Meat Ice creams

[donnad.livejournal.com]

There has been a lot of discussion going on over at this post. I was going to respond over there but figured it would just get lost in the shuffle.

I would like to try to clarify what I believe is Anns's complaint about meat ice creams. Ann correct me if I am wrong here.

Disclaimer: I am an omnivore, I eat meat. I do not like chicken liver at all therefore the thought of a chicken liver ice cream is a major squick for me. I have allergies to many other foods, many of them were made into ice creams this year, I actually had a run-in (so to speak) with one of those foods this year(mango if anyone is curious.)
I do not keep kosher.

So here is my take on this.

Say you have a table with several buckets of ice cream and one scoop and a bucket of rinse water.
First person, takes a scoop of the chicken liver ice cream, puts the scoop in the water, the water is now contaminated with chicken liver ice cream melt. Next person takes the scoop and scoops into the mango ice cream and puts the scoop back in the water. Mango ice cream is now contaminated with chicken liver water. Water is now contaminated with chicken liver and mango. Next one comes along, scoops into the chocolate ice cream, scoop goes back in the water, chocolate ice cream is now contaminated with the chicken liver and the mango. Water is now contaminated with chicken liver, mango and chocolate.

I come along, and I want vanilla. I take the scoop and proceed to contaminate the vanilla with chicken liver, mango and chocolate. Well, I am personally allergic to mango. I actually can't have the vanilla I want without having to deal with the contamination from the water of chicken liver, chocolate and mango melt. Thus I can't even have vanilla unless I use my own personal scoop, which BTW would be contaminated by anything else I may have dipped into prior to coming to the vanilla, thus contaminating the vaniila for someone else.

I think this is the issue at hand. How do we deal with stopping the cross contamination of dairy to non-dairy and meat to dairy/non-dairy?

Personally I think the meat ice creams are an interesting experiment and I don't want to discourage experimentation but... The situation could be easily remedied by a separation of them to a small table by themselves with their own scoops.

I think a separation of flavors based on type is a really a good idea for future Baitcons. The sorbets get a table, non-dairy/soy or coconut based on one table, the *hot* ice creams (like habanero) on another, the regular ice creams on one, and the meat on yet another. It would help to avoid cross contamination of dairy into meat, dairy into soy and other non-dairy flavors.



Now as for the other issue she raised. I too think that the person walking around with the torn t-shirt barely covering his privates was out of place, especially with so many young kids around. Call me a prude, but IMO, in the house area one should be a bit more modest. If it had been a speedo swim suit, it would have been fine. Or down at the stream, I wouldn't have blinked twice. But in the main common areas, where anyone could have driven in off the street he should have had a bit more modesty. I can only imagine what the owners of the property would have said/done had they decided to visit our little gathering and seen him.

Comments

[fraterrisus]

i think that's a perfectly fine rule to decide on ("thou shalt not squick the BaitMom"). however:

1. if that's a rule it ought to be published somewhere on the web site;

2. a slightly better definition of what does and does not squick the BaitMom might be appropriate, since "she's Bait's mother" is not sufficient to tell me what will and will not squick her.

i say this mostly because it's a rule that i'd hate to run afoul of. shoot me for being a relative newcomer to BC (this was my 2nd), but "don't piss off the organizers" is a prime convention-attending rule in my book :)

[quietann.livejournal.com]

It was formerly on the website, but seems to have disappeared. Hopefully a BCC member can tell us why. (I suspect it was because MomBait turned out to not be so squicked by naked folks dancing in the rain, in 2002 and 2003.)

The strange thing is, back in 1997, my very first baitcon, I got soooo worried about whether one particular instance of nudity on my part would get me kicked out. This was when baitcon was still at Big Indian. There was a long, steep, driveway that curved once before the house perched at the top of a small hillock. A then-boyfriend and I got very sweaty doing, um, interesting things in his tent, and gave each other naked solar showers on the lower part of the driveway, below the curve but in full view of the house. Luckily, if anyone noticed, no one seemed to care....

[larksdream]

Luckily, if anyone noticed, no one seemed to care....

That makes me glad. It's much nicer when people are, well, nice.

[(Anonymous)]

indeed, what he said. *nods*

[catya.livejournal.com]

but really i meant to say that as me and not anon. sheesh.

[keith-m043.livejournal.com]

Well when JB first pronounced the rule (and come to think of it it sounded more like a heartfelt request), the crowd was smaller, and everyone took it as, don't do anything in sight of the house that you wouldn't do in front of your own parents, but I think the issue of nudity was the specific topic that caused him to make that request.