“Many bristle at the visage and philosophy of Ted Nugent…”

I grew up eating rabbit (and hare). But then, I grew up in a place where animals had a utilitarian purpose – companionship and emotional bonding were not on the list. Yes, the little animals had a visual appeal, but we weighed that against the need for protein. They were food.
As a kid I helped prepare these animals for eating – from the killing to the plucking and the skinning.
My grandfather, by example, showed me that you slaughtered an animal for your own sustenance. You were not cruel about it, and you wasted nothing.

Many bristle and the visage and philosophy of Ted Nugent who likes to say: “Before you can grill it, you have to kill it” (or something like that). I don’t see that adage as some cavalier, alpha-male attitude. I see is as a truth from which our nugget-eating children have unnecessarily been sheltered.

I wrote your “problem” has been, not presently is.

Yes indeed, there are people who will always feel the need to go by someone else’s vision (or preference) but those of us in the wine writing biz should point out that critics often get the message across that there’s are objective evaluations when in fact, they are preferences. So what consumers receive is information more about the critic than about the wine.

Unless I’m not understanding what you think my “problem” is…

Thanks for commenting.

@Jason – Spot on.

Your problem has been that you mistake evaluation for preference. They aren’t the same thing.