Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

“Large” Restaurant Customers need special accommodation?

2456789

Replies

  • lleeann2001
    lleeann2001 Posts: 410 Member
    Samquentin wrote: »
    I've been on both sides. I was a size 26 (313 lbs), now am a size 2 (142 lbs).... at 313 I couldn't fit into regular booths, and always asked for a table. now at 142, the booths I could fit in at 313, are uncomfortable for me now, as I am SO FAR AWAY from the table.

    lol @ being so far away from the table!.....and kudos to you on the weight loss. Good Job!
  • lleeann2001
    lleeann2001 Posts: 410 Member
    h7463 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    h7463 wrote: »
    MikePTY wrote: »
    funjen1972 wrote: »
    Just throwing this out for considerstion, not my opinion...


    I identify as a tall slender female (ha!). Should restaurants have seating which prevents my knees from hitting the underside of a table? Should bar stools always have padding since I don't have much of my own? Should the distance between chairs be closer so I can be a comfortable distance to the others in my party?

    I identify as a lefted handed person (ha!). Should we switch the orientation of place settings, water glass and silverware? Should the TP be on the other side of the stall? Should door handles be changed to the other side?

    What about if I identify as a great tipper, a horrible tipper, a fast eater, a slow eater, a yeller, a rude patron, a very short person, a drunk, allergic to 10000 things, a (insert anything here)... Should I be accommodated?

    Just some thoughts to ponder...

    I'm going to go out on a wild limb and say as a tall slender female, the world in general is probably designed to cater to you more than an obese person.

    For a weight loss site, there's an interesting amount of casual anti-fat bias on here sometimes.

    I'd say, for making an educated business decision about their investments and budget, any business will find that a larger proportion of people is in fact not large... That's a risk that they will take.

    A 'weight loss' site is alway little bit 'anti fat' by nature.... There is no special bias involved, I'm sure... ;)

    Yeah, I don't think the post that mentioned tall slender people was exhibiting anti-fat bias. I thought she was taking the argument to the extreme as a way of asking how far we should go in expecting a restaurant to cater to individual physical characteristics.

    And to add to this, I'm just guessing, but I don't think we are talking about people who are just into the obese category, like around 200 lbs. Are we? While lots of folks are in the overweight/obese category, is the % who are closer to the 300+ lb range statistically numerous? At 200 lbs, do people have issues with restaurant seating?

    I think, even the number 200 is relative.. At 6'2" and at the time close to 200 lbs, my father-in-law didn't fit into much of anything..car seats, airplane seats, restaurant booths... The challenge is 3-dimensional... :D

    Well, I liked the idea that one poster gave a few messages up.....Perhaps some durable conversion seating might be possible for restaurants to invest in. When the word gets around, they would become known for accomodating those of a larger size and make more money which is their objective.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Panini911 wrote: »

    Yes, in my experience, any discomfort I ever experience in a restaurant or other public setting is due to me being relatively short. As a slender person, it already seems like the world is built for me. Airline seats, restaurant seating, movie theatre seats, etc . . . I can't think of a single situation where I've thought "This would be more comfortable if I weighed more."

    I have been obese 90% of my life and my biggest issue was then and is now being under 5'4. I'm almost 5'1 and can barely touch the ground in most chairs...

    I'm a bit taller, but it's still an issue for me sometimes. Especially in office chairs. If I'm lucky, they've got the little adjustment handle underneath the seat . . .
  • seltzermint555
    seltzermint555 Posts: 10,740 Member
    Samquentin wrote: »
    I've been on both sides. I was a size 26 (313 lbs), now am a size 2 (142 lbs).... at 313 I couldn't fit into regular booths, and always asked for a table. now at 142, the booths I could fit in at 313, are uncomfortable for me now, as I am SO FAR AWAY from the table.

    This is the case for me too, although I'm not as small as you are. I sometimes feel surprised at how large things still feel, years after losing the weight. The only time I really had trouble around 300 lb was in certain theaters when seeing live shows, usually very old buildings with small seats, all I could think about was my thighs pressing against the sides of the seats and whether my arms and torso fat was touching my companion(s). It was awful but it was one of many things that served as a wake up call and motivated me to change things.

    On the other hand, I'm ALL about accessibility for as many people as possible. Everyone, ideally.
  • lleeann2001
    lleeann2001 Posts: 410 Member
    congrats on your wdight lost @seltzermint555
  • como_agua1
    como_agua1 Posts: 210 Member
    edited March 2019
    funjen1972 wrote: »
    Just throwing this out for considerstion, not my opinion...


