I gather from our fantasy movies that are roughly Medieval in setting that people think the Medievals were inclined to nothing but roasted meat -- spiced with salt if anything -- bread and beer. Fancy people preferred wine, but otherwise just ate better versions of the same thing: salt and pepper, white bread instead of brown. It was a simple time, rustic and basic.
Yet in fact:
...it is certainly quite odd by modern culinary lights to cook a capon in red wine, cut it up, and then fry the pieces before serving them with the cooking broth reduced to a sauce flavored with spices, thickened with the liver and white meat pounded into a paste and with powdered almonds. Like other similar dishes, this one (Brouet of Capon, recipe 35) is a harmonious composition, where the flavor and texture of the meat itself are mingled with the aroma and savor of a vivid sauce, making a unified impression as the dish gives the tongue a momentary surprise with its supple crispness.... We confess that we have lost both the desire for such culinary intricacy and the very notion of it, and that it is no longer of interest. Yet as historians... it is our job to highlight the gap between today's gastronomic system and that which informed medieval culinary practices.
-Redon, Sabban & Serventi, trans. Edward Schneider, The Medieval Kitchen: Recipes from France and Italy (Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 22.
The use of advanced pre-cooking techniques to create flavor and differentiate texture is not wholly lost. When describing how to create a venison braise, for example, I advised browning the meat, then the vegetables in the grease used to brown the meat, then assembling them together and braising them to get a richer flavor than you would get from just putting it all in the pot with liquid alone. There are still some modern recipes with pre-cooking stages, some of which use fire as did the Medieval ones.
It is much less common, though. We tend to give our recipes variety by changing the ingredients instead: for lunch we will have venison, last night roast beef, perhaps chicken for dinner. At a time when there was less variety of ingredients and more time to devote to the exercise of cooking in the kitchen, these more sophisticated approaches made more sense.
In any case our ancestors were much different from how we often imagine them as a culture. They were smarter, more sophisticated, and rather wiser than we often give them credit for having been.
Glancing at someone in a public place is always permissible; there’s often a fleeting moment of mutual acknowledgment — perhaps a slight nod or smile — before both parties look away. This momentary connection is part of how we experience our shared social world. No doubt if you find the person attractive, your glance may well linger involuntarily for a moment. But prolonging that moment further can cross a line. We can’t control our initial notice of others; we can control our subsequent choices. I suspect your ‘‘quick’’ glance wasn’t so quick.In public settings, it’s generally intrusive to display sexual interest. That it may sometimes be welcomed doesn’t change the situation. Yes, a brief friendly glance that produces a smile and a direct reciprocating look can mean you’re being invited to maintain eye contact. But if there’s any doubt, the unease caused by leering is bad enough that you should err on the side of averting your gaze. In your case, there normally should be doubt. Being aware of whatever shortcomings we may have in the skills of everyday life can guide us toward better practices. Just as people who know they have a poor sense of direction learn to check maps more often, someone who struggles to read social signals around looking would do well by being reserved and not risk making others uncomfortable. It’s a matter of taking the trouble to do what, for you, doesn’t come naturally, and adopting habits that respect everyone’s dignity.When it comes to men looking at women, in particular, there’s a broader social context in which women often experience unwanted attention or feel unsafe. The sexual etiquette I’ve described allows men and women to enjoy public spaces as equals.
Something weird is going on with these definitions of 'equality.' The other day we were talking about an assumption that women would need rights men don't have in order to have equality. Here we've got a rule that applies to men only -- though especially to men who 'have trouble reading social signals,' meaning unequally even among men -- which somehow make men and women 'equals' in public spaces.
In Iraq we were given similar advice: not to look at or acknowledge the presence of women at all. That was only a stronger version of this advice -- to err on the side of caution by looking away -- but it certainly wasn't effective at creating a more equal society. I gather that the ethicist thinks this is going to work better because the intent is now to avoid offending the women, as opposed to avoid creating an offense to which their male 'guardians' would be obligated to respond. It's nevertheless strange that 'the rule' in New York City, of all places, should so closely resemble the rules in Baghdad or Kuwait City.
A retired drug and alcohol counselor who lives in Boise, Idaho, she pleaded guilty in January 2022 to a misdemeanor offense for entering the Capitol during the riot and was sentenced to 60 days in prison and three years of probation.She said she did not want a pardon.“Absolutely not,” Ms. Hemphill said in an interview on Wednesday. “It’s an insult to the Capitol Police, to the rule of law and to the nation. If I accept a pardon, I’m continuing their propaganda, their gaslighting and all their falsehoods they’re putting out there about Jan. 6.”Ms. Hemphill, 71, who was called “MAGA Granny” in some news headlines, has said that she no longer supports Mr. Trump or believes his lie that the 2020 election was stolen. She said that a therapist had helped change her view of the attack by telling her she was “not a victim of Jan. 6; I was a volunteer.”
I was preaching last Sunday about forgiveness, and I felt that not to forgive was just to send one to the hell of our little universe. Not to be forgiven and taken in by any human heart is the worst mishap that can befall. May I be taught a lesson hard to learn. You do not need it so deeply as I do--you only break out in thunder and lightning! I have a cold smile deep in my heart like a moth-eaten hole, when I feel really wronged....
Perhaps some of you have clever thoughts, though?
