Citricos

[RRB]

We just spent a wonderful weekend at WDW and stayed at the DVC GF resort for the first time, a beautiful resort and had a great time.

When booking a diner reservation at Citricos, the CM clearly stated the policies of the restaurant which specifically included the following....

1. no tattered clothing
2. no flip flops
3. no hats for men

Within 5 minutes of our party being seated, the 3 rules listed above were blatantly broken by 2 separate parties that were seated right after us.

I did not say anything to the staff deciding to wait until after dinner to discuss the situation with the CM's. After diner, I asked about the situation and was told "we're trying but it is difficult". That is a BS answer.

Here's my point - either stick to the rules or change the rules. Don't make rules that you are not going to enforce. This is a very simple concept but one that Disney can't seem to grasp.

I am not trying to debate whether Citricos (or any other restaurant) should have a certain dress code, all I'm saying is to not make guests abide by rules that are not going to be enforced.

 

[VisionDisney]

What's wrong with a nice pair of flip flops? Often times my feet and ankles get swollen when at Disney and flip flops are the only thing I can wear. They are technically still flip flops even though they are "Michael Kors" and look nice.

 

[RRB]

Nothing is wrong with flip flops, I wear them all the time. Nothing is wrong with board shorts or T shirts, I wear those too. That's not my point. My point is that if they are not allowed in a fine dining restaurant, the rule should be upheld and not allowed OR the rules should be changed. I can't believe that this basic concept is not adhered to

 

[loves to dive]

I could see how they would have problems with enforcing two of them. No hats is easy, sir would you kindly remove your hat. The tattered clothes could be on the edge, jeans with holes in them are very fashionable and so are women's blouses with burn outs, hard to say what is "tattered". The flip flops would be close to impossible. I have a number of dress sandals which technically are flip flops since they have no heel and have a toe strap.

 

[smcabee]

Wheres the popcorn emoji?

 

[VisionDisney]

Nothing is wrong with flip flops, I wear them all the time. Nothing is wrong with board shorts or T shirts, I wear those too. That's not my point. My point is that if they are not allowed in a fine dining restaurant, the rule should be upheld and not allowed OR the rules should be changed. I can't believe that this basic concept is not adhered to

You are correct on 2 of the 3 but as the below poster said, with flip flops, they come in all different styles and quality and for the most part are not flips you would wear to the beach. Hats and torn clothing is another issue all together. The person dining at a sig should know better than to show up with torn clothing and a hat. Common sense and manners really.

 

[Party.Of.4-NY>>>FL]

They are technically still flip flops even though they are "Michael Kors" and look nice

It's not the flip flops. It's what's inside them.

 

[VisionDisney]

It's not the flip flops. It's what's inside them.

Well, having an issue against feet is another thing altogether.

 

[Party.Of.4-NY>>>FL]

Well, having an issue against feet is another thing altogether.

Actually it's one in the same.

-Men must wear sport coat = we don't want to see your hairy arms

-Men must wear pants (no shorts) = we don't want to see your hairy legs

-No flip flops = we don't want to see your gnarly feet

-No tank tops = we don't want to see underarm hair while we are eating(men&women)

Dress codes (in restaurants) are in place not so much because of the clothing, but more because of what the clothing is meant to cover.

-No hats for gentlemen indoors is an exception to this as IMO speaks to proper etiquette. Same with removing sunglasses when meeting someone for the first time.

And yes, I do have an issue with feet. Not just in restaurants. Everywhere, and all feet. Men's feet, crusty-heel feet, gnarly toenail feet, walking around in flip flops all day-dirt between the toes feet, ALL FEET! Definitely not something I like seeing. Especially when eating.

 

[VisionDisney]

You would have a better chance of everyone being covered from neck to toe if you were dining in a cold climate but when it is 100 degrees with 100% humidity, it is not likely that many women will be wearing closed toe shoes. Sorry but this is just the way of things. I make sure to wash my feet and have hairless armpits when I leave the house. I hope that you otherwise enjoyed your night out at Citricos because life is too short to get caught up on the little things.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Odd--nothing about footwear in the Official WDW "Dress Code" that appears onsite--in fact, footwear isn't mentioned at all.

Perhaps the CM was mistaken???????

 

[PlutoTheDog89]

I agree to a certain extent about the dress code. It doesn't bother me what anyone else wears - to each their own.

Personally, if I'm going out to a nice dinner, I'm gonna wear a nice button down and khakis or dark-wash jeans with boat shoes. That's what I typically do in Disney. Our first year going for Christmas, I dressed up for dinner and people looked at me like I was crazy. It made it especially awkward if you're dining at the park. Since then, I don't bother tucking in my shirt and I go a little more on the smart casual than business casual.

As far as sandals or flip flops, I couldn't care less. If it's 90 degrees outside and a woman wants to wear a comfortable pair of sandals all the power to them.

When it comes to hats, if you choose to wear a hat while dining that's your choice. My grandma's partner (not my grandfather, but pretty close) was very strict about this. He'd make a point to say something to someone and wouldn't care. BUT - let's keep in mind that some people may be dealing with things larger than a dress code. God forbid that person is undergoing chemo and Disney makes a comment to him, not only is that person going to feel uncomfortable the entire time, but it's going to lead to problems.

