Guest Post - Pride is not for you

Today the blog welcomes Nick (who you may know from twitter) who wanted to share his (strong) feelings about a recent newspaper article about Pride, what it means and what it's for. And straight friends, I have news, it's not for us....

Here's what Nick has to say ...

It’s 2018, LGBTQ+ people have way more rights than ever before. At least in the UK and many parts of the so-called West, elsewhere our existence is still a legal question sometimes punishable by death. Here in the UK homophobic crime is still prevalent. Personally I probably get roared at in the street about once every six months. And I’m lucky, to the untrained eye I can sometimes pass for straight. Our camp brothers, butch sisters and trans comrades often don’t have that luxury, and for them it is far more difficult.

But we’re good right?

No we aren’t, and the need for Pride remains. Pride was born out of a bloody battle for equality, from vilification, chemical castration, ostracisation, the AIDS crisis, lost jobs, lost lives, and more.

Pride is now many things to many many people. From dikes on bikes, to fabulous drag queens, village groups to corporate giants, baby gays slowly making their way from Narnia to aged battle scared queens. This is incredible and I love it.

But Pride is NOT for Liam Payne to say how his son makes him proud and want to be a better person. Bully for you, you utter knob, he should do. That’s your job, you’re a Dad. In the Evening Standard piece that opens with his mug and the headline:

Liam Payne says having son Bear has ‘changed everything’ as he speaks out in support of London Pride: ‘He’s making me a better man’

You actually have to get to paragraph four before any LGBT person is mentioned.  Instead we get a roll call of the great and the good who are also ‘proud’. Get in the sea.

Pride in it’s origin was not about  our children making us want to be better people, doing well at uni, or anything else in the heteronormative world people are proud of. It was saying ‘We’re here, we’re queer and you can get used to it. We are proud of who we are despite the fact you kick the shit out of us.

So Liam, the Evening Standard et al can fuck right off.

Now I’m absolutely in love with my straight ally friends, and I know we would never have achieved equality without them. I also love them because if interviewed about Pride in London and asked what made them proud, they’d say that the people they love can live their best lives now. They’d reference pride. They wouldn’t make it about them. Because they bloody get it.

Anything else is stealing the air and experiences from a large group of people who are on the receiving end of more violent crime and hate than you will ever know. We are more observant of the world around us and vigilant because many of will still double check our surroundings before holding hands with a loved one. Yeah still, and it’s 2018.

Finally giving the headline to a straight-white-rich-able-bodied-man, perpetuates the idea that not being a racist/homophobic/misogynistic/disablist arsehole is something to be lauded. Are you fucking kidding me? Not being these things is human decency 101. It doesn’t deserve a medal. If you can’t manage all of this you have work to do to catch up.

So Liam et al, I appreciate what you’re doing, the campaign you’re supporting, but no one likes the dickhead that rocks up late to a party and then makes it all about them. If you do decide to make it all about you, expect to be shitting glitter and not in a good way. After all, as the overused meme says, anyone who says hell hath no fury like a scorned woman has never met a mildly inconvenienced homosexual, and at pride there’s thousands of us.

As usual I welcome comments. Or pop over to twitter and tell Nick what you thought.

He's not always this angry...

Sophie the Giraffe is not trying to kill your kids, your bad hygiene is.

I am fed up with hearing about Sophie the sodding giraffe.

Sophie the Giraffe is not trying to kill your kids, your bad hygiene is.

Toys that get damp inside, either from use in the bath or through sucking by a toddler are going to grow mould. And before you all jump on me, no of course I'm not the perfect housewife with a spotless house, but when a plughole in my house is stuffed up with congealed soap and pubic hairs I don't alert the media. Nor do I return the sink to Bathroom World and complain.

Now I'm sure this lady who discovered the horror that mould had grown inside her child's favourite chew toy didn't immediately grab the phone and ring the BBC, I'm sure she just intended it as a reminder to her online chums that they should clean the toys in their homes and keep an eye on what babies and toddlers chew on. (see how I haven't read every article so I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt over this)

Just like when I found DD, as a crawling baby, chewing on a well gnawed plastic dog's bone and reminded people that babies crawl and that dogs leave spit slimey toys laying about (thus winning the 'no shit Sherlock' award of the week). I guess that the media were just having a slow news day, probably all the wars had stopped or something.

Really, I am bored of reading about Sophie.

If you have toys that can get water (or baby dribble) inside them, you should wash them inside and out regularly. Use some water with sterilising fluid in, squeeze the toy under the water a few times to ensure water ingress, then give it a good shake, leave it for 10 minutes, empty and repeat. Empty and leave the toy to air dry. You should do this at least once a month, more often if you have the time.

Now excuse me, I have plugholes to clean.

Which Christmas tree is best, fake or real?

It's the time of year for tree wars. It's like the breastfeeding vs bottle wars but with more tinsel. (unless you are a really flamboyant breast feeder!)  So before everyone starts burning each others trees down in rage I thought I'd do a quick round up of real vs fake Christmas trees.

First The Real Tree:

• It smells of loveliness and the wild outdoors and Christmas
• You don't have to store it between Christmases (a big consideration if you like a largish tree and have little storage space, no loft, garage, shed etc)
• Trees are a renewable crop just like cabbages,(not exactly like cabbages, cabbages are difficult to decorate and trees are really hard to boil)  while they grow they do breathing and stuff that is good for the planet, and they are biodegradable.
• They are pricey though - this year the price of a tree (depending on where you live) varies from £4 a foot to an eye watering £20 a foot!
• They drop needles. Yep, even the non drop varieties, and even if you spray them with non droppy needle spray stuff. Those sharp little needles get everywhere, terrible if you have a crawling baby, merely annoying otherwise (unless you are having naked sex in the lounge under the tree then all bets are off).  Hoover daily, sometimes twice.
• Insects. You might bring them in with the tree or they might decide to live there later. Whatever, it's a party villa for creepy crawlies...but in your lounge.

