Well, Elmer you were wrong about my incessant banter. It is rude and classless to describe my comments as that. We have the option to scroll on by. I show off for no one. I’m confident in what I say. I’m not going to change.

Well, now you know, Elmer! You were wrong about me.

It’s still a mystery how your posts keep disappearing. 🤷‍♀️

No mystery, as per above.

Okay.

Sorry for completely messing up this thread sephia. My apologies. I’ll try to do better.

Maybe Elmer can join in and apologise, too.

That would be the nice thing to do. But, that will be his call to make.

roxsolid, no problem. I rarely start threads because Elmer usually gets into it with someone and ruins the intent of the thread. You should know better than to engage with him. He will continue on and on until he gets the last word. He will come back and comment on this comment, and I will ignore it to hopefully get him to stop.

sephia, I should know better.

He reminds me of an old fellow who used to be in a nursing home of a relative of mine.

He never seemed to sit at the same table for meals. He would focus on a certain group and head for that table. He talked, and talked, and talked….mostly about himself and his accomplishments. A dread would come over the table when folks saw him coming. He couldn’t just have a nice pleasant conversation. He always wanted to one up, no matter what the topic was. I think he was lonely and I kind of felt sorry for him, and always felt that it was just his personality and it was just who he was. I always talked to him and I should have known better. He just seemed desperate to be acknowledged. Poor thing. That’s what his conduct and words suggested.

I’m not saying Elmer is that way, he just reminds me of him.

I don't mind eating alone when traveling or at certain places around home and I am not bad at all about having casual conversations with people I do not know at meetings. But I don't particularly like running into people I know but not well, or know but see only once every few years. It's definitely social anxiety of a type.

Sephia, I just clicked on the link in your original post. I would say it describes me to a T. It's been a learned trait but one that has stood me well. I used to be extremely introverted. Now I'm only mildly so. Our life experiences really do make us who we are. Good topic, thanks.

@sephia_wa I couldn't find the post I was responding to in order to answer you, but I just saw it posted (again, I guess) This: "Of course not. That's the fallacy of your attitude."

There is no fallacy of my attitude. I own it and it's real. Mansplaining to women how our attitudes, knowlege and feelings are wrong is exactly what this is. If someone doesn't like being called out for mansplaining, then perhaps he could zip it. Every comment does not require his editorializing.

Mansplaining: The act of condescendingly explaining something, particularly by a man to a woman, in order to appear knowledgeable, or from a mistaken presumption that she has an inferior understanding of the topic.

I hear you, olychick. It's terribly annoying when a man feels the superior need to talk down and explain something to a woman. He will never understand how it makes him look when he does that. As grown women, we don't need that. We are fully evolved people by this time in our lives so the mansplaining just makes men look like pompous asses. Like I've said in our PMs, I just ignore him. I would block him if this were like Facebook. I worked decades in a male dominated profession - engineering, and while this behavior was common early on, the early 80's, it became rarer. Insecure men tended to be the ones who tried to do that. Unfortunately, you seem to be his favorite target. Just try to ignore his pompous comments.

No matter what the troll thinks, it takes more than one to flag.

@sephia_wa I've been pretty good at ignoring or laughing at him and his transparent tactics - mostly by not reading anything he writes. But sometimes I forget or maybe just need a little playtime.

Are we sure he is a he?

" Are we sure he is a he? "

Of course not.

Omg, there is no way he's not a he, lol.

Stomp the troll. If it want to post only about what it feels or thinks, fine. If it attacks or names anyone, stomp the troll.

Thanks to everyone, myself included, for derailing a thread that started out fun. Happens way too often and the common denominator is always the same person.

This will continue to happen if people respond to the rude, condescending, mansplaining comments he writes. I know it's really hard, but just IGNORE those comments. Enough people respond to those comments that apparently provide the sick satisfaction he seeks. Nice, respectful comments are great. The others? JUST IGNORE. Don't take the bait.

He will respond to this comment and I will do the same, ignore them. Hope others do the same. Because I know I'm sick of seeing posts constantly derailed by usually the same person.

And Sherry, no clue what "stomp the troll" means. That doesn't work. Ignoring comments is better for everyone. Continuing the back and forth ruins posts for everyone else. So please, just ignore.

Thanks for trying to rein us in Sephia! Like herding cats sometimes, no?!

Olychick, yes! And I have two cats so know what that feels like! Ha ha!

Sometimes people who haven't posted in a while return and post, and often acknowledge they don't post because of the constant bickering. Let's get those people back! Houzz won't do anything to change/correct someone's outrageous behavior so it's up to us.

I know it's hard, but try not to respond when you're baited. Expect the baiting to escalate at first because you aren't taking the bait. If everyone just ignores the rude, condescending, mansplaining comments, they will eventually stop.

