Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Disgusting Dining
Warning! The content of this video is graphic and may/should be disturbing to most viewers. Watch at your own risk!According to the information provided by the YouTube subscriber, Chinese chefs have developed a way to deep-fry fish without killing them. Subsequently, diners can enjoy their favourite deep-fried fish while it is still alive and writhing (in pain) on their plate. If this weren't designed as a professional blog, the next few sentences consist of profanities.
Firstly, I have to ask how any person, in their right mind, would enjoy eating moving food? If we (as humans) are going to claim that we are separated from the animal world because of our compassion and etiquette, we are certainly not exercising those traits in this instance. Animals eat their food live because they have no other choice. We do!
Secondly, not only would it be extremely painful for the animal to go through a deep-fryer without succumbing to death, but to put it under the knife immediately afterwards seems purely cruel. It boggles my mind. How can someone feel okay about eating something that is experiencing undue and unnecessary torture?
Ultimately, this fish is a living, breathing, feeling creature. Let's put ourselves in the fish's shoes/fins for a second, here. You've been scooped from the ocean/lake to become someone's dinner. That, alone, is a fate none of us would be too thrilled about. However, your troubles have only just begun. You are kept alive on the way to your restaurant destination, where chefs deep fry your body in some new fashion that allows you to survive. The scalds and burns on 90% of your body are excruciating and you simply want to be put out of your misery. This seems bad enough, but no, it's not over yet! Now you are garnished and put on a plate for someone to tear and consume your flesh before your eyes.
We call animals barbaric and lacking intelligence. Yet, things like this make US look barbaric. How are we any different or better than the animals we call savage when we do things like this?
I was a vegetarian for seven years and have only recently returned to the world of meat-eating. I am not saying that eating meat is atrocious, but this kind of behaviour is cruel and unusual. Ultimately, it is inhumane. The word "human" is the root-word of the word "humane" and, according to Dictionary.com, "takes into account only the nobler or gentler aspects of people and is often contrasted to their more ignoble or brutish aspect. A humane person is benevolent in treating fellow humans or helpless animals; the word once had also connotations of courtesy and refinement."
This behaviour is completely unrefined and certainly brutish. We cannot expect to separate ourselves from the savage animal world if we are unwilling to rise above it. Bottom line, this is vile.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Love and Let Live
Today, I came across a quote on love which I found to be quite profound. It read “The beginning of love is to let those we love be just themselves, and not to twist them with our own image. Otherwise, we love only the reflection of ourselves we find in them.”
I believe this to be true, but I feel it does not end with the beginning of love. It is said that familiarity breeds contempt. I understand that, but I also wonder why that is. Why is it that we are so careful about how we come across to complete strangers and, yet, we are willing to hurt those we love?
As a child of 23, I have been in and out of love. I have loved strongly and deeply and these small, but poignant quotes have quite an effect on me. Many people, myself included, constantly try to mould others into something that fits them. In reality, this is making them into something they are not, to better suit you. THIS breeds contempt.
No matter how much you love someone, you cannot and should not expect them to change for you or for anyone, for that matter. We are told, as children, that we should be ourselves and then, in love, we find ourselves trying to change for others. The simplest of rules, “be yourself,” suddenly becomes a challenge. We play a sort of masquerade, searching for the right personality to capture the object of our desire.
When we play this game, we inevitably sink into cycle of resentment. When you live your life for someone else, you regret. The regrets may not be instantaneous. It may take a while for the resentment to come out, but it will. These things, I know.
As I sit here and read my words which I know to be true, I wonder how I can preach so much and practice so little. We are all guilty of it. I see that I must embrace all the quirks and differences of the people I love because that is why I love them in the first place. If they were to change, love would change.
Lastly, I know this: “When the door of happiness closes, another opens but oftentimes we look so long at the closed door that we don’t see the one which has opened for us.” Let all your open doors be seen and all your love be pure.
I believe this to be true, but I feel it does not end with the beginning of love. It is said that familiarity breeds contempt. I understand that, but I also wonder why that is. Why is it that we are so careful about how we come across to complete strangers and, yet, we are willing to hurt those we love?
As a child of 23, I have been in and out of love. I have loved strongly and deeply and these small, but poignant quotes have quite an effect on me. Many people, myself included, constantly try to mould others into something that fits them. In reality, this is making them into something they are not, to better suit you. THIS breeds contempt.
No matter how much you love someone, you cannot and should not expect them to change for you or for anyone, for that matter. We are told, as children, that we should be ourselves and then, in love, we find ourselves trying to change for others. The simplest of rules, “be yourself,” suddenly becomes a challenge. We play a sort of masquerade, searching for the right personality to capture the object of our desire.
When we play this game, we inevitably sink into cycle of resentment. When you live your life for someone else, you regret. The regrets may not be instantaneous. It may take a while for the resentment to come out, but it will. These things, I know.
