Of bread and grandmothers

"What Christmas gift did you always want and never get?" Asked the radio D.J. when I was driving to work one day last week. Alone in my car, I blurted out "Easy Bake Oven". Then I laughed, because the reason why I never got an Easy Bake Oven is the same reason I don't have one now. I was allowed to use the real oven.

Growing up on a rural Nova Scotia farm in the pre-wireless age (it's barely wired now), make your own fun was an essential component of childhood. Having grandparents living 14 feet away was an essential component in that.

My sister Jan and I had a stool when we started baking with Granny; we weren't tall enough to reach the counter without it. We started out with easy gear, like cookies and squares, before migrating to bread. Bread, by comparison, is labour intensive, especially when you have a grandmother intent on teaching it old school and you're four and a half feet tall. Granny was only a few inches taller full grown. Game on!

We started with a cup of very warm water, yeast and sugar in a small bowl, covered with a plate. After that, in a big bowl, really hot water to melt the lard, salt and sugar, with a bit of vinegar thrown in to make the bread keep longer. Once the lard was melted into a shiny slick across the top, we'd add flour until we had an easy to stir slurry. Then it was time to beat in the yeast, which had magically expanded to touch the top of the plate.

Then it was adding flour, flour, and more flour, 'til you couldn't mix it with a spoon any more, at which point, we'd dump it on the counter for kneading. I worked as a baker for a little while. I find kneading bread soothing. This is why.  The rhythmic smooshing of dough, pulling up the side to throw fresh flour underneath to be rolled in. Sprinkling flour into the bowl and rubbing the dough stuck to the sides so you can work in every last bit. Waste not, want not.

On to kneading till the dough squeaked. The dough had to squeak, because that meant that the yeast was working and we were crushing air bubbles. Air bubbles are critical to bread success. At the time, had I known the word "sadist" I would have used it for my grandmother. It takes a lot of kneading to make the bread squeak. I certainly don't work the dough for that long now, but I don't have to. The yeast is is better.

But my grandmother had to. Growing up, if I ruined a batch of bread we had Ben's sliced white waiting in the wings, we just didn't get the treat of homemade bread, served hot, with butter and brown sugar. In my depression-era grandmother's day, no homemade bread meant no bread, so you worked it till it you receive squeaks of confirmation. Perhaps even willed it so.

P.S. I have used quick-rise yeast ever since my stint as a baker in '96. I love it. There's no proofing (the small bowl and plate), with quick rise yeast and as with any restaurant employee, you follow the recipe. I didn't know until I was reading recipes today that folks are skipping their first rise with quick-rise yeast. I swear I felt my grandmother cringe inside me when I read about it. Granny had a standard, and that was to get as close to store bought as possible, from canned peas to white bread.  Unless you let your dough rise at least once (Granny's was twice, but that's too long), before you form loaves, you'll never work out all the big air bubbles and when it's sliced, there's holes in it. The dough needs to be refined with kneading so the bubbles are tiny throughout.  Now grocery stores sell Artisanal bread and a point of authenticity is that it's irregular. Like homemade. How rude.

Tips for political petitioners on Change.org

The following petition appeared in my newsfeed this morning. Well, a copied and pasted version of it, which links to the petition here.

Now calling for politicians to be charged with treason is nothing new. For as long as there have been politicians, and before them, monarchies, there have been people calling their actions treasonous. We just use virtual pitchforks and torches now. Harper had his treason petitioners too (they appear to have a better grasp on grammar and spelling, but some crazy leaks out between the lines), which brings us to the point of this post: 

What you need to know about online petitions

1. Online petitions are meaningless in terms of petitioning the House of Commons

For real. This is how you petition the House of Commons. Pertinent details include a paper application with handwritten, verifiable signatures. Five minutes on Change.org doesn't cut it. You need to knock on doors, plead your case, get the support in writing. Wear comfortable shoes. 

2. Online petitions can serve as a rallying cry for change, which may lead to actual change

Also for real. Online petitions that obtain widespread support can be used to apply pressure on a government or an organization to take an action, like halting the forced relocation of 40,000 people. That petition carries over two million signatures. Cecil the Lion has over a million. Oh sure, the dentist was never charged, but good luck to game hunters who want to fly their trophies home on an U.S. Airline now. 

