Thank you all for your support thus far, and thanks in advance for even more of it in the future -
we hope to give the love and more right back to you all.
This is shaping up to be quite the year, with a few big news items later this year, so we hope you'll stick with us!
Today there will certainly be a dinner celebration, perhaps a few little surprises... and we'll update you over the weekend with a post of what we did!!
Cheers to many more!!
As a special anniversary favour to us, if you haven't followed us on Facebook, Twitter, and on this blog, PLEASE DO -
we love our followers and adore making new friends!!
Hi everyone, we hope you are having a fantastic week!
Today's WWLW is really more of a 'What Laura Loves Wednesday'. Because I'm not sure Sarah necessarily loves today's topic. I love introducing new things, especially new foods, to Sarah. In order for this to make any sense at all, let me give you a bit of background on Sarah and food.
Looking so innocent with her carbonara...
My girlfriend, in life, is very cautious when faced with new things. This is something I love about her and need in my life, but also that frustrates me to no end. I, on the other hand, have great big ideas and plans and run towards new things at one hundred miles per hour, with a 'it'll be great until I'm proven otherwise' mentality - which I am sure (well, I hope) Sarah loves, but also makes for some serious disappointment when my plans don't work out or when it turns out I don't like something. So when Sarah approaches my new things/experiences/plans with great caution and thinking she probably won't like it, we have arguments. Big, dramatic, theatrical (me) and annoyingly logical, level-headed (Sarah) arguments.
Our arguments look like this.
Nowhere is this extreme clashing of attitudes more prevalent than when it comes to food. Whereas I have grown up with a passion for food (can't you tell? haha), trying everything, loving lots of different types, and having a probably unhealthy habit of remembering experiences by the food I ate that day, in Sarah's house it was a very different story. She only really ate because she had to - didn't take great pleasure in it, besides potatoes and Cadbury's Creme Eggs. Her parents feel the same - they actually eat dinner every other day, and on the off days, have Bran Flakes for dinner!
This is how happy I am about food. All the time.
This resulted in Sarah not having ever eaten a lot of classic, delicious foods - because she had convinced herself she wouldn't like them. Imagine my horror to learn that she hadn't tried a strawberry until she was 21 years old?? Her college housemates conducted a blind taste test with her for different fruits and veggies - and every time she ate some healthy food, she was allowed to have some chocolate. My Sarah, at 8 years old, actually convinced her parents to agree that she wouldn't have to eat any vegetables, as long as she had baked beans with every meal! She should have been a lawyer!
**Here's a picture of me using Sarah's lack of food experience as pub quiz questions at our local in Sydney for Sarah's birthday 2010 - we'd play a game where they'd name off clues about someone, and each team had to write the answer on a piece of paper when they knew who it was and run up. Little did Sarah know, she was the answer that time! Her reaction is nothing short of adorable.**
One thing I always knew was that the person I ended up with had to love cheese. Yes, I understand how weird that sounds. I'm not talking putting up with a bit of cheddar here, I wanted my partner to appreciate the beauty that is Camembert, love them some Gorgonzola and live by the motto that my Dad taught me when I was little - the smellier the cheese, the better it is! I remember he used to open the cheese drawer in our fridge and take a deep dramatic breath with a big grin on his face - THAT'S THE STUFF!! Then next thing you know the whole kitchen would smell like French cheese. It was awesome. So when Sarah confided in me that she 'only liked cheese on pizza', I was beside myself and immediately launched into a speech about how incredible cheese is and how she needs to appreciate it if she wants to marry me (hey, I never said I was easy to live with!). I'm relatively sure she thought I was bat crazy. She now knows that she was right. Nevertheless, a (very) reluctant Sarah sat through my cheese appreciation lectures, my stories about how I picture my future with her as a 'foodie', my ordering of cheese platters wherever we went - I hoped she'd learn to like it just from exposure to it!
