Mr. J, a Former Professor Series – Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything
The Ethics of the Dining Table: What Micro-Behaviors Reveal About Personal Ethics
Some people look for dignity in words because they’ve lost it in living.
He called himself a professor.
He tried to teach me philosophy.
But
he
never
learned
to hold
a spoon.
Wrote in metaphors. But when he ate, it was like no one ever taught him how to exist at a table. Fingers grabbing. Spoon scraping. A bowl of coffee. There was no poetry there — just instinct.
They say teaching is about care. But how do you care for others when you don’t even know how to place a spoon?
In studying behaviors, what we often miss are the smallest signals.
In forensic psychology, behavioral analysis often begins not with violence, but with pattern.
How someone eats — how they place their spoon, how they take space at a shared table — can reveal more about their emotional regulation than an entire therapy session.
A man who cannot adjust the amount of coffee he drinks, but instead pours it into a bowl to suit his own rhythm — is not just improvising.
He’s resisting containment. He’s refusing regulation.
In forensic terms, this suggests a lack of attunement, boundary recognition, and care-based coherence.
But in human terms, it simply means:
You never learned to live with others — only around them.
Every meal is a silent trial.
You present your character with your utensils before your words.
As an academic, I find it refreshing — and deeply uncomfortable — to witness the symbolic collapse of a so-called mentor not through scandal, but through a spoon left on the bare table.
And seriously — how does someone who eats like that get to teach for 10 years in a university?
Let’s talk about Žižek for a second.
Not every professor who eats like a disaster is Žižek.
Žižek knows he’s messy — and owns it. He doesn’t pretend his spilled coffee is a metaphor for postcolonial grief.
The man I knew drank coffee from a bowl, scraped spoons against porcelain, and left his napkin untouched — but still called himself an educator in ethics and emotional care.
There’s a difference between chaos and contradiction.
Žižek performs disorder to expose power.
My professor performed virtue to mask it.
But irony even Žižek — whose table manners I once invoked in jest — once signed a letter defending a fellow academic accused of grooming a graduate student.
Perhaps the ethics of the dining table go deeper than I imagined. Not just in how one eats — but in who one defends, and why.
The Psychology of Messy Eating: When Survival Mode Wears a Scholarly Mask
What does it mean when someone, well into adulthood and of sound intellect, still eats like they’re in a rush to survive?
This isn’t about poverty or manners.
It’s about behavioral fragmentation — the disconnect between intellect and basic self-respect.
In forensic analysis, such disconnects are often treated as early indicators of emotional dysregulation and boundary erosion — especially in individuals who present well intellectually but struggle with relational and spatial ethics.
Observed behavior:
Eating with bare hands despite available cutlery
Spilling food without awareness
Slamming utensils directly onto the table
Drinking coffee from a bowl instead of a cup
Showing no concern for cleanliness or presentation, even in shared spaces
These aren’t eccentric habits. They’re diagnostic clues.
What Eating Habits Reveal: A Cross-Disciplinary Glimpse into Human Behavior
Eating isn’t just biological. It’s behavioral — and often, psychological.
Behavioral Psychology: Repetitive patterns like how one eats reveal impulse control, self-regulation, and subconscious comfort rituals.
Forensic Psychology: Criminal profilers often analyze eating and living habits to detect underlying stress levels, compulsions, or emotional volatility.
Behavioral Profiling: Intelligence agencies track micro-behaviors — like how someone uses cutlery, interacts during meals, or responds to disorder — to infer social adaptability and self-discipline.
Organizational Behavior: In professional environments, meal etiquette reflects one’s respect for shared space and boundaries. It’s not about how expensive the meal is — it’s about how consciously you share it.
Cultural Psychology: While cultural norms shape dining styles, small details often transcend culture. Even across contexts, one can still read subtle cues of self-respect, social awareness, or disregard.
How someone eats — hurried, clean, scattered, intentional — is never just about food. It’s a pattern. And patterns speak.
Survival-Driven Eating in Non-Survival Contexts
Eating hurriedly, as if starving, even in safe and comfortable settings, often reflects a brain stuck in chronic survival mode.