And the Fake Tree:

• After the initial spend (which can be considerable but often comparable to a real tree, see above) they are reusable so will become cheaper per year with the passing of time. I have an 8 ft tree I bought in 2001 and it's still in use, it cost £50 ( so £50/15 years = £3.30 per year)
• You can get wild colours to match your decor. It's a bit 80s I admit, but you can get trees to match a chic white colour scheme, or a blue Elsa and Frozen themed one...or (probably) a pink Peppa pig themed tree. In the 80s Mr TM and I had a white tinsel tree with pink baubles ... we really are too classy :-/
• They don't drop needles (don't panic, I'm going to try not to just write two lists that contradict each other) They are less mess, you can skip the hoovering.
• You can put them up as early as you like because they will always look the same! They won't get browner or lose needles and look thinner as Christmas approaches, they are as bushy on January 6th as they were on December 1st
• You don't have to trek around to find the perfect tree, after the first year you are sorted, there is the perfect tree. In your loft! (so yeah, you need storage space)
• They need to be 'put together'. Most large trees are in pieces and need some erection, and fluffing (stop that!) to get them to their prime. (DD would like to point out this is great family bonding time...she does the fluffing)

Our 15 year old tree

So there we have it. Trees for Christmas can be real or fake, each have their merits and disadvantages and your personal situation and choice will come to bear on what you get. I honestly don't think there is a right or a wrong answer. We have a fake tree. What sort of tree do you have? I'd love to see it - tweet me a picture at Tattooed Mummy or share a photo on my Facebook page, or comment below. 

Ranting about Delivery Companies

Today I feel the need for a rant, grab popcorn and take a seat.

Why are delivery companies all so terrible?

Copyright: ragnarocks / 123RF Stock Photo

I'm not going to single one out because every one I have ever had contact with has at some point done something stupid.

• I've had a laptop left on the doorstep in plain view of the street (in a box clearly identified as a new laptop!). 
• I've had a box thrown over a wall, a box containing 12 glass bottles of traditional beers, a box that then lay, smashed and sad in the rain for a WEEK because no card was left and so no one know the parcel was there. 
• I've had parcels left under car wheels. 
• Boxes left in empty recycling bins, again with no note. 
• Numerous parcels undelivered or left with neighbours but no note left to tell me.
• I once rang to chase the delivery of a new mobile phone to be told it had been signed for the previous day and that then mysteriously was delivered one day later...no signature required.

And that brings me to today's rant. DD ordered some presents for her friends from a well known online retailer, but from a seller there, not the well known online retailer itself, 4 days after the latest delivery date she emailed to ask where the gifts were, to be told they had been delivered and signed for, two weeks earlier!

No one in the house had seen this parcel, we checked with neighbours, we searched around the house, (no point in checking the bins as they had been emptied twice since the delivery date!) nothing. I contacted the company. 'Nothing to do with us' they said 'it's been delivered, we have signed delivery proof'. I asked to see the signature. The signature is barely even a line, it's a stroke of a pen and bears no resemblance at all to any of the signatures of the occupants of the house, in fact even the dog would make a clearer signature. I told the seller this. They replied that the driver had also filled int he name of the signer (my surname) and 'he couldn't have known that unless the signatory told him' ... erm...surely the name is ON THE PARCEL! Of course the driver can know the name to fill in!
Maybe he was busy and planned to come back later, maybe he got home and realised he missed the parcel and meant to do it the next day and forgot, maybe he called at the wrong house and some weird stranger claimed our gift? I don't know, but the parcel is not here and someone somewhere is lying.

I spoke to the delivery company in this case and they were helpful but said that it is up to the seller to query deliveries, not me, and that if there is a problem the seller needs to claim from them. So I am stuck in the middle, DD has paid, we have received nothing, the seller claims it's delivered, the delivery company can't help.

What is the point of a signature if it's not a signature that matches yours? I think it's about time that the delivery world caught up - what about a digital PIN, a number generated by the delivery company and not known to the driver, but emailed to the recipient so that they can key it in on delivery?

Currently I'm still fuming, arguing with a seller on a well known online retailer website and threatening to open a claim with the well known online retailer to get our money back.

Update : Well know online retailer have a good claims procedure and have refunded DD. So Yay! for them.

Do tell me about your delivery nightmares. I know you must have some....

I'm so sure you have a tale to tell - I've switched blog comments back on!

Being a Wise Woman, or a Killer Whale

Earlier today - interested by the mysterious headline "What can killer whales teach us about the menopause?" I had a read of a BBC article. Sadly it was not a ground breaking moment of clarity about hormones and physical changes. It was a moment of anger and rage!

At first I merely tweeted -

"The menopause is a puzzle for biologists. Why would the female of a species cease to reproduce half way through her life, when natural selection favours characteristics that help an individual's genes survive?"

Maybe because women have other skills that help improve the gene pool and the survival of the young as well as actually making the babies? Maybe old women have a purpose too!

""From an evolutionary perspective, it's very difficult to explain," says Prof Darren Croft, who travels here from the UK's University of Exeter to study the whales." says a man ...maybe we women know things, maybe we can teach things!

Seriously sometimes scientists can be dim.

but the more I thought about it the angrier I became. Were scientists (or at least one scientist) really saying that they had always thought that once we couldn't make babies women were useless? Based on that, even in animal and evolutionary terms they were saying female animals are only about babies. I assume that all animals while needing to make babies are also about keeping those babies alive. Making a new whale, or a new human, is important to carry on your genes but if you just leave it (especially among mammals which tend to be born fairly small and weedy) then your genes will die out pretty fast along with your baby!

In nature and still, often, in humans the bulk of rearing the young falls to the mother, often because of breastfeeding (those awkward breasts - being fixed to us as they are) and just the way things are. So if you are rearing young, pregnant and then rearing more young, you are pretty busy. (I see you new mums nodding) One of the things you are busy at is learning. Learning how to raise babies for a start! Your manly male may be off teaching hunting to the rest of the pod but that doesn't mean your skills are useless, just different.

So without being a scientist, or a professor of anything, it seems pretty clear to me that female mammals need a bit of time when baby rearing is totally off the table, to focus on teaching. Leaving that until after they have had time to learn makes some sense too.

To me the menopause is the start of that movement into 'wise woman' status. And while modern humans can share baby raising, share feeding (how handy to have bottles that make detatching a baby from the mum so easy!) and can control their fertility and pregnancies, it wasn't that long ago (in evolutionary terms) that we couldn't.