3. For actual change, support is critical

You don't even need a factual argument. Look at Vani Hari, otherwise known as The Food Babe. Hari is an expert at generating publicity through the use of online petitions: Subway changed their bread. Starbucks changed their lattes. Budweiser changed their beer labels. And all with zero scientific evidence that changes were required. The Food Babe just takes big words, makes them sound scary, and relies on the scientific illiteracy of her followers to take her to the finish line. Any doubts, read this:

Air is 78 per cent nitrogen, 21 per cent oxygen, plus carbon dioxide, argon and other trace gases. Filling an airplane cabin with 100 per cent oxygen takes already a flying bomb and turn it into an even more volatile flying bomb. But prior to Hari deleting this post (no take backs on the internet, Hari), she had lots of supporters agreeing with her in the comments.

4. Support requires a clear, understandable, and actionable message

Hari gets this. Oh sure, while she may possess the scientific intellect of an under-performing third grader, she has mastered the art of provoking an emotional response through skillful writing. 

You? You have not. Grammatically, look at the mess you made. It's like a red tide of proofreaders marks. Did you write this on your phone? Always use a word processing program. It won't catch everything, but it'll do a better job than you did.

Your "reason for the treason" is not treason. Not that you tried in any way to explain how stating that terrorists should get to keep their citizenship is treason, but your dots do not connect. Public criticism of a law is not treason. It is freedom of expression. It is a Charter right. 

Your call to action is also incorrectly addressed, in terms of being actionable. The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest appellate court in Canada. They here appeals. They do not lay charges. The RCMP do lay charges, but the guy whose attention you really want to get is David Johnston, the Governor General of Canada. As the queen's representative, he, constitutionally, stands the best chance of deposing a prime minister.

5. Unless you want to be ridiculed, which Hari routinely is, spend a few minutes playing devil's advocate to your argument

For example, what could possibly go wrong with renouncing the citizenship of a terrorist? (As opposed to locking them for life as the Liberals said they would do in the same leaked recording.) To save you time, here's a recent historical example. In 1992, rather than incarceration, the Saudi government renounced Osama Bin Laden's citizenship and banished him from the country. This did not end well for anyone. It is reasonable to say something similar could happen as a result of Bill C-24. It is also reasonable, not treasonous, to say so.

Grammar is really important

 

Nerd confession: I enjoy reading court decisions. I really like how judges write and the stories are interesting.

On the weekend I read the decision that struck down the Cyber-safety Act. It came with a cautionary tale about the importance of choosing your words carefully when writing rules. Especially rules, but it's good practice to do it all the time. In the decision, the lawmakers’ use of the word “may” in one clause resulted in the Act being deemed procedurally unfair. The clause was also a Charter violation, but that involved significantly more elements than grammar. This blog post is about grammar.*

The clause said:

5 (1) An application for a protection order may be made to a justice, without notice to the respondent, in the form and manner prescribed by the regulations, by

(a)    the subject… (the subject's parents, police, etc.)

The judge took issue with the no-notice part, because it violated the right of the accused to be heard—the Charter violation. The attorney general argued that the clause was written that way for situations where the accused was unknown and immediate action was required. In situations where the accused was known, the Act presented only it as a possibility, not as a procedure that had to be followed.

The lawyer for the defense argued that the clause had to be read as though the application must be made without notice to the respondent. If the “may be made” portion of the clause gave applicants discretion to choose whether to notify the applicant, it followed that it also gave the applicant discretion to choose whether to make the application to a Justice of the Peace and whether to follow the application process set out in the regulations. I.e. apply however you see fit. In terms of procedural rules, this is anarchy. The judge agreed with the defense.

Grammar is really important.

*Except for this part. Laws are really important. The Cyber-safety Act didn't get scrapped because it was was ill conceived. It got scrapped because it was badly executed. So write it again. Do a better job. The hard work is already done. There's the existing Act. There's Justice McDougall's 62-page decision, which is essentially an explanation everything wrong with the Act and why, and there's two years of operational data from the CyberSCAN investigative unit. 

Compared to the nothing the lawmakers of 2013 had to work with, today's lawmakers have a road map, rich in analyses and data, already laid out for them. They just have to follow it.

Of internet quotes and a bad driver

On my way back to the office today, I was stopped at a light behind a older, customized VW hatchback. There was a decal in the rear window that read:

 

"If one day the speed kills me, do not cry because I was smiling."

Paul Walker 1973 - 2013

 

I would have forgotten about it, but for the light changing and the driver treating the descent from Victoria Road to Windmill like a closed course, which is to say a lane-changing tailgating menace on a half kilometre of city street.

