General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #121 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

The Ranger wrote:
>
>
> Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
> should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways of
> doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
> might work in/outside the home.)



As far as I am concerned "work outside of the home" is just cheap rhetoric
to be used by housewives who don't want to be called housewives. There is
gainful employment and there are household chores. Bringing home the bacon
is a major contribution and if one partner is not "working outside the
home" there is no reason for that person not to be spending just as much
time on household chores as the other is in his or her paid labour. A
person should not have to come home and share the workload with someone who
has been out having coffee with friends all day or sitting around watching
Oprah. If both are working full time then both should share.
  #122 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,303
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 14:06:26 -0400, Goomba38 >
wrote:

>Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>> " BOB" > posted this at: rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>> "UNITS" instead of children?

>>
>> I apologize for intruding upon your discourse with Ranger and I'll not do
>> it again. OTOH, I've been reading Ranger's posts for a long time. I'm of
>> the opinion that the term, as he uses it, is one of endearment.
>>
>> Michael
>>

>I find it annoying. Cute the first time, perhaps twice. After that it
>just seems as if someone who got a laugh once didn't learn that the same
>joke told over and over again just doesn't work well.


Different strokes. I find it amusing. Then again, DOM (dear old mom)
and TA (Tacky Auntie) refer to me as "#2", as in model #2 (my daddy
was a race car driver in his younger years - championship!), and
"favorite #2 niece".

It's a family thang.

#2 (TammyM)
  #123 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,303
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 14:08:41 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>The Ranger wrote:
>>
>>
>> Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
>> should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways of
>> doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
>> might work in/outside the home.)

>
>
>As far as I am concerned "work outside of the home" is just cheap rhetoric
>to be used by housewives who don't want to be called housewives. There is
>gainful employment and there are household chores. Bringing home the bacon
>is a major contribution and if one partner is not "working outside the
>home" there is no reason for that person not to be spending just as much
>time on household chores as the other is in his or her paid labour. A
>person should not have to come home and share the workload with someone who
>has been out having coffee with friends all day or sitting around watching
>Oprah. If both are working full time then both should share.


LOL! I'd love to hear your wife weigh in on this one :-)

BOTH of my parents "worked outside the home". But only ONE of them
EVER worked inside - guess which one? Guess which one changed the
nappies, got up in the middle of the night, etc, when the babies
needed it?

Having said that, the one who worked inside the home didn't do
yardwork although the breadth of that didn't even closely come up to
the inside work! And then again, when their daughter units were old
enough, we did nearly all of both the housework and the yardwork.

TammyM, works outside the home - and inside! (where's Barb when you
need her)
  #124 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

TammyM wrote:
>
>>
> >As far as I am concerned "work outside of the home" is just cheap rhetoric
> >to be used by housewives who don't want to be called housewives. There is
> >gainful employment and there are household chores. Bringing home the bacon
> >is a major contribution and if one partner is not "working outside the
> >home" there is no reason for that person not to be spending just as much
> >time on household chores as the other is in his or her paid labour. A
> >person should not have to come home and share the workload with someone who
> >has been out having coffee with friends all day or sitting around watching
> >Oprah. If both are working full time then both should share.

>
> LOL! I'd love to hear your wife weigh in on this one :-)


My wife was employed and made pretty good money. I worked too. She paid
someone to come in and clean the house once a week. I did at least half of
the laundry and most of the cooking. In the 30 years we have lived in this
house she has never once mowed the lawn, never wielded a paintbrush
outside, never dog a garden, raked leaves, cleaned out eaves troughs.
>
> BOTH of my parents "worked outside the home". But only ONE of them
> EVER worked inside - guess which one? Guess which one changed the
> nappies, got up in the middle of the night, etc, when the babies
> needed it?


Your father?
  #125 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,306
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

jmcquown wrote:
> Giusi wrote:


>>

> Oh give me a break! Don't drag JESUS into this. Paintings are simply
> paintings. Would you like to take a look at some of the ones hanging in my
> apartment and then make sweeping judgements about things? Don't think so.
>
> Jill


Those paintings are generally valued as both masterpieces of art as well
as commentary on society at the time they were painted. If nursing a
child were as disgusting as some here think, the Madonna would never
have been portrayed doing it by the many deeply religious masters of the
Western world.

I don't want to see your paintings, why would I? To you they apparently
are daubs used for decoration, but to many they tell a lot about the
history of society. I didn't mention it for religious value but for
social commentary. Fra Angelico painted what he knew.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



  #126 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,635
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Pete C. > wrote:

>Dave Smith wrote:


>> Try as I may have, I could never breast feed my son. I don't have the
>> hardware for it.


