History behind Ploughman’s lunch revealed as dish’s name gets changed to Ploughperson’s lunch in bid to be gender-neutral

A pub in Devon, England has drawn flack for changing the “Ploughman’s lunch” to “Ploughperson’s lunch.” In an attempt to embrace the changing cultural norms that have demanded more equity between multiple genders, the pub decided to change the name of the popular pub stable to a more gender-neutral one.

But with the name change came furious attention that questioned the pub’s decision to bow down to cancel culture. Moreover, it forced a deeper dig into the historic context for the nomenclature of the dish, which had surprising revelations. The most surprising one was that the Ploughman’s lunch doesn’t really have much to do with those who plough.

---

Ploughman’s lunch was a marketing tactic

As it turns out, the name for the simple meal for people working in agricultural fields and pulling ploughs, does not have anything to do with them. Per reports from HITC, the name of the standard bread with ham, onions, cheese, chili, pickle and chutney was given in the 1957 by the Cheese Bureau and the Milk Marketing Board (MMB) to increase the sale of cheese.

While there are instances of the word’s use prior to that, large-scale propagation of the phrase was undertaken by the MMB to promote cheese in pubs. And what better way to do it than by appealing to the target customers’ profession.

Meanwhile, the Tors Pub simply made the change in the name of their dish as a way to acknowledge the farmers, who are both women and men. Dicky Harrison, the landlord of the Tors Pub, revealed to the Daily Mail that they changed the menu as a “tongue and cheek” tactic, saying:

“The menu item was just meant as a bit of tongue-in-cheek. We live in a farming community with amazing women and men farming the land. It's just a bit of fun and a nod to the amazing ladies who work the land here. I didn't think it would cause offence, but in reality, women plough too.”

But Harrison’s decision to make the change in the menu has not been well-received online. People have pointed out to several publications their disdain with the effort to catch up with the times. The false assumption about the dish’s nomenclature has further added to the backlash since the Ploughman’s lunch was never named after people working in fields.

With several organizations, both big and small, making changes to classic and long-standing products to appear culturally aware, a great deal of backlash has come to question the true impact of such actions. The attempt to change the name of Ploughman’s lunch to Ploughperson’s lunch, however inspired, has seemingly failed to have its intended impact.