When I am 40 and I ask myself why I am not as slim as I was at 20, I don't want any platitudes about ageing and how it's natural to change shape.
I want you to say "prawn crackers".
I believe that the discovery that you can make your own prawn crackers will turn out to have been a turning point in my life.
I love prawn crackers you see. They used to be rare, coming with chinese takeaway, to be eaten once you are stuffed full of other food. They are so full of air they practically dissolve in the mouth, while stil being crunchy and savoury and mmmmmmmm. The fact that each of those little pockets of air comes with a thin coating of oil can be ignored.
But now, now prawn crackers are an every day occurrence. Well, not every every day (although I wouldn't complain), but everyday as in common, not special, just-have-a-few-while-dinner-is-cooking. Because I can make them myself. They've always been available pre-cooked at exortionate prices from Sharwoods or Blue Dragon or similar, but those dry imitations just don't have the same appeal as a fresh tasty prawn cracker that has recently been submerged in smoking-hot oil. Admittedly they don't have quite the same effect on your kitchen walls either, but all pleasure comes at a cost.
I must admit that when I say I "make" prawn crackers, what I mean is that I go to the Chinese supermarket (I happen to live in the "most ethnically diverse area" of a really unethnically diverse city), buy strange solid translucent discs, and throw them into hot oil. A deep fat fryer would be great for this, and a friend recently held a let's-fry-everything party to celebrate the purchase of a deep fat fryer, but all you really need is a wok or small saucepan with a couple of centimetres of oil, and song tongs to fish out the crackers as they puff and spin and expand. It is a thing of beauty, truly. The Crackers expanding, not the pan that I keep specially for making them. The pan is a mess! But the crackers expand and twist and spin and puff up and turn inside out like a flower blossoming or those girls who dance with ribbons. (OK, so neither of those turns inside out, but if they did it would still be beautiful)
So there, my ode to prawn crackers. They are tasty, quick to make, and they will (probably) make me fat.
For a healthier you-can-make-it-yourself snack try edamame (and if you want to know more about the pleasures and dangers of edamame click here). You can buy them frozen in-the-pod at the above-mentioned Chinese supermarkets, and they just need boiling and sprinkling with salt. They're more expensive than prawn crackers, but they come with an aura of virtue that no greasy fried thing can ever achieve.
Friday, 1 July 2011
Friday, 24 June 2011
Why do men always...
Yes, I know it's terribly boring to talk about a forum on a blog, or to talk about a blog on twitter, or to talk about twitter on a forum, or any of that.
I came across a number of threads today asking questions along the lines of "Why are men useless?" "Why do men never empty the bin?" "Why can't men multitask?"
To which my answers are no they aren't, yes they do, yes they can. Perhaps one man in your life is currently fulfilling your expectations of men as useless, but there is no reason at all to think that all or even most men are like this, and certainly no reason why they should be.
I want to emphasise that this kind of lazy generalisation is just as sexist and just as damaging to society and just as unhelpful to feminism as the traditional "Women can't park" or "Women don't understand politics". If you repeatedly tell people that they are bad at something it is likely to become the case. If you tell people that they are incapable of doing something when in fact they have not had the same opportunities to learn then you are a fool. If you say that men cannot do a task, you are claiming that task for women (and vice versa). Why is it that we want to claim bin-emptying, while men claim politics?
For those who want to say "oh but men can't multitask" or "everyone knows women have worse spatial awareness" I strongly recommend Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine (ignore the horrible cover). It's sociology/neuroscience/behavioural psychology applied to gender differences and it manages to be very entertaining. A couple of key experiments: men do better at empathy tasks after reading that men who are empathetic get more girls; women do worse in maths tests if you remind them that they are women and women are expected to do worse than men.
I came across a number of threads today asking questions along the lines of "Why are men useless?" "Why do men never empty the bin?" "Why can't men multitask?"
To which my answers are no they aren't, yes they do, yes they can. Perhaps one man in your life is currently fulfilling your expectations of men as useless, but there is no reason at all to think that all or even most men are like this, and certainly no reason why they should be.