>Actually, they make add on hardware for that...


Or you can train your body to do it. Google on "male lactation".

Just an aside, I have absolutely nothing against public breastfeeding
however I do have an issue wish parents [**] who take a combative
"We're parents, we have special priveleges" attitude wherein
they wallow in the fact that they can do whatever they like in
public, as long as it is somehow linked to parenting. I do not
think I've seen breastfeeding figure into this sort of flaunting /
self-important attitude but I can visualize where for some small
minority of parents it might.

Steve

[**] By "parents" here I inlclude custodial individuals who may
not be birth parents.
  #127 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,635
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

margaret suran > wrote:

>What "high end" restaurant would admit a baby? It would not be
>considered "high end" if it did.


This is one different between California and New York.

Steve
  #128 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> "Pete C." wrote:
> >
> >
> > > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone

> >
> > I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
> > behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
> > vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
> > to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
> > next to them.

>
> The problem is that they don't. They usually have some loud, idiotic ring
> tone and then they shout into the phone.


Low class behavior in a high end restaurant, just like breast feeding.

I am on call frequently and as a result periodically take calls in
restaurants. My phone (and pager) are always on vibrate, never any "ring
tone" and I always maintain a normal volume. Perhaps I'm more attune to
volume levels from 15 years of audio and video work, but I've seen
plenty of other people who also maintain normal volumes.

Pete C.
  #129 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Goomba38 wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> > I still don't get this idiotic fuss over breast feeding. While it
> > doesn't faze me in the least unless the mother in question is
> > particularly obnoxious about it, it *is* low class.
> >
> > This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
> > available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
> > formula.

>
> Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
> off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.
>
> Insisting that a baby take a bottle, when they're breastfed is ignorant
> of the mechanics of breastfeeding. The two are not necessarily
> interchangable. That would be like expecting you to to suddenly know how
> to drive a manual transmission car when prior to that you've only used
> an automatic. They're both cars but they certainly do not work the same
> way.


Feeding a baby breast milk from a bottle *is* breast feeding, it does
however require a level of class, advance thought and consideration for
the other patrons in a restaurant that some people are not capable of.

Pete C.
  #130 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Pete C. > wrote in message
> ...
> > The Ranger wrote:
> >> Pete C. > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >> >> Long Live The New Philosophy and its equally shared
> >> >> responsibilities!
> >> >>
> >> > Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to
> >> > support the household is included in the shared
> >> > responsibilities
> >> > pool. Sending one partner out to work outside the home
> >> > to earn income, and then expecting them to do half the in
> >> > home work is *not* equal. If both partners work outside
> >> > the home, then equal division of the in home work is
> >> > warranted. If only one partner works outside the home,
> >> > then that partner should not be expected to do half the
> >> > in home work. Makes no difference which partner is
> >> > which, just that the total household support workload,
> >> > which includes the outside work, is shared equally.
> >>
> >> Work inside the home (which includes housework and yardwork)
> >> should be shared equally by all family members. There are ways
> >> of
> >> doing it without causing anyone to feel slighted (because they
> >> might work in/outside the home.)
> >>

> > What you propose is *not* equal. When someone spends 8 hrs a day
> > +
> > commuting time in support of the household, expecting them to do
> > half
> > the in home work is not even remotely close to equal. List all
> > household
> > tasks and the typical time to complete required, adjusted for
> > difficulty
> > level and then divide the result equally.

>
> It sure is equal and equitable to divide home duties equally. I've
> been doing it for the last 20 years and see no problems continuing
> to do so.
>
> When someone spends 8+ hours a day working in the field or at some
> physically taxing that is no less draining than the person working
> inside the home doing the manual labor/chores required for
> standard household upkeep. The difference is that the household
> chores don't end at the end of a shift.
>
> The Ranger


You seem to be missing the point entirely.

Work outside the home and work inside the home both qualify equally as
work. If partner A works 8hr outside the home and partner B works 8hrs
inside the home they have worked equal amounts in support of the
household. If the in house work requires 8hr to complete, then the
partners have shared the work equally and all is well. If the in house
work requires more than 8hr to complete than that portion over 8hrs
remains to be divided equally.

Pete C.


  #131 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Sharing the load was Restaurant owner to teach

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> "Pete C." wrote:
>
> > What you propose is *not* equal. When someone spends 8 hrs a day +
> > commuting time in support of the household, expecting them to do half
> > the in home work is not even remotely close to equal. List all household
> > tasks and the typical time to complete required, adjusted for difficulty
> > level and then divide the result equally.

