Actual title:

>Stolen fries are spicier than justice: How covert larceny enhances taste

My title:

>Stolen French fries are spicier than justice: How covert larceny enhances taste

You're saying adding "French" "... messed up the title?"

▲ metalman 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

  "stolen freedom fries" , which now that it's written, does have a certain alternative wierd double entendre thing happening, but if you are american, have no other red blooded option than to use.

▲ dlcarrier 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The poor Belgians aren't getting their representation.

	▲	bookofjoe 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Memories of that wonderful little place on the Venice [California] boardwalk that introduced me to Belgian-style fries in a paper cone with an array of to-die-for dipping sauces. Must've been around 1970.

▲ bookofjoe 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

One more thing: the paper's abstract (below), which uses the term "French fries:"

Abstract

Human folklore claims that “stolen food tastes better,” yet its effects on taste have not been quantified. In a within-subject experiment, 120 participants consumed identical French fries under four acquisition contexts: legitimate (own-portion), gifted, low-risk covert taking, and high-risk covert taking. Acquisition context strongly affected both taste pleasantness and overall enjoyment. High-risk covert taking yielded the highest pleasantness ratings, exceeding legitimate consumption by 39.3%. Context also shifted perceived saltiness, crispiness, and intensity. Across covert-taking trials, guilt was positively associated with enjoyment, as was excitement, though neither independently predicted enjoyment once acquisition context was accounted for.