I want to emphasise that this kind of lazy generalisation is just as sexist and just as damaging to society and just as unhelpful to feminism as the traditional "Women can't park" or "Women don't understand politics". If you repeatedly tell people that they are bad at something it is likely to become the case. If you tell people that they are incapable of doing something when in fact they have not had the same opportunities to learn then you are a fool. If you say that men cannot do a task, you are claiming that task for women (and vice versa). Why is it that we want to claim bin-emptying, while men claim politics?
For those who want to say "oh but men can't multitask" or "everyone knows women have worse spatial awareness" I strongly recommend Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine (ignore the horrible cover). It's sociology/neuroscience/behavioural psychology applied to gender differences and it manages to be very entertaining. A couple of key experiments: men do better at empathy tasks after reading that men who are empathetic get more girls; women do worse in maths tests if you remind them that they are women and women are expected to do worse than men.
Friday, 17 June 2011
Apparently it's Feminist Friday.
So I should write something feministy.
I am a feminist. Obviously. So are you, probably.
Here's a handy cosmo-style quiz to help out:
1 - Do you think that how people are treated, valued, and respected should be equal, regardless of their gender?
a Yes, of course
b No, people like ME should be treated better than people who are not like me
c No, people like me should get less good treatment
2 - Do you think that people generally are treated, valued, and respected equally, regardless of their gender?
a Yeah, pretty much
b Not completely
c Not at all and I am ANGRY about it
3 - Assuming you answered #2 correctly - do you want this to change?
a Yes, of course
b I told you, I like things being unequal
c Yes, and I try to make it happen wherever I can
Answers:
1
a - Correct, this is an essential point
b - That's not very nice, is it?
c - You need to work on your self-esteem until you switch your answer to a
2
a - Maybe you should look around a little more, because they aren't
b - This is also a key realisation - you don't need to be angry, just aware...
c - ...Although the more you think about it and look around and see sexism the more likely it is that you will become angry (sorry)
3
a - Congratulations, you are a feminist
b - Sounds like you are sexist, well happily for you the world is too. Enjoy it.
c - You're a feminist too, but you already knew that
I am a feminist. Obviously. So are you, probably.
Here's a handy cosmo-style quiz to help out:
1 - Do you think that how people are treated, valued, and respected should be equal, regardless of their gender?
a Yes, of course
b No, people like ME should be treated better than people who are not like me
c No, people like me should get less good treatment
2 - Do you think that people generally are treated, valued, and respected equally, regardless of their gender?
a Yeah, pretty much
b Not completely
c Not at all and I am ANGRY about it
3 - Assuming you answered #2 correctly - do you want this to change?
a Yes, of course
b I told you, I like things being unequal
c Yes, and I try to make it happen wherever I can
Answers:
1
a - Correct, this is an essential point
b - That's not very nice, is it?
c - You need to work on your self-esteem until you switch your answer to a
2
a - Maybe you should look around a little more, because they aren't
b - This is also a key realisation - you don't need to be angry, just aware...
c - ...Although the more you think about it and look around and see sexism the more likely it is that you will become angry (sorry)
3
a - Congratulations, you are a feminist
b - Sounds like you are sexist, well happily for you the world is too. Enjoy it.
c - You're a feminist too, but you already knew that
Tuesday, 14 June 2011
I am older and wiser now
Last night at the gym (actually on the way back) my ipod decided to play me Avril Lavigne's "Nobody's Fool" (apologies, couldn't find an official video), followed by Blink 182 "What's My Age Again?"
I might've fallen for that when I was fourteen
And a little more green
But it's amazing what a couple of years can mean
Clearly Avril at 16/17 felt that she was much more worldly-wise than she was at 14.
Nobody likes you when you're 23
...
My friends say I should act my age
What's my age again?
And this guy is being accused of acting too childishly for the grand old age of 23.
It made me think that there is only a very small window in your life where you can seriously say Feeling twenty-two, acting seventeen (Katie Melua "Closest Thing to Crazy") before you scoff that 22 and 17 are so close together you can barely remember the difference.
It also reminded me of Stuart Baggs (of Apprentice 2010) in his "You're Fired" follow-up interview, claiming to be much more mature than he had been during the filming of the series. Either the presenter or another guest mocked him, saying "oh yes, now you;re 22 you're much more grown-up than when you were 21." (this part is from memory)
So at what point does it stop? Is there a time when we stop looking back on how we've grown?