Sarah protested so much - so I was very excited when she discovered she liked Brie. Out of seemingly nowhere, my 'melted cheese is the only good kind of cheese' girlfriend was eating real cheese - sure, it's a mild one, but it's FRENCH! From there, she has moved onto small amounts of Gorgonzola (I make an awesome chicken stuffed with Gorgonzola wrapped in bacon), and has actually requested Camembert occasionally. I will never forget the day she made me the happiest girl in the world. In Australia, we were driving the back streets of the countryside, when we happened upon a goats' cheese factory. We went in to check it out, and Sarah, completely on her own, went to the samples area, asked to try each one, and ended up buying goats' cheese with sweet chili in it!! *Sniff* I am so lucky.
Some of my fav foods - in Sydney for my 22nd birthday with Mum & Sarah!
My other favourite Sarah food moment so far was also in Australia - this time at my grandparents' house on the Central Coast. My grandparents are amazing, so funny and love Sarah. My Nan actually got us to write a list of food Sarah DOES like - because 'the list of what she doesn't like would be much longer'. Hahaha amazing!! That list was taped to the kitchen counter the entire 8 months we were there. It may still even be there. So yeah, Sarah gets a bit of a reputation for being a picky eater everywhere she goes. Not many of you will have eaten proper Aussie prawns with the shells on (vegetarians, I suggest you skip to the paragraph after next ;D ) - but it's commonly done, in my Aussie family at least, that someone goes to get freshly caught and cooked prawns wrapped up in newspaper - you then need to wrench off the head and rip off the legs and shell, then squeeze off the tail to be able to eat said prawn. Apologies about the very graphic description you got there, but it most accurately describes what happens. It's kind of a right of passage with my Aussie family - I remember when I was 13, I used a knife to cut off the heads instead of doing it with my fingers (heaven forbid!) - and I still haven't lived it down, 10 years later. Sarah had only ever eaten battered prawns. Needless to say, she was seriously dreading P-day (prawns, get it?) at my g-parents' casa.
Dun, dun, DUNNNNNN
One fateful Saturday, I was sitting in the garden, when Sarah rushed outside looking like she'd seen a ghost. 'IT'S HERE!!' she said - P-Day was upon us. I tried to comfort her, but she had opened the fridge to get a soda, just to find a bowl of them staring back at her. 'SO MANY EYES!!' she gasped, almost hyperventilating! I laughed - it's really no big deal. But I could see how nervous she was, so I decided to take an emergency measure - I took her to the shops to get some sweet chili sauce - I know my girlfriend will eat anything covered in sweet chili!! She was temporarily consoled - I was a hero. But even I couldn't save her at lunch. We all sat down to the table (me, her, Nan, Pop, my aunt and uncle) and nobody said a word. I started lunch - peeling prawns and making a little sandwich, and Sarah took a prawn, and put it under her napkin (so it wouldn't stare at her) and started eating a roll. My Pop was full-on watching her to see what she'd do with it!! Eventually we got everyone to start eating, and with the pressure off, Sarah successfully de-shelled her first few prawns and ate them in a sweet chili sandwich. So proud, she was successfully initiated!! After all the pre-prawn drama, she quite liked them, and we had them a few more times while visiting Nan & Pop.
In Buff Point, Australia with my g-parents - check those Aussie tans! We barely recognize our non-pasty selves!!
And then there's the banana story - if you ever meet Sarah, you'll see she is proud that she grew up on her 'unhealthy' diet and didn't put on weight - born lucky for sure! The story starts back in her childhood. Until the age of 4, Sarah was told that bananas were candy! It was one summer afternoon that Sarah's Dad took her to the shops, and as they didn't see any fruit, Sarah got to pick a lollipop - and that was the end of bananas, and in fact fruit as a whole! She had tasted real candy, and from then on the only fruit Sarah had came from fruit-flavoured sweets. In fact, on her 21st birthday her Uni friends gave her a huge container of skittles with a warning that 'This jar DOES NOT contain real fruit' and a jar containing 'real fruit' - guess which one got eaten!
I very much enjoyed introducing my girlfriend to these new foods, and so many others. I am responsible for Sarah loving kiwi fruit (she was convinced she had previously tried it and hated it - but now she loves it!), banana bread (she 'doesn't like' bananas or cinnamon, but somehow she ended up loving my banana bread, despite refusing to try it originally), sweet potato, pumpkin, pate (she resisted on that one for a long time, but now orders it on her own in restaurants, and has twice brought some especially delicious pate home so I can try it too!), cheese stuffed peppers, regular peppers, most types of mexican food, and countless other things. And I will definitely continue - my girl is turning into a foodie! And they say dreams don't come true...
