Assuming there is enough wine there to make it worth my while, of course.
There are always a few wineries at the Ak show. Selaks had a biggish stand, we bought from West Brook and I think there maybe another 6-10 other wineries (including the one that told me "no I hadn’t tasted their wines"). But for me the problem was they were scattered all over the show, so oddly I never really felt like getting into a serious wine tasting rhythm – also, it was early.
Plus one for the Green Meadows beef. We hit it very early and by the time we went back to actually buy meat just before leaving they had sold out of half their stocks. It really is a credit that something as simple as minced beef tastes so great.
I also liked that Lucky tacos actually looked like they were having fun. There were other stands that could have taken a lesson from them in engaging with the public - pro-tip telling your potential customer they are wrong and "they haven't tasted their wines before" ... bad move.
Overall I felt like the show lacked the small new players. I'm not sure why, maybe the fees for the stands were too high, but there really were too many "corporate stands" and too few genuinely passionate food producers this year.
My WTF moment was the stand where they were making pizzas, in a massive open oven - but not for the patrons of the show - oh no - these pizzas were only to be tasted by the judges of some weird pizza competition. What a waste of space.
Oh and the show special at Simon Gault's stand 5 for $25 instead of $6 each. Kinda meh but cudos for seeing the man actually there talking to people and serving tastes. He does come across as genuinely passionate about food.
Having your partner jailed, losing his income? Which becomes losing your home and struggling to feed your kids?
Wouldn't it be nice if such an event triggered an automatic support system, both social and financial. Would be happy to have my taxes do something like that.
Domestic abuse is bullying. The motivations and the methods are the same. The pervasive effect on the victim is the same.
Aye. I was just thinking out loud that perhaps one approach is to address the general bullying that pervades our society. The assumption that if I can make someone do something they don't want then I have "won". Again without wanting to take focus from the specific, just trying to figure out how much of our culture we need to change. Depressingly, we may need to change all of it.
I'm not sure I'm right though - there really does seem to be something special about the expectation that men have some dominant right to commit violence on women. Something that goes beyond mere bullying.
As I said just thinking out loud and very happy to be wrong.
“Defence lawyer Steven Zindel argued there was little or no impact on the 4 year old victim and there was no coercion.
“There’s not the coercion, I know that is because she is young. There is also no immediate effect on her.”
WTF! I thought Rosemary was a little hard on the legal profession, but no, she’s right.
That’s on the same wavelength as that case where the defence lawyer Keith Jefferies said the victim should have “kept her legs closed”. The kind of guy who says ”do as I say, not as I do”.
To me this is why the way we try rape cases must change. Because as it stands lawyers are obliged to pollute the court with this crap to protect their client.
With a different structure it might be possible for lawyers to defend the facts of the case without resorting to the behaviour that results in reasonably minded people to consider them to be scum (mostly they aren't scum, they just know behaving like scum helps their client).
Sorry for a half-formed thought but doesn't some of this come under bullying as an accepted part of our culture. Abuse of power, the abuse of political power, the abuse of physical power to achieve your goal.
We see it in our business structures. We see it in our sporting heroes.
And sadly because women so rarely have physical or political power they are the usual victims.
Even more sad is that when women get power they so often devolve to the same abuse of power. I guess that's a bit of this that I find as disturbing as anything else.
Not trying to distract from the very real and specific issue of violence against women but just trying to see what parts of our culture enable the continued violence.
Actually Bart I fully support teaching science in Maori. It’s a great way to update Maori.
I have no problem with working to save/update Maori. But I have a problem with doing it at the expense of science. There really is no need to teach science in Maori, you can do it for fun and fun helps children learn. But if you want those children to succeed in science then you must teach them excellent English skills. Yes I know that's unfair but it really is the language of science at this time.
I would offer some links
Please. I tried to find recent stuff but got bogged down by companies selling language training.
I wouldn’t go so far to say its a myth: rather, it’s a controversial hypothesis (although the evidence is still on there being a thing called “first language acquisition phase”, the point at which learning languages requires less effort on the part of a child learner). That particularly article you cite is a) pretty old and b) doesn’t even really do all that a rigorous survey of the literature of its time.
Yeah. Sadly google didn't help because instead of finding the science I'd read in the last couple of years on the topic you end up with propaganda pieces from companies wanting to teach you their system for learning languages.
I agree there really is a period where the brain lays down pathways in the language centres but that is really early. What most folks are talking about when they say children learn languages easily is the period between about 2 and 7 or so, a period when parents feel comfortable about shifting to another country without disrupting their children's education.
The other half of the statement is that adults can't learn languages easily which really isn't true. What is true is adult don't learn languages.
What could be more useful than communication? None of your science or engineering or medicine or law happens without it.
Yup. It's one thing to do science, it's another thing to communicate it, to other scientists and to the general public.