As I sit here and read my words which I know to be true, I wonder how I can preach so much and practice so little. We are all guilty of it. I see that I must embrace all the quirks and differences of the people I love because that is why I love them in the first place. If they were to change, love would change.
Lastly, I know this: “When the door of happiness closes, another opens but oftentimes we look so long at the closed door that we don’t see the one which has opened for us.” Let all your open doors be seen and all your love be pure.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Why are you complaining?
This morning, I came across an article in the Hamilton Spectator about a group of parents from Calgary who have managed to persuade their lawyers to ban homework at the schools of their children.
The parents and their lawyers are arguing that their children "were suffering from the stress of balancing sporting events with elaborate home projects assigned by their teachers." While I agree that children in elementary schools should not be bombarded with what they are calling "excessive amounts of homework" every night, I think the idea of completely banning homework is absurd for several reasons.
Firstly, as a caregiver, I recognize the importance of getting children to focus on something productive for a portion of their after school routine. Parents, like any caregiver, are likely returning home from a hard day's work around the time that children would be performing their scholarly duties, and need this time to prepare dinner or simply wind down. This concept of no homework completely removes any realm of possibility for these necessary actions unless parents would rather plop their children in front of the television. Hence, the title of this post: Why are you complaining? I don't understand why these parents are upset with the idea of children doing something school-oriented with a portion of their free time as opposed to watching television or strictly enjoying play time.
On another note, learning to cope with multiple tasks is a valuable experience for children. Although it would be foolish to expect them to deal with "excessive amounts of homework" on a nightly basis, this 'homework time' is an invaluable lesson for the future. If students are to excel later in life, they will need to learn the work ethic that success requires. From a post-secondary perspective, in particular, there is no one there to hold your hand every step of the way. Developing a strong work ethic from a young age is vital to achievement later in life.
Ultimately, I feel these parents are providing their children with an unrealistic learning atmosphere. They will be put at a disadvantage when paired up with students from other schools later in their academic careers because they will not understand the importance of work outside school. Nothing in life is free and these parents are not teaching their children that important message. I certainly believe that down time is important, but completely banning homework from school altogether seems a very regressive learning strategy indeed.
The parents and their lawyers are arguing that their children "were suffering from the stress of balancing sporting events with elaborate home projects assigned by their teachers." While I agree that children in elementary schools should not be bombarded with what they are calling "excessive amounts of homework" every night, I think the idea of completely banning homework is absurd for several reasons.
Firstly, as a caregiver, I recognize the importance of getting children to focus on something productive for a portion of their after school routine. Parents, like any caregiver, are likely returning home from a hard day's work around the time that children would be performing their scholarly duties, and need this time to prepare dinner or simply wind down. This concept of no homework completely removes any realm of possibility for these necessary actions unless parents would rather plop their children in front of the television. Hence, the title of this post: Why are you complaining? I don't understand why these parents are upset with the idea of children doing something school-oriented with a portion of their free time as opposed to watching television or strictly enjoying play time.
On another note, learning to cope with multiple tasks is a valuable experience for children. Although it would be foolish to expect them to deal with "excessive amounts of homework" on a nightly basis, this 'homework time' is an invaluable lesson for the future. If students are to excel later in life, they will need to learn the work ethic that success requires. From a post-secondary perspective, in particular, there is no one there to hold your hand every step of the way. Developing a strong work ethic from a young age is vital to achievement later in life.
Ultimately, I feel these parents are providing their children with an unrealistic learning atmosphere. They will be put at a disadvantage when paired up with students from other schools later in their academic careers because they will not understand the importance of work outside school. Nothing in life is free and these parents are not teaching their children that important message. I certainly believe that down time is important, but completely banning homework from school altogether seems a very regressive learning strategy indeed.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Official Supplier of Sleep?
Without a doubt, Canadians are excited about the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games, and with good reason. However, when companies begin to monopolize on them, it starts to push my buttons.
For example, I was watching the news this evening, and a commercial for Sleep Country came on. Everyone's favourite spokesperson, Christine Magee, discussed the droves of athletes that will make their way to Vancouver in the new year and emphasized the importance of their rest.
At the end of the commercial, she says "We're Sleep Country, the official supplier of sleep for the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games." Official supplier of sleep? Come on. Sleep Country doesn't supply sleep. They supply mattresses.
Using something as exciting as the Olympic Games to push your products that have little, if anything, to do with them is not going to make me, or any person in their right mind, run out to buy a Sleep Country mattress. It's not as if we're going to say to ourselves "Oh, Sleep Country is the official supplier of sleep for the Vancouver Olympic Games? Well then, I have to be sleeping on whatever all those Olympic athletes are sleeping on. Christine Magee...you've done it again!"