 

The driver made me mad. The Paul Walker quote made me mad, because obviously the driver thought enough of it to glue it to his window. So I looked up the quote. It made me madder.

 

The quote is unattributed and appears only after Walker's death. There is no evidence he ever said it. Whether to make themselves feel better about his passing or to sell bumper stickers and window decals, someone made it up and it was accepted as fact (and we all know that never happens on the internet).

 

It's also not true. The disturbingly easy to locate online coroner's report states that Walker was in a defensive position immediately before impact. He was trying to protect himself. I have a hunch if you asked Walker if he wanted his actions to end his and his friend's life that day, he would have said no.

 

To the author of this quote, you put false words in the mouth of a dead man. That's beyond low. There's no takebacks on the internet, so don't do that again. Ever. You should already feel like tapeworm inside a tapeworm for falsifying the quote in the first place.

 

To the driver, using a fake quote to glorify a preventable accident does not make you a badass nor does it mean you're living the dream. It means you need to broaden your  horizons and try new non-car things. You may live longer. Better still, so may others.

Refugee rant for the contrary

You said we shouldn’t help the refugees because they were dangerous. Then statistically you were shown that refugees are not dangerous.

Then you said their neighbours should take them in. Their neighbours, poor countries all, have taken in millions of refugees.

Then you said, no not those countries, the rich ones, the gulf states. You mean the ones run by constitutional monarchies that are home to some of the world’s worst human rights violations. How exactly is that helping?

Then you said we needed to help our vets and our homeless. They said stop using them as an excuse to not help.

Then you went back to it not being safe and more screening was required. We needed more time for screening. We can’t rush things. There’s still just as much screening as there was three of your arguments ago.

Then to address concerns about safety, refugees were cut to women, children and families, at which point you screeched sexism and discrimination against men that you previously called terrorists.

Today the government announced that they need more time to bring in the refugees and now you’re bitching about the government breaking promises.

If it’s because the deadline will be missed, that’s great! Clearly you’ve had a change of heart and you now want these refugees to become a part of Canada. Bravo! That’s the spirit. Let’s do all we can to help!

If it’s because you’re just contrary and you still want to do nothing but fill up comment boards with your vitriol, your whining, and your ever changing list of arguments against refugees, put your time and/or money where your virtual mouth is and spend some time helping veterans and homeless people. You know, the ones you were staunchly defending earlier.

If you got your back up over sexism, you can donate to help all refugees, including single men, here.

And if it’s because you don’t want to help anybody here, you don’t want to help anybody coming here, and you don’t want to help anybody overseas, do our country a favour and shut up. We are a vast cold country and the only reason we, as a country and a society, have flourished is because we help one another. If you don’t get that, you don’t deserve the time of day, let alone an internet soapbox.

Of wine and waiting tables

One night when I was working as a server I had two single tables, both men. It was a slow night, which is probably why this memory of returning both of their wine orders to the bar for something else stuck.

The first guy, a suit in his late 40s, turned his table into a temporary desk and ordered a nut brown draft, barely looking up from his paperwork. The second guy, late 20s, friendly and talkative, looked like he would be more at home on a four-wheeler than sitting in a pricey waterfront restaurant. He needed a moment with the wine list.

I brought the first guy a second nut brown.

Second guy needed more time with the menus and to talk briefly about the main industries of Halifax. And the delicious bread.

On the way back with more delicious bread, I brought first guy his third nut brown. I also helpfully dug out his menu from beneath a stack of papers in case he wanted to eat something. 

After discussing the population of HRM, Nova Scotia's main exports, my current status as part-time server full-time student, and unasked, my fiance, second guy decided to on appetizer and a Coke to start and a half litre of white zinfandel with his main.

First guy ordered a fourth nut brown. I was beginning to think he was pouring them on the floor when I wasn't looking, but the carpet was dry. He promised to know what he wanted to eat when I returned.

Returning with a Coke and the nut brown that gave me the perfect excuse to drop the Coke off and carry on, first guy opens his menu, picks the first thing he sees and orders a litre of white.

By the time I reached the station to ring in first guy's order, I'm convinced I misheard him and he wanted a half litre. He's nearly finished his fourth draft. The draft glasses are large. The fourth one is typically where I abandoned reason and the next day's double-shift became no deterrence to a night on the town.

