Carrot Top

And of course nothing in my attempt above to resolve and/or improve the societal status of the woman (man? ) in the kitchen at home helps this thing I have of thinking of food in the romantic way that I tend to, but at least maybe it could provide some respect as a side dish.

Here's some interesting thoughts from Reay Tannahill's "Food in History" in the section "The Birth of Civilization": (In this section, the subject is the 7000 years where humanity moved from a Stone Age existence into a state of civilization. Beforehand, women and men appear to have been more or less equal in the division of labor that provided the family's meals, but after this transition, Tannahill writes, "emerging from the Neolithic mists, most institutions, most inventions and all power were the prerogative of the male") I'm not sure what to take away from this* except that it reinforces my own feelings that I don't ever really want to be a truck farmer. P.S. *Except, to wonder if there is something in a historic or factual way about "care-work" (which includes home-cooking for the family) that substantially removes it from a place where it could or would ever, finally, be respected as much as the work of a "professional" (for in "professional" jobs one major factor is time allotted and time respected by others, for the one that is doing it, for thinking). The thinking part. If care-work were to be altered in society's perception, to something that included "time for creative thinking" then maybe it could cast off the aspersions that lurk in odd ways near it. Interesting, too, to read azurite's earlier excellent post above, and then thinking of the historical perspective that Tannahill provides:

If I were pi-prone, I would make a blueberry pie. Round or square. Or maybe even free-form just to accentuate how mathematic other sorts of pies actually are. It would be a pie with a top crust and a bottom crust, and the top crust would be decorated with cut-out pastry numbers. 3's, 1's, and 4's. Well-glazed of course, to make the numbers attractive rather than scary, which can so often be the case with numbers. When it was time to cut and serve the pi pie, there would be a contest held among whomever was eating it to count the berries they had been served (by sheer luck of the draw and cut of the knife - no math controls there) and the person with the number of berries closest to 31.4 would win a prize. Like a nice protractor kit or something. Afterwards we would play pick-up-sticks while using the sticks we picked up to hit the edges of the glasses of our perfectly measured-out pousse-cafes, trying to create the best little drum-riff in any three-point-one-four second period of time. Mwah ha ha ha ha.

I try to avoid mathematics as much as possible but isn't Pi an infinite number? If so, I think you should start baking one pie on the day itself and then never stop, continuing on with at least a pie a day. Or, to do it really right, maybe you should proceed forward into time with the numeric pattern of Pi as your constant. Make three pies the first day, one pie the second, four the next day and so on and so forth, for the rest of your life. I rather like that idea.

Darn it all, ludja, but I was counting on all that scrolling to be my weight-loss exercise for the day.

I can tell you one thing it's done - it's made me order salads and healthy options when they are available (and given the price points and ingredients I wonder if they might not be more profitable sometimes than some other menu items) and it's made me willing to even enter the doors of some fast-food places or chains more than I was before . . . and I'm not sure I'm the only one that feels this way. It still feels as if the focus on "bad obesity" is a bad culprit to me. It feels as if the focus should be on "good health", and I think there are profits to be made there for everyone in this situation - perhaps not fast profits or huge profits, but profits nonetheless.

It seems to me that there is enough interest among consumers that eat at chains in the idea of "healthy food" (just because this is an interest in general in our culture, broadly, at this point in time) that the idea (of having the information available on-site but not forced upon the diner), could really be an excellent thing for both consumer and for the business. The shape that this *should* take is not one of punishment or of warning *against* certain foods or certain portion sizes but rather the shape of having *more options* and having the knowledge to decide between all options available made easily available to the consumer. I think this is such a good idea that if I were a DM of a corporate chain I would develop a proposal to give to the VP in charge of the area that would include the costs of doing this (including training for new seventeen year old hostesses, who, if they do *not* learn after being trained, might actually be made to cry by their manager rather than by the CSPI guy ) vs. the estimated profits that could be made by bringing more customers (of a slightly different variety perhaps) in the door, over a certain period of time - then give it a trial run. It would have to be shaped as a promotional idea and would have to have corporate support behind it for it to work well. Advertising costs would have to be part of the budget for this trial period. These corporate chains are in fierce competition for customers. Generally they are all in one area, sitting there together like clumps of foreshortened trolls awaiting their diners with bright pink and blue shining signs decorated their fake-log-cabin fronts. The food is not all that different between many of them. Customer loyalty is a much-desired commodity in the corporate chain, and to get customer loyalty requires defining a personality that certain customer groups will enjoy over the other place next door. Meeting sales goals *counts*. And exceeding sales goals provides managers and DM's and VP's etc etc. better bonuses. I can not see how offering this service would offend anyone and can see how it would rather, make some, very pleased and ready to come back and eat again, *soon*. Great opportunity for a niche service, a foothold in the rough bark of the tall scrubby trees of the jungle.