This mindset seeks control, dominance, and emotional resources — often through others — as a way to regulate internal chaos.
No Spatial Boundaries, No Social Boundaries
Careless eating signals more than sloppiness. It reveals a failure to respect physical and interpersonal boundaries — the kind that govern both shared space and emotional autonomy.
Fragmented Self: Intellect vs. Action
A person may speak in refined terms, analyze others, even hold intellectual authority — yet fail to regulate their own impulses at the most basic level.
This kind of dissonance suggests a split between cognitive competence and behavioral maturity — a form of personality fragmentation often overlooked in polite academic settings.
When Self-Respect Isn’t Habituated
Not caring how one presents themselves — not out of protest, but apathy — often signals eroded personal dignity.
When someone behaves carelessly when they don’t have to, it’s not freedom.
It’s neglect.
And that neglect often extends to how they treat others.
Validation Through Symbolic Consumption
Sometimes, people don’t just eat messily — they live messily.
They feed on others emotionally, write about them, reference them, provoke them — not to build connection, but to confirm existence.
If the body consumes in chaos,
the mind might crave attention in the same way
urgently, invasively, and without asking.
When Amber Heard and Johnny Depp made headlines, the world watched for blood: court footage, recordings, dramatic testimony.
But what was often missed — even by journalists and analysts — were the micro-behaviors: the pauses, the breath patterns, the refusal to self-regulate.
These aren’t just personality quirks. They are ethical signals.
In my case, there were no tabloids, no courts, no screaming.
There was just a bowl of coffee.
A spoon scraping on bare table.
And the realization that dignity does not break loudly. Sometimes it erodes through how one drinks, eats, speaks — when no one’s watching.
Image Credit: The Central Trend
What Eating and Posture Reveal About Self-Control and Hidden Psychology
In behavioral profiling, the way a person eats — and how they physically carry themselves — often reflects deeper psychological structures than we realize.
These are not just habits. They are unconscious expressions of impulse control, social awareness, and emotional regulation.
1. Eating Habits as Micro-Indicators of Impulse Control
When humans are in “survival mode,” our instinct is to eat quickly, without refinement — to grab, drop, devour. Civilization trains us to pause, regulate, and share space respectfully.
Eating too fast, chaotically: Signals poor impulse control, especially under stress or frustration.
Eating messily, with no effort to correct: Indicates lack of boundary awareness and disregard for shared space.
Eating neatly but naturally: Reflects balanced self-regulation and quiet self-respect.
Tidying up after eating, placing utensils properly: Demonstrates high social awareness and internalized norms.
These subtle behaviors often hint at how a person may handle conflict, intimacy, or social accountability.
2. Posture as a Psychosomatic Memory of Emotional Weight
A persistently hunched or slouched posture — when not caused by medical necessity — can act as a somatic expression of long-term psychological burden.
In forensic behavioral profiling, these are not treated as quirks but as physical testimonies:
Chronic forward-leaning posture: Suggests prolonged emotional burden or a learned defensive stance toward the world.
Drooped shoulders, head down: Often found in individuals who feel small, judged, or existentially “heavy.”
Shrunken or curled walking posture: Reflects the inner voice of “I don’t want to be seen.”
3. It’s Not Just About Sitting Too Much
Academic or research professions may involve long hours seated — but socially regulated, self-aware individuals tend to retain upright posture even with age.
When we observe significant postural collapse in otherwise healthy adults, it may suggest:
Repeated professional failures
Chronic family pressure
An internalized narrative of social rejection
Or the quiet erosion of self-worth masked by intellectual detachment
4. The Body Stores What the Mind Tries to Hide
The nervous system remembers.
When someone experiences prolonged shame, disconnection, or internal collapse, their body adapts — often before their mind does.
The way a person eats, moves, or occupies space often encodes years of survival logic: urgency, fear of scarcity, loss of boundaries.
This is not aesthetics.
This is not personality.
It is the body’s archive of emotional residue —
a physical narrative of what remains unspoken.
What the Behavior Reveals: A Forensic Profile of J
1. Pattern of Discipline
Rating: Low – Unstable
Indicators: A 16,000-word emotional outpouring written without academic structure; publishing impulsively without regard for consequences, then retracting visibility after receiving criticism.