When I was 20 I was naive, but now I'm much more wise.
When I was 30 I was idealistic, but now I'm much more pragmatic.
When I was 40... when I was 50... when I was 60... I was <adjective>, but now I'm much more <opposite adjective>.
I might've fallen for that when I was fourteen
And a little more green
But it's amazing what a couple of years can mean
Clearly Avril at 16/17 felt that she was much more worldly-wise than she was at 14.
Nobody likes you when you're 23
...
My friends say I should act my age
What's my age again?
And this guy is being accused of acting too childishly for the grand old age of 23.
It made me think that there is only a very small window in your life where you can seriously say Feeling twenty-two, acting seventeen (Katie Melua "Closest Thing to Crazy") before you scoff that 22 and 17 are so close together you can barely remember the difference.
It also reminded me of Stuart Baggs (of Apprentice 2010) in his "You're Fired" follow-up interview, claiming to be much more mature than he had been during the filming of the series. Either the presenter or another guest mocked him, saying "oh yes, now you;re 22 you're much more grown-up than when you were 21." (this part is from memory)
So at what point does it stop? Is there a time when we stop looking back on how we've grown?
When I was 20 I was naive, but now I'm much more wise.
When I was 30 I was idealistic, but now I'm much more pragmatic.
When I was 40... when I was 50... when I was 60... I was <adjective>, but now I'm much more <opposite adjective>.
Thursday, 9 June 2011
Sorry for the absence
Been quiet recently, because I'm well aware that there could be "real life people" reading this, and the main thing I've been thinking about is the fact that I'm going to be changing jobs, which I wasn't ready to tell everyone about.
If you are one if those RL people, by the way, feel free to keep quiet about it. I know intellectually that I don't do the best job of anonymising, but I prefer to think that I am talking to Internet sprites who only know the virtual me.
I don't usually capitalise Internet. I'm writing this on my phone in the doctor's waiting room. They have restored the magazines that were for a while banned on germ-spreading grounds, but in the meantime I have discovered other forms of entertainment. I have also decided that I agree and old magazines that have been handled by ill people are a bit yuck. Dentists surgeries are ok, because everyone is extra clean when they go to the dentist (and unlikely to have a caold, becausse can you imagine the horror?).
Saturday, 28 May 2011
Oh no, not another food blog!
There are too many food blogs in the world already, I know.
You can look away now if you are sick of them.
But this post is going to be a food post. I love food. I love reading cookbooks (preferably chatty ones like Nigella rather than simply lists of instructions) even when I don't get around to making the food inside. I love reading menus, even after I have chosen my meal. Cocktail menus are fantastic too, and I love to watch cocktails being made, whether the barman looks like Tom Cruise or not.
In a previous life I was a scientist, so the idea of measuring things out, mixing them up, spinning them around, heating up or cooling down, this all is very familiar. And unlike science, what you get at the end is FOOD!
So tonight I am making dinner for some friends. You can call it a dinner party if you must. Really it's an excuse to spend the afternoon in the kitchen, spend more money than usual on ingredients, and try out some recipes. Whenever I watch Come Dine With Me and a contestant says "I haven't tried this before" I always scream at them "Nooooooo! You are being judged! Do something tried-and-tested!" (although when they say "I've done this a million times before" it is generally a sign that this will be the time it goes wrong). Luckily I am not being judged. Except perhaps by you. I am having dinner with friends who will treat my efforts kindly, and if all doesn't go well the Indian takeaway round the corner is open til 12.
Here are the two untried recipes:
Thai pork patties from the lovely, funny, and slightly sweary Esther Walker
Thai green curry from Jamie Oliver (actually from a book but this is where I could find it online - don't worry it's a safe link).
As you can possibly see, I didn't follow either recipe 100% to the letter, but tasty food came out at the end so I will call it a success. The curry could have been creamier but that's easy to fix - just add more coconut milk!
You can look away now if you are sick of them.
But this post is going to be a food post. I love food. I love reading cookbooks (preferably chatty ones like Nigella rather than simply lists of instructions) even when I don't get around to making the food inside. I love reading menus, even after I have chosen my meal. Cocktail menus are fantastic too, and I love to watch cocktails being made, whether the barman looks like Tom Cruise or not.
