Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Scientists develop a pollen grain–sized “medicine” that could save bees from pesticide poisoning

You may not like bees, but you don’t want to imagine a world without them. Although bee populations began to decline as early as the mid-20th century, scientists did not become alarmed about the problem until studies over the past few decades confirmed that this was a meaningful trend. Humanity is at risk of living in a world without — or at least with far fewer — bees. Colonies are collapsing, with worker bees vanishing and leaving the queen alone with the nurse and immature bees, and overall bee populations are no longer as dense or wide-ranging as they used to be.

Based on the premise that bee communities may be declining because of pesticide exposure, scientists at Cornell University developed a medicine the size of a grain of pollen that contains pollen patties and sugar water, both of which bees find delicious. The microparticle also includes enzymes that detoxifies pesticides which are commonly ingested by bees and harm them in the process. When the bees eat the enzymes, it protects their insides from the pesticides that are killing other insects that also make contact with the plants that are drenched in the controversial chemicals.

“This work has produced a viable product to mitigate insecticide damage to pollinator colonies” as well as lays the foundations for improving pesticide design or using microparticle treatment to help important bugs like bees, the authors write at the conclusion of their study, which was published in the journal Nature Food. They add that further research will need to be done to determine whether the microparticles will work when they try to get an entire colony to take them, to determine how their plan when implemented would improve crop pollination efficiency, and to figure out how to treat wild pollinators.

Bees are absolutely vital to human survival. Scientists estimate that bees pollinate more than 70 of the top 100 crops that make up the diets for 90% of the world’s population. They pollinate apples and tomatoes, blueberries and almonds, squash and many other vital crops. In addition, we would struggle to continue to breed livestock that depends on the plants which bees pollinate (cows definitely fall into that category, since bees pollinate alfalfa). Bees are needed to create clothes, medical wound dressings, lip balm, skin creams and countless other products. Without bees, it is difficult to imagine having enough food and other necessary products to sustain the 7 billion people alive today. Experts believe our supermarkets would have about half as many fruits and vegetables.

“This technology could make a contribution to securing managed pollination of crops,” Dr. James Webb from Cornell University’s Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering, who co-authored the study, told Salon by email. “Managed bee colonies are constantly in need of being replenished due to losses. This relieves the stress for beekeepers to meet the ever-increasing demand for pollination,” he added.

Webb added that the “demand” for pollination refers to the need for most industrial agriculture outfits to have bees present to fertilize crops. In other words, this technology is intended for industrial agriculture; when it comes to wild bees, “considerable developments are still required if detoxification technologies could be applied to wild pollinators which contribute to pollination.”

As Webb pointed out, it is important to realize that there is more at stake here than simply humanity’s own survival. Bees have intrinsic worth on their own and we should be concerned about the possibility of a world in which we do not rely on them.

“What I fear most about a world in which bees continue to decline is as a result, we engineer crops that don’t need to be insect pollinated, or we switch to mechanical pollination,” Webb wrote to Salon. “This would release our dependency on bees, and therefore cause a negligence of our consideration of wildlife (bees) in our agricultural practices.”


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


Ellie Kemper’s history of winning a pageant with a racist past is stirring up controversy

Over the weekend, “Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt” star Ellie Kemper was exposed by several Twitter users for her participation in a beauty pageant that is part of a debutante ball with a racist history called the Veiled Prophet Ball. Kemper even won the pageant, which is held annually in her native St. Louis, Missouri in 1999. 

The 41-year-old actress is under fire for her participation in the pageant because of its history of racism, explicitly allowing only white people to participate until 1979, not to mention featuring imagery that many social media users have compared to symbols and paraphernalia of the KKK. According to Newsweek, the pageant was founded by a grain executive named Charles Slayback in 1878 to celebrate the mythical Veiled Prophet of Khorassan. Slayback was notably the brother of a Confederate Army officer, Alonzo Slayback.