Pattern: Cyclical loss of control — outburst, manipulation, withdrawal.
2. Pattern of Respect for Boundaries
Rating: Extremely Low – Repeated Violations
Indicators: Continued writing about the subject despite clear verbal and written non-consent; use of identifiable markers including name, city, personal nicknames, and culturally specific references.
Pattern: Semantic distortion of “anonymity” used as a loophole to violate personal boundaries while maintaining a veneer of moral authority.
3. Impulse Control
Rating: Poor – Evident Behavioral Dysregulation
Indicators: Reported door-slamming incident; public posting shortly after making an apology; sending long strings of unanswered messages over several weeks.
Pattern: Defensive emotional reactivity — indirect aggression (covert hostility) coupled with an inability to self-regulate under stress.
4. Cultural Adaptation Ability
Rating: Low – Lacks Nuance, Social Misalignment
Indicators: Eating inappropriately (messy, unhygienic), using a bowl for coffee in formal or shared settings; socially awkward conversations about finances in the presence of others.
Pattern: Low cultural sensitivity; likely shaped by long-term isolation or an egocentric framework that resists context-based behavioral adaptation.
5. Integrity in Informal Settings
Rating: High Risk – Manipulative Tendencies Evident
Indicators: Writing in a glorifying tone about the subject while simultaneously engaging in coercive behavior; invoking his underage daughter as a moral buffer; repeatedly deleting or altering digital traces.
Pattern: Ethically performative behavior — the use of literary form to mask coercion under the guise of poetic or reflective expression.
6. Micro-Level Social Instability
Rating: Moderate — Escalation-Prone Under Social Tension
Indicators: Repetitive behaviors such as slamming a taxi door; habitual remarks like “the food here is so cheap” made in social settings — framed as casual observations but functioning as subtle image control; inability to de-escalate minor interpersonal tension.
Pattern: These are not isolated quirks. They reflect a compensatory need to assert control or dominance when social status feels threatened.
Interpretation:
While often dismissed as trivial, such micro-behaviors offer insight into deeper emotional fragility and a reactive need for superiority — commonly found in figures who conflate personal control with moral authority.
In relational settings, these behaviors may also inadvertently devalue others — reducing shared moments to transactional cost and subtly eroding the emotional significance of mutual presence.
Overall Conclusion
The subject displays behavioral breakdowns across 5 out of 6 dimensions. The only consistently maintained skill — writing — is misused as a tool for image management and symbolic control.
This profile suggests internal inconsistency, semantic manipulation, and strategic misuse of academic language and persona — hallmarks of coercive behavior disguised in intellectual form.
Why do some people date those with sloppy table manners — and not see it as a red flag?
Because they romanticize dysfunction:
“He’s just carefree.” / “She’s adorably messy!”
Because feelings override logic:
“Love means accepting flaws.” / “You get used to it after a while.”
Because of poor boundary education:
They were never taught — or never learned — to recognize subtle forms of disrespect.
Because of loneliness:
“It’s better than being alone.”
So they lower the bar just to fill the silence.
Because of behavioral absorption:
Living with someone long enough makes you unconsciously mirror their standards.
But there are also people who notice it immediately.
Who are they?
People with:
Strong self-respect: They don’t need a lecture to know when something feels off.
High boundary awareness: They can sense nonverbal violations, like shared utensils crossing personal space.
Sharp observational skills: They pay attention to small cues — how someone holds cutlery, whether they wipe their mouth, how they serve themselves.
Past toxic experiences: Old wounds turn into high-alert sensors.
Social-spatial sensitivity: Even mild disorder triggers mental resistance, long before words are said.
“They’re not watching you eat to judge your etiquette.
They’re watching to measure your life discipline.”
If you can read someone’s character from how they eat,
you can probably save yourself from relationships that drain you later on.
But what if someone eats neatly… and is still toxic?