>
> That is a tough one to do. Some of the chores are daily, some are weekly,
> and some are seasonal. Then you have to consider the amount of actual work
> involved in a chore. For instance, laundry takes a lot of time, but not a
> lot of work. Sort, the laundry, put it in the machine, add detergent and
> start the machine. The cycle might take 30-40 minutes, but there is only
> a few minutes of actual work. It is not like the old days where it is all
> time one piece at a time by hand. When it is done, you take it out of the
> washer and put it in the dryer. The dryer cycle might take 45 minutes, but
> it only takes a minute or two to load it and unload it. I realize it has
> to be sorted, folded, hung or maybe ironed..... but I am talking just the
> actual washing and drying time. A person can multitask while the machines
> are doing their thing. Similarly, cooking is generally more time being
> cooked than it is being prepared. Two minutes to prepare a roast and two
> hours for it to cook. It is two minutes work, not two hours.
>
> Yard work, OTOH, can't usually be multi-tasked. You have to mow, then edge,
> then rake. You can't just start the machine and work on something else.
>
> You can get a lot more work done if you learn how to multi-task. For
> instance, this morning I got back from my riding lesson. I had a quick
> shower, came downstairs, turned on the oven to pre-heat and made up a batch
> of pie pastry. Then I went outside and cut some rhubarb, came inside and
> cut it up, rolled out the pastry and put half in the pan and the other half
> rolled out for the top, put the rhubarb in the pie stuck it in the oven
> with a timer set for 15 minutes. While it was cooking I grabbed the vacuum
> and ran through the upstairs, the stairs, spare bedroom and kitchen. When
> the timer went I turned down the temperature and started preparing muffins
> and put some bacon and sausage on to fry slowly. When my wife got home all
> I had to do was take out the pie and pop in the muffins and had 10 minutes
> to make coffee and scramble eggs.
>
> If I had done each of those tasks one at a time it would have taken hours.
> When I have to do the lawn, I am looking at close to two hours to mow with
> the tractor mower. Then I have to get the trimmer out, and that is good for
> another 30-35 minutes. Then I have to get out the broom and sweep off the
> walks. I may not get as much accomplished outside, but it is a lot more
> work and a lot more time.


Yep, it is complicated. You need to analyze all of the required tasks
and assign difficulty adjusted time values to each if you want to find a
fair balance. Add in the complication that some people prefer to do
particular tasks and it's even more complex to find that balance.

Pete C.
  #132 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,949
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 19:10:50 GMT, "Pete C." >
wrote:


>Feeding a baby breast milk from a bottle *is* breast feeding, it does
>however require a level of class, advance thought and consideration for
>the other patrons in a restaurant that some people are not capable of.
>
>Pete C.

I swore I was not going to get involved in this thread, but...

No, it is not. As Goomba stated, the mechanics are different. The
muscles used are different.

There is a big debate in the neonatal community and especially amongst
lactation consultants. Many say that there will be "nipple confusion"
and that one should never give a bottle because of this. When a baby
is very young, I disagree, as they (if they are healthy) will suck on
almost anything. However, it is very easy to see right off the bat
which baby is a "breast" baby and which is a bottle baby. The breast
fed baby often has difficulty with a bottle, because of the shape of
the nipple, and because the nipple of the botttle doesn't work like
the breast does.

I am not a lactation consultant, but I have been a neonatal nurse
since 1975. I have taken a few courses on teaching breast feeding, as
part of my work. I have seen a lot of babies, and fed a lot of them,
when they are healthy. And even when they are not healthy.

I work with a lot of premature babies, extremely tiny ones, who have
difficulties with feeding when they are so small. Sucking from the
nipple of a bottle can sometimes cause death defying moments, as the
nipple of a bottle is a passive object, and often gives the baby more
than he/she can handle at the time. And because of this, and because
the breast feeding mechanism is very different than that of bottle
feeding, these tiny babies do much better when they are attempting to
breast feed. This also happens to be very true sometimes when they
are normal newborns.

I also see in my work, many, many fathers who are totally involved in
their babie's care, and do almost as much as the mother does,
excluding breast feeding of course. I have also seen fathers who are
scared to death of their baby, and with a little bit of encouragement,
they get totally involved. And I have seen mothers who are terrified
of their newborn. It works all ways.

Christine
  #133 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,635
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan > wrote:

>I remember asking Steven how they got little babys to
>keep so quiet. His eyes twinkled and he said "Now Michael, you've heard of
>infant Valium... surely you have." He said my eyes got huge and my face
>got really red. He could tell I was about to have a huge hissy fit. He
>told me it was just a joke. Good thing, I would have been in the parents
>face over feeding a baby Valium.


