>Exposure, plain and simple. Scientists tell us that aversions fade away when we eat moderate doses of the hated foods at moderate intervals, especially if the food is complex and new to us. (Don't try this with allergies, but don't cheat either: few of us have genuine food allergies.) Exposure works by overcoming our innate neophobia, the omnivore's fear of new foods that balances the biological urge to explore for them. Did you know that babies who are breast-fed will later have less trouble with novel foods than those who are given formula? The variety of flavors that make their way into breast milk from the mother's diet prepares the infant for the culinary surprises that lie ahead. Most parents give up trying novel foods on their weanlings after two or three attempts and then complain to the pediatrician; this may be the most common cause of fussy eaters and finicky adults--of omnivores manqués. Most babies will accept nearly anything after eight or ten tries.
>>7248505 >when foreigners are here, people tell me to be understandable, because they have another culture >when I'm in other countries, natives expect me to follow every aspect of their culture or it's an insult
"Nah, it doesn't look like something I would eat" is what I usually say.
I eat it and see if I like it or not. Then I probably eat it regardless because I probably like it, and even if I don't like it I wouldn't want to waste food, unless the portion size is stupid large. Why?
>>7249312 I enjoy good food, so you'd be wrong there. For instance the kind of shitfood you people make threads about here (jack, regional fast food, junk food "nostalgia food" threads about the toxic mass-produced poison your parents abused you with as a child) is of no interest to me and honestly produces a sense of physical revulsion just thinking about eating it
Authentic ethnic cuisines from all over the world on the other hand are in most cases full of wholesome and delicious things. Remember just because it doesn't smell like chemicals and have an indistinct texture due to being rammed through an extrusion tube and mixed with weird fillers and artificial preservatives doesn't mean it's going to hurt you. On the contrary, you'd probably do well to eat more real food.
Here is a picture of a food with recognizable anatomical features. Does this give you an anxiety attack?
>>7249314 >How can you really know getting shot is bad without ever having been shot before? >How can you really know ripping your fingernail off is bad if you've never had your fingernails ripped off before? >How can you really know that having your arm sawed off is bad without having someone take a saw to it and start cutting?
>>7249364 >anyone who claims to like real food made of decent ingredients must be trolling or insane, people only pretend to like nice things in order to make themselves appear superior to those around them Flyover as fuck
>>7248966 >If it looks tasty, I eat it. >Disgusting things look disgusting for a reason. >almost literally judging a book by its cover >quite literally not trying new stuff because of irrational fear you might not like it >not considering food "beauty" is subjective and part of a culture do you also leave your green vegetables when eating? did you not kiss your first gf because some friends in elementary school told you kisses were gross?
>>7249497 They're called "chive dumplings." Because they're made with chives. They wouldn't be called that if they were made with snowpea leaves. You know the sort of chives I'm talking about, right? Those Asian, leafy sort of chives? Yeah. Those. That's what they're made of. You know the ones.
>>7250919 Reverse google search the image, and you'll see that the original source calls it a 'spinach, and shrimp dumpling'. I know chinese chives, and from looking, the leaves, and stem in those dumplings look nothing like those of the chives which are thin rather than clearly having stems.
>>7251178 >don't provide source >LOL U DONT HAVE A SOURCE PROVE ME WRONG FAGGIT I WIN >provide source >W-WOW YOU'RE JUST A BETA WHY ARE YOU SO UNSURE OF YOURSELF STOP SOURCING THINGS TO PROVE ME WRONG ;_;
>>7249497 >implies chive dumplings don't exist >gives "they wouldn't be tasty!!!" as faulty, beta reasoning for the implication >implies they're snow pea tip dumplings
>>7250919 >states, rather than implies (because alphas say things and not imply them) that chive dumplings exist
>>7251109 >learns that they're not snow pea tip dumplings at all >"I PROVED YOU WRONG!!!"
Nothing was proven wrong. Are you retarded as well as beta? What was said was that chive dumplings are a thing. No one proved that they're not a thing. Because they are. They are a thing. A delicious, delicious thing.
>>>7251109 >"let me ignore what you stated and instead say that they're not chive dumplings but spinach dumplings because i'm retarded durrrrrrrrrrr" >"also, i proved you wrong because they're not chive dumplings even though you never said they were chive dumplings!!!"
>>7251178 >states chive dumplings exist and are delicious, directly contradicting what's implied in >>7249497
These two posts. He is clearing talking about a particular image, trying to explain what kind of dumplings they are.. He even goes on about how the greens in the image don't look like chives. This is your clue that he isn't talking about the thing that you're talking about.
So you should not be replying to that post just reiterating that "Chive dumplings are a thing. A delicious, delicious thing."
Because that doesn't follow at all, at least not for your argument. And only serves to confuse everybody. It's worded ambiguously enough that it's fair for him to assume you're talking about what he's talking about (the dumplings in the OP.)
>>7252368 not him but conversations are held in real time with someone you know or can identify at least
you can have a conversation via irc for example, or via facebook messenger or face to face.
you cannot have a conversation on an anonymous imageboard, because either party can simply drop out of the conversation and because third parties can join in and impersonate or replace either of the participants
>>7252260 I appreciate your efforts to reason with the other poster. I never said chive dumplings are impossible. Just that a dumpling entirely out of chives would likely not be great - they do make dumplings that have predominately chives, but they're usually mixed with pork which is not evident in the picture. Hell I make gyoza with chives, but I mix it with pork, and shrimp. Another reason for this is that chives don't really hold together well without something else, hence why they're mixed with pork a lot of the time.
The guy who was replying to me seemed just intent to prove me wrong - even though, as the reverse image search showed, we were both wrong.
I based my judgement on my own experiences with snow pea tip dumplings or generally called "choy gao" in dimsum places (literally vegetable dumpling). Those dumplings tend to be nothing but the vegetable and quite a large helping of oil. They may occasionally include bits of dried scallops, and other aromatics.
I've attached a picture of an example of these dumplings, though the one at my local place has a thinner skin, and is as transparent as the one that OP posted.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.