Why the beer hate? (Forked Thread: What are the no-goes...)

[Mistwell]

Hospitality

I think a lot of this topic comes down to hospitality.

In my opinion, here are the applicable generally accepted rules of hospitality in our society:

1) The host makes the rules in their own home;
2) The guest is obligated to try and adapt to the rules of the host's home, unless those rules directly infringe on the guest's belief system;
3) The potential infringement on the guest's belief system is not sufficient cause for the guest to leave or be impolite.

So here is how I see this all playing out in this context.

Bumble's belief system includes not having to deal with drunks, or people who misbehave during drinking (or during other activities I presume). And for what it is worth, I think this is a perfectly reasonable and legitimate belief system.

If it is Bumble's home, rule 1 applies, and he reasonably makes the rule that no alcohol is allowed.

If Bumble is instead invited to another person's home, Bumble is obligated to try and adapt to the hosts rules. The mere potential for his belief system to be infringed is insufficient for him to try and dictate rules or not attend or leave (see rule 3). It's only if actual drunkeness or bad behavior result that it becomes polite under those circumstances.

And I think this is the crux of the dispute we are currently having. I believe Bumble is ignoring, or disputing, or unaware of generally accepted rules of hospitality.

The mere potential for a violation of your belief system is not sufficient for you to offend your host by trying to make demands on the rules or leave or refuse to attend. When dealing with an invitation from someone else, the rules of hospitality in our society dictate that you politely try and compromise as far as you can - and in this situation, you can attend and quietly wait and see if there will be a problem before leaving. You've breached the unwritten rules of hospitality by dealing with it otherwise.

For me, this has played out many times. I am a vegetarian. As a guest in someone else's home for dinner, I might personally prefer they serve non-meat food. However, unless the host insists I eat meat, I keep my mouth shut and politely partake in the dinner to whatever extent I can. I usually don't even mention I am a vegetarian, for fear I might make the host feel bad for not preparing something extra. It's my job as guest to make the host feel successful and comfortable in their job as host.

The mere potential that the host may insist I eat the meat they serve is not itself cause for me to decline an invitation to dinner or to leave or be impolite. Even though on very rare occasion that has happened in the past, resulting in a minor conflict. Potential problem is not sufficient cause for a guest to create the actual problem of being inhospitable to a host. And that applies to the invitation and acceptance of the invitation itself. You don't decline an invitation based on potential problem. It's rude.

The potential for a problem is not sufficient cause for you to offend a host. Period. Trying to avoid a potential problem in such a manner rather than deal with the risk is an affront to the rules of hospitality. It seems like self-centered behavior to me.

THIS PART IS NOT DIRECTED AT BUMBLE (just general observation): I also suspect that this has something to do with gender as well. Women tend to know these rules of hospitality instinctively. Men tend to not know them (and I didn't really know or understand them until I was in a long term relationship with a woman). It sometimes takes men being in a long term relationship with a woman, and being invited to the home of other couples, before some men "get" these rules even exist, much less how to properly deal with them.

 

[Piratecat]

For me, this has played out many times. I am a vegetarian. As a guest in someone else's home for dinner, I might personally prefer they serve non-meat food. However, unless the host insists I eat meat, I keep my mouth shut and politely partake in the dinner to whatever extent I can. I usually don't even mention I am a vegetarian, for fear I might make the host feel bad for not preparing something extra. It's my job as guest to make the host feel successful and comfortable in their job as host.

See, that seems unreasonable to me. As a host, I would no more expect a vegetarian guest to eat meat than I would a kosher Jewish guest to eat lobster; both fall into the realm of "the guest is expected to communicate these reasonable dietary choices." I'd feel awful if I gave you a delicious, delicious BLT and you thought you had to eat it to be polite. That being said, I wouldn't expect your vegetarianism to stop me from having a piece of chicken, and I'd be surprised if you chose to leave when I did.