Like killer whales we seem to live fairly complex lives; and having the ability to pass on information without the complication of babies seems pretty clever to me. After all males are burdened until death with sexual desire. Something older female mammals can move away from (and before you all shriek, yes I know older ladies like sex...shhhh) Males of many species often retain the testosterone instincts to fight and hunt too, leaving those pesky useless women at home.

The mysterious wise women of folklore, that 'scary' knowledgable witch, is a real person, with midwifery skills learned from years of doing it right (after all - if you got it wrong you would die) and skills in childhood illnesses and finding useful foodstuffs that babies could eat. These are skills to pass on to your own offspring, because your genes mustn't die! And you might not have time if you are busy still raising babies, to teach your daughter what she needs to know.

I can't help wondering if we would have come as far along the evolutionary path as we have if women had all died as soon as fertility finished. Longer life gives rise to greater learning, and a better ability to pass things form generation to generation.

So the article just seemed to confirm the obvious, that women, even old women, have a place of genetic evolutionary importance. And I didn't need to go to university, or study killer whales to know that...it seems I just needed to be old.


Read the full article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37025092

Need to tell me what you think? Pop over to my Facebook page

Whale Image Copyright: desertsolitaire / 123RF Stock Photo

Woman and child Image Copyright: digitalpress / 123RF Stock Photo

I want my country back

Never mind the country. I have reached breaking point. I am full. I see posters stating that 'I want my country back' and 'Vote leave' everywhere I go. I see 'proud to be British' posters and 'no room' signs. I am full up with them.

I would like my country back too. But the country I know was one that learned from it's brutal beginnings where we invaded and enslaved cultures, one that realised that having a commonwealth meant responsibility as well as power. A country that saw joining a club to stop wars was a wise move. A country that could see that other cultures add to a whole to enrich it not destroy it. A tiny island that knew that bluff and bluster and xenophobia won't help us, it will make up look silly and aggressive like a yapping lap dog.

Copyright: dnkstudio / 123RF Stock Photo

I want my friendly country back, the one that can laugh at itself when we meet a foreigner who speaks perfect English while we wallow in shouting and pointing. I want the country back, the one that welcomes the lost and the scared. A country that is happy to help and knows that in the long run it's better to be friends than enemies. A country of people bright enough to see that bigger is better, that joining the right people is the right thing.

But what of those long weeks of strikes, the misery, the racism, the 'no dogs, no Irish, no blacks' signs? The days before statutory annual holidays from work? The piles of rubbish in the streets? The army manning fire engines? The power cuts? The 'women don't need as much pay as men because they won't be the main breadwinner'? Do I want that country back too? And do I want to return to a time with no free travel around so many countries right on my doorstep?

Yes, that's me.

I think that all of us, all of the people who 'want our country back' are fooling ourselves. We can't grab those past sunshine filled days and expect to slip comfortably in them like familiar slippers. We are moving on, the world is moving on. Staying in Europe, being involved in important decisions that will affect the whole world is important. We need to look ahead not back.

On Thursday I will vote to Remain in the EU. I am scared that I am in a minority, surrounded by a sea of people who 'want things how they were' without even knowing what that means.

Check out some of the myths about the EU here. And think before you vote. But whichever way you vote - if you are eligible, please do get out and make your voice heard. Afraid as I am of leaving the EU I am also afraid of apathy and my path to the future being chosen by a small part of the country. EU referendum day is 23rd June 2016

Copyright: vepar5 / 123RF Stock Photo

Download a guide to voting - showing opposing views and both sides of the campaign, here http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/203410/EU-Referendum-voting-guide_England-and-Scotland.pdf

The Jaffa Cake Debate

It can't have escaped your notice that many authors in the Wordy Wednesday interviews choose the delicious orange Jaffa Cake as their favourite biscuit.

Since the day the Jaffa cake was invented (by good friends Mr Jaffa and Mr Cake) there has been debate as to whether they are biscuits or cakes. If only Mr Jaffa's cousin Reginald Biscuit had gone into partnership with him as first planned this would never have happened!*

There was even a court case about the small round and biscuit sized snack, which determnined that, for tax purposes they were tiny flat cakes, not biscuits. Decided by the simple fact that a cake becomes hard when stale while a biscuit becomes soft. Test it for yourself, leave a jaffa cake uneaten for a few days out on a dish in the kitchen (no I have never managed this test either - the tax office must be very strong willed).

But can we trust what the tax office says? After all, they said that Egyptian mummies were 'dried fish' for tax purposes, so there can be some debate as to their veracity.

So I asked the general public via the medium of Twitter, as we all know they are an intelligent lot. There was of course much squabbling as they are also an argumentative lot. But the final outcome was...

So please answer and RT this poll in readiness
Is a jaffa cake a biscuit? Also do you like them? #jaffacake

— Tattooed Mummy (@tattooed_mummy) June 8, 2016

and therefore there will be no more acceptance of Jaffa Cakes as the favourite biscuit of authors. Thank you.

@tattooed_mummy It's a biscuit dammit. You can dunk it in tea.

— Marion Grace Woolley (@AuthorMGW) June 8, 2016

No! No more!

@M_Hoosenhole @tattooed_mummy in all honesty I would be the one eating them while everyone else argued about it anyway

— Ice Queen (@opalfruits78) June 9, 2016

Ok there we are, we can eat them, we cannot call them biscuits.

Pop over and like my Facebook Page to join in a conversation about Jaffa Cakes, or some news story that catches my eye. Or Follow my meandering chatter on Twitter.

*This bit may be a blatant lie

Extra info about the law and why the debate matters : Under UK law no value added tax (VAT) is placed on biscuits or cakes. But critical to the controversial issue of Jaffa Cakes’ name, when a biscuit is covered in chocolate it becomes subject to the standard VAT rate, currently 20%.

Photo credit Copyright: shootdiem / 123RF Stock Photo

Don't Piss on my Parade

Ah bloggers. What are we like.

Well some of us are lovers and all nice and snuggly and supportive of each other, and some are snarky bitches (I'll let you decide which camp I fall into).