Which airline was it that was caught spiking childrens' food
and drinks with Valium?

Steve, childfree unit
  #134 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,984
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Dave Smith wrote:
> Goomba38 wrote:
>>
>>> This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
>>> available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
>>> formula.

>> Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
>> off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.

>
> That shows how times change. In the good old days if you were a person of
> position you would hire a wet nurse to breast feed your child for you.


LOL, true. I should have qualified that by saying "currently, in
America..."
  #136 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 378
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
> Pambo forced margaret suran > to post this
> at: rec.food.cooking:
>
>> What "high end" restaurant would admit a baby? It would not be
>> considered "high end" if it did.

>
> I've seen it twice. Once at Tony's and once at Giovanni's. This is
> Giovanni's on The Hill website: http://www.giovannisonthehill.com/
>
> For St. Louis I would consider it high end.


What can a Maitre D' do if a baby starts crying in such a restaurant?
The other diners who are in the middle of at least a $200.00 meal would
be quite inconvenienced. Getting the "Crying Baby Party" another table
(most likely not available in such a place) would just annoy other
patrons and moving the $200.00 diners to another table would interrupt
their meal and spoil the evening for them. If they choose not to pay
for that spoiled evening, nobody could blame them. No high end
restaurant would take such a chance, especially since there might be a
large loss of business if it became known.
  #137 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 378
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Steve Pope wrote:
> margaret suran > wrote:
>
>> What "high end" restaurant would admit a baby? It would not be
>> considered "high end" if it did.

>
> This is one different between California and New York.
>
> Steve



There used to be discreet signs in some restaurants, asking diners not
to come to their places smelling of strong fragrances. At least one
listed some of those perfumes, both for men and women.

I was in a nice place with my husband and another couple many years ago,
when one woman came in and was told to try and wash off the fragrance
she wore. When she refused, she was told she could not be served and
she and her escort left. I sure would have hated to be seated near her.
  #138 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,726
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Ophelia wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms
>>>> with chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and
>>>> bring a bottle for the kid.
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>
>>> Are you stupid or just ignorant?
>>> First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
>>> people peeing and/or crapping?
>>>
>>> You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
>>> eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
>>> expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to
>>> use a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.
>>>
>>> Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
>>> their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they
>>> are discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless
>>> they are getting paid to show them).

>>
>> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The
>> Assholes let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3
>> kids and don't know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some
>> guy with 3 more. IDIOT.

>
> Why in the world would you say that. What that poster was saying was
> more than feasible.
>

Absolutely not feasible or warranted.

> Do I take you have no children or at least have never breast fed??
>

I have no children; I chose not to have them. Just because I have the
equipment doesn't mean I automatically have to give birth.

> Your response does seem dreadfully over the top


No, HER response was over the top. What does my having a cat have to do
with breast feeding children in a restaurant lobby? Reinstituted my
killfile of the gmail domain. It's obvious school has let out for summer
and someone's mommy isn't paying attention to what their kids are doing with
their computer.


  #139 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,799
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners


"Pete C." > wrote in message
> Indeed, as long as the responsibility of earning income to support the
> household is included in the shared responsibilities pool. Sending one
> partner out to work outside the home to earn income, and then expecting
> them to do half the in home work is *not* equal. If both partners work
> outside the home, then equal division of the in home work is warranted.
> If only one partner works outside the home, then that partner should not
> be expected to do half the in home work. Makes no difference which
> partner is which, just that the total household support workload, which
> includes the outside work, is shared equally.
>
> Pete C.


We made the choice for my wife not to work when we had children. We were
able to get by on my income and we felt it was more important to have a
mother home when the kids came home from school, to help out at school, and
all the things that go with raising kids. Sure, some two income families
had more "stuff" than we had, but that was their choice to make.

Some days I worked harder than my wife, other days she worked harder than
me. In any case, we did what had to be done and never complained about it
or worried about who did more.

So, 40 years later, would we do it the same way? Absolutely. Not ever one
can, not everyone has the same priorities and it is not my place to get them
to change. BTW, the household workload these days is split about 80-20 and
there are reasons for that and you won't hear any complaints from the person
doing the 80%. .



  #140 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 212
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

In article >,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
> >
> > Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
> > rec.food.cooking:
> >
> > > "Pete C." wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
> > >> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
> > >> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
> > >> welcome.
> > >
> > >
> > > That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
> > > feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
> > > feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
> > >
> > >:-)

> >
> > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone

>
> I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
> behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
> vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
> to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
> next to them.


Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
breastfed baby is doing -- eating.

Miche

--
In the monastery office --
Before enlightenment: fetch mail, shuffle paper
After enlightenment: fetch mail, shuffle paper


  #141 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On May 27, 10:58 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
> Ophelia wrote:
> > jmcquown wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >>> On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:

>
> >>>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms
> >>>> with chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and
> >>>> bring a bottle for the kid.

>
> >>>> Jill

>
> >>> Are you stupid or just ignorant?
> >>> First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
> >>> people peeing and/or crapping?

>
> >>> You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
> >>> eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
> >>> expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to
> >>> use a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.

>
> >>> Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
> >>> their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they
> >>> are discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless
> >>> they are getting paid to show them).

>
> >> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The
> >> Assholes let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3
> >> kids and don't know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some
> >> guy with 3 more. IDIOT.

>
> > Why in the world would you say that. What that poster was saying was
> > more than feasible.

>
> Absolutely not feasible or warranted.
>
> > Do I take you have no children or at least have never breast fed??

>
> I have no children; I chose not to have them. Just because I have the
> equipment doesn't mean I automatically have to give birth.


First smart thing you ever did.

>
> > Your response does seem dreadfully over the top

>
> No, HER response was over the top. What does my having a cat have to do
> with breast feeding children in a restaurant lobby?


To demonstrate that your cat possesses something which you lack. The
sense not to eat near shit and ****.

> Reinstituted my killfile of the gmail domain. It's obvious school has let out for
> summer and someone's mommy isn't paying attention to what their kids are
> doing with their computer.


Someone who's not using gmail better let Jill know it's time to check
in to the psych ward and get her meds adjusted. They Hysteria is back.

  #142 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Miche wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
> > >
> > > Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
> > > rec.food.cooking:
> > >
> > > > "Pete C." wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
> > > >> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
> > > >> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
> > > >> welcome.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
> > > > feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
> > > > feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
> > > >
> > > >:-)
> > >
> > > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone

> >
> > I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
> > behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
> > vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
> > to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
> > next to them.

>
> Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
> breastfed baby is doing -- eating.


But not in a socially acceptable manner. Fed from a bottle is socially
acceptable for a baby, just as eating with a fork / knife / spoon (or
chopsticks) is socially acceptable for an adult.

Pete C.
  #143 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Mon, 28 May 2007 14:37:48 GMT, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>Miche wrote:
>>
>> In article >,
>> "Pete C." > wrote:
>>
>> > Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
>> > > rec.food.cooking:
>> > >
>> > > > "Pete C." wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
>> > > >> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
>> > > >> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
>> > > >> welcome.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
>> > > > feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
>> > > > feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
>> > > >
>> > > >:-)
>> > >
>> > > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone
>> >
>> > I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
>> > behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
>> > vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
>> > to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
>> > next to them.

>>
>> Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
>> breastfed baby is doing -- eating.

>
>But not in a socially acceptable manner. Fed from a bottle is socially
>acceptable for a baby, just as eating with a fork / knife / spoon (or
>chopsticks) is socially acceptable for an adult.


Hate to break it to you, but breastfeeding, done discretely, =is=
socially acceptable to most normal folks.

Regards,
Tracy R.
  #144 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,984
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Pete C. wrote:
> Miche wrote:


>> Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
>> breastfed baby is doing -- eating.

>
> But not in a socially acceptable manner. Fed from a bottle is socially
> acceptable for a baby, just as eating with a fork / knife / spoon (or
> chopsticks) is socially acceptable for an adult.
>
> Pete C.


Breastfeeding should be acceptable. That it isn't to you tells me that
*you* have the problem, not others feeding their children.
If you'd had grown up seeing it in a matter of fact way, instead of
placing unnatural shame on it, you too would see it as acceptable.
How sad.
  #145 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Fri, 25 May 2007 16:05:20 -0700, Serene >
wrote:

>Kent wrote:
>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
>>> becomes necessary.
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave
>>> www.davebbq.com
>>>

>> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant, recently,
>> in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's pretty
>> tasteless.

>
>Feeding a child in a restaurant is not tasteless.
>
>Serene


not for the kid, anyway.

your pal,
blake


  #146 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 14:12:01 GMT, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
>>
>> Pambo forced Giusi > to post this at:
>> rec.food.cooking:

<snip>
>> > I shouldn't think many young mums get to eat with or without baby at
>> > Keller's restaurant, but then when did Keller's restaurant become a
>> > shrine?

