Broomist comment re vegetarians and non in families

[Guest guest]

I don't disagree with what you're saying at all, but through my kids

I definitely learned that often there is an unexplainable, or

unfounded even, aversion to something that can be changed in this

way. I believe that rutabagas and turnips are healthy foods and so

pureeing them and putting them in my soups so no one would notice

felt like a reasonable solution for getting something healthy in

their bodies and with them not having to gag over it.

 

Later, when I was certain that my whole family really liked the

soup, I would fess up what was in it and they learned that, at least

pureed in soups, turnips and rutabagas are not such a bad thing. To

me, this was a happy step in the right direction and, I think,

opened their minds to the idea that other long-held dislikes might

be worth revisiting.

 

My sister has hated vegetables her entire life mostly because my

father forced her to eat what were ugly, frightening looking things

to her as a little person, even if she had to sit there all night

(which she often did). As an adult it has been so hard for her to

try these things that brought her such heartache so many nights at

our dinner table and I desperately did not want to have my children

living a life without vegetables in them.

 

Where I would never find it acceptable (in the food arena) to

deceive would be trying to sneak in meat, etc... to a known

vegetarian. That is a lack of respect, whereas I hope what I've

been doing all these years has been an act of love. Sigh, I suppose

it's all a matter of perception in the eyes of the doer no matter

what they're trying to do. Sharita

______

 

, " broo mist " <broomist

wrote:

>

> Ah yes (LOL) a relationship based on trust and openness (sigh). In

> veg/non-veg homes, neither party has the right to dictate what the

other

> eats, but both have the ability to make their own foods to their

own

> tastes. In homes where that is NOT an option, I'd posit that

there

may be

> more " wrong " than the dietary choices of either party, no?