According to historians, the Veiled Prophet Organization that hosts the ball was conceived as a means to boost trade in St. Louis, after the post-Civil War era saw Chicago become a preeminent manufacturing center and agricultural shipping point. But historian Thomas M. Spencer also says the Veiled Prophet Ball was a means for “class control” to “heal the wounds of a bitter labor-management fight” — the 1877 St. Louis general strike — in his book, “The St. Louis Veiled Prophet Organization: Power on Parade, 1887-1995.” 

An image of the hooded Veiled Prophet in the “Missouri Republican” newspaper in 1878 showed him menacingly brandishing a shotgun and pistol, with the paper writing, “It will be readily observed from the accouterments of the Prophet that the procession is not likely to be stopped by street cars or anything else,” as a reference to labor protesters in streetcars.

Every year, originally during Mardi Gras celebrations in October and later moved to December, an anonymous, elite community member in St. Louis would be named the Veiled Prophet, and he would choose one pageant participant to be the Queen of Love and Beauty. Kemper was chosen in 1999. 

A “St. Louis Dispatch” article from the time said Kemper was “the 105th young woman to be so honored by the Veiled Prophet organization.”

Kemper has since faced an onslaught of internet backlash for her participation — and triumph — in the Veiled Prophet Ball of 1999, as Twitter users have called Kemper the “KKK princess” and the pageant, the “Klan Ball.” Of course, though the Veiled Prophet Ball has a deeply racist history and remains to this day an exclusive event reserved for St. Louis elites, it doesn’t appear to have explicit ties to the Ku Klux Klan. 

Still, while it may not be fair to sweepingly present Kemper as the new face of the KKK, the internet scandal is certainly a reminder that she hails from one of the wealthiest families in Missouri, as wealth and status have been prerequisite to participation in the pageant. And it’s as good a reminder as any that the beauty pageant industry itself has always been rife with racism, classism, and white supremacist beauty standards. 

Trump’s refusal to block McGahn from testifying in private will come back to haunt him: columnist

In a column for the New Republic, editor Michael Tomasky asserted that Donald Trump may well come to regret not spending the money needed to block former White House counsel Don McGahn from speaking in private and under oath before members of the Senate Judiciary Committee this Friday.

As the New York times reported, “Mr. McGahn’s agreement to testify — with President Biden’s permission — was contingent upon there being no active legal challenge to his participation in the matter, according to the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the legal and political sensitivity of the matter.”

As longtime political observer Tomasky notes, Trump used the full force of his presidency — and attorney-client privilege protections — to keep McGahn from answering questions before but that was when his legal maneuvering would be paid for by the federal government.

That no longer is in effect now that he is a private citizen.

Writing that “There are things a thieving real estate tycoon can get away with that a president of the United States can’t. And this will be the precise source of his downfall,” Tomasky added that a recent decision by the Justice Department to no longer interfere on Trump’s behalf meant the former president needed to step up and fund his own continuing legal challenge — and chose not to for financial reasons.

“Trump himself was not party to the agreement to get McGahn to testify (obviously, since he would never so agree). But he has the right under the law to intervene and challenge the agreement. Right after the deal was struck in early May, a lawyer for Trump indicated that such a challenge was forthcoming. But more recently, that same lawyer said that Trump would, in fact, not intervene,” the columnist reported. “But now, as a private citizen, he’d have to foot the bill himself. And it seems he chose not to. “

That, he points out, may come back to haunt Trump.

“Trump is such a skinflint that he’d rather risk McGahn telling Congress that, yes, the president personally directed him to commit obstruction of justice—to fire Robert Mueller and then to create a fake paper trail to suggest that Trump never asked him to do that—than have to shell out his own money to try to stop it!” he claimed. “And yes, it matters. If the facts stated in the Mueller Report are correct, and McGahn fesses up to them, it may not make any difference to the January 6 crowd, but we will have a president’s legal counsel on the record saying that the president obstructed justice. That’s a big deal.”

According to Tomasky, that would have implications far beyond what the Senate committee is looking at.