>>
>> I've never been to Keller's. People are allowed their opinions and
>> restaurant owners should be allowed to enforce a certain decorum that is
>> enjoyed by, and respected by other patrons.

>
>"No shoes, no shirt, no service" as the sign on the door says.
>
>>
>> >
>> > Some place nursing next to elimation processes, others find it sexual
>> > behavior. My head is spinning around.

>>
>> To me it just looks like the baby is hungry and it's feeding time.

>
>Indeed, and I've never said otherwise. What I have said is that breast
>feeding in public, in particular in a higher end restaurant is low class
>behavior.
>
>Pete C.


breast feeding is public is o.k. as long as the mother is wearing coat
and tie.

your pal,
blake
  #147 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Mon, 28 May 2007 01:14:37 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan"
> wrote:
<snip>
> We got to the restaurant and were immediately told
>ladies would not be permitted to enter with trousers. ReJeanne had worn
>(she looked smashing BTW) a man's tux, stiletto heels and black top hat. I
>don't know if it was the liquid lunch or what, but ReJeanne quietly said
>"No problem" and immediately took her "trousers" off. It caused quite a
>ruckus and we were unceremoniously shown the door. We wound up partying on
>Rush street all night and I can't recall what, if anything, we wound up
>eating for dinner. The 4 days we were in Chicago are a tad bit blurry.
>
>Michael


too funny. i hope she was wearing formal undergarments as well.

your pal,
blake


  #148 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 20:55:41 +0200, Giusi > wrote:

>jmcquown wrote:
>> Giusi wrote:

>
>>>

>> Oh give me a break! Don't drag JESUS into this. Paintings are simply
>> paintings. Would you like to take a look at some of the ones hanging in my
>> apartment and then make sweeping judgements about things? Don't think so.
>>
>> Jill

>
>Those paintings are generally valued as both masterpieces of art as well
>as commentary on society at the time they were painted. If nursing a
>child were as disgusting as some here think, the Madonna would never
>have been portrayed doing it by the many deeply religious masters of the
>Western world.
>
>I don't want to see your paintings, why would I? To you they apparently
>are daubs used for decoration, but to many they tell a lot about the
>history of society. I didn't mention it for religious value but for
>social commentary. Fra Angelico painted what he knew.


but did he go to high-tone restaurants?

your pal,
blake
  #149 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 13:54:53 -0400, Goomba38 >
wrote:

>Pete C. wrote:
>
>> I still don't get this idiotic fuss over breast feeding. While it
>> doesn't faze me in the least unless the mother in question is
>> particularly obnoxious about it, it *is* low class.
>>
>> This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
>> available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
>> formula.

>
>Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
>off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.
>
>Insisting that a baby take a bottle, when they're breastfed is ignorant
>of the mechanics of breastfeeding. The two are not necessarily
>interchangable. That would be like expecting you to to suddenly know how
>to drive a manual transmission car when prior to that you've only used
>an automatic. They're both cars but they certainly do not work the same
>way.


so true. i was a bottle baby and when i first got my hands on a
woman's tit i was completely confused.

your pal,
blake
  #150 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 14:03:30 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Goomba38 wrote:
>>
>>
>> > This is 2007, how many decades have inexpensive breast pumps been
>> > available? Show some class and fill a bottle with breast milk instead of
>> > formula.

>>
>> Actually it is hardly low class. In America, the more educated and well
>> off you are the more likely you are to breastfeed. Statistics prove that.

>
>That shows how times change. In the good old days if you were a person of
>position you would hire a wet nurse to breast feed your child for you.


exactly. i thought high-class educated people didn't have babies at
all, much less drag them around with them all the time. don't they
have dogs for that?

your pal,
blake


  #151 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sat, 26 May 2007 02:09:14 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>Serene wrote:
>> Frankcar wrote:
>>> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and
>>> having sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full
>>> public view- why should breastfeeding be any different?

