Today I was reading some rather humorous and pointed critique of the recent Disney "healthy gumbo" recipe put on a Disney-sponsored facebook page. The recipe critique was so biting that the recipe was inaccurate to gumbo, though accurate to soup that Disney pulled it. My favorite complaint, as it would be termed on this thread, was that the recipe should have been called "California (gentrification) Gumbo." California Gumbo would speak directly to the layers of culinary appropriation. I was so tickled that there was a real life application of our discussion, in a disney context no less.
In chatting with DH about why I don't enjoy a corporation assigning the wrong name for profit., I found another rather grossly broad example. To me, it's akin to reading the menu offers Sandwich and Fries, but what you really get is a Sandwich and Tater Tots. Yes, fries and tater tots are bite-sized, fried/baked potato sides, but they're not identical. Imagine, in a widely hypothetical context that someone's only experience of "French Fries" are actually Tater Tots. It's that type of "mis-representation" that makes me feel insightful information about certain foods (like beignets, poutine, etc) can be helpful for folks who want that context.
Anyways, it was quite amusing to read today. Some of the responses were pretty witty with their critiques.