A recent semi-viral blog post suggests that all 'mummy bloggers' (and man oh man how I loathe that term) are 'fucking shit'. (and no I'm not linking to it) Don't hold back lady, tell it like it is. I mean obviously first you should use a paragraph or two to remind us that you made gazillions of dollars from your blog and had all the hits and were excellent and that, but then tear us all off a strip for being boring, parochial and tedious. No go ahead, we'll wait. Because you see, most of us don't care. We don't care what you think. You are one person, on the internet! and we all know what the internet is like, full of rude trolls hoping to get popular by being vile.

The honest truth is that blogs, bloggers and especially parent bloggers (we are not all mummies) vary. Some are good, some are boring (and even the great ones write the odd boring post) , some are hilarious. And loads of us write for ourselves. I've been writing this blog, with hardly any readers for over 10 years. When I first started it I had zero hits a week. Zero. But I didn't care because I'm fucking amazing (see we can all swear, ever though it's neither big nor clever) and my blog is about me, for me, by me. Guess what! It really is all about me! If someone wants to read about me or what I like or what I reviewed, good luck to them, I love to have them here, it's fab! (You still reading? yes you - I love you!) If someone wants to send me something to review even better. I don't make money from my blog, I have fun here.

Most parenting blogs are like that and that is great, it is what they are for! They share parenting worries, triumphs and funny stories, cute babies and tales of losing the cat in the dishwasher. We parents like to have a network of friends and when some parents are distanced from 'real life' friends by circumstance the club of parents online can really help. New parents can feel supported and relieved, older parents can feel that our knowledge isn't wasted, and we can laugh at some of our old mistakes being made again. Mummy and daddy blogs don't suck, they help.

I'm sorry that you, dear Ex-Mummy Blogger, are so bitter, twisted, and generally disillusioned with blogging that you felt the need to slag off everyone else rather than just quietly saying goodbye and walking away from blogging. It takes a special kind of mean to piss on someone else's fun because you are not having any. I assume you were the kid that took the ball home so no one else could play. That's sad. I hope you stop hating yourself, and stop hating everyone else too. Personally I shall continue to read mummy blogs (and daddy blogs) sometimes I will laugh, often I'll cry, or nod, or get advice; and sometimes I'll skim read (like I did most of your hideously unpleasant rant) but bloggers seem to me to be fairly awesome.

Copyright: coramueller / 123RF Stock Photo

Thank you if you read this ragey post and thank you if you are a blogger, keep doing what you do.

You can't comment here (Not even 'great post' :-)) as I switched off comments - so come chat On my Twitter or  Facebook page.

Thanks to Mummy in a Tutu who inspired this post - go and read her take on the whole kerfuffle. (she let's you comment - tell her it's a Great Post! she loves that :-)

Asda Cakes!

A quick blog post - DD and I just popped into Asda, she wanted to get a birthday card for a friend, and I needed cava (can you imagine, I ran out!) so after the initial horror of seeing empty cava shelves...

I was able to calm down enough to realise that there was other cava, 75p more than my usual but hey, I'm nothing if not posh, so I grabbed a bottle. The lady next to me in the wine aisle definitely sniggered as I exclaimed "No Cava! Don't they know who I am!!" anyway, we moved on to look for cards and found ourselves in the cake aisle.

Now DD and I stared in amazement, cakes have improved immensely since she was small! We nearly bought a cake for her even though it is months until her birthday. She caved in and bought a tiny cake for her friend, it is SO cute and only £3.50. I have bought Asda cakes before and they have always been nice, so while I won't get to try it I'm sure it will be good.

No one paid me to tell you all this by the way, I just felt you needed to know, the pug cake, the mini pug and even little pug cupcakes! So cute.

Never mind the gay joy of Unicorn and Rainbow cakes.

And...well I'll just leave this here, but suffice to say I misread it as a Vajazzle Cake.....

(sorry for the blurred phone photography)

SATs and why I (almost) like them

A blog post today as a follow on from something my daughter said on the morning of the SATs and the subsequent twitter chat on the subject.

SATs are compulsory national tests for primary school pupils. Children in England are required to take Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) at the age of 11 (school year 6). SATs were first introduced in 1991 for Key Stage 1 (KS1)
SATs are given at the end of year 2, year 6 and year 9. They are used to show your child's progress compared with other children born in the same month.

It won't have escaped your attention that some parents kept their children away from school for the day (risking fines) as a protest.

My daughter is 16 and currently revising for her GCSEs. She was surprised at the kerfuffle, and stated that while she didn't love tests or exams, starting them early, including 'big' tests' has helped to prepare her for the ones she now faces and she thinks that starting testing early is good as it starts to make tests common place and takes away the fear often associated with them.
She went on to say, that in her opinion, it is the adults making a fuss about the tests (and she included teachers, parents, and I suspect, the media, in this 'adult' group) that is the real problem, not the tests themselves, which she said she didn't really even notice when she had the first ones at age 6 and was OK with at age 11 as the teachers didn't make a big deal about it.

I've always held by the belief that tests are a useful gauge of how teaching is going, and can pick up on children that are falling behind, or leaping ahead of their peers, it can help to stream classes and that can be a good thing. But I also don't think that testing children more and more will improve teaching.

Improving teaching is based on lots of things, mainly the teachers themselves, and the curriculum they are given. I think a wider curriculum is better as it is more likely to capture childrens' imaginations. (currently I think teachers feel compelled to teach to do well at exams)

So, I was interested that a child that has recently done the tests was in favour of them, though many adults are telling me they have changed since she took them. And that opens up a whole new can of worms about changing the ways schools, teaching and exams happen; I firmly believe that constant change is a bad thing. Changing in education has become a thing that politicians seem to do now for the sake of it. We really need to look at why we are schooling children. To make good workers? To improve their minds? To help them think? And then look at the best way to achieve that goal and stick to it (sorry I have rambled off of the point)

My own view is that testing is needed. It should start early with the emphasis being that it is the teaching being tested and the children should not even be told it's happening to begin with. (am I the only parent that remembers the 'school inspectors' of the 70s visiting the school and sitting in the back of class making notes, and on the day before the visit the teachers begging us to behave?) But constant testing won't improve teaching or learning, so let's let teachers get on with that too.

If you fancy telling me what YOU think, pop over to Facebook where I have a page that would love your thoughts, or tweet me.
Thanks for reading.


