• I would never order something liek that anyway. I used to work in a restaurant and i couldnt watch them cook the lobsters alive...i felt so bad.
  • Nope! I must admit, i m not a fan of fish eyes staring at me, but as for the rest of it - I can deal with it
  • Nope... I think it implies a responsability toward the animal you just ordered stabbed in the head and split down the middle. Pay homage to the poor thing that died for your drawn butter!
  • It is no wonder I turned vegetarian,I can not even eat potatoes for they have eyes,and corn for they have ears.
  • If you are going to eat an animal, then what is the problem? That's what an animal looks like. I don't, but I used to and the whole body has many delicious parts. Lobsters don't have teeth by the way. I can pass up the eyes too, but the rest of it is a shell with meat inside. Don't fool yourself into thinking that just because you have a blob of white only on your plate that it is something different. Have a good salad!
  • Nope. How is it any different than me personally catching the fish, bringing it home in a bucket, gutting, boning, and scaling it in my own kitchen, and tossing it in the frying pan? I don't get amnesia between the stove and the kitchen table or anything... it's still a fish.
  • nope. Can you tell me these states that require lobster and fish to be served whole?
  • It doesn't freak me out but it does annoy me. Generally I'm paying enough for the meal that the chef could make it a little more accessible. No one serves steak with the hide on it or chicken with the feathers still attached. I mean, damn, I ordered meat, not offal. . There are exceptions to this of course. I have been told that fish eyes are a delicacy in Japan. So I give ethnic restaurants a pass on this. . Another exception, is that single flap of skin butchers leave on fish to prove what kind of fish it is. That's for my protection so that I don't pay for monkfish and get whitefish. . And I don't really expect to have shellfish removed from the shell or for the shell to be clipped open, though the latter is nice.
  • Of course not. It is the best way to cook fish and shellfish. Please explain what states require this 'by law'.
  • Prawns are the cockroaches of the sea. Lobsters are their larger versions. Never eaten, Never ordered.
  • Nope. i love seafood in all shapes and sizes, and that includes the whole body as well.
  • Nope... 'Cus... I'd NEVER order fish at that type of restaurant. (I don't like seafood.) I'll settle for appetizers if seafood's all they have for entrees. ;-)
  • The reason that seafood is required to be served whole is so the consumer can identify the product. Too often restaurants substitute monkfish for lobster. They take empty lobster shells and put monkfish in them. It used to be common practice to offer swordfish on a menu, but serve the customer mako shark. The laws are made to protect the consumer from fraud. When you buy fish at market, the markets are required to leave the skin on the fish so it too can be ID'd. If you are dining out, and want fish, and live in a state that has laws about serving seafood, simply ask your server to remove the skin, head, fins, etc., after bringing you the presentation dish. - If we humans are going to eat stuff, it seems to me that if it is going to "Turn your stomach" when it is raw or presented, then shouldn't it also make you sick as it goes down your throat. By not acknowledging the origins of our food, it disconnects us from our food. Not necessarily a good thing when it is difficult to trust food supply, chemicals, sources, etc.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy