Two more suggested topics

"concerning Oatmeal: Quaker Classic rolled, John McCann Irish Steel Cut , another less known brand....please define the archetype?"

Since you did not specify which of the McCann Irish steel cut oats you wanted me to discuss I feel that I first need to speak for just a moment about that, most folks do not have such a discerning palate as yourself and in turn most likely have never heard of them. Their basic product has not changed in 150 years, not surprising considering oatmeal manufacture is a relatively simple process. They are considered the classic Irish Oatmeal – nothing added and nothing taken away – just pure goodness, so they say but I feel that claim is suspect. They have, since then, added several varieties to the mix, you know us, one or two choices is not nearly enough. You can get the quick and easy that is ready in just 5 minutes or the quick cooking microwave version. The instant version is available in 4 great flavors and is the ultimate in convenience because it is ready in a flash. There is of course the sugar free version for those who suffer with diabetes and the bulk food service sizes, those are, of course, distributed exclusively through Roland.

So with that said I will move onto the comparisons. Like I said earlier oatmeal manufacturing has changed little and neither has the basic product we have purchased for all these many a year. The real big dog in this hunt is Mr. Quaker and his top tier products are the Old Fashions and the One Minute varieties, both of which are available in the big cardboard tub we are all accustomed to from childhood. For me personally I feel the One Minute oats are better, only because I like the texture better but the difference is strictly based on personal preference and for the sake of this argument, any further differentiation is not necessary. As I indicated I prefer the simplistic nature of just plain oatmeal, Quaker offers many selections, even more than McCann oats. They have provided us so many choices that it has reached the point of ridiculousness for me. They have various flavors and some with no sugar and others that are tweaked to be cooked in the microwave. I did find something that I did not know, they too have a steel cut variety as well. According to the folks at Quaker we are to believe that just when we thought Quaker Oats couldn't get any better, Quaker Steel Cut Oats are out to prove us wrong. They are a 100% whole grain oat product that are steel cut, rather than rolled. Which I also found offers us a heartier texture and a rich, nutty taste, all I have to say is WHO KNEW!

Now for me personally I have no vested interest in this BUT, I will always have comment. As American’s we all grew up with Quaker oats, some families may have imported the McCanns from Ireland but if taken as a percentage of the population the number would be very, very small. So with that said, and of course this is just my humble opinion, Quaker Oats wins hands down and here is why. Oats are Oats and you can dress them up with brown sugar and cinnamon or vanilla, almond and honey or you can grind them in the traditional method or some new fangled way but the bottom line is, they are still just Oats. As Niels Bohr said, “the opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth” so the fact they are still Oats is our profound truth. As far as McCann’s I feel strongly that anyone who is eating them here in the United States is doing so to show off and should be looked at with a jaundiced eye.

Here is part 2
"Why do you think people tend to anthropomorphise animals?"

First off, I want to point out that my friend who suggested this topic also misspelled anthropomorphize, I know the Z and S are close on the keyboard but I am not positive that it was a typo or maybe just maybe he may be trying to slip me up for some ulterior motive. No worries though because even if that is the case I will jump in with both feet and see where I land. First of all, let me explain that word in case you do not know what it means. According to Merriam-Webster.com it is a verb that when used as a transitive verb : “to attribute human form or personality to” or when used as an intransitive verb : “to attribute human form or personality to things not human” and that makes this is a good topic. Being a pet owner I have to admit right up front I am guilty of this myself when it comes to my pets. That is not the case, for me, when speaking of wild animals and since my friend did not specify I will speak to both. First the pets, Bride and I have been pet owners since before we were even married and since we did not and do not have any tricycle motors it became easy to be called anthropomorphists. You know what - as American’s we have the right to bear children or the equal right NOT to bear children. We love our pets and treat them as human members of the family. I think it is even harder than raising children, I mean seriously how often have you have to put a child down, one which has lived with you for 14 years and was unfortunate enough to suffer kidney failure. I cried like a baby on that day and the three other days that I lost a pet. When you get a pet as a kitten or puppy and raise them through their lives it is easy to become attached to them, once attached it is easy to treat them as part of the family, and therefore easy to anthropomorphize them. For you non pet owners you might understand but try to imagine having to euthanize your 14 year old and you can quickly see why people become very attached and treat their animals as part of the family. I am just saying.


Now as far as wild animals, they should not be anthropomorphized and here is my opinion as to why. There is a key word in that phase and that is the big difference between pets and WILD animals. They are wild and some of them, given the opportunity, will eat you! Just because they look like cuddly little polar bears or beautiful snow leopards or majestic lions does not make them so. Most of us domesticated humans are far removed from our past, paleoanthropologically speaking we have not had to hide from these cuddly, beautiful and majestic killers so it is easy to see them on television or in the cruel setting of a Zoo and think they are like our pets. WRONG! There are still places in the world where people are still eaten by lions or trampled by elephants and disemboweled by an angry bear. Come on folks these are wild animals and should never be anthropomorphized, it is insulting to the animal and is an overly arrogant attitude by humans considering people are killed by them all the time. We reached the top of the food chain, mainly due to our opposable thumbs, and we have this egotistical attitude and hold the ridiculously conceited false sense of security when we are talking about the critters who used to and in some cases still eat us. On our way to the top of the food chain I assure you no Neanderthal or Homosapien EVER tried to anthropomorphize the saber toothed tiger before he was eaten by said tiger, why should we!