As far as tethered clothing that's just ridiculous. I mean, the new "style" seems to be a bit weathered and worn, but a nice restaurant is no place for that.

Overall - I think Disney's main concern is that they want to keep guests from coming in wearing offensive clothing. With a "dress code" most guests won't show up wearing a bathing suit or tank top. Having the dress code allows Disney to refuse service should someone turn up with over-the-top attire - like a bikini or tank top, not flip flops.

I get it, what's good for one is good for everyone—but I can't see a huge problem with flip flops; I'd eer on the side of caution with commenting on someone wearing a hat (especially having a father who went through chemo and knowing someone with alopecia).

 

[AngiTN]

I agree that if they are going to have a dress code they should enforce it.
Though I'll go one step further and the people who book there, who are informed of the dress code should have the common sense to abide by it.
But since people are too self absorbed to believe rules apply to them these days it's a hopeless case.
Disney isn't going to turn away guests because they don't have the right attire on. Right or wrong they just aren't going to do it

 

[AngiTN]

Actually it's one in the same.

-Men must wear sport coat = we don't want to see your hairy arms

-Men must wear pants (no shorts) = we don't want to see your hairy legs

-No flip flops = we don't want to see your gnarly feet

-No tank tops = we don't want to see underarm hair while we are eating(men&women)

Dress codes (in restaurants) are in place not so much because of the clothing, but more because of what the clothing is meant to cover.

-No hats for gentlemen indoors is an exception to this as IMO speaks to proper etiquette. Same with removing sunglasses when meeting someone for the first time.

And yes, I do have an issue with feet. Not just in restaurants. Everywhere, and all feet. Men's feet, crusty-heel feet, gnarly toenail feet, walking around in flip flops all day-dirt between the toes feet, ALL FEET! Definitely not something I like seeing. Especially when eating.

Adhering to the rule about flip flops isn't going to stop you from seeing feet, you realize that right?
And tank tops are only listed for men. Women can wear sleeveless tops/dresses

 

[Uncleromulus]

Remember guys--the only enforceable part of the "code" is that very short list of what is not permitted in the restaurant.

All else is by way of recommendation/suggestion.

And as far as I am aware there is no rule about flip-flops.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

A couple of years ago a guy checking-in in front of us was turned away from Artist Point for wearing a t-shirt. They offered him a collard shirt, but he declined.
It's the ONLY time I've actually seen the rule enforced.

MG

 

[Uncleromulus]

But T-shirts are allowed in the dress code!!!

 

[AngiTN]

But T-shirts are allowed in the dress code!!!

Seems like there may have been a time when the signatures required a collared shirt. Though I may well be wrong with that

 

[minnie mum]

Here's that popcorn emoji someone asked for. And something to wash it down with. No dress code required:

Nothing is wrong with flip flops, I wear them all the time. Nothing is wrong with board shorts or T shirts, I wear those too. That's not my point. My point is that if they are not allowed in a fine dining restaurant, the rule should be upheld and not allowed OR the rules should be changed. I can't believe that this basic concept is not adhered to

The is the actual dress code, as stated on the dining web page :.
Not permitted are tank tops, swimsuits, swimsuit cover-ups, hats for gentlemen, cut-offs, torn clothing and t-shirts with offensive language and/or graphics.

No where does it forbid flip flops, t-shirts ( without offensive graphics) or board shorts. The hat issue is nothing new. Apparently there are generations of American men who were raised with no knowledge of when it is proper to remove their head gear. However, I have seen many instances of CMs asking guests to remove said hats. But Disney is infamous for all the policies that it either doesn't enforce, or only enforces sporadically. Personally, I have better things to do than act as the dress code police when I'm dining at a signature restaurant. I am too busy paying attention to my meal and my dining companions to evaluate the dress quality of the other guests in the dining room.

Actually it's one in the same.

-Men must wear sport coat = we don't want to see your hairy arms

-Men must wear pants (no shorts) = we don't want to see your hairy legs

-No flip flops = we don't want to see your gnarly feet

-No tank tops = we don't want to see underarm hair while we are eating(men&women)

With the exception of V&As, none of the signature restaurants should be compared to fine dining in a city. This is resort dining.
- sport coats are never required ( except for V&As.)
- shorts are permitted. Hairy legs are no more repulsive than hairy forearms. By which I mean, they aren't. And once seated, you can't possibly be offended unless you're down on your hands and knees doing a bare leg inspection. I'd rather see a well formed hairy calf than some of the poor clothing choices I've seen by some diners who are fully covered.
-flip flops are permitted. As are sandals and other open toed shoes. You really need to realize that your issue with feet is not the norm. And how can you be bothered by feet that are tucked under a table that isn't your own?
-tank tops - and this also includes any sleeveless tops? Do you actually find that seeing underarm hair on women is such a recurring problem that a universal ban on sleeveless garments are required? I think not. The tank top restriction is aimed at men.

It's a resort. People need to lighten up. When we go to a resort signature we take the time to shower and change into something less casual than we wear in the parks. What other people choose to wear is up to them. Whether or not they pass muster at the podium is up to the maître d, not me or you.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Seems like there may have been a time when the signatures required a collared shirt. Though I may well be wrong with that

There was--and it came back and bit them. Which is why now T-shirts are permitted.