If anything, this marketing ploy makes me NOT want to buy a Sleep Country mattress. Perhaps if they geared their commercials towards something with the slightest bit of relevance, I might take notice, but until then, this girl will stick with her Beautyrest.
At the end of the commercial, she says "We're Sleep Country, the official supplier of sleep for the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games." Official supplier of sleep? Come on. Sleep Country doesn't supply sleep. They supply mattresses.
Using something as exciting as the Olympic Games to push your products that have little, if anything, to do with them is not going to make me, or any person in their right mind, run out to buy a Sleep Country mattress. It's not as if we're going to say to ourselves "Oh, Sleep Country is the official supplier of sleep for the Vancouver Olympic Games? Well then, I have to be sleeping on whatever all those Olympic athletes are sleeping on. Christine Magee...you've done it again!"
If anything, this marketing ploy makes me NOT want to buy a Sleep Country mattress. Perhaps if they geared their commercials towards something with the slightest bit of relevance, I might take notice, but until then, this girl will stick with her Beautyrest.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Lest We Forget
I remember, fondly, the days of elementary school when we would gather in our tiny gymnasium to pay homage to those soldiers who so bravely gave their lives for the freedoms we take for granted everyday. We would carry wreaths and crosses adorned with tissue paper shaped like poppies and recite "In Flander's Fields." An entire morning, if not more, was dedicated to remembering and honouring our ancestors and war veterans. I recall spending weeks in preparation for this day and I would proudly wear my poppy over my heart.
As the years of my childhood passed and I slowly but surely made the transition into highschool and, eventually, University, this day became somewhat elusive. Highschool Remembrance Day mornings would include a ceremonial bag pipe rendition and a moment of silence over the announcement system. Then, in University, nothing at all.
I understand the importance of teaching our children to remember and honour our dead. They are impressionable and their innocence allows them to take life as something playful. We need to teach them that their freedoms and rights were paid for dearly. It seems, however, that as we grow older we, too, forget these things. Less emphasis is put on the importance of this day. We may have a moment of silence, here and there, but there are no images, no recitals of poems, no carrying of crosses. We simply expect that people will pay tribute in their own special way when, in reality, they likely won't. Remembrance Day becomes just another day in our calendar.
So, this year, in my effort to pay my respects, I will recite that poem by John McCrae that was once so vivid in my vocabulary. I will remember.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
As the years of my childhood passed and I slowly but surely made the transition into highschool and, eventually, University, this day became somewhat elusive. Highschool Remembrance Day mornings would include a ceremonial bag pipe rendition and a moment of silence over the announcement system. Then, in University, nothing at all.
I understand the importance of teaching our children to remember and honour our dead. They are impressionable and their innocence allows them to take life as something playful. We need to teach them that their freedoms and rights were paid for dearly. It seems, however, that as we grow older we, too, forget these things. Less emphasis is put on the importance of this day. We may have a moment of silence, here and there, but there are no images, no recitals of poems, no carrying of crosses. We simply expect that people will pay tribute in their own special way when, in reality, they likely won't. Remembrance Day becomes just another day in our calendar.
So, this year, in my effort to pay my respects, I will recite that poem by John McCrae that was once so vivid in my vocabulary. I will remember.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
H1N1: Is it a hoax?
With all the hype surrounding H1N1, I figured I would blog about the flu. A few months ago, I received an email from my father that raised questions about whether or not the flu was being overblown. One of the things that it discussed was symptoms of H1N1, which include fever, sore throat, coughing, chills, fatigue, body aches, headache, and occasionally vomiting and diarrhea.Considering these symptoms, one has to wonder how you would ever be able to tell the difference between H1N1 and the regular flu, a fever, a cold, strep throat, etc. The list could go on forever. This is part of the reason I am so skeptical.
Another reason for my skepticism are the profits that drug companies are yielding from this "pandemic." According to a press release from Kalorama information, "few areas of pharmaceuticals have seen the fast-moving developments in the marketplace that the vaccine market has." The statistics for vaccine revenue are shocking.
Although I'm sure the families directly affected by H1N1 would disagree, the illness seems to have been blown completely out of proportion for the benefit of pharmaceutical companies and the government.
A friend of mine, a nurse, has even opted not to have the vaccine. She worries that the trial period for testing the vaccine has been to small. Historically, she argues, drugs that have been given tiny windows for testing and are still administered to patients, often result in serious side effects years later. The birth control method, Depro-Provera is a good example of one such drug which has been discontinued due to its damaging side effects.
Overall, I am looking at this flu from a perspective of suspicion. Perhaps I'll change my mind when I'm directly affected by H1N1. I'm sick right now, though. My symptoms include coughing, a sore throat, fatigue, aches and pains. So...does that mean I have H1N1?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
