My housemate came home earlier with a festive dilemma that made wondering how many minutes to the pound to cook a turkey a doddle. Christmas cards: who gets one and who gets listed on them. Actually it’s more complex than that – a near half hour conversation boiled down to the following…
When do you include a significant other – when they’re living together, when they’re married, if you’ve met them?
When should you/your significant other be included in the sending of card – when you’re living together or if you both want to wish that person/persons happy holidays?
Or is it household to household? In which case, when is it appropriate to stop including family members that have flown the nest? And if you’ve moved out, should you expect and send a separate card?
And is the use of ‘partner’ or ‘and family’ just a bit rude, especially if they’re not married, they have no children or are just living together? Should this be used if you’ve no idea who their significant other is and if so are you wishing random strangers happy holidays?
If, as I am, living with friends, should we be sending and receiving cards to mutual friends as a household?
When do you send cards to friends – when you won’t see them near the festive period, people you’re especially close to, people you see on a regular basis (work people)?
Do facebook/text messages on the day make this whole concept redundant?
And finally, are we overthinking this?
I haven’t sent out Christmas cards this year, mainly because I’m only just beginning to catch up with my own life. But given the in-depth conversation I’ve just taken part in, I think it was probably wise!
*This was originally posted on my old blog Sisyphean Solutions*
Yesterday evening I happened across an anti-BNP protest in Birmingham city centre. I’m not entirely sure why they felt the need to protest then – as far as I know there was nothing specifically BNP happening in Brum yesterday. I suspect it was to echo the protest in London where BNP leader Nick Griffin was holding a press conference. Nevertheless given the lack of elected BNP officials in B’ham over say, Stoke, it seemed like an odd choice.
What seemed like an even odder choice was their method of protest. They chanted, the abused and generally they professed their hatred through intimidating and aggressive methods without really educating anyone on why the BNP are racist/fascist/homophobic/sexist/generally reprehensible humans. Sure they said it, but they never once gave examples. They could’ve pointed to comments from prominent BNP supporters that women should enjoy rape, links to the National Front or well-publicised Holocaust denial. For the entire time I was observing I didn’t once hear them tell people why the BNP are bad, only that they are. And the protest in London was worse at echoing the uninformative sentiment.
Anti-BNP protest in Birmingham on 9/6/09
But what’s the point? Why should ordinary people passing through the city centre believe protesters without evidence? And why should they believe people who act in a manner that echoes one they are fighting against?
Surely the way to argue against a group who you believe will erode democracy, remove free speech and employ violence and interrogation is to not to use their methods as a template to get your message across. Yes, what they propose is nothing short of terrifying, but hounding them out, not giving them a chance to speak and refusing to nobly argue your point and show your point of view is correct can only be viewed as undemocratic and equally oppressive.
The way to get people round to your thinking cannot be to deny the opposing side a voice, that can only serve to drive them underground and make their message more dangerous. And even if you did succeed in stamping out the opposing view through intimidating, what kind of victory is that?
Continuing the ageing of my good self to that of the middle years, I got up early and cooked blueberry pancakes for my housemates before we trekked off to the cinema to see Coraline in 3D, buy cables in Maplins and eat ice cream in Selfridges.
The recipe came from Olive Magazine’s May issue where they had a recipe a day article and this was the one for today. It’s incredibly easy and uses sensible, everyday ingredients – which is always a plus. The last time I made blueberry pancakes was about three years ago and I distinctively remember failing to find buttermilk in Lancaster in December. I know the supermarkets in Birmingham sell it, but it’s not exactly an everyday purchase that I’ll use again. So the fact this used things we would already have in the house (minus blueberries) sold it to me.
200g self-raising flour
1tsp baking powder
pinch of salt
25g melted butter
85g 100g blueberries (I used more because some of the pancakes had lots of blueberries and towards the end some were lacking)
- Mix in the flour, baking powder and salt into a bowl.
- Mix together the wet ingredients – butter, egg and milk. I had some problems with the melted butter in the cold milk – best to leave it to room temperature before adding.
- Add the wet ingredients to the dry and whisk. The recipe said to do this in parts, but it was fine all in.
- Stir in the blueberries.
- Heat some butter in a non-stick pan and drop in tablespoonfuls of the mixture. Cook for about three minutes on one side and then flip for another three.
Easy to make and very, very tasty. Housemates well fed – possibly too many for three people. Would be good for four. Yummy.
*This was originally posted on my old blog BeanHeartBatman*