Second guy's main is nearly ready so I present him with his wine. He leans forward and waves me in closer too. "I ordered the white zinfandel," he says in hushed tones, as we both observe the pink wine housed in the carafe.  I squirm a little as I explain that white zinfandel is, in fact, pink. I offer to bring him the wine list so he can pick another wine, and in light of his now rosy cheeks, throw him a bone asking if he'd like a half litre of my favourite white (a pleasantly mild soave that goes well with people who don't drink wine). That would be great.

Second guy is fine with the soave. I bring first guy his wine. Sparing me a quick glance, first guy says "I ordered a litre." I apologize for my error and bring him a litre of wine. He tastes it. It's fine. He goes back to his paperwork.

I give both men their meals. Second guy is a little less chatty after the pink wine incident. First guy alternates between his fork, his pen, and his wineglass. As first guy is obviously not in need of companionship, and I already separated a small mountain of paper doilies into easy access singles, I return to second guy to see if he is over his shyness. I am bored. I live off tips.

Unlike the rock that is first guy, second guy is loosening up as the wine goes down. I give him a rundown on the bar scene, by music and by drink specials.

Second guy is the first to go. I thank him for his 20 per cent tip and tell him I hope he enjoys power hour at the Crow. He kind of looks like he wants a hug. It's a good time to disappear to pull doilies apart.

First guy also leaves me 20 percent, and in a lasting state of awe. He deftly signed his bill and walked out of the restaurant straight as an arrow, having consumed enough alcohol to put me, no slouch in the booze department, out cold under the table after some singing and I love yous. And he did work the whole time! I wanted to high five him on the way out, but despite the alcohol tolerance worthy of a rock star or an aging bartender, a suit is still a suit.

Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline Launch Day

 

Photo: Calgary Herald

The Harper Conservatives have pledged to launch a police hotline to report "barbaric cultural practices" should they be reelected. This is despite Canada already have a national 24/7 hotline, 911, for reporting emergencies and crimes, barbaric or otherwise. It got me thinking about what those calls would sound like. In my head it sounded like a topic that needed to be explored all the way to absurdity.


Operator: Thank you for calling the Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline, this is Jenny, how can I help you?

Caller: Hi Jenny, I'm riding the number seven bus and the man across the aisle from me has a throat and face tattoos. He looks really scary.

Operator: Hmmm. That wasn't in our training. I'm going to put you on hold while I look at the caller manual. It's our first day.

[Pause]

Operator: Hi there, I'm back. I'm sorry, but there's nothing in the caller manual about face tattoos. Apparently it is not a barbaric cultural practice.

Caller: What do you mean face tattoos are not a barbaric cultural practice? I mean, these are life choices that can seriously damage his ability to be a productive member of our society. He's got cobwebs and teardrops on his face. On his face! I bet he got them in jail. He looks dangerous.

Operator: Hi there, I'm sorry, but there's nothing in the manual about this, but let me ask a few more questions. There may be something else. Does he look like a foreigner? Is he wearing foreign clothes?

Caller: No. He looks like a scary redneck in a wife-beater.

Operator: A wife-beater? Is there a woman with him? Is she oppressed into covering her face?"

Caller: No. He's all alone, but the "Fear" in the "No Fear" tattoo on his throat is spelled with two Es. I can see it really clearly. He's looking right at me.

Operator: I'm sorry, there's nothing in the caller manual about tattoos, misspelled or otherwise.

Caller: Uh oh. He's coming towards me. He looks angry. Jenny, I gotta go. I think I need 911.

[End call]


Operator: Thank you for calling the Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline, this is Jenny, please report your barbaric cultural practice.

Caller: Hello Jenny. Two young men showed up at my door this morning and they wanted me to join a cult.

Operator: Oh my, that sounds serious. Were they members of ISIS?

Caller: How would I know?

Operator: Did they sound like they were from the middle east? Did they have long beards? Black pajama-like clothing?

Caller: No. They sounded like they were from here. They had on crisp white shirts and black trousers. Ties. They were clean shaven and had short hair.

Operator: Well, they could have been in disguise. What did they say?

Caller: They asked me if I could spare a moment to talk about our Lord Jesus Christ. They were very insistent.

Operator: Hmmm. Let me do a quick key-word search of the caller manual. Hold please.

[Pause]

Operator: Hi there, I searched the caller manual and the words "Lord", "Jesus" and "Christ" didn't appear, so this is definitely not a barbaric cultural practice.