Before I went into engineering, I was a psych major. Ignoring unwanted behavior is called "extinguishing" it.

Here is an article that describes it:

https://paloaltou.edu/resources/business-of-practice-blog/behavior-you-dont-like

And I'm not suggesting to ignore him all together, just the bad behavior.

And here we go again, ,an interesting thread about dining alone gets thrown a curve ball by a certain member who seems to enjoy derailing a thread in an unkind manner.

Elmer, says ” many of the people here remind me of a woman my wife knows.” Then you share the large paragraph of negative statements that the rest of us should clearly recognize ourselves in, my question to you is, why come here at all if this is how you feel?

People: The way to getting someone to not further engage in a negative behavior is to completely ignore the negative behavior. It is NOT to talk about the person or their said negative behavior in the thread in which you want them to stop the behavior. That is not ignoring the behavior; rather, it is adding to it.

Yes, this was a fun and lighthearted thread until it got derailed....

Porkchop, I know and agree for the most part. But….sometimes I just can’t hold back.

😞

To answer the burning question, yes. More so when I was on business travel on the evening of the arrival. And while I usually looked at meeting materials while eating I wouldn’t spend any longer time in there than necessary. Typically they gave me a table for 2 or sometimes 4 so I could spread them all out. But I prefer to go out with other people though, it’s more fun. Me-time is for quiet reflection and meditation..

I would be happy to eat out alone if necessary, eg when travelling. But I rarely ever do because I rarely ever eat out at all. Eating out is a special, social occasion for us, not a refuelling exercise. It isn't something we would do just for a day to day meal. If I'm at home alone I'd much rather eat something tasty in my kitchen than trek out looking for something expensive and disappointing in town.

In my 20s I did almost all of my traveling alone, and also mostly traveled alone in my 30s as well. I often wished that I had a traveling companion, and I did have a couple of friends in San Francisco that I took a couple of trips with, but if I could not get someone to go with me, I would always go alone. I mostly went to Mexico in the winter than Vancouver in August, until I went back to university in Jan 1985.

I mostly ate out alone when traveling, but often I would just eat street food, and so that was not like going out to eat. I never minded going to restaurants by myself.

When I lived alone in Los Angeles in the early 90s, I would seldom go out to eat my myself and would simply cook meals at home, since it was cheaper. I did have a few favorite restaurants that I would go to by myself, however, when I wanted Thai, Indian, or Brazilian food,

I don't eat out alone. I seldom eat out anyway, it's for an occasion, out for lunch or breakfast with a friend etc.

I took my step-father out to a local mom and pop restaurant for his birthday lunch. The owner was thrilled to see us, she remembered me and Tom going in regularly. I told her I don't eat alone, and she said to definitely come. Do it when it's not busy, say mid-afternoon, bring a book, take my time and have a nice lunch.

I'm still planning on doing it, just never have. I wouldn't do it in peak dining times, I'd feel self-conscious, although a number of people love dining alone. A lot enjoy eating at the bar, where they can socialize with the bartender etc.

I deleted a prior comment. Just admitting it in case anyone notices. It was only up briefly and no one responded, so fair game as far as I’m concerned.

Anyway, one thing I said was that Elmer made me think more about the ”opportunity cost” of just one person taking up a table. Most of the time that my wife and I go out, we’re seated at a booth or table for four. So that’s taking up the space of two extra people, twice as much as a single person sitting at a table for two. We often go out with one of our kids, no such thing as a table for three. Some places don’t have tables for two, so by design they’ve set themselves up for underutilized seating.

Just things to consider, if ”wasted space” plays into your decision not to dine alone. If there’s a line for seating, I might still hesitate to take up a table alone.

I think this depends upon where you live. Most restaurants here have many tables that start out as tables for two that are just pushed together to make tables for larger parties.

And many places we eat have places for single diners, usually a bar or counter like set up so they are not seated at tables meant for more people.

“for you but I think the sensors of your empath detector are set WAAAY too far into the high sensitivity section.”

In retrospect I didn’t spell it out word for word but I still think it should be clear that my post was basically in agreement with you, noting a “possible” exception if the place is super busy. Small courtesies aren’t burdensome to me, and in such a case it would benefit not just the restaurant but also anyone else who would wait in line behind me, not to take up a table alone.

Maybe not as cleae as I thought. My assumption is that most people wouldn’t think twice about seating 2 at a table for 4, so why worry about 1 sitting at a table for 2, which is only half as ”bad.”

" Just things to consider, if ”wasted space” plays into your decision not to dine alone. "

Never. Their use of space is not my problem. If they don't want to seat a solo diner at a table, they're free to make that choice; I have known restaurants where reservations cannot be made for a solo diner. I can't imagine I'd ever feel guilty for wanting to dine alone in a busy restaurant any more than I would feel guilty booking a resort vacation solo during a busy time of year.