"Mummy is a Gadget Geek" also wrote on this subject here

and you can try your luck at a mini SATs here (I scored 6/10)

Smooshed Creme Egg Bakes - Neither big nor clever

*trigger warning for huge amounts of creme egg cake recipes

On social media and in the world of blogging it seems you cannot blink this Easter without another picture of a cake covered in broken Cadbury Creme Eggs.

For anyone visiting from Uranus, a creme egg is a chocolate and fondant confection of teeth rotting sweetness. The centre wittily resembles that of a real egg.

In my youth I too liked a creme egg at Easter, and like many before and since, I poked my tongue into the moist middle with delight. But as I've grown up my sweet tooth has diminished and the diabetic inducing sweet no longer appeals. That would be fine, and I could ignore them and get on with my life that except that the world has gone berserk adding the eggs to anything and everything claiming that it makes something tastier and more Easter themed. I blame Pinterest.

Well, adding creme eggs doesn't improve things. It just adds extra sugar, and the horrible look of a house attacked by angry trick or treaters (ooh idea for Halloween cakes - no! stop, enough). A smashed creme egg looks like a smashed egg, that is not attractive. They taste only of sugar and American disappointment.

And if you don't believe how prevalent this horror is just look at a few of these examples! We have chocolate brownies and they are delicious, they do not need the addition of gloop, but despite that a recipe exists with just that.

Brownies made by The Minis and Me

And as for a creme egg 'blondie'...well, I really have no words, a blondie is something I already view with some suspicion, to add a creme egg into this dubious American mess can only end badly.

Blondies via MamaMummyMum

Cakes, whole cakes, already a treat, chocolate flavoured and covered in icing (frosting) I'm fairly sure crushed  creme eggs all over the top are an unneeded gilding of the cocoa lily!

Cake from Chilling with Lucas

Cheesecake, cheesecake!, is there no end to the abomination that is the creme egg takeover! A cheese cake needs no extra, it is cheese, soft and delicious, maybe with a tart fruit addition, but a smooshed creme egg? No no no. Just no.

Cheesecake from MotherGeek

And breakfast, the first meal of the day, where we need some protein and goodness, do we need creme eggs? No we do not, and yet it seems there are those among us that think a creme egg will improve a croissant. A croissant! That sophisticated and chic French pastry of delicate buttery loveliness, just no.

Croissant from Californian Mum in London

And last and most unnecessary of all, the Scotch Egg Brownie. I'm not sure I can fully express my horror and disgust, to hide the runny candy egg within and innocent brownie casing, to trap the unwary nibbler with a horrific gooey mine...

Scotch Egg Brownies form Nobody Said it Was Easy

I am ashamed of you all - I am especially ashamed of those blog readers that are, even now, writing down some of those recipes for later. You are sick! Sick I say! (or you will be later) Stick to proper recipes using chocolate mini eggs like normal people.

Recipes for Easter like mini white chocolate nests,  or regular chocolate nests, or even chocolate mini egg fudge, these are for normal, good and proper people.

Chocolate nests from The Messy Blog

Thank you to all the bloggers who agreed to be featured in this round up of loathing and disgust. All photos used with permission from the original posts.

Come and chat over on Twitter or my Facebook page I'd love to hear from you

Ranting and Pissed off about poor PR and lack of Coffee

Copyright: czany / 123RF Stock Photo

It’s been a while since I’ve had a good old pointless rant on the blog, but last night tipped me over the edge into being a pissed off tattooed mummy so today you have this little gem to read.

A while ago I received an invite to a sampling evening at Costa Coffee, lots of people, maybe all card holders, were invited too and I initially ignored it as it would be a rush to make it after work, but then after a reminder invite I thought ‘what the hell, might as well, a few nice snacks, some tasty coffee, might cheer up a drab Wednesday night’ so I duly sent my RSVP

Fast forward to yesterday, the Wednesday in question. Due to some bad planning I ended up working at a different site to normal, and to make matters worse had a meeting at a third location! I decided to walk to the meeting to save parking costs and as the parking is hard to come by any way, so I walked half an hour down a steep hill to my meeting. After work I realised I now had to walk up a steep hill for 30 minutes in the dark, carrying a laptop and other bags and to top it all it was now pouring with rain.

I arrived back at the car looking like a drowned rat, fed up, aching (that much walking when you have motor and sensory neuropathy is just stupid! Idiot) and now half an hour later than planned, and an hour’s drive from home and the Costa event. I thought about not going, but maybe it would be I needed, after such a miserable walk, and I’d dry out on the drive.

I arrived at the Costa Coffee shop at about 7.10pm, I saw no sign of anything Christmassy, staff were mooching about, hardly any customers…I panicked, was it the wrong Wednesday? I checked my invite and the Costa twitter feed, nope it was tonight. As I walked to the counter I was overtaken by another woman..she was deep in conversation by the time I arrived and what it boiled down to was that the staff had no clue whatsoever about the promotion! They said the manager was away on a course and no one had told them anything, they made excuses but didn’t apologise. The lady asked if there were any samples at all “no, not really” they replied. She looked annoyed, unsurprisingly as she seemed to have brought a friend (we were promised extra club card points for bringing a friend) I stood listening, incredulous, and then, almost in tears, I left. Seriously pissed off.

But my fun evening didn’t end there, I realised my petrol light had come on in the car so went to the garage to fill up, a car on the forecourt had broken down and was being pushed into a parking place by the owners, the garage attendant was telling them they couldn’t leave the car there and they were arguing. As I was paying for my fuel they were still messing about, when the garage lady ran into the kiosk shouting ‘call security!! They are threatening to jump start the car, right over the main tanks, they won’t be told!!’ Wowser, maybe my night could get worse, maybe I’d be blown up!

As you will see, I wasn’t. I paid and scarpered, arriving home over an hour late, pissed off, wet, hungry, achy, tired and cold. Only cheap wine and twitter (and a cheeky young man threatening to send *ahem* personal DMs to me) cheered me up.

This morning my hips are so painful I can hardly walk.
So, moan over…how was your day?

It’s not the winning it’s the taking part

It’s not the winning it’s the taking part. I hate that phrase. We’ve all heard it, might even have said it, but deep down do we believe it?

