Skip to main content

diet diary, part 2

so the battle with the bulge continues. i'm actually becoming used to the pace, although for some reason my stomach still seems to think it needs far more food than it actually does.

week days, when eating is more of a functional than a festive activity, are fairly easy to cope with. weekends are a challenge, especially living in a city that has as many good restaurants as toronto. i'm not restricting myself to the home, but i am finding that i have to pay careul attention when i go out. last night, i overindulged on injera atthe ethiopian house. injera (the soft, moist, spongy bread that serves as food and cutlery in ethiopian cuisine) makes food fun by forcing you to eat with your fingers. it's hard to exercise restraint in such conditions.

when i first moved to toronto, i was expecting to find it much as i remembered it from years ago- with a dearth of good eating places. apparently, things have changed. there are great places to eat just about every kind of food you've ever imagined (and some you probably haven't) all over the city, with new ones opening all the time. i've already blogged about caju and the allure of brazilian cuisine. or if that's too run of the mill for you, you could try banu, the improbable-sounding retro iranian vodka bar that's just opened on queen street (try the lamb and one of thetir appetizer yogurts). there are tapas restaurants everywhere, since tapas are apparently the new sushi, but torito won me over with particularly scrumptious gambas al ajillo (shrimp with garlic and, in this case, a little smoky saffron for extra flavour).

i'm not into to making myself miserable to get a smaller waistline, so i have been letting myself out to enjoy the varied snacks that the city as to offer. i'm just trying to make sure that i don't eat myself into a coma.

there are a couple of things that have disappeared entirely from my diet. i have not had any type of deep fried food in weeks, although i've been tempted a couple of times. i also have pretty much eliminated any type of sweets and, to my eternal surprise, it's the one thing i don't particularly miss. for everything i've heard about the addictiveness of sugar, i've discovered that i have a much harder time turning down the opportunity to go for a new, intriguing type of cuisine than i do turning down an offer of free pastries. (i know this because i've had to cope with free pastry offers three times at the office in the last couple of weeks. including a massive box of doughnuts pressed under my nose when i was very hungry.)

the payback for my temperance? twice this week, i've put on skirts that used to pinch a little at the waist to discover they are magically more comfortable. i haven't dropped a lot, but it's enough that, for the first time, i can feel it.

the plan is working.

Comments

Alright, you realise that this puts you in charge of dining on the weekend... last time, the choice was... unfortunate. So your city, you pick :D
Oh, and congrats on the loss.

as long as you're here, why not read more?

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …