"Excuse me..."
We went out for dinner on the weekend—just the two of us. I'm not the world greatest cook so we tend to eat out fairly regularly.
Oh, yes siree, I've sure had my share of near apocalyptic disasters in the kitchen, mostly when we've invited guests over, but at least I can say they're not always my fault. I remember one evening when I'd stuck a roast in the oven and it started emitting an odd smelling smoke. I foolishly and certainly rather optimistically assumed it was just something that I'd burnt onto it the last time I'd cooked. Alas, a half hour before our guests arrived, I went to check the roast and the oven had checked out!
Over the years, however, with the love and support of my darling partner I have managed to overcome the embarrassment of culinary failures. Now when guests come to dinner I've got him cued to say things like: "Alex, this simply delicious! It's cook exactly the way I like it!" So, even if it's raw, charred, or just simply didn't turn out how it was suppose to, our guests always assume, "Well, obviously Alex prepared it the way John likes it—can't blame her for that."
Ah, but I digress...
So, we were out for dinner on the weekend—a nice little place with soft music and lighting. We were perusing the menu when a party of eight came in and sat down a couple of tables away from us. Within minutes of being seat they were talking so loudly we were forced to endure their entire and entirely vapid conversation, peppered with raucous laughter each time one of them made an, obviously in house, joke. I felt like leaning over and calling out to them, "Excuse me, but we didn't quite understand what you meant, would you mind explaining it to us all?"
It was as if they'd forgotten where they were and that there were other diners nearby, and so they could treat the restaurant as their very own private dinning room. Needless to say, it only got worse as the evening wore and they consumed an inordinant quality of alcohol.
Now, don't get me wrong here, I'm all for people having a good time when they dine out but why is that some are just so obviously oblivious to other diners, and so inconsiderate and incapable of comprehending that others may not be as entertained and amused by their loud and obnoxious behavior as they seem to be?
Monday, September 22, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
Evolution of the Female
It may seem odd that, in today's modern western world, the preferred sex for many expectant parents is still a boy. Maybe it's a kind of inherent attitude that males are physically stronger, and therefore seen as better investments for their families? Or, maybe it's because egotistical males feel that unless there's a male offspring to carry on his name, his genes will be some how lost for ever? Actually, that's kind of ironic really, considering a recent report done in Australia found that as many as one in five men may not be the biological fathers of the kids they're raising.
Ah, but I digress...
So, in our new technology driven world, where brains are more important than brawn and more women are opting to be single mothers, is this attitude changing?In years gone by women were almost always financially dependent on men. He was "the man of the house"; going out each day to work as the family's sole breadwinner. Women were merely the baby makers and housekeepers whose non- domestic talents were almost always stifled by society's narrow patriarchal attitudes and traditions. How could a woman possibly achieve academically or have a success career with a tribe of kids, a mountain of laundry and other household chores, while still keeping up her 'wifely duties' to her husband? Now days with all our modern appliances housework has become far less labour intensive, the women's liberation movement is in full swing, and of course the 'the pill' has allowed more women than ever before to enter a whole a new era of independence.Of course, from a business point of view, it's really just good sense to employ women, particularly in 'white collar' positions, since studies suggest that females, generally, aren't only just as capable of the same tasks but are better at team building and communicating. Interestingly, researchers also conclude that women actually tend to make better investment decisions than men do.
A survey, by investment site "Digital Look", found that women consistently earn higher returns for their investments. So, maybe it's just a process of sound economic evolution, that as the workforce becomes less labour intensive, more women should enter it? Yes, Sir (Ma'am?), right now women are surely, economically speaking, the modern world's most under utilised resource, but is that all about to change forever, as we move further into the twenty first century and beyond? In 1950 only one-third of western women of working age had a paid job. Today two-thirds have paid jobs, making up almost half of the western workforce. More females, than ever before are enrolling in Universities. In fact, in Britain more women than men are now studying to become doctors and engineers.
By the end of the last century women hit the proverbial glass ceiling. It would seem now as if they are poised to smashed right through it leaving many a man at the bottom to sweep up the pieces, as they realise their full feminine potential.
Could the world, right now, be on the verge of an estragon powered takeover? But, realistically, how much further can the pendulum of change swing?
We've come a long way from they days when man was required to clubbed and dragged the evening meal back to the cave and fend off anything threatening with a shout and a big stick. However, while man is not longer traditionally the 'provider and protector', will many women still continue to instinctively look for those qualities in a mate?
Can a few decades of social engineering really undo millions of years of human evolution?
Footnote: Yes, I realise in some countries matriarchal tribes have and probably still do exist.
It may seem odd that, in today's modern western world, the preferred sex for many expectant parents is still a boy. Maybe it's a kind of inherent attitude that males are physically stronger, and therefore seen as better investments for their families? Or, maybe it's because egotistical males feel that unless there's a male offspring to carry on his name, his genes will be some how lost for ever? Actually, that's kind of ironic really, considering a recent report done in Australia found that as many as one in five men may not be the biological fathers of the kids they're raising.
Ah, but I digress...
So, in our new technology driven world, where brains are more important than brawn and more women are opting to be single mothers, is this attitude changing?In years gone by women were almost always financially dependent on men. He was "the man of the house"; going out each day to work as the family's sole breadwinner. Women were merely the baby makers and housekeepers whose non- domestic talents were almost always stifled by society's narrow patriarchal attitudes and traditions. How could a woman possibly achieve academically or have a success career with a tribe of kids, a mountain of laundry and other household chores, while still keeping up her 'wifely duties' to her husband? Now days with all our modern appliances housework has become far less labour intensive, the women's liberation movement is in full swing, and of course the 'the pill' has allowed more women than ever before to enter a whole a new era of independence.Of course, from a business point of view, it's really just good sense to employ women, particularly in 'white collar' positions, since studies suggest that females, generally, aren't only just as capable of the same tasks but are better at team building and communicating. Interestingly, researchers also conclude that women actually tend to make better investment decisions than men do.
A survey, by investment site "Digital Look", found that women consistently earn higher returns for their investments. So, maybe it's just a process of sound economic evolution, that as the workforce becomes less labour intensive, more women should enter it? Yes, Sir (Ma'am?), right now women are surely, economically speaking, the modern world's most under utilised resource, but is that all about to change forever, as we move further into the twenty first century and beyond? In 1950 only one-third of western women of working age had a paid job. Today two-thirds have paid jobs, making up almost half of the western workforce. More females, than ever before are enrolling in Universities. In fact, in Britain more women than men are now studying to become doctors and engineers.
By the end of the last century women hit the proverbial glass ceiling. It would seem now as if they are poised to smashed right through it leaving many a man at the bottom to sweep up the pieces, as they realise their full feminine potential.
Could the world, right now, be on the verge of an estragon powered takeover? But, realistically, how much further can the pendulum of change swing?
We've come a long way from they days when man was required to clubbed and dragged the evening meal back to the cave and fend off anything threatening with a shout and a big stick. However, while man is not longer traditionally the 'provider and protector', will many women still continue to instinctively look for those qualities in a mate?
Can a few decades of social engineering really undo millions of years of human evolution?
Footnote: Yes, I realise in some countries matriarchal tribes have and probably still do exist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)