Pics of me fud

Either this post is a tribute to Andrew Brown's foodblogging or perhaps it's just because I've not got anything better to write about ... anyway, I thought I'd start documenting my culinary triumphs.

This first one is a classic salad nicoise:

And the second is grilled salmon with new potatoes and broccoli, topped with home-grown nasturtium leaves and flowers (as an experiment - proved v tasty!):

Read the small print carefully

For those who don't already know, us south-east London residents are currently very concerned about the London Olympics Games organising committee's plans for Greenwich Park.

After Friends of Greenwich Park managed to stir up a bit of media coverage over this, the organisers (LOCOG) have written to them purportedly offering reassurances.
According to the Standard (yes, I know, not words that are apt to reassure), LOCOG 'said it would not damage or remove trees of ecological importance'.
I think you'll find the key words in that sentence are ... 'ecological importance'. Does anyone want to be the first to draft a water-tight definition which will prevent these bulldozer-friendly fuckwits from spoiling one of south-east London's treasures?

Books you'd love to throw across the room

Inspired by this Times article, I was wondering which books my handful of readers really couldn't bear to finish, the books that you'd love to throw across the room in fury. Book you love to hate.

I used to say Dickens but that's changed now. Paulo Coelho is a sure-fire candidate for the recycling bin, I can't stand his hippy-dippy drivelling. In fact I reckon I could definitely write something better myself (and that's not saying much). I was underwhelmed by DH Lawrence but I don't think I'd go so far as to throw him across the room. I tried to read a Patricia Cornwell novel a few years ago on holiday in Greece (I found it on the shelf in the villa, I didn't pay good money for it, I promise!) and managed three pages before giving up.

Anyone else got any 'worst evers' to report?

OMG check this building out - so cool!

Oh and Wimbledon? What she said.

When even the Daily Mail has spotted coppers attempting to subvert political protests, you know things have got a bit ridiculous ...

(Via Bloggerheads.)


PS. Yes I know the blog links have disappeared, I need to re-do them!

Ms who?

An aside from the Shami Chakrabarti row is the frequent use of her first name in discussion of the situation. In similar situations men are usually given their surname ('the Burnham-Davis-Shami Chakrabarti row' followed swiftly by 'the male reaction in the main has been to dismiss it and accuse Shami of over-reacting').

This is something I've become sensitised to recently and have therefore tried harder than usual to purge the instinct - for example, my use of 'Clinton' where it could have been interpreted as referring to Bill, not Hill.

Yes, but what does it matter?

It's infantilising. I've been in meetings where I'm the only one referred to by my first name, and my gender isn't a coincidence in these situations.

Women deserve to be treated as professionals in their public lives and their monikers are a casual but telling indication in this area. If you respect a woman as a professional, a colleague, someone whose gender is irrelevant to you, then don't talk of 'Burnham' and 'Davis' and then call her 'Sharmi'. It's 'Chakrabarti' to you, and don't forget it please.