Oh, man. I'm so sorry. I can imagine that some people would find that "uncivilized". I'm not saying it makes sense, but at events like that, picking at other peoples' food is simply seen as "bad manners".

But in all actuality, when you stop and think about it, the whole thing is idiotic. As you pointed out, the food would have gone to waste otherwise. And there you were, still hungry...so, why not eat it?

It's funny... when you stop and think about a lot of societal norms - especially things that fall under the categories of manners and decorum - you quickly realize how nonsensical they can be. So many rules are created for silly reasons.

To pick these things apart, sometimes I think it's easier to look at other cultures' norms. That way, we can look at these practices more objectively, and not bring our own cultural baggage into the matter.

Example A: When you go to eat dinner at someone else's house in many places in Asia, it is customary to always leave a little bit of food on your plate. If you eat all of your food, then you run the risk of suggesting that you were not satisfied. Then your host worries they did not supply enough food. If you don't eat enough of your food, and leave more than just a little, then it seems as if you did not like the food.

Forget the fact that sometimes we simply don't have as large of appetites, or that sometimes we might really enjoy the food and want more. Or, of course, the possibility that the amount of food they supplied you was just enough for you...

No, no matter what the particular situation, you are always expected to leave only a little bit of food on your plate. The reality is, that human experience is far too variable to expect it to fit comfortably into these rules.

From my own personal experience, I can remember eating at my grandmother's house. She would always give me way too much food. Now, to not be rude, I was obligated to eat all of it. Even though on many occasions I felt literally ill eating so much. I would have to sacrifice my physical health to ensure that these frivolous social expectations were met. If I didn't eat it all, I ran the risk of making my grandmother think that I didn't like her cooking. But why couldn't she simply understand that while I loved the food, I'd simply had enough!? Something about our social norms demanded that I put myself in physical discomfort so as not to offend my grandmother.

I think this discussion partially informs why it is that your eating others' leftovers at the party was seen as "ill-mannered". First of all, it suggested that you were not satisfied by what you were provided. By eating other peoples' leftovers, you were suggesting to the host that what they had allotted you was not enough. It makes them feel cheap and ungenerous.

However, why can't we simply realize that not everyone has the same appetite? What was more than enough for others, was not enough for you. While many people felt satisfied with what they were given, you were compelled to have a little more. Well, surprise, not everyone is equal in appetite.

But then we run into the other problem - by you wanting more than others, you are breaking a sense of social cohesion. Everyone else was fine, and got up and began to mingle, but you were quite literally the odd man out. That runs the risk of making you look gluttonous, or greedy.

Now, let's imagine the flip-side. What if everyone had left the table dissatisfied. They were only pretending to be satisfied, and they left the table simply because they felt obligated to do so. What if everyone was still hungry!?

Well, then the only alternative would be that the entire party would have to express to the host that they were not served enough food. Clearly, while the host was being quite gracious and generous to feed so many people, we shouldn't complain, right?

So where are we left?

The reality is that there were probably many other people at the party, just like you, who would have happily eaten more food. Probably the younger crowd, the men, the larger folks... But, if they were all to act on that hunger, like you, then the host would inevitably feel like they didn't supply enough.

What's the solution? Buffets! Let everyone help themselves. You eat to your heart's content...and to be honest, I've never seen a buffet run dry. Much less waste and much more satisfaction. No one eats more than they want, and no one is left hungry.

So let's apply the buffet method to the rest of life. Let's allow more autonomy for the individual - to express his or her particular wants in the social world. Having a get together? Let your guests decide how much social interaction they want. Maybe, even if they're relatively quiet, they want to be there. Maybe they like to listen. Maybe they want a degree of social interaction that is greater than zero and less than one hundred. Great. Let them enjoy that space. The people that interpret distance as disinterest make it really difficult for many of us to enjoy social spaces.

It's time to start social interactions "buffet style".

I'm sorry, folks. I got a little baked and my thoughts ran away from me. I still think it makes a lot of sense though. We'll see what I think tomorrow...