OMG have you seen the latest comments from Scotland’s most Senior Catholic….writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Cardinal Keith Michael Patrick O'Brien, has said that gay marriage is a "grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right". Erm what?! He actually suggests that same sex marriage will lead to three-way marriages (what, we all want to get into polygamy now!) and compares the government's support for equality to legalising slavery. Yeah, that sounds logical.
The Cardinal continued “Those of us who were not in favour of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, warned that in time marriage would be demanded too. We were accused of scaremongering then, yet exactly such demands are upon us now. Redefining marriage will have huge implications for what is taught in our schools, and for wider society. It will redefine society since the institution of marriage is one of the fundamental building blocks of society. The repercussions of enacting same-sex marriage into law will be immense. Can we simply redefine terms at a whim? Can a word whose meaning has been clearly understood in every society throughout history suddenly be changed to mean something else?” – We would say yes! As we have said in previous posts, some outdated traditions need to be re-defined to be more inclusive and reflect the times we are in. Including us in 'marriage' will only be a positive and only affect only those same-sex couples who want to get married instead of civil-partnered - nobody else!
In reading the article about this, there are always quotes that we see that make us go ‘OH NO S/HE DI-N'T!!’ (you know, like the divas we are!) and this was the one we found from the Cardinal - “There is no doubt that, as a society, we have become blasé about the importance of marriage as a stabilising influence and less inclined to prize it as a worthwhile institution.” – should this not be directed the Kim Kardashian, Britney Spears and Liz Taylor’s amongst us - not those who actually value what marriage represents?!
The Conservative MP Margot James, an open lesbian, said: “I think it is a completely unacceptable way for a prelate to talk. I think that the government is not trying to force Catholic churches to perform gay marriages at all. It is a purely civil matter.” Cardinal O'Brien's language was "unacceptable". The Home Office says that couples should have the right to marry “irrespective of their sexual orientation”.
These comments were actually from last week - this week however, the spiritual head of the Church of England, Rowan Williams said that the Anglican communion will fight gay marriage. Introducing gay marriage is supported across the political spectrum including by the SNP first minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond; the Conservative prime minister of the UK, David Cameron; the Liberal Democrat deputy prime minister of the UK, Nick Clegg; and by the Labour leader Ed Miliband. At least the government is showing sense on this issue!
Liberal Democrat candidate for Mayor of London, Brian Paddick said: “Same-sex marriage should simply be a universally accepted human right for everyone. If we really believe in equality, there is no sound intellectual argument against gay marriage. There may be religious objections, as there are religious objections to equality for women, but that does not mean we should be ruled by them.” – Agreed!
The Times paper has also come out to show its support for gay marriage - In response to the Cardinal’s comments, The Times has published an editorial stating it is firmly in support of gay marriage. You may have read that last week despite “criticism from clerical and political opponents”, the prime minister’s position is remains in support of gay marriage and the paper says that position is “right” and equality would be a “just and wise reform." Reforms to marital law need to be informed by a sense of history, lest they give rise to unintended and damaging consequences. Only in the past generation has the principle of same-sex marriage gained widespread support. It is not a frivolous criticism that the legitimacy of marriage and the social cohesion that it provides might be damaged if the law is rewritten without regard for how most people understand an historic institution. The objection is misguided, even so. British society has in 45 years gone from decriminalising homosexuality to introducing civil partnerships. That legislative and cultural distance is immense. Only one of the reasons that such reforms have enhanced the quality of life is their expansion of personal liberty. Recognising the validity of homosexual relationships serves the public good too. It has encouraged gay couples to commit to enduring partnerships, in which many show a devotion, care and disinterested love that do far more to create ordered domesticity than government programmes could ever achieve. The paper concludes that “far from damaging marriage, expanding it to same-sex couples shores it up”. We’re not personally Times readers, but this article we completely agree with.
