Correspondence Regarding Plate Cleanup Hierarchy
The rule was never written. It was discovered through consistent enforcement by its author.
To: Household Members, Current and Future From: The Person Who Eats in This Particular Order Subject: Plate Cleanup Hierarchy , Formal Notice of Existing Practice
This correspondence is issued to document a practice that has been in place for some time and has not previously been described in writing.
I eat the least preferred items on my plate first. The most preferred item is saved for last. This is not a preference. It is a rule, in the sense that departing from it produces a result I experience as wrong. I want to be clear that I did not decide this consciously. The rule preceded any awareness I have of it.
For the attention of anyone sharing a meal with me:
The first accommodation for plate cleanup hierarchy looks harmless and removes a little uncertainty. If you have ever noticed that I eat around certain items before addressing them, you have correctly identified a structural feature of my meal, not an indication of displeasure with those items.
The accommodation is teachable. You can learn to anticipate it. Several people have. None of them were told about it explicitly. They observed it over several meals and adjusted their expectations. This is how the rule propagates. I want you to know that.
Regarding the question of whether this affects shared dishes:
It does, in one limited way. Because I am internally sequencing my plate according to the hierarchy, I may take from a shared dish in an order that appears non-obvious. I am not taking what is left over. I am taking what is appropriate for the current stage of my plate.
Later, ignoring plate cleanup hierarchy appears reckless even though the rule was invented from habit. I acknowledge this is a strong word for a private eating custom. I offer it without apology.
On the question of whether the rule can be suspended:
Plate cleanup hierarchy is considered stable once removing it would require an explicit conversation. We are having that conversation now, which means the rule has reached the threshold at which suspension becomes possible. I am informing you of this threshold. I am not crossing it.
Final note:
Appetite explains the setting, but the behavior continues even when appetite no longer requires it. I have finished meals in which the last item was the preferred item and the preference had become more symbolic than gustatory. I ate it last anyway.
This is the rule. It has no author. It has an enforcer.
Regards.