Caller: Hey, I worked a 12-hour back-shift and had just gotten to sleep. Those jerks woke me up and told me if I didn't embrace Jesus I'd burn in Hell. That's barbaric!

Operator: Sorry sir. Your complaint isn't in the manual. I hope you get some rest.

[End call]

Operator: Thank you for calling the Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline, this is Jenny, do you have a barbaric cultural practice to report?

Caller: HELP ME, JENNY, MY NEIGHBOUR IS AN EVIL MONSTER!

Operator: Oh my, this sound serious! I want you to take a couple deep breaths to calm yourself. You're safe with us.

[Pause]

Caller: Thank you, that feels better.

Operator: So tell me, what is your neighbour doing?

Caller: He's having a pig roast next weekend!

Operator: Are you of a religion that doesn't eat pork? Is this why you're reporting this?

Caller: Religion? No! I'm a vegan! PETA SAYS MEAT IS MURDER!

Operator: I'm sorry. I think you missed the intent of this hotline. This is for barbaric cultural practices and a backyard pig roast doesn't qualify.

Caller: MEAT IS A BARBARIC CULTURAL PRACTICE YOU MONSTER!

[End call]


Operator: Thank you for calling the Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline. Jenny here, do you have an actual barbaric cultural practice to report?

Caller: Yes I do! My granddaughter and I are waiting to get into the Justin Beiber concert and there are half-naked teenage girls everywhere. I mean some of them are wearing belts instead of skirts.

Operator: I'm sorry, ma'am, but I don't believe a lack of clothing qualifies as a barbaric. The manual only speaks to overly covered up as culturally barbaric.

Caller: It most certainly a barbaric practice! This is Canada. Do you have any idea how cold it is tonight? It's freakin' freezing outside. These girls are going to catch their deaths! And the shoes! My granddaughter says they are called "stripper stillies". If they keep wearing them, they are sure to have no end of foot and back problems when they're older.

Operator: I'm sorry, there's nothing in the manual about stripper stillies. Enjoy the concert though.

Caller: Are you [expletive] kidding me?

[End call]


Operator: Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline, Jenny here, do you have an actual real barbaric cultural practice to report?

Caller: Yo Jenny, I sure do. It's a crime not just against Canadians, but the core values of the Canadian way of life.

Operator: That sounds like exactly the type of thing we're here for. Please go on.

Caller: I just found out there's a Justin Beiber concert here tonight. I need you to make it stop before he destroys our Canadian legacy of musical excellence. The Band. Neil Young. We are the home of Rush!

Operator: I'm sorry, the Beiber is not in the caller manual.

Caller: What about Nickelback? Nickelback is playing here next month.

Operator. Sorry. Still no.

[End call]


Operator: Hello, this is Jenny at the Barbaric Cultural Practices Hotline, do you have something culturally barbaric to report?

Caller: Hi Jenny, I want to report someone for creating promotional material that uses images and video of ISIS executions. These are horrific acts. People were tortured - slaughtered - on camera and now they are being exploited again to spread fear and distrust.

Operator: Well, that's exactly why this anonymous hotline exists. We are here for you. Tell me all about it.

Caller: It was in a 2015 federal election ad paid for by the Conservative Party of Canada.

[End call]


Operator: This is Jenny, do you have a barbaric cultural practice to report? A real one?

Caller: PIGS ARE PEOPLE TOO, YOU MONSTER!!!

[End call]


Operator: Jenny speaking, do you have a barbaric cultural practice to report? One that involves an actual oppressed minority group.

Caller: Hi Jenny, why, yes,  yes I do.

Operator: That's great! Lay it on me.

Caller: There are over 1,000 murdered and missing aboriginal women in this country and the government refuses to take action. It's like when it comes to women they don't care about anything other than niqabs.

Operator: Let me put you on hold while I perform a key-word search for "missing and murdered aboriginal women" in the caller manual.

[Pause]

Operator: Hi, I'm back. There were no instances of "aboriginal", women or otherwise, in the caller manual. There were over a two dozen instances of "niqab", though.

Caller: Hi Jenny. In that case, I'd like to report that hundreds of aboriginal women are missing. I believe they all want the right to wear niqabs while receiving public services.

Operator: I'm sorry. I don't understand.

Caller. Well it's like this. Given the uproar two niqab-wearing women can cause, the government will surely want to locate these missing women immediately and liberate them from oppression. Or take away their services. Either way, their families will finally know where they are.

[Pause]

Caller: Hello? Are you still there?