The dangers of the high horse

[Mabelline]

We need to quit beating each other up. Come on, we all love food, and we oughta be helping each other out to the best eats, and if they're cheap, so much the better. I have known some very rich folks, that pinched pennies till they squeaked.

By the way, fifi is right about the melting 18 hour brisket. sorry. The truth hurts.

[srhcb]

On another food discussion board we use the term "eG" to imply snobbishness, part in fun, but not by accident.

While most of the Threads are informative and interesting, even if contentious, a certain distainful attitude does often intrude. For the latest example, check out this discussion of Rachel Rayes Food Network shoe:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=35119

SB

[cdh]

While most of the Threads are informative and interesting, even if contentious, a certain distainful attitude does often intrude. For the latest example, check out this discussion of Rachel Rayes Food Network shoe:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=35119

SB

I just read that whole thread. The only disdain I saw was when talking about the Food Network's management decisions to dumb down some of their more "advanced" content, and their justification for doing so. Doesn't sound like snobbishness to me at all. Sounds like the market segment that demands more advanced food shows demanding more advanced food shows and being disappointed when TVFN decides to scale back that very product line. The occasional comment on RR's perpetual perkiness sounded entirely reasonable to me, and not high-horse driven... people are allowed to honestly disagree about what they like and not be horrible snobs, right?

Unless you're saying that asking for more advanced content in a food show is itself disdainful and snobbish... then we just have an honest disagreement about terms.

[JohnnyH]

As far as food is concerned - I can point out a couple of things.  First and foremost - people from New York are willing to acccept really bad service/attitude in return for being in trendy places... 

...Wouldn't care so much if this only poisoned places in New York (because I'm not there that often).

Isn't there an inherent contradiction here? Why are you so willing to volunteer as an expert on the dining habits of New Yorkers if you admittedly don't spend much time here?

[marie-louise]

At the risk of sounding like Dr. Phil here... I think it's better if you say "I statements" instead of "you statements." For example, it lends itself to a more productive conversation to say "I felt angry/ hurt when you said..." instead of "You made me angry..."

In this case, it seems like we could have a more productive discussion if we stuck to "I" statements, such as , "I felt angry/ hurt when I posted... and then you said..." or "I feel like I don't fit in here, and I want to..." Citing examples of what "you said" by identifying a particular thread or giving examples of why "all New Yorkers are...", or saying that "everyone says you are..." by telling us that other boards make derisive statements towards eGullet, doesn't seem like it is going to get us to the heart of what this thread really seems to be about: some people don't feel comfortable participating on eGullet. Is there something we can and want to do about that? To paraphrase Eleanor Roosevelt, no one can make you feel inferior without your permission, but perhaps by talking it through without blame we can reach a better understanding of what you are feeling and why you are feeling it.

[Busboy]

At the risk of sounding insensitive, I have to wonder how angry or hurt (barring utter brutality or deletion-level personal attacks) someone should get, over what someone they've never met writes on an Internet bulletin board.

There are plenty of humorous, informative or otherwise non-controversial topics on eGullet -- though, with this crowd, one never knows what's going to get a discussion going -- but if you wade into a controversial topic, sombody is going to take issue with you: passionately, articulately (usually), and without necessarily a great deal of concern for your psychic well-being. And, as long as they stay within the boudaries of the site, it's not their job to worry about other peoples responses.

People get carried away, usually they apologize. If they don't, the mods will make a decision.

In the mean time, those who can't stand the heat...

[fresco]

At the risk of sounding insensitive, I have to wonder how angry or hurt (barring utter brutality or deletion-level personal attacks) someone should get, over what someone they've never met writes on an Internet bulletin board.

There are plenty of humorous, informative or otherwise non-controversial topics on eGullet -- though, with this crowd, one never knows what's going to get a discussion going -- but if you wade into a controversial topic, sombody is going to take issue with you: passionately, articulately (usually), and without necessarily a great deal of concern for your psychic well-being.  And, as long as they stay within the boudaries of the site, it's not their job to worry about other peoples responses. 

People get carried away, usually they apologize.  If they don't, the mods will make a decision.

In the mean time, those who can't stand the heat...

