can just about navigate my way around this shit now (yes, I did eventually look it up), but really? Better a crust in peace.
When it comes to which liquid goes in which glass if the rich take the piss out of their servants how can they be certain what the liquid contains in the first place?
Yes, there's a spectrum of attitudes to non-members, from exclusive to proselytizing. With laid-back somewhere in the middle.
And anywhere on that spectrum can feel offputting, to those who don't want to be exclusive or don't want to be out there proselytizing or want something more than chilling out.
Whilst uniting those with a shared love of exclusivity or missionary endeavour or just hanging out with others.
I'm told that the longest queues are for the nightclubs with the strictest admissions policy...
The specific rules are different, but they’re still there.
So name a specific rule that poor people use to make rich people social pariahs and keep them in their place.
"Hah, ya rich bastard! That'll keep you in your place of wealth, privilege and power. Trying to come 'round here and share in our lack"
I’ve known pubs where wearing the wrong colour shirt or having the wrong accent was enough to guarantee you would be made to feel very unwelcome. Places where the phrase “fuck off back to the Ritz, you posh bastard” certainly wouldn’t be out of place.
The problem is, you only think excluding people from a culture is bad if it’s a rich culture.
Did they? I can remember the "Upper Class Twit Of The Year" sketch and one where a poet father resents his son for moving away to take up coal mining (with their clothes/accents/etc all suggesting the opposite careers), and the Four Yorkshiremen of course, but nothing about this sort of thing. It's quite possible you're thinking of a sketch I've forgotten, of course.
It just annoys me when this sort of cultural or social phenomenon is judged to be right or wrong based not on the phenomenon itself, but on how much money the person doing it has. As if the rich tapestry of culture, manners and morality can be reduced to "whoever has the least cash is the one who is right".
No one is arguing that. But you're still making excuses for rich people acting like dicks to poor ones.
Poor people act like dicks to rich ones as well. I'd say the dickishness scales are fairly balanced.
Don't get me wrong, I still think it would be better if no-one was a dick to anyone else. But that's an issue for the whole of society to deal with, not something that's restricted to one particular segment of it.
There are rich dicks. There are poor dicks. I do not think this is a question anyone is confused about.
The effect that might have some play is the degree to which having access to more wealth and power seems to enable more dickishness, both in terms of frequency and severity. Because humans suck, generally speaking - especially at resisting temptation. This does not mean that being rich automatically makes one a dick, which seems to be what Marv is defending against.
Is that was he’s defending against? Well, at least it’s something besides a total lack of comprehension.
Yes, there are in-groups at every level of the social strata.
But those of rich are tied to maintaining the status quo financially as well.
It is a reminder of wealth and the power it represents.
That is what ettiqeuete is and exactly the purpose it serves.
And not being welcome down at the local is not in the same league as not being allowed in at the bank.
For Gods sake, you’re making it sound like you think the only reason there are different items of cutlery for different courses is to make sure the poor stay downtrodden.
Newsflash: rich people Do not spend their entire lives scheming to find new ways to oppress everyone else.
For Gods sake, you’re making it sound like you think the only reason there are different items of cutlery for different courses is to make sure the poor stay downtrodden.
No. But it's undeniable that it's a form of class signalling, both to those in-group and those out-group.
Comments
The shit-weaselly word-origami used to conflate individual respect with invading armies is still a bit of a reach, but then preposterous bait is your whole reason for being here. So it's hardly fair to expect you to be any more subtle than that.
I'd rank that as a 7/10 troll. Good effort.
No, not really.
She has the right to refuse to shake hands. Regardless of her religious affiliation.
What she doesn't have is a right to escape the consequences of her action.
Except that it seems much higher than a custom in France.
Ha. "Instinctively know". The assumption which is the bane of my life.
Tell me about it. You get told "this is the rule". You apply the rule. Then one day it turns out you're supposed to intuit that *this* time you do the opposite, because of something you had no way of knowing and it would be impolite to ask.
And those who apparently do know, neither explain what's what, nor offer any reason for the bizarreness of the ritual, they merely observe the prole getting it 'wrong' and count themselves superior.
Which is why the last time it happened, I deliberately and gloriously ignored all convention, drank what the hell I wanted from whatever containers came to hand and kept hold of as much cutlery as I could between courses.
If she doesn't want to shake hands with someone, how about a bow, or a dap, or a slight incline of the head and a grunt of "alright?". Vive le difference.
I can't help with the glasses because I don't do this normally, but I have had to set the tables for others - and cook the starters, veg and any last minute pudding bits behind the scenes
I just grab stuff with my fists and jam it in while talking, then I blow my nose on the table cloth and ask the waiter in a loud voice, 'where's the shitter'. Then I fart, and turn around to my coarse companions who are all falling about laughing.
Yes, I am Ozzie Osborne.