>>
>> Because breastfeeding is not smelly, obscene, or an elimination
>> process. It's *feeding* a *person* -- something that's perfectly
>> appropriate in a restaurant.
>>
>> Serene

>
>Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
>are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point of
>letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't care
>to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.


i agree. besides, the food at most strip joints is lousy.

your pal,
blake
  #152 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sat, 26 May 2007 09:24:03 -0400, Goomba38 >
wrote:

>jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
>> are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point of
>> letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't care
>> to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.
>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with chairs
>> and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring a bottle for
>> the kid.
>>
>> Jill

>
>Having breastfed for years, I can state that I rarely exposed myself
>while feeding in public. I can't recall ever seeing more than a touch of
>skin on other women while feeding either. I don't think it is common.
>I think we need to see more women feed naturally so that uptight others
>would get desensitized to it and women would grow up feeling more
>comfortable doing it. Why complicate life with forced bottles when
>natures packaging is already perfect?
>I would give anything to have another child at my breasts as it is the
>most natural, loving act a mother can perform for her child, IMO. You
>just have no clue what you've missed, Jill.


maybe so, but let's look at it from the imagined child's viewpoint.

your pal,
blake
  #153 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,383
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

Goomba38 wrote:
> Pete C. wrote:
>> Miche wrote:

>
>>> Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
>>> breastfed baby is doing -- eating.

>>
>> But not in a socially acceptable manner. Fed from a bottle is socially
>> acceptable for a baby, just as eating with a fork / knife / spoon (or
>> chopsticks) is socially acceptable for an adult.
>>
>> Pete C.

>
> Breastfeeding should be acceptable.


It is acceptable to most people I know. It's been years since I
heard Pete's arguments. I thought they had died out.

Serene
  #154 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 12:23:16 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>"Pete C." wrote:
>>
>>
>> Responsibilities should be divided evenly and what you indicate seems to
>> be a perfectly even division of responsibilities for the situation where
>> one partner does not work outside of the home i.e. stay at home Mom /
>> Mr. Mom. If both partners work outside the home then division of the in
>> home responsibilities would be warranted.

>
>
>Try as I may have, I could never breast feed my son. I don't have the
>hardware for it.


honestly, men always have some kind of lame excuse.

your pal,
blake
  #155 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 09:08:59 -0400, " BOB" > wrote:

>"The Ranger" > wrote in message

>> BOB > wrote in message
>> .. .
>> [snip]
>> > I notice that you, Ed, have/had CHILDREN,
>> > whereas the "Ranger" has, as he calls them,
>> > "UNITS".

>>
>> There's your reading comprehension shooting another hole in your
>> foot. No wonder ADFP kicked your sorry ass out with such
>> unmitigated joy.
>>
>> > Nuff said.

>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> The Ranger

>
> HUH?
>
>"UNITS" instead of children? No, I think that it's you that has a problem
>with comprehension.


i believe the technical term for this kind of usage is 'joke.' you
may want to read up on the concept.

your pal,
blake


  #156 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

blake murphy wrote:
>
>
> exactly. i thought high-class educated people didn't have babies at
> all, much less drag them around with them all the time. don't they
> have dogs for that?


The first time I was in Paris I was surprised to see a dog in a nice
restaurant. It was very well behaved. If I had not seen it sitting beside
the table I would never have known it was there. It didn't make a sound the
whole time we were there, which is more than you can say for most (not
all) children.
  #157 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On 27 May 2007 07:01:44 -0700, wrote:

>On May 27, 8:36 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:

>>
>> >> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with
>> >> chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring
>> >> a bottle for the kid.

>>
>> >> Jill

>>
>> > Are you stupid or just ignorant?
>> > First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
>> > people peeing and/or crapping?

>>
>> > You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
>> > eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
>> > expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to use
>> > a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.

>>
>> > Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
>> > their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they are
>> > discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless they are
>> > getting paid to show them).

>>
>> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The Assholes
>> let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3 kids and don't
>> know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some guy with 3 more.
>> IDIOT.

>
>Oh, did I hit a nerve? You know I'm right. Your cat has more sense
>than you do. I have no kids by choice, I'm happily married to the same
>wonderful man for 12 years, who happened to request zucchini bread and
>I haven't found a decent recipe for it,which is why I'm here.
>
>I can't believe they haven't run you off yet. Still the same bitch you
>were 6-7 years ago.


we got lots of stamina.

your pal,
blake
  #158 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:58:39 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>Ophelia wrote:
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> On May 26, 3:09 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms
>>>>> with chairs and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and
>>>>> bring a bottle for the kid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jill
>>>>
>>>> Are you stupid or just ignorant?
>>>> First of all, would you want to eat in the same room where there are
>>>> people peeing and/or crapping?
>>>>
>>>> You mentioned you had a cat. Even a cat is smart enough to refuse to
>>>> eat when the food dish is too close to the litter box. Ever hear the
>>>> expression "don't shit where you eat"? Why should someone have to
>>>> use a public bathroom to feed their child? Now THAT is disgusting.
>>>>
>>>> Most women do not flop their tits out in front of the world and feed
>>>> their babies. They use a blanket, or something similar, and they
>>>> are discreet. No one wants their tits showing in public (unless
>>>> they are getting paid to show them).
>>>
>>> YET ANOTHER REASON TO REINSTITUTE THE BLOCK ON GMAIL POSTERS. The
>>> Assholes let you out of school, didn't they? You've probably got 3
>>> kids and don't know who the baby's daddies are. And are dating some
>>> guy with 3 more. IDIOT.