In a previous life I was a scientist, so the idea of measuring things out, mixing them up, spinning them around, heating up or cooling down, this all is very familiar. And unlike science, what you get at the end is FOOD!
So tonight I am making dinner for some friends. You can call it a dinner party if you must. Really it's an excuse to spend the afternoon in the kitchen, spend more money than usual on ingredients, and try out some recipes. Whenever I watch Come Dine With Me and a contestant says "I haven't tried this before" I always scream at them "Nooooooo! You are being judged! Do something tried-and-tested!" (although when they say "I've done this a million times before" it is generally a sign that this will be the time it goes wrong). Luckily I am not being judged. Except perhaps by you. I am having dinner with friends who will treat my efforts kindly, and if all doesn't go well the Indian takeaway round the corner is open til 12.
Here are the two untried recipes:
Thai pork patties from the lovely, funny, and slightly sweary Esther Walker
Thai green curry from Jamie Oliver (actually from a book but this is where I could find it online - don't worry it's a safe link).
As you can possibly see, I didn't follow either recipe 100% to the letter, but tasty food came out at the end so I will call it a success. The curry could have been creamier but that's easy to fix - just add more coconut milk!
Thursday, 19 May 2011
How do I know thee? Let me count the ways.
Prompted by a conversation on Twitter that went something like this (details removed so we don't have to discuss the actual issue itself)
Journalist - Link
Journalist - Joking/sarcastic comment about link
Me - Another sarcastic comment
Journalist - I was being sarcastic! Don't believe I think that.
Another human being (who I assume doesn't know the journalist personally) - I was worried for a second.
Me - I was joining in with the sarcasm - I didnt think you meant it!
Journalist - Phew!
I realised that I had assumed that the journalist knew that I "knew" her well enough to know that she would never say anything like that seriously. Which is of course madness. She doesn't know me, I don't know her, neither of us knows the third person, and yet I assumed that she would know I was being sarcastic, and she cared when she thought that we had misunderstood her joke.
When you communicate with people online, do you feel that you know them? In the online world I can feel that I know a lot about people's opinions without knowing very much about their lives at all. Age, location, marital status, children, even sex in some cases. All of these are secondary to what someone thinks about a new TV series or the best way to mix a cocktail or whether crocs are the work of the devil or comfy enough to override the ugliness.
In real life the opposite is true, when you meet someone the first things you find out about them are the externalities, the house/job/children, but in order to get to know someone, to know if this is someone you want to meet again, you need to chat about what you think about things, not what you have or what you do but how you feel about issues.
I can't see any way to change this, however, without sounding like a deranged quizmaster.
Nice to meet you, now what do you think about MSG? Which is more important, a good haircut or good shoes? Which Beatle do you like best and why?
I can't see it going down well.
Journalist - Link
Journalist - Joking/sarcastic comment about link
Me - Another sarcastic comment
Journalist - I was being sarcastic! Don't believe I think that.
Another human being (who I assume doesn't know the journalist personally) - I was worried for a second.
Me - I was joining in with the sarcasm - I didnt think you meant it!
Journalist - Phew!
I realised that I had assumed that the journalist knew that I "knew" her well enough to know that she would never say anything like that seriously. Which is of course madness. She doesn't know me, I don't know her, neither of us knows the third person, and yet I assumed that she would know I was being sarcastic, and she cared when she thought that we had misunderstood her joke.
When you communicate with people online, do you feel that you know them? In the online world I can feel that I know a lot about people's opinions without knowing very much about their lives at all. Age, location, marital status, children, even sex in some cases. All of these are secondary to what someone thinks about a new TV series or the best way to mix a cocktail or whether crocs are the work of the devil or comfy enough to override the ugliness.
In real life the opposite is true, when you meet someone the first things you find out about them are the externalities, the house/job/children, but in order to get to know someone, to know if this is someone you want to meet again, you need to chat about what you think about things, not what you have or what you do but how you feel about issues.
I can't see any way to change this, however, without sounding like a deranged quizmaster.
Nice to meet you, now what do you think about MSG? Which is more important, a good haircut or good shoes? Which Beatle do you like best and why?
I can't see it going down well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
