One down, one to go

[johnnylexicon]

I've been performing this new poem lately called, "Fuck You, Mitt Romney and Rachael Ray At the Same Time." Performed it last night, actually. And now, apparently, I have to entirely change the title.

Now, if only Rachael Ray would get booted from the Food Network, I could happily retire that piece.

Yes, ratpackslim, I'm aware of your little perversion.

Comments

I must be feeling feisty today lol

[smyley]

2 things:

1) Cooking food over long periods of time is a privilege. Providing a shortcut out of cooking (i.e. 30 minutes meals) can be looked at as a tool for the working class to spend less time cooking and more time with their families. Just a thought.

2) Many sects of feminism see reclaiming traditionally feminine acts (such as cooking, sewing, the color pink) and redefining them as potentially empowering. Thus, the idea of rather than being forced into cooking, I cook because I love cooking. Thereby, the genderizing of an act is removed and all that remains is the passion for pleasure.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[johnnylexicon]

1. Spending time cooking means spending time with your family. Make your kids help out in the kitchen. And don't talk to me about privilege. I work a part-time job for barely above minimum wage and have zero dollars, and I will still braise the crap out of some pork shoulder for three hours when I get home.

2. I agree. It should be for pleasure. Now, in our world of processed food, the "empowerment" comes from the knowledge of cooking, as well as the ability to walk away from the stove. Both partners should have such empowerment, because it ain't for pleasure if one person has to do it. Ergo, everyone knowing how to cook means greater equality. Rachael Ray teaching (primarily) women "shortcuts" does not help this.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[smyley]

1. Theoretically this is true, but you're using your own experience and applying it to everyone. My mother didn't get off of work until 8 PM when I was growing up after getting to work at 8 am. Braising pork for 3 hours is far less attractive after working for 12 hours than having me help her cook a quick 30 minute dinner and then spending an hour playing a game or sitting down and talking about our day. Not saying that you're wrong in this, but just that you're not right either. Things like these do offer some benefits as well.

2. I agree. I love cooking, it is something I take pride in being able to do well. However, I've watched RR before and don't remember it saying "30-minute meals for women only." Is this implication a result of her being a womyn? Perhaps simplifying cooking can be seen as a fantastic way to get men off their asses and into the kitchen as it is a beginner's course to cooking as opposed to jumping right into being a gourmet chef.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[ratpackslim]

i wish i would have read your #2 response before i commented, but, uh...yeah! you tell him!

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[johnnylexicon]

1. Okay, I understood this from the jump. And mind you, you're talking to someone who grew up in a single-parent household for a large part of his childhood. Obviously, Rachael Ray is the symptom of a much larger culture shift in which families are smaller and work hours are longer, which is a whole different topic. So what I'm talking about -- and I guess I should have clarified this -- is cooking in households with two adults where they even see each other. But I do think that a large part of the audience has the capability to cook slow food and chooses not to, lured by convenience. On another note, I also think there are better, more qualified tv cooks out there who are promoting similarly quick recipes, but the machinery behind Rachael Ray is pushing a "safer" cuisine that does little to promote good taste. Since her visage is used to promote Kraft, Nabisco, and Dunkin' Donuts should be an indicator that she's dumbing down food at a time when more Americans, for health and environmental reasons, should be paying attention to what

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[mskittieface]

Television's target demographic nearly across the board is women. This is not just true of the Food Network. And I think it's indicative of larger problems in our culture that that is the case.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[seanachiehearth]

"The 90s are dead. There is no "y" in "woman.""

I love you for this.

Sarah

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[smyley]

Never responded to the other parts of your post because of your #3. Still not going to respond in full...well yet, at least. Just know that I am offended and don't understand why you resorted to the level of mocking another's beliefs. Don't get defensive and tell me why I'm wrong and what you said is ok. I'm not and it isn't. My use of language choices go beyond a whim or something I read in a book and is something I feel strongly about. Rather than mocking another, why not take a second to ask why I do it. Or at least be clever about it.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[smyley]

I'm not as angsty as that response sounded. Sorry, I was fighting with my girlfriend and kind of took it out on you lol. Not that I don't agree with my sentiment, just in a less hurt way.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[upendedurn]

1. You're right in the context of your mom and the hours she had to work, but if you look up the average number of hours the average American watches TV every day, I think Xn's argument, as a whole, stands.

2. Ditto Xn here as well. Among her many books, Ray has one entitled "Guy Food" - and it's clear, if you take a look at it, that this is supposed to be stuff a lady can make for her man and his buddies as they're watching the game. It doesn't mean it has to be used that way, but I think most men who need to cook quick and easy meals avoid Ray and go for Bittman or something. As a former bookseller, I'll also say that you can clearly see it in Ray's fan base. They market her to young women, and those are the folks who buy her books.

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[smyley]

1) I don't think the argument stands, In fact, think it is a separate argument that parallels my point. In addition to 30-minute meals, there should be a separate show/book/plan/etc. giving ideas on what to do with your family besides watching TV. Is cooking long meals an option? Yes, it is a fantastic one. But for those families that don't have time to do so, the short meals can be a fantastic help in conjunction with something else.

2. This is an argument against marketing and our capitalist society though, not an attack on Rachel Ray. Just to clarify, I'm not defending Rachel Ray, I'm defending the idea of Rachel Ray. Marketing firms are disgusting in the way they appeal to stereotypes as money-making schemes. Why do more womyn buy the books? Because we live in a society that socializes womyn to cook. Why are her books marketed to womyn? Because a marketing firm's main purpose is to make money, and going against the status quo is not the best way to put money in your pocket. So why do men avoid buying books from Rachel Ray?

Re: I must be feeling feisty today lol

[johnnylexicon]

Okay, listen: let me clarify my argument.

I am not saying that hard-working mommies have to slave over a hot stove all day. I can make all manners of delicious meals in 30 minutes. But I don't think Rachael Ray is the best person to teach people cooking, as her food looks both trashy and gimmicky, and I despise her ubiquity.

And no, I'm not saying you should let your tiny children play with flaming knives, either.