http://cache.jezebel.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/jezebel.com.png http://jezebel.com/tag/dining http://jezebel.com/tag/dining

New research promises to shed light on why we eat how we eat, and whether or not the gender of our dining companions really influences our food choices that much. More »
]]> http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5846614&view=rss&microfeed=true

How can three innocent words sound so ominous in combination? "Neighborhood cooking co-ops." More »
]]> http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5164304&view=rss&microfeed=true

When it comes to today's "challenge" in the New York Times' "Dining" Section - Great Meals for Two, Under $100 (It’s Possible) - most of us could probably have given restaurant critic Frank Bruni a pointer or two. Bruni describes his task as finding "a dinner for two that was at least three courses in a restaurant structured that way — and a similar amount of food in a restaurant that wasn’t — would be $99 or less, including tax and a tip of 20 percent on the total of the check before tax." (Wine, obviously, is out of the question on this pauper's budget.) Amazingly, he manages it! We say: no one wants to deny these writers the fun of slumming it, but "experiments" like this are an insult to those of us for whom the budget he describes is a challenge of quite a different kind. Emputhee: ur duin it rong. [New York Times] More »
]]> http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5106651&view=rss&microfeed=true

FYI: You like meat. But you kind of feel bad about it, so menus have to trick you into ordering it. Oh, and you're really sensitive to harsh lighting, too. What, you didn't know? Well, according to the Times, every restauranteur does: it all comes out in a piece on the often "laughably clichéd" differences — traditional and otherwise — between diners of different sexes. More »
]]> http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5060706&view=rss&microfeed=true