This is not true, but fair dinkum, why worry? You're paying through the nose for the meal, and everyone around you is a bastard corporate type or a foodie who doesn't give a shit about you or what you do. Be inventive, just don't make a fuss. That's the cardinal sin in a good restaurant.
I think you're making a category error with assuming that such dining situations happen because of a restaurant's preference. Much more likely is that it is the purpose of avoiding offending ones dining companions - and this kind of cultural scrutiny seems more keen when the occasion is at a private residence.
Added for the knickers I hear twisting in the background, etiquette ≠ manners or courtesy.
Oh yeah, you're right. I did assume a posh dinner would be at a posh restaurant. I think an ex of mine wanted to have and go to posh private dinners, but she was stymied by having friends who liked to drink and smoke dope. I myself would be giggling like a hyena before the entree was even served.
Well, I suppose it's easier than taking five minutes to learn which piece of cutlery goes with which course and which glass goes with which drink.
If you were invited to a formal dinner by some Arabic friends would you likewise deliberately ignore all convention, keep your shoes on, drink water with your main meal, and get food from the serving bowl with your left hand? No, of course you wouldn't, because you would want to be respectful to your host. Shouldn't that principle apply to all hosts though?
What's the difference between etiquette, manners and courtesy in your view? Because I've got a fiver that says the only difference is which part of society a given social rule comes from.
That's the difference, which imo, is not insignificant.
Just use a Swiss Army Knife. Everything you need for moving food to mouth.
Manners and courtesy are both the host and the quest trying to accommodate each other.
A sibling's house is one in which shoes are removed upon entry. They did not expect me to know this prior and did not demand that I comply. They merely made note that this was their custom. I, not being a complete dick, complied. There are a few foods that I do not eat. They, being courteous, did not serve those during my stay.
Though one could learn about "proper" table settings and use, their existence is a reminder of class and place.
There are social norms and expectations in all walks of life, and a posh person would be just as out of place in the local where I grew up as the stereotypical poor person at a posh dinner.
The specific rules are different, but they’re still there.
I'm confused - why do you need to know which glass is for which liquid at a posh dinner? The only liquid you'll be pouring into a glass yourself is the port, and by that time it'll be obvious which glass to use.
"Hah, ya rich bastard! That'll keep you in your place of wealth, privilege and power. Trying to come 'round here and share in our lack"
You're confused? Imagine what I was like! I can just about navigate my way around this shit now (yes, I did eventually look it up), but really? Better a crust in peace.
All culture unites the in-group and divides it from the out-group.
Or it can be exclusive, inward-looking and unfriendly.
So, no. #notallculture
And anywhere on that spectrum can feel offputting, to those who don't want to be exclusive or don't want to be out there proselytizing or want something more than chilling out.
Whilst uniting those with a shared love of exclusivity or missionary endeavour or just hanging out with others.
I'm told that the longest queues are for the nightclubs with the strictest admissions policy...
I’ve known pubs where wearing the wrong colour shirt or having the wrong accent was enough to guarantee you would be made to feel very unwelcome. Places where the phrase “fuck off back to the Ritz, you posh bastard” certainly wouldn’t be out of place.
The problem is, you only think excluding people from a culture is bad if it’s a rich culture.
Nearly 50 years later, some people have regressed.
Did they? I can remember the "Upper Class Twit Of The Year" sketch and one where a poet father resents his son for moving away to take up coal mining (with their clothes/accents/etc all suggesting the opposite careers), and the Four Yorkshiremen of course, but nothing about this sort of thing. It's quite possible you're thinking of a sketch I've forgotten, of course.
It just annoys me when this sort of cultural or social phenomenon is judged to be right or wrong based not on the phenomenon itself, but on how much money the person doing it has. As if the rich tapestry of culture, manners and morality can be reduced to "whoever has the least cash is the one who is right".
Poor people act like dicks to rich ones as well. I'd say the dickishness scales are fairly balanced.
Don't get me wrong, I still think it would be better if no-one was a dick to anyone else. But that's an issue for the whole of society to deal with, not something that's restricted to one particular segment of it.
The effect that might have some play is the degree to which having access to more wealth and power seems to enable more dickishness, both in terms of frequency and severity. Because humans suck, generally speaking - especially at resisting temptation. This does not mean that being rich automatically makes one a dick, which seems to be what Marv is defending against.
Yes, there are in-groups at every level of the social strata.
But those of rich are tied to maintaining the status quo financially as well.
It is a reminder of wealth and the power it represents.
That is what ettiqeuete is and exactly the purpose it serves.
And not being welcome down at the local is not in the same league as not being allowed in at the bank.
Newsflash: rich people Do not spend their entire lives scheming to find new ways to oppress everyone else.
No. But it's undeniable that it's a form of class signalling, both to those in-group and those out-group.
Seriously dude, they’re not thinking about you half as much as you think about them.
I'd write this in crayon if I though a simpler explanation would get through.
What it has nothing to do with is virtue.
Manners and etiquette are pretty much synonymous.