Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Recommended Posts

Posted

Where do you sit in these scenarios:

1) Two diners, square four-person table with a seat on each side. Adjacent sides or face to face across the table? Adjacent sides seems more common, especially in situations that invite more intimacy between the diners, e.g. a date, but I do not enjoy tilting my head at a 45 degree angle. If you're interested in below the table hanky-panky, although adjacent sides allows more with the hands, face to face allows more footsies -- you know, if you're into that.

2) Two diners, four-person table with two seats and a bench, no seats on two sides of the table. Usually this is face to face but I have seen a few couples that sit side to side on the bench. This is much much worse than the adjacent sides scenario as you have to turn your head a full 90 degrees but I suppose it allows for maximum hanky-panky. The awkwardness of the sitting position, though, would seem to broadcast your intentions to anyone who glances in your direction.

3) Three diners, six seats, round table. All on one half side or one seat in between each diner? I prefer the latter, especially if there is a lazy susan involved, which is always fun to use.

Posted

Personally, for the two diners situation, if I am with a female friend, I sit face to face. If with my husband, on the 4 sided table we sit adjacent sides, if one side is a booth, we sit opposite each other.

I read a study on this once and there was an overwhelming difference between female preferences and male preferences. In most situations where conversation would take place, the females prefer to face their counterpart and the males prefer to be to the side of their counterpart. Don't recall the details, but it was interesting reading!

Cheryl, The Sweet Side
Posted

Regardless of other factors I always sit with my back to a wall. :unsure:

SB (old habits die hard) :wink:

Posted

I always attempt to sit on my hind quarters.

Rich Schulhoff

Opinions are like friends, everyone has some but what matters is how you respect them!

Posted
Regardless of other factors I always sit with my back to a wall. :unsure:

What happens if your dining partner wishes to do the same?

Posted
Personally, for the two diners situation, if I am with a female friend, I sit face to face.  If with my husband, on the 4 sided table we sit adjacent sides, if one side is a booth, we sit opposite each other.

I've never understood why couples would ever want to sit side-by-side.

If dining alone with one other at:

1. 4-Top along banquette, I prefer to sit across from my date.

2. 4-Top, adjacent sides

If dining with 2 others at a 6-top, I'd have to agree with Kent that if there is lazy-Suzy, I prefer to spread out. If no lazy-Suzy, I'd prefer to sit all in a row for more intimate interaction, rather than shout across a large table.

u.e.

“Watermelon - it’s a good fruit. You eat, you drink, you wash your face.”

Italian tenor Enrico Caruso (1873-1921)

ulteriorepicure.com

My flickr account

ulteriorepicure@gmail.com

Posted
Where do you sit in these scenarios:

1) Two diners, square four-person table with a seat on each side. Adjacent sides or face to face across the table? Adjacent sides seems more common, especially in situations that invite more intimacy between the diners, e.g. a date, but I do not enjoy tilting my head at a 45 degree angle. If you're interested in below the table hanky-panky, although adjacent sides allows more with the hands, face to face allows more footsies -- you know, if you're into that.

2) Two diners, four-person table with two seats and a bench, no seats on two sides of the table. Usually this is face to face but I have seen a few couples that sit side to side on the bench. This is much much worse than the adjacent sides scenario as you have to turn your head a full 90 degrees but I suppose it allows for maximum hanky-panky. The awkwardness of the sitting position, though, would seem to broadcast your intentions to anyone who glances in your direction.

3) Three diners, six seats, round table. All on one half side or one seat in between each diner? I prefer the latter, especially if there is a lazy susan involved, which is always fun to use.

I think this really depends on who you're dining with.

In the first scenario, I would choose face-to-face with friends (either male or female--doesn't matter.) If I were on a date in a more formal restaurant, again, I would sit face-to-face. I prefer sitting adjacent to my date if we were in a casual restaurant or a lounge.

Second scenario--side-to-side on the bench with a date (assuming this is a casual restaurant, as formal restaurants don't usually have benches). Face-to-face with friends.

Third scenario--I would sit with my friends on one side of the table. A huge gap in the middle of the table seems to create weird distance.

Posted

If you are eating with kids that aren't big enough to cut their own meat, you sit right by them.

When Paul and I dine alone, we want to sit facing each other. We can look each other in the eye and it's easier to play footsie.

Susan Fahning aka "snowangel"
Posted
If you are eating with kids that aren't big enough to cut their own meat, you sit right by them.

When Paul and I dine alone, we want to sit facing each other.  We can look each other in the eye and it's easier to play footsie.

I'd agree on both points, and I prefer back-to-the-wall across- the- table with anyone I'm dining with. I want to see my dear buddy's face.

For lovers who haven't seen each other for awhile, side-by-side at a banquette is darned romantic: easier to hold hands, play footsie, examine decolletage, play kneesies, slip hand under hemline.

Margaret McArthur

"Take it easy, but take it."

Studs Terkel

1912-2008

A sensational tennis blog from freakyfrites

margaretmcarthur.com

Posted

Um, like, maybe it's just me... eating out is for food. Romance, well, let is build then go elsewhere... eat first I say. Sit where it's comfortable, and eat.

"Coffee and cigarettes... the breakfast of champions!"

Posted (edited)

i always use a kinda feng shui sense.. there's a correct combination depending on the room, placement of table, companion/s etc, energy flow through the room..

there's a spot that always just 'feels' right.. [conversley there is also a 'wrong' spot/combination]

when i was younger i used to pick spots with a view to attack angles, defensible positions, viewpoints etc [i was heavily into martial arts and being 'tough' ;)]

my how things change.. though in essence one is really the continuation of the other..

Edited by Tae.Lee (log)
Posted

Haha, I always use feng shui as an excuse to sit wherever I want. Being Chinese, people tend to believe my bullshit.

  • 1 year later...
Posted

I've never understood why couples would ever want to sit side-by-side.

I often sit next to my husband because we share dishes. It's easier than forking stuff across the table or handing round plates.

:smile:

“Don't kid yourself, Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd eat you and everyone you care about!”
Posted

In the banquette senerio, I thought that the lady allway's get's that seat. I heard that the reason for this is, arcanely, to show off your date. It allway's puts the guy's back to the door which is kinda like saying "I'd die for you" which is very romantic and all... I guess you should keep staring into her eyes looking for a refelction of someone sneaking up on you.

But I like the act of standing and pulling out the table so she can exit, and enter. Give a little ritual, and grace to the old in-out, in-out.

A DUSTY SHAKER LEADS TO A THIRSTY LIFE

×
×
  • Create New...