I think that some care, consideration and respect does encourage more people to post and generally makes this site a more pleasant place.

If no holds barred verbal wrestling produced more eloquent and rewarding posts, I'd be all for it, but all of the evidence is to the contrary.

[Busboy]

I wouldn't go so far to say "no holds barred" by I think putting people of the defensive for stating their opinions simply and forcefully is equally damaging to the quality of the exchange.

He said, simply and forcefully.

[marie-louise]

At the risk of sounding insensitive, I have to wonder how angry or hurt (barring utter brutality or deletion-level personal attacks) someone should get, over what someone they've never met writes on an Internet bulletin board.

There are plenty of humorous, informative or otherwise non-controversial topics on eGullet -- though, with this crowd, one never knows what's going to get a discussion going -- but if you wade into a controversial topic, sombody is going to take issue with you: passionately, articulately (usually), and without necessarily a great deal of concern for your psychic well-being. And, as long as they stay within the boudaries of the site, it's not their job to worry about other peoples responses.

People get carried away, usually they apologize. If they don't, the mods will make a decision.

In the mean time, those who can't stand the heat...

I agree with you. My first post on this thread was something to the effect that I just don't see it. EGullet has many smart, articulate, and yes, opinionated participants. I lurked for months feeling slightly intimidated and not sure if I had anything to add. This place is amazing-for example, you want to talk about cooking beans, none other than Paula Wolfert will answer you (and I could go on and on, but I have to leave for work now.) But now that I have particilate by posting, I have to say I have felt nothing but welcomed here. No one board is for everyone. You are absoluteley correct in saying that if you post something here, expect to defend it. Not because you're new, not because you don't have credibility, not because you are not from New York. Because debate is the culture of this board. Debate does not equal class warfare, and if someone has a different opinion than you, there may be a better way of expressing your feelings than telling them they are on a high horse.

[Raynickben]

And let me add that it is often impossible to know what emotion is being expressed when it is written. I could say something in a joking manner (and forget to add a smiley face) but the post comes off as arrogant or obnoxious.

[balex]

I don't know if this has been said before on this thread but I have a two word rebuttal for anyone that claims that food snobbery is prevalent on eG: Burger Club.

It is much less snobby now than it used to be when he who must not be named was on the site, thank God.

[tommy]

I don't know if this has been said before on this thread but I have a two word rebuttal for anyone that claims that food snobbery is prevalent on eG: Burger Club.

one exception doesn't prove anything.

[balex]

I don't know if this has been said before on this thread but I have a two word rebuttal for anyone that claims that food snobbery is prevalent on eG:  Burger Club.

one exception doesn't prove anything.

It's not proof, it's evidence

[tommy]

evidence of what? sorry to split hairs here, but if all of the other 3000 threads were filled with snobbery (and of course i don't think they are), then your exception isn't evidence of anything except that there's one thread not filled with snobbery.

edit: ok, 4 threads, or how every many burger clubs there are.

Edited January 15, 2004 by tommy (log)

[balex]

Well ok, you (or someone who wants to claim that there is a lot of snobbery) now can provide some evidence for snobbery by mentioning a current thread that is full of snobbery.

Then I retort with another non snobbery thread etc. and then we just start hurling insults at each other. That's how we scientists resolve disputes.

[tommy]

Then I retort with another non snobbery thread etc. and then we just start hurling insults at each other. That's how we scientists resolve disputes.

ok. on your mark...get set...

[srhcb]

While most of the Threads are informative and interesting, even if contentious, a certain distainful attitude does often intrude.  For the latest example, check out this discussion of Rachel Rayes Food Network shoe:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=35119

SB

I just read that whole thread. The only disdain I saw was when talking about the Food Network's management decisions to dumb down some of their more "advanced" content, and their justification for doing so. Doesn't sound like snobbishness to me at all. Sounds like the market segment that demands more advanced food shows demanding more advanced food shows and being disappointed when TVFN decides to scale back that very product line.

The comments concerning Food Network's policies were indeed what I wished to refer to. Food Network started off with more hands-on cooking shows, which I also enjoyed more than the current travelogue type programing, but this is apparently what the viewers, hence advertisers, desire?