Similarly, no guest should have alcohol forced on them and it's reasonable for someone to leave my home if someone has become drunk and they're uncomfortable. I'd personally consider it somewhat extraordinary if a guest left just because someone in my home was having a glass of wine; in that case I'd consider it (as Bumbles has said, I think) their issue and not my failure as a host, and I'd shrug and carry on without them.

 

[Desdichado]

I also suspect that this has something to do with gender as well. Women tend to know these rules of hospitality instinctively. Men tend to not know them (and I didn't really know or understand them until I was in a long term relationship with a woman). It sometimes takes men being in a long term relationship with a woman, and being invited to the home of other couples, before some men "get" these rules even exist, much less how to properly deal with them.

I was with you up 'til this point. While I agree that in general, women do understand a lot of the more subtle rules of social interaction (or perhaps to some extent they create them) there are some more basic rules of social interaction, that you expect anyone, even barbaric young bachelor men, to understand intuitively.

To me, this scenario falls squarely in that group.

 

[Bumbles]

I believe Bumble is ignoring, or disputing, or unaware of generally accepted rules of hospitality.

Well, if you were concerned about the 2 of those 3, I can only say this thread should disabuse you of that. We done worrying about them?

See, that seems unreasonable to me. As a host, I would no more expect a vegetarian guest to eat meat than I would a kosher Jewish guest to eat lobster; both fall into the realm of "the guest is expected to communicate these reasonable dietary choices." I'd feel awful if I gave you a delicious, delicious BLT and you thought you had to eat it to be polite. That being said, I wouldn't expect your vegetarianism to stop me from having a piece of chicken, and I'd be surprised if you chose to leave when I did.

Vegetarianism was one of the first things that actually made me realize that it would be better to leave some situations that pick a conflict. Some people didn't want to see other people eat meat. Some professed to be ok with it, but I could see they were sickened by it. People who liked to eat meat, often got upset at the preferences of others, even when they didn't say anything about anybody else's eating habits, only their own. So I realized, you know, it's not wrong to give consideration to others...and then I realized, it's not any more wrong to give consideration to myself.

Similarly, no guest should have alcohol forced on them and it's reasonable for someone to leave my home if someone has become drunk and they're uncomfortable. I'd personally consider it somewhat extraordinary if a guest left just because someone in my home was having a glass of wine; in that case I'd consider it (as Bumbles has said, I think) their issue and not my failure as a host, and I'd shrug and carry on without them.

Yep, it's no great failure as a host, it may be something a bit out of the norm for you, but there's no reason to consider it impolite. I don't consider it impolite if somebody refuses to play in my games because of any of my rules. I respect their desire not to argue over it.

 

[sjmiller]

In answer to Morrus.. Lanefan's much earlier question.. if I went to a new game and was having fun.. then someone cracked a beer, I would play on. If said drinker turned into a drunk.. I would pick up my things and leave. I do not enjoy social gatherings with drunks.

I have a question for you. If, perchance, this person did get drunk and you were picking up your things and leaving, would you tell the group why you were leaving so suddenly, or would you leave without any explanation? I believe the former would be accepted without any problem. The latter, I feel, would possibly be considered rude by the others. That is, of course, my own personal take on the situation.

 

[ST]

I've never felt much need to game with strangers, so it's "dinner with friends at their place, plus gaming", and as a functioning human adult I've never needed explicit rules to get through that kind of harrowing social experience.

Adults should be able to handle their own intoxicants of choice, and if they can't, that's a separate issue. And it certainly isn't a gaming issue.

As a rule, "We can have these X people in one room for a few hours, and people will be comfortable, relaxed, and not antisocial or disruptive" is a prerequisite for gaming (or, really, doing almost anything socially), so general social awareness and communicativeness is sort of important for us humans.

 

[MichaelK]

I also suspect that this has something to do with gender as well. Women tend to know these rules of hospitality instinctively. Men tend to not know them (and I didn't really know or understand them until I was in a long term relationship with a woman). It sometimes takes men being in a long term relationship with a woman, and being invited to the home of other couples, before some men "get" these rules even exist, much less how to properly deal with them.

Just a note.