Taking part is part of the thing of course, but in any competitive event surely it is the winning we want? After all why compete if you don’t want to win? I don’t mean that you shouldn’t do things that you know you won’t win, but when you do something, you know that you want to, you want to win.  Saying 'It’s not the winning it’s the taking part' implies that the winning is not just not the most important bit, but that it’s hardly important at all – and while there are a few exceptions where runners lose a race helping an injured runner over a finish line etc – winning is important. Winning is the best bit.

Winning and competing are important. As is learning to be magnanimous in glory and stoic in defeat, and we can’t learn to be a good winner or a good loser if we don’t do it and we if don’t play to win.

I was terrible at sport as a child, I came last in every event I was ever forced to enter – winning seemed like a shining light at the end of a long dark tunnel of pain. I hated sport, I hated it because it wasn't the taking part it was the winning, and I never won. "It's not the winning it's the taking part" is a sop given to a loser. It's not true, and if anything it makes a loss sting harder, I would rather have been told "Oh well, better luck next time, you never know, keep trying"

Later when I grew up and was diagnosed with Charcot-Marie-Tooth I felt better about my lack of physical skills, after all, I often won at chess or cards, I was great at quizzes too. And that’s what hits home to me, that instead of telling people that it’s the taking part we should try and find things they are good at, fail at a few things but strive to find your winning event. Maybe there is something that you really love but you never win at? Well that's great, keep trying, enjoy trying, but don’t fool yourself with that ‘taking part’ talk, you know it, I know it – you want the feeling of winning.

Sometimes that win is beating your own personal time of course, not all events involve competing against another person, plenty of marathons are run by people who won’t come first but hope to conquer personal bests, or illness, or fear, that’s still winning.

If you get to the Olympics/Paralympics it's a big deal, but don't tell me those athletes don't want to win! Winning is the best feeling.

And if it's not the winning but the taking part that is important why is there an idea that you should always let children win at games played against adults? Lots of parents seem to do this. I’m obviously an horrific and cruel parent as I have never purposely let DD win at things. I might give her a headstart, more cards, etc because she is younger or smaller, but let her win? No way! If we played Top Trumps, I played to win, draughts? I’ll take a queen please and then all your pieces. Skittles? Give me that ball and let’s see who’s the best, you get the picture.

And yes sometimes DD cried and railed and complained “it’s not FAIR” and I would say “shall we play again but I’ll let you win?” and she would look daggers and say “No! that’s not fair either” And so she grew older, bigger, cleverer and eventually she started to beat me. Of course games of chance like snakes and ladders had always given her the odd taste of victory, but now she was winning based on her memory and cunning (Top Trumps) or her balance and steady hand skills (Jenga) or her speed (first one to the ice cream van gets free ice cream) And she flipping loved it. She loved to win because it was real.

She still loves to win now, and to be good at things. Yesterday she innocently asked me to help with a tricky question in her maths homework…it may as well have been written in Klingon when I looked at it! She sniggered, she already knew the answer. “It’s not FAIR!” I wailed.

Eat Well for Less

I watched ‘Eat well for less’ last night. Leaving aside the grammar issue, and the fact that I don’t usually watch ‘reality TV’ because the directors always portray the people as thick as planks and thus hateful or snobby know-alls and thus hateful, here are my thoughts.

Pizzettas, ham and peach, made by DD from scratch (including base)

The Scott family was (of course) shown as lazy and stupid in turns, the mother shopping and buying not only almost every meal ‘ready made and oven-cookable’ but worse, she bought food ready sliced, diced and grated. When shown a cheese grater she either had never used one or pretended she hadn’t. (useful advice, buy a modern cheese grater like this one, and cut the cheese into manageable chunks before grating)  She saw slicing a potato as a challenge worth celebration and placing a slice of (pre cut) fruit loaf into a toaster as ‘preparation’.

But I think much of that was rubbish. She microwaved ready made pancakes (!) but didn’t moan that that was preparation for example. I think her ‘lazy stupidity’ was enhanced for the camera and mightily played up by the director. If you haven’t watched it you can probably catch it here.

I don’t believe the mum in this episode was really lazy either. Her children and her house were spotless and the children well behaved and polite, that doesn’t happen by chance, and both parents worked too. I think she didn’t know how to cook, and laughed it off as she was embarrassed.They were a really nice family, and despite the initial desire to slap Kate I did warm to her, her husband and their three children.

I was more interested in what Gregg Wallace didn’t say or show the family. The meals they were shown how to cook were all variations on what they were eating already so not especially healthy, mainly just cheaper and nicer. That makes sense though as you need to change eating habits gradually, there is no point in saying ‘bin the chips, eat quinoa’ that just won’t work. But I do wish he’d talked more about nutritional balance, vegetables, starches, fats etc and which foods contained which things.

There was also much talk of saving money on the food bill, but no discussion as to the fuel bill. Would 45 minutes for cheap potato chips in the oven impact more than the original plan of oven chips that take 15 minutes for example? The same for the pizzas shown later. I don’t know the answer, maybe it would make little impact but I would have liked it to have been considered.

Biscuits made at home

Gregg did briefly mention using a butcher but only to buy the ham, there was no discussion of independent butchers – ours is often cheaper than the supermarket, the meat comes with little packaging and best of all – no sell by dates! – something the mum on the show was shown as being terrified of. (see my take on that here) Not only can local butchers be cheaper, but even if the meat is slightly more expensive it can be better value, the chops we buy there shrink much less in cooking than the ones we buy at the supermarket and taste better too.

Oddly there seemed to be no discussion of buying fruit or veg at a greengrocer’s (very odd as Chris Bavin is a greengrocer). We use a local one when we can, all the food is, again, packaging free, and has no use by dates, it’s a lesson in what fruit and veg should look like. Also fruit and veg bought in season can still be cheaper than trying to stick to the same fruit and vegetables all year round, a local farm shop can be cheaper for the vegetables that are in season if you are lucky enough to have a farm nearby.

Some ideas for recipes in using things that are about to go out of date would have been good too – the old stand-by of banana cake for example for those suddenly black bananas, the idea that you can cook and freeze a meal or blanche and freeze vegetables.

