Mjx

Sometimes, if it's nice and crunchy, I just eat the skin. Flabby skin I avoid. When we roast a chicken, my boyfriend and I may be seen frantically pulling the skin off the portions we haven't plated, so we catch it before it softens. I rein in calories by eating less food overall, rather than eating 'normal' amounts, and skipping the things I love.

Some meals begin with ingredients that have potential, but the project is gunned down by by faith in a lousy recipe source, indifference, or misguided ideas about time/calorie saving. These are the meals that make you nearly weep for what might have been. The other night I had a meal that consisted of roast pork, baked potatoes, and mixed vegetables. I like simple food, and this could have been great. Unfortunately, the pork was dried to the point of beginning to curl, because when it reached temperature, it was decided to keep it in the oven, until the potatoes were done. Even after a couple of hours in the oven, the potatoes remained hard, and their cut surfaces were coated with a reduced-calorie butter substitute and 'Mexican spices', the primary ingredient of which was, apparently, soap powder. The vegetables were a bagged mix in an alleged 'pesto sauce' that was a disturbing shade of chartreuse. These were stir-fried, then kept warm and covered over low heat, for about an hour. The cook (a genuinely sweet person, who unfortunately hates to cook, and really tries to cut time and calories) was candidly displeased with the results of the meal, but said she just couldn't bring herself to spend more time on it. As a guest, there was no way I could be that frank, but I keep thinking about it, and the fact that these 'nearer-miss-than-you-think' (as opposed to trainwreck from initial conception, right on through) situations are far from uncommon. So: Any similiar tales of woe?

One of the sets of measurements was probably an afterthought, might even have been added to the original MS by an editor.

My parents became vegetarian when I was about two or three, and were also big on health food, sustainable agriculture, organic farming, and so on. On the one hand, I really do appreciate their instilling in me a sense of the importance of thinking about food. On the other hand, thinking about food also led to my conclusion that, in general, the entire 'substitution' concept is questionable: You can't effectively substitute whole wheat flour in, say, angel food cake, just because it is supposed to be healthier; Home-made peanut butter, made with lightly salted nuts, on Arnold's whole wheat = child will not eat lunch; Carob drink powder becomes acceptable if you add a lot of instant coffee to it; Honey cannot be counted on as a sugar substitute; Nut loaf (substitute meat loaf) is a bad scene.

Get back to the authors about this: I remember seeing that they spcifically wanted to be informed of any errors that were found.

One of my favourite desserts is a gelatin, flavored with citrus juice and ginger (fresh or grated, depending on what's available); a miniscule pinch of salt keeps it from tasting insipid, and a little sugar rounds it out. I use 10g/0.35oz gelatine for each 100cc of liquid, and let it firm up overnight. Once I've dissolved the gelatin, I add the juice of a lime, lemon, or half a grapefruit, and enough water to bring the volume up to 600cc/2.5 cups. Anyone make something similar, but with different flavorings? I've heard of several Asian ones that use ingredients such as orange flower water, cardamom, and (I think) coconut milk: anyone tried these?

That's a good example of something I'd never, ever buy. I make big batches and freeze it. Same here, with regard to making, rather than buying (but I don't usually make enough to freeze).

Yes, that was a point I made... I've never come across an actual scientific study of this topic, and did not indicate that I had; in fact, this I was questioning their existence. The relationship between perceptions in popular culture and reality is not what I'd describe as 'close'. I'm going to answer these in reverse order: Watching what people choose to eat, particularly when they're unaccompanied/unobserved (while sitting and reading a book in a park, for example, or in their homes, when they know you very well) can be an indicator of personal preferences. However, it isn't unusual for women modify their eating behaviour (consciously or not) in public, particularly around men. So, a woman's decision to have a salad ('No dressing, please!') and some mineral water, when she's eating out should not be assumed to be an indication of preference. Actually, the original question was 'What is the manliest restaurant in America?', the dissection of what the concept may or may not mean is just a fun bonus. If 'manly' means having the whole 'man' thing served up on a plate, non-stop, I think whoever mentioned places that have a 'bear' clientele nailed it... but I doubt that's the desired answer.

Yep... what I said (and had a massive fight with my mother about, a week ago) at the top, the 'box-in-the-fridge' thing is a no-go. But I'd bet its sells the majority of boxes of baking soda!

Baking soda definitely works as a deodorizer. What are you doing wrong? Snorting it? You can "deodorize" by masking with another scent. Sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) cannot. You can deodorize by absorption of air molecules, such as activated charcoal; Sodium bicarbonate has no ability to absorb. It can, however, possibly deodorize stinky shoes by direct application to neutralize the offending source if it is of acid based. dcarch There was a discussion in CI about the effectiveness of baking soda paste on cutting boards that smelled of onion/garlic. That is, they actually experimented, and found it effective for this purpose (I have no recollection of the mechanism involved, but I believe they described it, at least in general outline). I'm quailing at the thought of looking thought several dozen issues of CI, but I can look it out, if you want..?

That assumes that the population of this forum consists of an accurate picture of average men and women...something that should be pretty easy to dismiss, at least with regard to any questions involving food. 'E.g.' means 'for example': I could add further examples, including my observations of what I've seen people eating in a number of different countries over a couple of decades. I would add that I wrote 'suggests' because this is my impression, not something I'm presenting as conclusive fact. However, I do believe that, if we adjust for the tendency of many women to worry about what they eat/are seen eating, the difference in food preferences (when it coms to meat and starch) between men and women is probably not significant. So, my guess would be that, regardless of how 'manly' a restaurant purported itself to be, its menu would probably be pretty much the same as that of any other of whatever genre it belonged to.

I'm afraid you've misunderstood me: While political correctness is of minor interest to me, scientific correctness is not, and an unsupported statement cannot be described as representing fact. Men, as a group, have higher metabolic rates than women, but metabolic demand is not the principal determinant of choices and amounts of food consumed by human beings, particularly not among the bulk of the US population, as is evident from the rates of obesity and other conditions related to nutritional excess. I'd pursue this further, but I realize that this is line of discussion is dragging the topic rather far from the identification of the 'manliest' restaurant going

Eeeeh?! Please point me to one of these studies. I've often heard people say this sort of thing, but the evidence (e.g. member posts on these forums) suggests that both men and women are equally diverse in their appreciation of all sorts of foods.

I used 'Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 9 Chemistry and Toxicology', by Dietrich Hoffmann and Ilse Hoffmann as a reference, when I wanted to determine a safe level of tobacco to use in some truffles. In an infusion, I'd err on the low side, since alcohol is likely to extract the tobacco compounds very effectively, and could spoil the flavour.

The box in the fridge thing? Definitely. But if you make a thin paste of it, and apply it to a cutting board, for example, it's actually pretty effective (more than just washing with dish soap).

Wheat germ is a fraction of the wheat grain, and contains oils that keep the toasted form crunchy in liquids; Weetabix is made from the entire wheat grain, and tends to go soggy in milk, so if the portion of the recipe in which you were considering using it contains a significant amount of water, you might be unhappy with the result. On the other hand, if you were thinking of using it as a coating for something that is going to be fried, for example, it might be pretty good.

Hah! All you have to do is glance through many women's magazines/beauty culture books, to find all sorts of alternate uses for kitchen ingredients. Coffee grounds combined with brown sugar do, as claimed, make a decent, cheap skin exfoliant, if you don't mind the colossal mess in the shower, and picking coffee grounds from your hairline for the next day or so. Not certain that 'messy' is analagous to 'outrageous', however. Also, according to a Japanese lab partner I once had, in Japan bathing in sake is believed to detoxify the skin, a vague claim which always makes me sceptical. However, regardless of whether or not it detoxifies, I can definitely state (scepticism being the mother of experiments, for me) that a bottle of cheap sake in a tubful of hot water will get you frighteningly smashed in no time flat (and removes soapy deposits form porcelain!). I've also heard that peanut butter can be used to remove gum from hair and clothing... does anybody know whther this works?

I am wallowing in a state of post McDonald's shame: A recent visit to NYC was so hectic that most of the plans I had for eating were blown out of the water, and I ended up in McDonald's three times, wading through obscene quantities of chicken nuggets. Thing is, I actually craved them: I was raised in a vegetarian and anti-consumerist household, so I didn't actually have anything from McDonald's until I was in my 20s, but a single Happy Meal established an odd craving for food that has no flavour I can really describe, beyond 'salty, sort of sweet'. But man, those things are loaded with MSG: I had ten for breakfast one morning, and was pretty trippy.

There's a Hooters at Frankfurt airport, now! Full of fatigued and grumpy families, who would not have noticed if they'd been served by Big Bird wearing a leather hood. I too would like some expanded parameters for 'manly'. When I think of 'manly' in conjunction with eating, I think of those men who consider anything kitchen-related to be unmanly, for some reason, or men who are convinced that cooking edible food requires some form of occult training. A 'manly' restaurant taking this as its starting point would not have enough dishes and flatware, so most food would be served on paper plates, with plastic flatware, and random sets of take-away chopsticks sourced from other establishments. Diners waiting for the busboy to return with more paper plates would while away time playing with their gadgets at the bar, which would have many, many bottles of vodka, each containing about 5cm of spirits. Daily specials would probably each persist for several days, owing to the quantity originally made. Orders would be placed by direct huddle with the chef (since only the chef would actually have a clear idea of the available ingredients), and takeaway would usually only be an option if you had a some sort of container in which to put your food. The manliness of the place would be made absolute by the complete absence of women, who prefer to not confirm the truth of the rumours they've heard, via personal experience. There probably is a restaurant like this, isn't there?

My first thought for a possible offender was corn syrup. Most things that contain it in any significant amount taste bitter/metallic (or, sometimes, soapy) to me. It's a bit of a pain to change recipes to replace corn syrup with sugar, but it is doable, and I've been really happy with the results of everything I've done this for, from chocolate sauce to fondant.

I tend to abruptly change direction and make a wide detour around anyone offering samples, since the whole setup makes me feel incredibly awkward (and unless a sample is wrapped, I worry that I'll catch yet another of the year's fine selection of colds and seasonal diseases). I can't remember the last time I tried a sample, or whether I've ever bought an item I've sampled.

Definitely different, especially on an electric range. I don't want a full burner firing away under the mocca, but really do want the heat to be pretty even to the edge of a big stock pot.

I had some questions about stubs, and articles identified as requiring cleanup: what and who determines when their status has changed? Is it something that's simply picked up during regular sweeps of these things, or should we notify someone, if we do anything substantial to a stub or article requiring cleanup? Any general parameters for 'stub'? A few topics can be covered quite thoroughly by a few compact sentences: are they still stubs?

You're probably fully aware of this, but just in case: liquorice is naturally quite sweet, so if you don't like sweet notes in your savoury dishes, you'll want to keep that in mind.

Excactly. Add 'And let's all be polite and non-confrontational about this', and that should cover it. But things seem to have reached a point where both customers and chefs expect the worst from the other side, which makes it hard to come to this subject without feeling a bit hostile/defensive.