Maybe a gentleman’s dish would be set down ahead of his female companion’s.
Would anyone really care?
Yes, as Ms. Moon said she learned when reading a customer comment card one night. “Serve ladies first!” it said.
... [S]he did tell servers that they could and should start considering gender, at least sometimes. “Read the table,” she told them, “and if it seems like they would appreciate ladies being served first, just do it.”
Although the goal in many public places and in much of public life is to treat men and women equally, most upscale restaurants haven’t reached that point.
Then again they haven’t really tried all that hard. They’ve learned that ignoring gender is risky, and often foolish, because men and women approach and respond to restaurants in different ways, looking for different things.
A broad generalization? Absolutely. It’s also nowhere near as true as it once was.
Certain musty rites — chivalrous from one perspective, chauvinistic from another — have faded or disappeared. It’s a rare restaurant that gives menus without prices to women dining with men. And most restaurants no longer steer the “ladies” toward the banquette, assuming they want to face out toward the room.
"Musty rites"! Goodness gracious, if dining becomes a gender-blind experience I think that I will give up dining out all together in protest. Clearly it matters where women sit. And I love the idea of menus without prices. I have a strict rule: if a gender difference insults me (cough*poker game exclusions*cough), I call it chauvinistic; if it is nice, I call it chivalrous.
No comments:
Post a Comment