Everyone’s entitled to as much caffeine as their bodies can handle, but it is pretty odd to ‘love coffee’ but actually love ‘coffee-flavoured hot milkshake’. Like saying ‘I love fruit’ but really meaning ‘I love apple jacks pop tarts’, it’s not wrong, just a bit odd.
Yeah that’s still gatekeeping though. Coffee is coffee regardless of what you put in it. Even if it’s gross according to my own individual taste, it’s still coffee. Saying anything else is just “better-than-you” gatekeeping.
Edit: it’s also nothing like your example at all, because coffee with creamer is still literally made with real coffee, while an apple jacks pop tart is almost definitely not made with real apples.
Coffee is only coffee if the coffee part of the drink is > 50% of the volume. In North America, lots of people drink a mixture that would actually have you curious about that ratio.
Sure, it’s gatekeeping coffee - the reason we build walls with gates is to keep the barbarians out! I wasn’t trying to ‘gatekeep caffeine’ in the slightest, those concotions are defintely cafffinated hot drinks. And of course, by some standard they’re ‘coffee’ and so is tiramsu.
Apple jacks pop tarts are made from apples (apple powder, but apples nothertheless), and while it might be a small fraction of the total, the point where it stops being fruit and becomes a snack is an arbitary line. I assume you consider a drink made with instant coffee powder still coffee?
Obviously, it’s a silly semantic debate, and someone could equally judge me for wanting my coffee beans roasted and ground “why not eat the berries fresh if you say you love coffee‽”.
Obviously, it’s a silly semantic debate, and someone could equally judge me for wanting my coffee beans roasted and ground “why not eat the berries fresh if you say you love coffee‽”.
My point is that it would be silly to judge someone for this, just like it’s silly to judge someone for putting creamer in coffee.
Edit: also, what about drinks like mochas, cappuccinos, macchiatos, etc. which also have other ingredients mixed in? Generally it’s still fine to call those forms of coffee, no?
Random side note: I’ve had chocolate-dipped espresso beans before and they’re actually a pretty good snack. You just can’t eat too many of them because of the caffeine content.
Yes, I guess I take the different perspective with that. I’m fine sticking with my own arbitary rule for what is coffee, and judging people (in a very mild and irrelevant way) for not liking “real” coffee. But I’m also totally fine with someone judging me for doing it wrong. Or putting cream in my carbonara or whatever. I don’t think people judging each other and having arbitary standards is a bad thing, and I’m aldoy happy for people to disagree with that belief.
A cappachino is coffee and frothed milk, a mocha is coffee and chocolate and milk, etc. If you make something by mixing A + B + C then the result can’t be C. Personally I like just coffee on its own, but I’m happy to make others sweet and milky coffee drinks if they desire them. They smell nice and look pretty!
Imagine gatekeeping caffeine
Everyone’s entitled to as much caffeine as their bodies can handle, but it is pretty odd to ‘love coffee’ but actually love ‘coffee-flavoured hot milkshake’. Like saying ‘I love fruit’ but really meaning ‘I love apple jacks pop tarts’, it’s not wrong, just a bit odd.
Yeah that’s still gatekeeping though. Coffee is coffee regardless of what you put in it. Even if it’s gross according to my own individual taste, it’s still coffee. Saying anything else is just “better-than-you” gatekeeping.
Edit: it’s also nothing like your example at all, because coffee with creamer is still literally made with real coffee, while an apple jacks pop tart is almost definitely not made with real apples.
Coffee is only coffee if the coffee part of the drink is > 50% of the volume. In North America, lots of people drink a mixture that would actually have you curious about that ratio.
Sure, it’s gatekeeping coffee - the reason we build walls with gates is to keep the barbarians out! I wasn’t trying to ‘gatekeep caffeine’ in the slightest, those concotions are defintely cafffinated hot drinks. And of course, by some standard they’re ‘coffee’ and so is tiramsu.
Apple jacks pop tarts are made from apples (apple powder, but apples nothertheless), and while it might be a small fraction of the total, the point where it stops being fruit and becomes a snack is an arbitary line. I assume you consider a drink made with instant coffee powder still coffee?
Obviously, it’s a silly semantic debate, and someone could equally judge me for wanting my coffee beans roasted and ground “why not eat the berries fresh if you say you love coffee‽”.
My point is that it would be silly to judge someone for this, just like it’s silly to judge someone for putting creamer in coffee.
Edit: also, what about drinks like mochas, cappuccinos, macchiatos, etc. which also have other ingredients mixed in? Generally it’s still fine to call those forms of coffee, no?
Random side note: I’ve had chocolate-dipped espresso beans before and they’re actually a pretty good snack. You just can’t eat too many of them because of the caffeine content.
Yes, I guess I take the different perspective with that. I’m fine sticking with my own arbitary rule for what is coffee, and judging people (in a very mild and irrelevant way) for not liking “real” coffee. But I’m also totally fine with someone judging me for doing it wrong. Or putting cream in my carbonara or whatever. I don’t think people judging each other and having arbitary standards is a bad thing, and I’m aldoy happy for people to disagree with that belief.
A cappachino is coffee and frothed milk, a mocha is coffee and chocolate and milk, etc. If you make something by mixing A + B + C then the result can’t be C. Personally I like just coffee on its own, but I’m happy to make others sweet and milky coffee drinks if they desire them. They smell nice and look pretty!
Defintely agree about the beans.
If it tastes good it is good!