When we moved into this house, there was (still is ) an old rotary-dial phone (in an awful yellow color ) attached to the kitchen wall. My son, now barely 13, wanted to know what it was. I had to teach him how to use it, pushing his fingers into the holes of the dial and showing him how to turn it. He was very focused on this ancient arcane task, his eyes intent upon the very wierdness of it all. What a strange way of dialing a number that was! (Though we never thought so while doing it in the past . . . ) And I'm curious whether the rice drink was sweet or not. Did you like the taste? I've heard that when a Chinese restaurant opens, the good-luck gift should be green plants. Is this true also in Korea? I also wonder what the deer's antlers are supposed to be good for - it is a "health" drink, isn't it? P.S. I am quite sure there are two of you, twins, that are doing this blog. So much energy displayed here for our eager eyes!

If he did he (she?) would risk some pretty damn bad public relations stories in the newspapers that would make the organization look pretty sleazy. Hey. Sounds like a plan.

I adore that placed in that spot, Anne. Adorable. My answer would be that I would call placing informational sheets at the chains the "Post-It" effect, and if I were a manager I'd want to give it a try. Why? Well . . why not? Why? Are you thinking of being a hostess at one of the chains? Honey, you'd never get any work done if I came in to eat, 'cause we'd just have to sit and have a lovely tussle of a chat.

So if corporate chain restaurants decided to have a line on the bottom of their menus that said "Nutritional information available upon request" and there was a sheet with this information available behind the host station that the servers had access to, so that they could bring this informational sheet to the diners that requested it, how would that sit with you, John?

I look forward very much to reading what you write about, SB. Yes, I am sure that when you share the things you cook it is much appreciated, Ellen. And food is very affirming, isn't it. I talk about my life because I am very curious about other peoples lives. Everyone has a story, don't they - whether they believe they do or not. And food has to be a big part of anyone's story, again, whether they believe it or not. For where would we all be without it?

I'm against legislation, too. But I would like to have the chains be pro-active in terms of providing the information to those who would want it, on-site. A simple page that could be given to the customer if they asked for it - with a small note on the bottom of the menus that this information *was* available upon request - would be a good thing to my mind. But of course I use post-it notes to remind me to do things. I like them. So naturally I would like the equivalent available to me in these situations. It *might* remind me to make the best choice available in terms of what I chose from the menu for myself.

I'm not so sure that it's in cause of making people "thin" but rather helping people be healthy if they are not. There is a personal testimony in the thread above from someone who did wish to have the nutritional information made more easily available, on-site at the restaurant. Probably there are more people that feel this way. I was waiting for the slippery slope part to arise.

Ellen, it is you and others who are helping *me* think this through. And I can not tell you how very moved I've been by each one of the responses. One of my own peculiar problems to resolve for myself involves what you quoted above. Yes, I do believe this with all my heart. But then again, with cooking and how I use it to show love, it sort of backfired badly once in my life, and I am still feeling the repercussions and trying to find a way out or around them. The instance was that I married someone who appeared to be a fine person but who turned out have a scumbag hidden within, and I did not discover that fact for a number of years. So each day, for these years, I cooked for him. I applied myself to creating a happiness through food for him (and of course in any other way I could think of). The foods he liked were not mostly the sorts I would prefer, but that really didn't matter to me . . . as you say above, it is about using something we enjoy to bring joy to the lives of others. And after a number of years I discovered that I was feeding my love in daily bites on the dinner table to someone who was not who he pretended he was - someone whose idea of "love" was quite a confused one. Someone who was a selfish, conniving, liar. Yes, strong words. And true. The answer is, of course, that I made a wrong choice in terms of person-to-feed, person-to-bring-joy-to. But I have to tell you, it threw me for a real loop. And since cooking is what I do mostly (or did mostly) as expression and as profession, the idea, the feeling that is involved with cooking took the hit. It has been stung badly by this thing. It is not what it was. Then of course my mother's ideas of feminism come into the picture, hovering there saying "I told you so. You fed him rather than feeding yourself." ................................................................................... In thinking of how I feed my children after reading these many posts, the emotion there for me, is devotion. Loving spoons of devotion each day, but of course devotion is a quiet thing, and devotion takes patience. It is not generally as loudly passionate as some other emotions. I'm really glad to have this sense of devotion. Really, really glad. But I'd still like to try to clear up the other stuff if possible, for the good name of cooking in my life.