"I would never consider eating at a bar in any establishment unless there's a wait for a table and I'm pressed for time."

I also prefer to eat at a table with my feet on the floor. But I wasn't talking about eating at a bar that is primarily for drinking. I was talking about a linear set up for eating, a counter or a long communal table. If I am with someone I don't like to sit next to the person, but if I am by myself I don't mind eating lined up. The place around our corner has a counter along at large window so you can look out.

"Dining parties of 2 or more preferred"

I have seen this essentially in action. I have seen signs that say "Booths/4 tops reserved for parties of three or more", and in places where they have a person seating people, they seat people to minimize the impact of having a "less-than-optimal" number of people for the tables available, especially if they are busy, including 5 put at a round table that frequently seats 4 and things like that.

Of course I live in and visit densely populated areas where there are Always more tables added to the original official design, up to the point of reaching legal occupancy. Even for fine dining. It's unlikely to have a meal most places I go in a hushed large dining room with oversized tables unless you are paying over $100 a person for the experience. (Which we try Not to do often). But really I do miss the days when the padded table with a white tablecloth and a dim, hushed environment was more common.

“Never. Their use of space is not my problem.“

At least one person here takes that into consideration, so my comment was more directed to them. Lot’s of things are technically ”not my problem” but I’ll still take them into consideration for others’ sakes.

Re movies, it’d be a total waste of money for me to go alone. I need someone elbowing me to keep me awake!

Lot’s of things are technically ”not my problem” but I’ll still take them into consideration for others’ sakes. "

I don't take on the problems of other people's businesses - they make their own business decisions, for better or worse. And, frankly, I'm sure they don't want me making business decisions for them either.

As I said above, ”Small courtesies aren’t burdensome to me, and in such a case it would benefit not just the restaurant but also anyone else who would wait in line behind me, not to take up a table alone.”

No, I’d just be too self conscious.

" As I said above, ”Small courtesies aren’t burdensome to me, and in such a case it would benefit not just the restaurant but also anyone else who would wait in line behind me, not to take up a table alone.” "

Yes, I know.

I think that leaving a restaurant without eating just because it is crowded is more than just a "small courtesy". I don't mind sharing a table, though - agreeing to share a table is a small courtesy I would be happy to make in such crowded circumstances.

I also let a person with one item directly behind me and my cart in a checkout line cut in front of me, or give away my seat to someone struggling more than me, overtip (%-wise) waitstaff when I order a cheap meal, put away lazy people’s shopping carts on windy days rather than let them blow into others’ cars… Maybe I should just mind my own business since none of this is in the business’ rules, but to me it’s all just common courtesy. Or, sadly, uncommon courtesy it seems.

I wonder if a restaurant's policy to not take a single diner's reservation has anything to do with the percentage of single diners who do not show up for those reservations. If there are two unrelated people going maybe they would be less likely to no show even if one of them had changed their mind.

For years now, restaurants here have asked for credit card information for larger parties or for special nights, but in my area a number of restaurants are starting to ask for credit card information for anyreservation. The usually crowded, but casual restaurant on my corner is one of them. We said something but the thirtyish chef owner (it's that small) said "Yeah we kinda feel like jerks but you would be surprised by the number of people who just don't show up and don't cancel."

Apparently late millennials and older Gen Zs are especially notorious for this, making reservations at various restaurants for the same time and then deciding at the last minute which one they want to go to. (Although this behavior extends over all generations) .

My niece worked front of house and in the office for a large restaurant group, and she said they would regularly get reservations for more than one of their restaurants for the same day and time, not realizing they were all owned by one company. And they wouldn't be very nice about being called on it and asked to make a commitment to one place or the other.

I do as you do with one of two of the things you mention but I think you're throwing dissimilar things and circumstances into what you seem to consider to be a homogeneous bucket.

" I also let a person with one item directly behind me and my cart in a checkout line cut in front of me "

But would you walk away and leave the store without purchasing anything if someone behind you had only one item? That's the equivalent to leaving a lineup at a crowded restaurant without eating, rather than taking a table solo. It's not about letting someone get seated first, it's about whether you eat at the restaurant at all.

There was a very small restaurant here (no dinner at that time) that was one of my favorites and one day the owner came up to the table and said "I am going to have to move you because I want to put two tables together and you're in the middle." Then she picked up my plate and stuff and moved me to another table. "I know you are in here all the time and you won't mind."

I didn't really, but she made quite an assumption.

TV - The checkout line wasn’t intended to be a direct comparison, any more than the shopping cart or giving up a seat were. The truth is I won’t always let someone cut, I won’t always put carts away, and I won’t always give up my seat. And maybe I’ll grab a table of my own at a busy time - I’ve definitely done this at airports for example. But I also won’t say ”never” as you did, and pretend that I’d be making business decisions for others by simply extending courtesies here and there.