>>
>> Why in the world would you say that. What that poster was saying was
>> more than feasible.
>>

>Absolutely not feasible or warranted.
>
>> Do I take you have no children or at least have never breast fed??
>>

>I have no children; I chose not to have them. Just because I have the
>equipment doesn't mean I automatically have to give birth.
>
>> Your response does seem dreadfully over the top

>
>No, HER response was over the top. What does my having a cat have to do
>with breast feeding children in a restaurant lobby? Reinstituted my
>killfile of the gmail domain. It's obvious school has let out for summer
>and someone's mommy isn't paying attention to what their kids are doing with
>their computer.
>


it's expecting a lot for mere mortals on usenet to be up to your
intellectual level, jill. perhaps we should institute a test or
something.

your pal,
blake
  #159 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,983
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

On Sat, 26 May 2007 19:49:50 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>Pete C. wrote:
>> Serene wrote:
>>>
>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>> Kent wrote:
>>>>>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional
>>>>>>> that this becomes necessary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>> www.davebbq.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant,
>>>>>> recently, in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us
>>>>>> that's pretty tasteless.
>>>>>>
>>>>> What does that have to do with this article? There was no mention
>>>>> of breastfeeding in public.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat: WHAT DOES BREAST FEEDING HAVE TO DO WITH THIS ARTICLE?!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Jill, meet thread drift. Thread drift, this is Jill.
>>>
>>> Serene

>>
>> It's not thread drift, it directly ties in to peoples perceptions of
>> manners and behavior in restaurants.
>>
>> Pete C.

>
>No, it's a MAJOR thread drift. The article was about teaching children ages
>6-10 table manners. It said nothing, *absolutely nothing*, about women
>breast feeding children in a restaurant.
>
>Jill
>


it was just a ploy to get your valuable opinion on this vital subject.
why anyone thought such a ploy was necessary, i cannot say.

your pal,
blake
  #160 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,847
Default Restaurant owner to teach kids' classes on table manners

y wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2007 14:37:48 GMT, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >Miche wrote:
> >>
> >> In article >,
> >> "Pete C." > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Michael \"Dog3\" Lonergan wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Pambo forced Dave Smith > to post this at:
> >> > > rec.food.cooking:
> >> > >
> >> > > > "Pete C." wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> Bingo again! I don't expect much at a low end restaurant, but I do
> >> > > >> expect a quiet, peaceful experience at a higher end restaurant and
> >> > > >> little hell spawn running around and/or screaming is simply not
> >> > > >> welcome.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > That begs the question of which is worse.... the woman who breast
> >> > > > feeds in a high end restaurant, or the one who interrupts breast
> >> > > > feeding in the same restaurant to answer a cell phone call ?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >:-)
> >> > >
> >> > > My vote is the one with the frigging cell phone
> >> >
> >> > I vote for the breast feeding. People having a conversation is expected
> >> > behavior in a high end restaurant. As long as the cell phone is on
> >> > vibrate, not some obnoxious "ring tone" and the user keeps their volume
> >> > to normal levels it is no different than a conversation with the person
> >> > next to them.
> >>
> >> Eating is expected behaviour in a restaurant, too, and that's what a
> >> breastfed baby is doing -- eating.

> >
> >But not in a socially acceptable manner. Fed from a bottle is socially
> >acceptable for a baby, just as eating with a fork / knife / spoon (or
> >chopsticks) is socially acceptable for an adult.

>
> Hate to break it to you, but breastfeeding, done discretely, =is=
> socially acceptable to most normal folks.
>
> Regards,
> Tracy R.


"Discretely" does not equate with "at a table in a restaurant". Breast
feeding in the privacy of one's home/car/etc. is acceptable, as it
eating without proper utensils in the same settings.

Pete C.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inconvenient truth to teach kids about sugar [email protected] General Cooking 5 14-02-2014 08:00 PM
When to teach Kids Knife Skills? RT General Cooking 123 12-04-2007 08:37 PM
When to teach Kids Knife Skills? Sharon[_1_] General Cooking 1 10-04-2007 04:23 PM
table manners Rescue General Cooking 39 01-03-2006 04:56 AM
Table manners kalanamak General Cooking 103 30-03-2005 04:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"