I say forget about the organizations that are trying to lobby and focus directly on what the "problems" are specifically. Then choose a POV. The trans-fat ban was a BAN which is different than what this situation is. That was a "NO" said to the public. This is not a "no", merely a "yes a little more of that, please".

I like the idea of "care-work", very much. And I can understand your concerns about finding someone whose vision matches yours. I even like (no, love) the idea of the Goddess of Home and Hearth, who figured often in ancient literature. On the other hand, it does feel as if the fact should be mentioned that stay-at-home Moms (care-workers, those who cook in the kitchen as well as do the many other tasks of the household, which costs when added up as they do in the financial sections of newspapers each year can total the equivalent salary if paid to others of close to one million dollars a year - Yay Moms! ) (or Dads, too, if they happen to be doing full time "care-work") leave themselves at risk in terms of their financial future (and then, obviously it would also be their children's future) if they happen to divorce, or if they happen to want to re-enter the work force at some point, at the same level they enjoyed previous to leaving it for undertaking "care-work". So it definitely is a trade-off and definitely a sort of risk, for those that have enjoyed the pleasures and the benefits of a high-level professionalism in some field. Ha! Have we created a "Cook at your own risk" (as care-giver) world?

Somehow here we (I say "we" with reservation because though it happens, I only partake of the food in a much smaller quantity than the children do) have edged into having a small breakfast before they go to school for the day, then two meals which are almost like suppers or dinners themselves, right after school ends about 3:00 then another later about 8:00. How this has happened is that (whether or not I pack a lunch for them or whether they decide to eat at the school cafeteria) they really do not eat a full lunch. Either from the stress of the middle-school cafeteria (which I understand can be an awesome thing due to social pressures and the age of the kids which creates some "interesting" behavior among some of them sometimes, to say the least ) or, if it was a school-bought lunch that day, from the awfullness of the food itself. Granted, if the kids were *really* hungry, they would eat. But they have been lucky enough in their lives that they don't really know that sort of hunger. And I figure that to give them this sort of "meal" is healthier in the long run than offering a whole lot of cookies and milk. So when I pick them up from school they are ravenous. So I make them a big sandwich (often a hot one) with salads or something for sides. Large enough for a casual meal. Sometimes, they have soup or a stew instead, with a salad. Then homework happens, then their activities happen. Karate three times a week for Drew, two hours each (he "teaches" the four and five year olds though he is only thirteen, along with his usual classes) that lands right smack-dab in the middle of the more traditional "dinner-time". Kristen also has activities several nights a week that happen around these times. When they come home from the activities, around 7:30, they ask: "What's for dinner?" and I say, "You sort of already had dinner, how about a snack?" and they say "MOMMMM. I'm HUNGRY." And I've learned that they are hungry for two things when they say this: First, a real meal that looks like a traditional "dinner". And second, the idea of having "dinner", not a snack. That seems Right to them. So it happens. Maybe I should name these late afternoon/late evening meals by adding the "f" of "first"and the "s" of "second" to the word "dinner"? "Finner" and "Sinner". Ah, yes. We pay for our sins.

Artful implication with the use of "yes, Virginia" that the issues on the table are a myth, like Santa Claus, and that anyone who chooses to think otherwise is a child-like innocent, like the Virginia of the famous letter. Unfortunately, this implication does not compute as anything but sarcasm used in argument for emotional effect, in my book. Again, you have said you do not make assumptions for others but it does sound rather as if that is precisely what you are doing in saying that "we all know what those consequences are--really we do." I would agree with you though, in saying that this is not a simple issue. I don't believe that anyone said it was, though I could be wrong.

You may not have meant this to be humorous, Milagai, but the idea of "Mr. Tool Belt skills" had me laughing all afternoon. Oh. It's *still* funny!

I'm trying to remember what fifi's example is, Kouign Aman. Can you remind me of what it was that she did? I seem to remember her working outside the home as a professional, and seem to remember a housekeeper? maybe? and of course I remember many good recipes of fifi's, but the specifics are vague. Can you fill in the blanks for me and for others who may not know exactly what you mean in this sense? fifi, is, of course, an excellent example in many ways, so a more definite categorization of example is required here.