Another truth is that I’d very rarely walk out of a busy restaurant when trying to dine alone, because I most likely wouldn’t go to a busy restaurant by myself, during peak hours, in the first place.

We’re all free to do what we want of course, my key objection here is implying it’s misguided to extend a little courtesy when we see fit for whatever reason.

" I most likely wouldn’t go to a busy restaurant by myself, during peak hours in the first place. "

Would you then not go to a busy restaurant with two other people, totaling three in your group, if you knew the place had no tables that sat just three - only for two, four, and multiples or combinations thereof?

Elmer you really don’t have to scroll up too far to see that I addressed parties of three, in fact I’m the one who introduced it to justify unused seating.

One person taking up a table of two is 50% use, taking up a table of four is 25%. three people taking up a table of four is 75%.

What would I do if alone? 9 times out of 10 I’d sit at the seat that best accommodates a single diner, and that would be at the bar. Three dining at the bar wouldn’t allow the same ease of conversation, not what I’m looking for when going out as a group, so this would be a last resort if the only option.

You do you, I’m not trying to change anything but your unnecessary rudeness when calling someone’s consideration a fallacy of their attitude.

Sorry if I missed it, my intent was to understand your point of view. It's not one I've heard expressed before.

" my key objection here is implying it’s misguided to extend a little courtesy when we see fit for whatever reason. "

And my point is that what you're talking about is more than "a little courtesy". You keep implying that my opinion on this shows I am discourteous, maybe selfish, and don't care about others' feelings, and that's misguided.

TV - I’m simultaneously responding to you and Elmer who are pretty much sounding the same so if I’m saying something that doesn’t correspond to something you said, then I guess it wasn’t meant for you. I’m replying whoever suggested that my attempts to be considerate are in effect making business decisions for someone else rather than mind my own business.

I most likely wouldn’t go to a busy restaurant by myself, during peak hours in the first place.

I think some of this is generational and some of this is gender based/generational.

Most men of a certain age would not assume that "taking up space" was inherently discourteous, and many women of a certain age, were probably taught, at least implicitly, that "taking up too much space (as a woman) is 'not nice' (for a 'lady') to do."

Plus, it was more common for men of a certain age to travel and dine alone and less likely for women to be traveling and dining alone in public. I think they got room service. Plus lots of men do not really have close friends, like women, and do lots of things alone anyway.

I came of age during a period where, after college age, groups of people of the same gender, in pairs, in particular would Never go out to a fine dining restaurant by themselves, or as a pair of two men or two women. And if they did people would look at them. I was visiting a male friend once after college and I suggested going to a particular nice restaurant and he said "as a pair? on a weekend? Not dressed in work clothes? Are you crazy? We might as well carry signs that say 'we are a Gay Couple'!'' And he wasn't kidding. When I was in post doc one of my fellow residents got engaged and her future SIL was hosting a (fancy) party, and my co resident said in all seriousness: "Since you don't have a girlfriend I feel odd inviting you because it will be mostly couples and it would probably be a little weird to bring a random date to an engagement party..." and I said "I could come by myself". and she said "Really? and you won't feel self conscious about that?"

And now of course I see men in couples and groups eating out together and women in couples and groups out together in very high end restaurants and it doesn't matter whether it's a regular Saturday night, or a holiday, or whatever, I , and I am assuming most other people do not assume that just because they are eating alone, or as pair of men or a pair of women, or as a group of one gender together or a mixed group that 1) they are a loser without any friends, or 2) since they are eating together they must be having sex together, or that 3) the mixed group is made up of people who are dating each other. And I think people in Our age group grew up with baggage like that and have trouble putting that baggage down.

(as it turned out, there was only a few uncoupled people out of at least 100 at this engagement party: me, another woman we worked with, and a man who seemed to know half the people there but stayed in the kitchen. "Who's he related to?" I asked. "Oh, that's my fiance's parents' chauffeur" my co-resident said.

Occasionally it's a treat for me to eat alone at a restaurant - I'll stop off for a taco and a glass of wine at Serranos as a treat for getting the shopping done, for example, especially at holidays.

And on the way to the midwest to visit my mother I like to have a day in Chicago where the people are super nice ! I went to Second City by myself, and was treated to the welcome of 'party of one, party of fun' which made me feel totally okay and at home:)) and I was seated with a nice group.

And the Elephant and Castle pub saved me with an awesome leek and potato pie after my train was late and I barely made it to Hamilton and was starving afterwards - the very nice men at the Dearborn pointed me there as their kitchen had closed... and then I got to eat at the Dearborn the next day for lunch before my train to Mom's, sooo delicious !

Sometimes it's fun to travel and dine alone :)