Then you observe beyond the plate:
How they respond under stress:
Polished talkers may still show micro-glitches — hesitations, blame-shifting, emotional exaggeration.How they treat personal boundaries:
Clean eater, but constantly pushes your limits? That’s a covert red flag.How they treat service staff or the “weaker”:
This is the gold standard test.
How they treat someone who can’t benefit them reveals everything.
Bottom line:
Eating neatly doesn’t guarantee moral hygiene.
But sloppy eating, combined with erratic speech and boundary-blind behavior?
That’s often the early signal of a deeper personality deficit.
Read the full series
- Entry 1: The Man Who Taught Me Ethics by Failing All of Them
- Entry 2: The Disappearance of the Public Poet
- Entry 3: The Hanging Tree Case Study
- Entry 4: Hidden Like Accountability
- Entry 5: The Collapse of Assumptions
- Entry 6: The Ethics of a Tinder Bio
- Entry 7: How He Ate Told Me Everything (you are here)
- Entry 8: What Makes a Scholar Dangerous
- Entry 9: Fragment of Life, Fragment of Accountability
- Entry 10: Anatomy of Disappointment
- Entry 13: QUT and The Man Who Raped Me
- Entry 14: Why Sarcasm Toward Institutions Can Backfire
- Entry 15: P*ssy or Toxic Masculinity?
- Entry 16: Who is Your Favorite Comedian?
- Entry 17: And What is Your Favorite Song?
- Entry 18: Grant Proposal — Narrative Ethics as Survivor-Led Forensics
- Entry 19: The Coward Behind the Clone
- Entry 20: [URGENT HIRE] CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST
- Entry 21: [URGENT] Legal Counsel Needed for Complex Reputation Rehabilitation
- Entry 22: YOU’RE AN ABUSER. STOP CONTACTING ME
- Entry 23: Seeking Counsel for a Fallen Academic
- Entry 24: Internal Legal-PR Briefing
- Entry 25: For Journalists – Legal & Ethical Clearance Summary
- Entry 26: Symbolic Prostitution, Transactional Intimacy, or Just a “Loan”?
- Entry 28: Why He Simply Cannot Shut Up
- Entry 29: Forensic Commentary on “LARGE Language Muddle”
- Entry 30: Don’t Just Threaten My Future. Because I’m Going To Archive Your Present
- Entry 31: Open Letter to the Person Who Tried to Break Me with Defamation
- Entry 32: Defamation, Harassment, Doxxing Class 101
- Entry 33: Confidential Crisis Recovery Proposal
- Entry 34: Forensic Behavioral-Somatic Report
- Entry 35: Forensic Commentary on the Tattoos
- Entry 36: QUT and the Abuser They Once Had
- Entry 38: When Poetry Becomes Revenge Porn
- Entry 40: A Man Built for Applause, Not Accountability
- Entry 41: Neurobehavioral Addendum
- Entry 43: Why Does It Sound Like a War Metaphor?
- Entry 44: Forensic Commentary on Racialized and Fetishizing Language in “Hidden Like Rice”
- Entry 45: Public Misuse of Former Academic Affiliation
- Entry 46: The Two Things That Didn’t Leave a Bad Impression
- Reflection: The Miscalculation
(More entries coming soon)
→ [Back to Start: Introducing Mr. J, a Former Professor Series]
© 2025 Linh Ng. All rights reserved.
This publication is intended for educational and reflective purposes only.
Sharing the original link is welcomed and encouraged.
Please do not reproduce, redistribute, or translate this content — in whole or in part — without written permission.
This piece reflects both lived experience and critical analysis. It is not meant to be detached from its author or reframed without context.
Misuse or decontextualization may lead to formal clarification or takedown requests.
This work has been reviewed and quietly followed by scholars, educators, and ethics professionals across multiple sectors.
If your institution is engaging in critical discourse around narrative justice, symbolic coercion, or representational ethics, feel free to connect via Substack DMs or formal channels.
A regulatory case regarding this matter has already been classified under a protected status within national education integrity systems.
Should any reputational countermeasures or distortions arise, I reserve the right to publish the documented timeline, behavioral patterns, and contextual metadata.
All relevant documentation has been submitted through formal legal and regulatory pathways.
Photo cover by Ben Rosett on Unsplash