It is great to see that the Cardinal’s comments have propelled gay marriage back to the front pages – having grown up in a world where gay marriage was unheard of, to see it so publicly discussed is a good thing. While Sarah's parents do not support gay marriage, we are beginning to feel they are in the minority. An ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph has found, people are in favour of changing the law to allow gay couples to marry! 45% support the move in principle, while just 36% oppose it. The rest of those asked had no firm view. Women are more strongly in favour than men. A similar poll by YouGov for the Sunday Times found 43% in favour of same sex marriage, 32% in favour of just civil partnerships and just 15% opposed to both.
Other comments made public are from Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat minister for equality and she has told the told the Sunday Times ‘The language the Church of England and the Catholic Church has used is homophobic and that the views that the leaders are expressing belong in the Dark Ages. This is about love and commitment and things that are good for society and families; it is a matter of celebrating love and commitment. I have heard homophobic language used in connection with this very loving and progressive step. This is a live-and-let-live policy. We have no wish to cross over into territory that is not ours, no desire to stop those who believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. They [the opponents] do not have to agree with this. But we will have to agree to disagree because for those who want to express their love in a civil marriage, then I think the state is here to facilitate that and to encourage it and rejoice in it.'
In not-so-good news, in a letter to be read to congregations at Mass this weekend, two senior Archbishops in the Catholic Church tell followers they have a ‘duty’ to ‘ensure’ gays should not be allowed to marry even in civil ceremonies. The address was reported by the Daily Telegraph and comes from the most senior Catholics in England and Wales, the Archbishop of Westminster, the Most Reverend Vincent Nichols, and the Archbishop of Southwark, the Most Reverend Peter Smith. The letter will be read to 2,500 church Masses this weekend with a note encouraging faithful to sign the Coalition for Marriage, an effort to oppose marriage equality led by the heads of anti-gay religious groups including the Christian Institute.
Dismissing wholesale the arguments of “equality and discrimination”, the archbishops writes: “our present law does not discriminate unjustly when it requires both a man and a woman for marriage. It simply recognises and protects the distinctive nature of marriage. A change in the law would gradually and inevitably transform society’s understanding of the purpose of marriage. It would reduce it just to the commitment of the two people involved. We have a duty to married people today, and to those who come after us, to do all we can to ensure that the true meaning of marriage is not lost for future generations. Its status in law is the prudent fruit of experience, for the good of the spouses and the good of the family. In this way society esteems the married couple as the source and guardians of the next generation. As an institution marriage is at the foundation of our society.” Argh it’s so infuriating that they are so publicly airing their views which are built on nothing more than ‘tradition’. Tradition said the women’s role was ‘in the home’ and that ‘black’ people were secondary in society! We agree with everything marriage should stand for, especially for the good of family- but family can be a single mother or single father so does the church not support them?! We want the true meaning of marriage to remain – a commitment between two individuals who will love, honour and support each other for better or worse, in sickness and health, for richer or poorer till death do us part!
The 2007 British Social Attitudes Survey estimated that 9% of the adult population of England, Wales and Scotland were Catholic and of those 14% attended weekly services. So hopefully only a small percentage of them actually buy the backward view the Church is forcing on them!
As always we like to include some video footage so here’s what we found this week…
Back in 2011 you may remember Australian tennis play Margaret Court made her views on homosexuality public and lets just say not all Australians agree....
Following up on last weeks post good news for the Prop 8 play - A reading of the play 8, with an all-star cast headed by Brad Pitt and George Clooney, raised approximately $2 million for the American Foundation of Equal Rights (AFER). The reading, sold out and an additional 210,000 viewers watched live on YouTube. (More than 277,000 people had watched the performance as of noon PST on Monday (5 March).
The more publicity for gay couples the better we say - the more it is 'normalised' the less of an issue it can be made into!
Until next week
Sarah & Laura xo
If you want to see other news updates check out WHHS here!
Today we are lucky enough to be featured on 'A Summer Full of Peaches', our friends Stacey & Carley's blog. They both visited London recently and asked for our input on where to go and what to see. So if you have any plans to visit London this year check out our suggestions HERE!