The oven where the magic happens

Gregg briefly mentioned freezing sandwiches, though didn’t discuss the best fillings for freezing, and the suggestion seemed to just be laughed off) for reference, ham, cheese and tuna mayonnaise all freeze well (Though DD says to remind you that on a cold day they may not thaw by lunchtime if taken out of the freezer at breakfast time – I think I’ve lost mummy points!) Adding salad to a sandwich though makes it a soggy mess, so leave the lettuce, tomato and cucumber to add separately to the lunch box!

One thing the mum, Kate, said at the end was that she planned cooking on Sunday and freezing meals for the week. Good on her! And I admired their proposal for meal planning. I think she could also save money, have fun and improve her kitchen skills by baking biscuits with the children, perfect for lunch boxes and a great winter afternoon pastime.

I won’t be watching the programme again, I don’t feel I learned any thing, the presenters took a long time to really say nothing much as the advice on butter vs margarine wasn’t even particularly current. (new research which looked at 50 studies involving more than one million people found there was no evidence that saturated fat was bad for health. ) But for anyone that is out there thinking the a Findus Crispy Pancake is the height of sophistication and that a poached egg on toast is a ‘meal that need a lot of cooking’ then I think this show could help them to branch out a little.

My favourite cook book

I would suggest that ‘looking for cheaper versions of what you normally buy and trying them’ is a good idea, maybe one item a week from a supermarkets cheap basic range? After all, it might be OK and if not you can go back to your usual. We like basic pasta and rice for example but I prefer branded bagels and cream cheese. ‘Blind’ taste tests can be fun too, as the programme showed when they tasted the unmarked coffee…

And the simplest option of all? Buy a simple cookery book.

Did you watch the show? What did you think? And will it make you change your eating or shopping habits?

Words, language and change.

Words, language, change. I’m a lover of the first two and I understand that the third happens, though along with many people I’m not keen on it, and I’m especially averse to change for the sake of change alone.

In George Orwell’s 1984 he took a lot of care explaining how newspeak, a state controlled way of using language, could be used to control the minds of the populace, but even so, I feel that the populace is not always best placed to make their own language changes. Lately I’ve found myself asking “Can I get a cup of…” when I should blatantly be saying “May I have a cup of …” and even the awful extra use of the word ‘get’ to mean ‘understand’ as in “I don’t get what you are saying”.
And here I will point out you do indeed ‘get’ what I’m saying, because unless you are deaf the sound waves of my speech have reached your ears, it’s translating those sounds into meaning that you are struggling with.

The silly thing is that some words seem to move happily onto a new meaning without rousing my ire. I’m cool with wicked meaning good (and with cool meaning ….well, cool) I don’t mind brilliant no longer referring to light, or that fantastic no longer refers to fantasy. Even celebrity slips by, though I have never celebrated any of them.

But some things make me silently cry inside. I cannot stand silently by and listen to the use of ‘literally’ used to just add emphasis, where people are speaking metaphorically. As in “I literally died!” “I literally peed myself”

I don’t like the new trend of using perfectly fine nouns as verbs. When did athletes stop winning medals and begin ‘medalling’. This morning on Radio 4 a man referred to someone (presumably having been killed by an armed drone) as having been “droned by the Americans”. Did this all start with Google and Instagram and Facebook? Is the internet to blame (do ‘inbox me’ to let me know).

Top of my current loathe list, however, are the phrases “me time” which in reality means, some time to do what I want to do, and sounds both pretentious and selfish simultaneously in my opinion. And the frankly horrendous “hack” specifically (but not restricted to) “Life Hack”. Hack, even in computer speak means to break something, to chop and damage. What on earth is a Life Hack anyway? Usually the word hack is replacing the perfectly serviceable word “idea”. So here’s a hack for you. Speak English, and people that also speak English will then be able to understand you without resorting to looking up your words and phrases on an online urban dictionary.

Much love
Grumpy TM

PS do add any of your own pet hates in the comments below.

Compassion Fatigue - I'm guilty

BBC News - The direct mail that tugs the heartstrings http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33549655

This rant was brought about by a reminder via the BBC News site of the way charities target people.

I realise that charities need to be given money and time and often old clothes to work, and I know about the argument that the money spent on advertising and promotion is regained in donations but one thing that is annoying is that it's not fairly spread.
For example. I see an online request or a TV advert for a specific event (in the last year this has happened to me at least twice) I respond with a donation - usually using a website, my name and address and details are given. Over the next year I receive numerous 'news letters', 'updates', requests for more money, asks for direct debits, pens, coasters, in short I receive in 'junk' mail well over the value of the original donation I made. So while over all, the advertising is paid for by donations, I feel that mine is wasted and hasn't gone to the thing I intended at all.
And usually, unlike with an email, I don't have an easy opt out on the paper mail. There is no 'send the enclosed card back to stop future mail'. Last year after about the 7th mailshot I finally tracked down, via an online search, an email address and asked to be removed from the mailing list. So far I have had no more mail from that charity.

Christmas is also a high pressure time for charities with certain charities insisting on sending 'gifts' of pens, stickers, wrapping paper, cards etc and then asking for a donation. The idea here is presumably to make you feel so guilty at having received a gift that you donate more. It's horrible to add such pressure in a donation request in my opinion.

The people in the cases the BBC highlights feel pressured to give and I feel that too sometimes, though the final effect too much 'bumpf' through the post actually has, is to harden me to charity requests.
Because I do support several charities (on a regular basis) I now find it easier to disregard letters that fall on the mat begging me to stop child abuse, help battered woman and feed the starving elderly. I send these letters straight into the recycling. I am not proud or happy about this hard hearted attitude, I would like to be soft and kind and care lots but as the BBC has reported, it doesn't stop, it increases. Donate £5 and next you will be asked to donate £20 and then set up a direct debit and then a new, equally worthy cause will fall onto your mat.

I don't know the answer. For me it is picking a charity or two and setting up a regular donation. I do respond sometimes to world disasters but luckily my main charity is also a member of DEC so I don't get extra requests subsequently. Otherwise, for local charities I donate in cash only, so they don't have my details or know who I am. Perhaps charities could look at online and phone donations and ask at the time "Is this a one off donation or should we contact you in the future?" and make that a large and clear question, not a vague check box buried amongst the terms and conditions in a way large corporations would be proud of.  Don't even get me started on the 'chuggers'; the charity muggers that accost you on the street and try and guilt you into donating, showing you pictures of starving cats and beaten dogs.