Hopefully, there exists a sufficient number of hardcore food enthusiasts that some other producers will choose to exploit as a market and sophisticated cooking and dining shows will soon appear on another venue.

SB (any enthusiasm includes an element of snobbery by definition)

[beans]

(any enthusiasm includes an element of snobbery by definition)

Hmmmm. I do not agree.

Per my online of The New Oxford Dictionary of English

Snob:  noun a person with an exaggerated respect for high social position or wealth who seeks to associate with social superiors and dislikes people or activities regarded as lower-class.

[with ADJ. or NOUN MODIFIER] a person who believes that their tastes in a particular area are superior to those of other people: a musical snob.

****

Enthusiasm:  noun [MASS NOUN] 1 intense and eager enjoyment, interest, or approval: her energy and enthusiasm for life | few expressed enthusiasm about the current leaders.

[COUNT NOUN] a thing that arouses such feelings: the three enthusiasms of his life were politics, religion, and books.

2 archaic, derogatory religious fervour supposedly resulting directly from divine inspiration, typically involving speaking in tongues and wild, uncoordinated movements of the body.

Enthusiasm is infectious. Snobbery is not.

Do we examine ethusiastic snobs or snobby enthusiasts?

Now how many times does a variation on the following words are going to go without due consideration? Or is this a thread turning into a vent, gripe and point distainful fingers at x, y or z threads or unnamed fellow eG'ers, present or past. *yawn*

To paraphrase Eleanor Roosevelt, no one can make you feel inferior without your permission

Emphasis mine.

[srhcb]

(any enthusiasm includes an element of snobbery by definition)

Hmmmm. I do not agree.

Per my online of The New Oxford Dictionary of English

Snob:  noun a person with an exaggerated respect for high social position or wealth who seeks to associate with social superiors and dislikes people or activities regarded as lower-class.

[with ADJ. or NOUN MODIFIER] a person who believes that their tastes in a particular area are superior to those of other people: a musical snob.

****

Enthusiasm:  noun [MASS NOUN] 1 intense and eager enjoyment, interest, or approval: her energy and enthusiasm for life | few expressed enthusiasm about the current leaders.

[COUNT NOUN] a thing that arouses such feelings: the three enthusiasms of his life were politics, religion, and books.

2 archaic, derogatory religious fervour supposedly resulting directly from divine inspiration, typically involving speaking in tongues and wild, uncoordinated movements of the body.

Enthusiasm is infectious. Snobbery is not.

Do we examine ethusiastic snobs or snobby enthusiasts?

Now how many times does a variation on the following words are going to go without due consideration? Or is this a thread turning into a vent, gripe and point distainful fingers at x, y or z threads or unnamed fellow eG'ers, present or past. *yawn*

To paraphrase Eleanor Roosevelt, no one can make you feel inferior without your permission

Emphasis mine.

Semantics is the refuge of a scoundrel?

This is the sort of thing that I meant.

SB (lighten up)

[ExtraMSG]

By that definition Beans, the talk about the Food Network's new lineup is certainly snobbery.

One thing to consider: snobbery is not necessarily bad. Snobbery in moderation may be a good thing. It's good to have values, to distinguish between qualities of things, but that does create a certain level of snobbery. (Snob often has negative connotations, but strictly speaking it doesn't have to be so.)

Like I've said before, the only snob I can't stand is the one who won't give something a try. It's one thing to be a snob based on experience and to treat others opinions with respect. It's another to be a snob merely based on prejudices and to treat others like crap for disagreeing with you.

I think most eGulleters fall into the first category of snobs (including myself, I hope) with occasional falls from grace into the second category.

[Boris_A]

All IMHO, but why take eG that seriously?

That right there's the big question. This thread is cracking me up.

Spleen? instead of snobbery.

[Fat Guy]

Thanks to all who have offered constructive comments on this topic. At this point, the various positions have been stated clearly over the course of 170 posts. The eGullet.com site is many things to many people. The site strives to be ecumenical, and our policies and guiding principles are designed to be inclusive and to encourage diverse discussion. We look forward to all of you participating in the growth and expansion of the site.