sometimes, wrong people are wrong

[fox]

There is an ongoing disagreement about chili. I maintain the perfectly reasonable common-sense position that normal chili contains beans, and while you can make chili without beans, it is then correctly described as "chili without beans". Himself insists that chili does not contain beans, and the moment you add beans, what you have is no longer chili, but bean stew.

Around and around and around.

me: They're called CHILI beans!
him: No no no no no.
me: You realize you sound like a little kid having a tantrum when you say that?
him: [sticks his tongue out at me and laughs]

Right around then is when I kind of lost it.

me: Okay look. You know there is a thing called chili con carne?
him: Sure.
me: So it need not contain meat at all! But there's nothing called chili con frijoles, because that is what is known as chili!

We have agreed to disagree. :-P

Comments

[kass]

In Texas, chili does not contain beans. Period. Its more proper name is chile con carne, which means, basically, "chile peppers with meat." It is not called chile con carne y frijoles.

*grin*

(The chili I grew up eating is something like this. I recognize that Texans can get kind of obsessive on this issue. :-)

[aerye]

I wonder if this is a regional thing, because I grew up in Arizona and yes—chili always had meat. Beans were optional. You could ask for chili with meat and beans, but chili with just beans was just—beans. ::g::

[meara]

I'm totally with you regardless of proper Texas naming. Or thinking that Cincinnati chili is kinda freaky weird.

Chili should have tomatoes and beans and possibly meat (preferably ground beef), and a varying level of spice. Best served with options of cheese, sour cream, and crackers or corn bread. Should not be very thin and runny.