    @fjunjen1972 Should bar stools always have padding since I don't have much of my own?



    this is me :D
  • HeliumIsNoble
    HeliumIsNoble Posts: 1,213 Member
    peleroja wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    I think something else to consider is just cold practicality. The restaurant business is hairy - most new restaurants won't survive. They are often moving into a space that is already laid out and don't have tons of money to change the layout to allow for plus size booths or chairs. And as any short woman (who sometimes feels like a 5 yr old who needs a booster seat in regular restaurant setups) will tell you, if you design a booth or chair for a 300+ lb person, many smaller people won't be able to use it. So do you have two booths that have to sit empty while people wait if no one that size happens to show up? Which is better for your profit margin - having space available to accommodate larger people and risking it sitting empty if no one who can use it shows up, or losing out on the business of larger people because they can't fit? And as previously asked, how big should you accommodate? Do you have booths for up to 300 lbs, and booths for up to 500 lbs?

    Perhaps chain restaurants have better finances and more corporate backing to be able to design a more inclusive layout. Or some kind of convertible situation, where a regular setup can be converted if someone needs it. But most small restaurants, lunch shops, local dives etc are working with limited space and are desperate to serve as many people as possible to aim for a razor thin profit margin. Unless they find themselves often dealing with customers who can't eat there because of their size or embarrassing situations when they try to, I can't imagine doing much about it is possible for many of them.

    While I feel awful for people whose size puts them in this situation in the first place, I'm not sure expecting restaurants to find a way to change that is realistic.

    This is a good point. While I feel for people who are in this situation, I also have personally seen the negative impacts of making things like seating larger. Not trying to do the "well skinny people get shamed TOO!" nonsense that can get so prevalent on these discussions, but just talking about pure practicality. It's impossible to have one design that is going to fit everyone, so I think the move to provide a variety of options as far as practicable makes a lot more sense than just making everything bigger.

    I'm short (well, average height for a woman - 5'4") and have been seated many times in restaurant booths where my feet dangle, the table is so high I can't cut my food without my elbows uncomfortably high and splayed, I have to perch on the edge of the seat, etc. If everything starts being made bigger, I'm not going to be able to eat at a restaurant either, and I'm not sure that's better (especially because I'm far from an outlier size-wise, 5'4" is pretty darn common).

    In my experience, most of the things I interact with on a daily basis are built for a normal-BMI person of about 5'9" or 5'10". Those of us who are further from that standard than others will struggle sometimes. I can't reach the handholds standing on the train to work. I can't see over a podium if speaking at an event. I often can't reach the armrests of my seat because my arms are too short. The top shelf at the grocery store is beyond my reach. But if the world changed to suit me, then new problems would start for taller people.

    The best we can do IMO is try to offer sensitivity, flexibility, and kindness and help people out where we can. Options are great. Tables, booths, bar tops, chairs with and without arms, moveable furniture if we can (especially when creating something new - retrofitting is understandably more complicated logistically and financially.)

    5'4" is average for females (at least in the US), you aren't short. You are normal. The average male in the US is 5'9". I wonder who is building things?

    I'm 5'0". I'm short, even for a woman. I have problems with restaurant seating sizes as well, dangling feet, difficulty reaching the table. I often feel like a child sitting in seats like that.
    This reminds me of this article I read last week.

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/feb/23/truth-world-built-for-men-car-crashes

  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    amyepdx wrote: »
    That was a difficult read. It shocked me to see the modern verbiage of people who "identify" as fat, obese, or large. That doesn't seem to be something up to personal choice.

    Exactly - I was trying to figure out how to articulate that point. The denial was unbelievable

    Fun fact - I live in the same neighborhood as that restaurant.
    I haven't been there since they moved to their current location. If their dessert option for Portland Dining Month wasn't panna cotta, I'd totally go this month.

  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    funjen1972 wrote: »
    Just throwing this out for considerstion, not my opinion...


    I identify as a tall slender female (ha!). Should restaurants have seating which prevents my knees from hitting the underside of a table? Should bar stools always have padding since I don't have much of my own? Should the distance between chairs be closer so I can be a comfortable distance to the others in my party?

    I identify as a lefted handed person (ha!). Should we switch the orientation of place settings, water glass and silverware? Should the TP be on the other side of the stall? Should door handles be changed to the other side?

    What about if I identify as a great tipper, a horrible tipper, a fast eater, a slow eater, a yeller, a rude patron, a very short person, a drunk, allergic to 10000 things, a (insert anything here)... Should I be accommodated?

    Just some thoughts to ponder...

    In all serious, the things that a restaurant in the US (and Besaw's and the woman profiled in the article are) would be required to accommodate on your list would involve things that are included under the ADA.
  • amyepdx
    amyepdx Posts: 750 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    amyepdx wrote: »
    That was a difficult read. It shocked me to see the modern verbiage of people who "identify" as fat, obese, or large. That doesn't seem to be something up to personal choice.

    Exactly - I was trying to figure out how to articulate that point. The denial was unbelievable

    Fun fact - I live in the same neighborhood as that restaurant.
    I haven't been there since they moved to their current location. If their dessert option for Portland Dining Month wasn't panna cotta, I'd totally go this month.

    I’ve only been once since they moved - I liked the old place better!
This discussion has been closed.