A particular group having social rules that no one else knows or follows unless they're heavily involved in that group is a subculture. (or a culture, if it's a discreet group).

If what you say is true, and only women or those heavily involved with women know or follow these rules then it's not a "rule". It's a part of female subcultural values.

 

[Mistwell]

See, that seems unreasonable to me. As a host, I would no more expect a vegetarian guest to eat meat than I would a kosher Jewish guest to eat lobster; both fall into the realm of "the guest is expected to communicate these reasonable dietary choices." I'd feel awful if I gave you a delicious, delicious BLT and you thought you had to eat it to be polite. That being said, I wouldn't expect your vegetarianism to stop me from having a piece of chicken, and I'd be surprised if you chose to leave when I did.

I'll rephrase for clarity.

I would try and enjoy the meal the best I could means not eating the meat, but eating everything other than the meat. There will probably be side dishes I can eat, and I would just eat those and be happy and gracious.

I'd probably mention during the invitation that I am a vegetarian, but if you didn't prepare a vegetarian dish at the actual meal for whatever reason, I wouldn't mention it, and I certainly wouldn't leave because of it. And if I mentioned before the meal that I am a vegetarian and you said "Oh well, we are meat eaters and the meal will be primarily meat" I wouldn't decline the invitation (I just would make due with whatever non-meat there is, or eat before I left, because the dinner is a social event anyway).

I also said if you did try to actually make me eat meat, that's when an issue would arise.

Similarly, if I didn't drink alcohol, I simply would not consume alcohol. It would only be an issue if you insisted I drink alcohol. That's the distinction. Same distinction pretty much everyone in this thread made in reply to Bumble, in different words.

Similarly, no guest should have alcohol forced on them and it's reasonable for someone to leave my home if someone has become drunk and they're uncomfortable.

Yes and yes. I agreed that nobody should be forced to consume alcohol, and that it would become polite to leave IF your belief system became actually infringed - which in this case is someone actually becoming drunk, as opposed to merely the potential for it.

I'd personally consider it somewhat extraordinary if a guest left just because someone in my home was having a glass of wine; in that case I'd consider it (as Bumbles has said, I think) their issue and not my failure as a host, and I'd shrug and carry on without them.

Right. My point is that him leaving when someone is not drunk, or him declining an invitation on the mere possibility of such an event occurring, is a breach of hospitality rules.

 

[Mistwell]

Just a note.

A particular group having social rules that no one else knows or follows unless they're heavily involved in that group is a subculture. (or a culture, if it's a discreet group).

If what you say is true, and only women or those heavily involved with women know or follow these rules then it's not a "rule". It's a part of female subcultural values.

Nope. It's rules. Going back thousands of years. There are whole biblical chapters on the topic, and the rules have been built on through many different cultures and years. These are the rules of our society. They are not subculture rules, they are the actual rules applying to everyone. They include such things as don't pick your nose in public and making sure you do not excessively smell in public for example. Those are real rules that apply to everyone in our society - you can choose to not follow it, but you know darn well it's the rule regardless of your gender.

It's just that women seem to instinctively grok these rules while men tend to learn them slower. That's an observation on learning of the rules, not an observation about who makes or follows those rules. They are definitely not only applicable to a female subculture.

Ignorance of them is an excuse until you learn about them, but that's all it is - an excuse. It doesn't make them not applicable to you. Just as, if you drive in my state and don't know the u-turn rules, they still apply to you. Societal rules are real, and they apply to everyone, even if you don't know about them, or disagree with them, or ignore them.

 

[MichaelK]

So I realized, you know, it's not wrong to give consideration to others...and then I realized, it's not any more wrong to give consideration to myself.

That strikes me as a mature and responsible attitude.

I think the problem (partly in real life and perhaps also on this thread) people may just end up feeling judged. And... In a way they are being judged. The thing is you're making a judgement on the suitability of the environment for you to spend a long period of time within, which is being misinterpreted as a judgement upon their character.

Well, that's how I see it anyway. YMMV.