Have I got 'compassion fatigue'? Is it possible that the constant attempts by so many charities to wear me down, to get me to part with money, has actually had the opposite effect? Maybe.

How do you cope? Do you give regularly? Not at all? Cash only? Or are you a sucker for a good cause and give as often as you can?

For information you might like Give as You Live - an online scheme (which costs you nothing) where you sign up and many online purchases cause charity donations to be given on your behalf, Amazon is part of their scheme for example.

The charities I support regularly are CMT UK (as I have Charcot-Marie-Tooth it's rather self serving of me) and World Vision - where I sponsor a child in Uganda.

Animal attacks, safari parks and safety.

I once wrote a post about animal attacks on humans and I think it may be time to do another. This time though I'm going to specialise on safety. I think we must have all seen the tragic news that a woman was killed in a South African lion safari park, after being mauled by a lion. Reports vary (as news in the media tends to) about how badly her companion was hurt, although he seems to have survived; but all the reports agree that they had the car window open. There were numerous witnesses to this horrible event and after seeing a video of a similar safari trip on Youtube I imagine the scenario to be similar.

(I can't help but notice that there appear to be children leaning out of the window, presumably the parents think that's just fine)

I have visited safari parks in the UK, most specifically Longleat and have taken DD there several times. One of the things they tell you is to keep all car windows closed. The first time I read that, and then subsequently seeing it on numerous signs in the lion (and tiger) enclosures I remember thinking 'really? you have to tell me to keep my windows shut?' and I genuinely couldn't imagine anyone not shutting a car window near a huge carnivorous feline. But youtube and several news stories have made me realise some people need telling. Luckily Longleat also remind you not to get out of the car, or maybe people would picnic in the enclosure.

Another warning about the lion and tiger enclosures was to lock all the doors as you drove through. Lock the doors? I assumed that they worried about small kids in the back opening the doors as we stopped to look at the cubs or something, but I always locked the doors anyway - after all it's not a big task, you push a button, and job done. It seems that I was wise in this respect too. Judging by more youtube footage.

So here's today's wild animal news. Large meat eating animals eat meat. We are made of meat. Keep your windows closed, windows are made of glass, you can see through them, that's their job. If a lion smells you all tasty and nervous inside a car it may investigate...you cannot roll up a window faster than a lion can get to your car and be in through it (lions can leap distances of 15 ft did you know that?) And even if a lion only gets a paw in through a gap in the window it can then easily shatter the window.

Enjoy your safari trips. Stay safe.

Top 10 things women find attractive in men

1. Beards – woman love manly bearded men, so masculine, proper man of the wild, able to protect and support a family, all that displayed in a face. Lovely. Also added benefit of tickles.
2. Smooth shaven men – women love a man with a shaved, smooth face. Demonstrating a commitment to regular grooming, clean and smart. A man that can think and make decisions, while in touch with his emotions. Added benefits, no stubble rash when kissing.
3. Muscular men – a man that has power, rippling muscles beneath the skin, at ease with himself because he can feel his own strength. A man to hold you in manly arms…Added benefit of winning cuddly toys at the test your strength machines at the fair.
4. Thin men – ah the joy of the geek, he is pale and looks like maybe he doesn’t get out much but he has a glint in his eye, a bright intelligence, a quick wit, honed form years reading or studying, or just being alone thinking. Added benefit of being able to talk about things, may cry at sad films..actually lots of men do that – don’t say I told you
5. Chubby men – something to snuggle into. A warm and cuddly bulk of a man, someone not afraid to order a starter and a dessert so you can do the same! No one likes to feel bad about what they eat. Give this man some cake. Added benefit of cake.
6. Tall men – someone to make you feel all feminine and girly, a man to tower over you, to reach high shelves, to lift you onto his shoulders at festivals. A useful man, see him tall in a crowd, looking over the heads of everyone, reporting back to tell you what’s going on. Added benefit of saving on step ladders.
7. Short men – no one likes neck ache, how fine to have a man your own height, or maybe even slightly shorter, rock those heels and make him feel like a millionaire with a hot babe on his arm. Mother him, or pretend he’s an Italian gangster (unless he is an Italian gangster, then just revel in being his ‘moll’) Added benefit of eye contact and romantic gazes.
8. Hairy men – manly to a fault, gorilla like chest hair, prefect to snuzzle on a cold evening, or to run your fingers through on a sunny day at the beach. Added benefit of warmth.
9. Smooth bodied men – naturally smooth or shaven, showing off the shape on the body beneath, no hair to get stuck in your teeth. A nice smooth skin under a white shirt, perfect to tan or to keep pale. Added benefit of lickability.
10. Being a man – women that find men attractive often find men attractive, due to them being men. Sometimes you can’t say what it is that made you look twice, or made you realise he was the one, sometimes you can’t say if it was his eye colour, his funny taste in shirts or his loud laugh. Maybe it was the way he held a tea cup or the way he flexed a bicep. Sometimes a man is just attractive and women don’t know why.

I think by now you ‘ve got the point…men (and people in general) are all different and amazingly we all like different things too, one person loves a joker, always laughing, pulling pranks; another likes a serious type, someone to be thoughtful in difficult circumstances. Where one person loves a redhead, another prefers the distinguished look of grey hair.

Shush Mr Tumble, that's a whole other post!

When I see lists on the internet of ‘Top 10 things men hate in a woman’ or ‘Top 10 things men love in a woman’ (and I’ve seen a few lately, hence this post) I want to scream!! I have rarely seen a ‘What women love in a man’ type post or even a ‘What men find attractive in men’ post but I’m sure they are out there. I’m putting this post up to remind us all that different is good and with all the amazing people in the world I’m pretty sure that if you want to find one who is perfect for you, you will.

And yes this is horribly hetero centric, because I’m straight , but it applies to all people really, I’m fairly sure straight, gay, undecided, bi, whatever, people like all sorts of other people…go forth, be single, or find a friend (or friends) have fun. Be most excellent to each other.