Well, I can remember when there were no health warnings on cigarette packets. That particular health-related intake of a substance went full circle, certainly. With lots of lawyers getting rich during the process. With the health-related claims that are being made against obesity, and with the potential of charges that could be raised in the future of "negligence" in terms of not being fully to all crossed t's and dotted i's, communicative in terms of the health risks in terms of eating these huge portions or large amounts of fat, against the corporate chains (deep pocket bullseye just sitting there), I wonder if it might happen that the chains do become more completely or aggressively "user-friendly" in terms of providing this information . . .i.e. having it there to see on the spot rather than making the customer doing the work to find the information . . .

I don't usually ask but twice recently I felt the urge to. Once at IHOP, where I had not been for many years. After being startled by the portion sizes I asked the server what the calorie count was and got a response that seemed like the question was phrased in the Martian language - totally incomprehensible to them. Online the information was available and I think the breakfast counted out at something like two thousand calories ( , yes) with a lovely high fat count, too. The other time after ordering a something-or-other at Starbucks I asked, and the server looked below the counter in the standardized recipe book to give me the information, after asking her manager if they had the information. I wouldn't be surprised if most chain restaurants already have general nutritional information, either attached to the standardized recipe sheets or in the manager's office. And I wouldn't be surprised, also, if there is a line in each chain's policy and procedures manual that defines whether or not the information should be given out to customers who ask.

Ah, Hathor. I'll have to expose myself in answering you. First (and least, but always nagging) there is the thought that one should be bringing oneself to a state of being where they "look out for #1" before they look out for others. This was one of the tenets taught me by my own (ardently feminist) mother, but it never quite took. The reason given for doing this, in theory, is that when you are looking out for others first "you" come behind and therefore suffer in ways. Traditionally women had the role of supporter in this sense. Today we are taught to fight the nurturing-others urge in lieu of a nurturing-ourselves urge, to equalize balances of other things. In cooking, this would translate to cooking what one wants oneself rather than cooking what others want. Sigh. Secondarily (exposure moment) I find that I do not enjoy cooking for my children on a daily basis as much as I have enjoyed cooking for romantic partners (i.e. spouse/boyfriend types) in the past. I can explain this to myself by the fact that the children's tastes are limited (though I've always tried new and different things, they still prefer the "same old standards") but sense there is more to it, for me. When I read of the story of the mother who stopped cooking when her spouse died I had a shock of recognition. Which was odd, to say the least. So I ask myself, do I really need to have a romantic partner around to really enjoy cooking again? That's a pretty wierd question for me to look at.

I've been thinking about this subject ever since these posts in another thread . . . the first part in a general sort of way and the second one with a more specific wondering: Yes, and moreso than most might suspect. After all, as dissimilar notables as Brillat-Savarin and Tiny Tim more or less agreed that we are what we eat. Women may be "responsible in fact", (although at least in our culture not quite as exclusively as in earlier times), but perhaps not in principle? In my own family's case, my parents came from culinarily disparate backgrounds; my being Mother second generation Serbian-American and my Father nth generation Scots/English. While my Father wasn't a fussy eater, and apreciated native Serbian delicacies, the majority of the food my Mother prepared was of the 1950's meat and potatos school, filtered through her own ethnic background and her degree in Home Economics. In other words, she made what my Father liked. How this affects women in general I can't say, but from my particular point of view, when my Father died, my Mother quit cooking. ← Our generation has expanded its way of living to include other ways of being rather than just man/woman husband/wife, of course. So anyone that has thoughts upon this subject is welcome and invited to add thoughts, for all are valid. I posted the subject as women in kitchen/guys at the table based mostly on history, for I like to think of history and how it affects us. Do we still cook, as women in the home kitchen (or men sometimes?) for our romantic interest mostly, on a day to day basis? Who do we wish to please when we cook? Our life partner, ourselves, our friends, or our children? How does this affect what we cook? How often does it happen that a lifetime of cooking is set aside when the one(s) we cook for are no longer there? Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or just a "that's the way it is" thing, when a wife and mother (even a mother of grown children) just quits cooking, as above? Obviously there is no one true answer, but it would be interesting to hear thoughts. I'm going to bet that the hardest question to answer will be whether women who have been through fifty or so years of feminism as part of life and culture in whatever way - still tend to use and think of the skills of the kitchen with a man, in some romantic sense, layered on top or underneath it all somehow. I'll be bold and risk derision to say that indeed, I do. And that makes me both smile wryly while still doing it while wanting to hit myself upside the head at the same time.