“The walls are closing in fast. [Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus] Vance just empaneled that three-days-a-week grand jury. New York Attorney General Letitia James is hard at work getting to the bottom of, among other malefactions, the funny business around that land in Westchester County. And now, we learned late last week, the Eastern District of New York has opened up a third front on Trump, looking into Ukrainian meddling in the 2020 election on his behalf,” he wrote.

“Men like Trump don’t just think they’ll never get caught: After years of successfully dodging responsibility, they come to convince themselves that the reason they’ve never been caught is that they never really did anything wrong in the first place. They think they’re infallible. I hope to God that Trump is squirming and panicking these days, as he learns just how fallible he is,” he concluded.

You can read more here.

“A new inauguration date is set”: Inside the latest QAnon conspiracy theory to “reinstate” Trump

Hundreds of people gathered in Texas for a QAnon-sponsored conference over Memorial Day weekend to hear the biggest boosters of Donald Trump’s Big Lie downplay the Capitol riot and bandy about new threats of a coming coup.  

Key Trump allies, including Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, Allen West; and perhaps most notably Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tex., attended the three-day event, dubbed “For God & Country Patriot Roundup,” at the Omni Hotel in Dallas. 

The QAnon conference came amid reports that Trump is attempting to orchestrate another election coup from his far-off kingdom at Mar-a-Lago. According to a Tuesday tweet from the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman, the former President has been telling a number of people he’s in contact with that he expects he will get reinstated by August.” Trump’s reported thinking echoes that of his former lawyer’s, Sidney Powell.  On Saturday, Powell told attendees to the QAnon conference that Trump “can simply be reinstated.”

“A new inauguration date is set, and Biden is told to move out of the White House, and President Trump should be moved back in,” she explained. “I’m sure there’s not going to be credit for time lost, unfortunately, because the Constitution itself sets the date for inauguration, but he should definitely get the remainder of his term and make the best of it.”

Powell was not the only speaker at this past weekend’s event who spoke directly about the possibility Trump could reclaim his throne soon. 

Michael Flynn, apparently looking to encourage another election coup, asking the crowd why “what happened in Myanmar” can’t happen in the U.S?

“No reason,” Flynn answered. “I mean, it should happen here.”

Flynn’s comments drew widespread scorn but during his speech on Saturday, Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert promulgated a number of baseless conspiracies about the Capitol riot, claiming that “there’s no evidence” that the event constituted “an armed insurrection.”

Although “armed” in legal terms extends beyond that of just firearms, police nevertheless found a number of guns on rioters in the aftermath of the insurrection. Furthermore, CNN reported that the Oath Keepers, a far-right anti-government militia, were planning on trafficking a number of guns across the Potomac River to Washington, D.C. in an effort to support the insurgency.

During his speech, Gohmert also criticized his Democratic colleagues’ push to assemble a commission to investigate the riot – an effort that was effectively killed with a filibuster last week by Senate Republicans. Back in January, Gohmert baselessly accused Black Lives Matter and antifa of infiltrating the Capitol riot. Over the weekend, the representative appeared to double down on this theory, claiming that “it wasn’t just right-wing extremists” who were involved. Allegations of left-wing agitation and infiltration have been routinely debunked

The Texas lawmaker also accused the FBI of “unfairly” targeting Trump supporters in their federal probe into the riot. “Where is the outrage about young people being unfairly treated?” he rambled. “Joe Biden’s Justice Department is criminalizing political protest.” Gohmert later echoed on CNN: “Any violence should not be downplayed. But people who are not engaged in violence should not be charged with crime.” 

Following his speech, Gohmert posed and took a picture with known QAnon conspiracy theorist and podcaster RedPill78, who openly admitted to storming the Capitol building on January 6. 

Around the time of the riot, Gohmert distinguished himself as a loyal Trump booster, spreading the baseless conspiracy theory of systematic fraud at the ballots in the 2020 general election. Back in January, Gohmert filed a lawsuit on Trump’s behalf, arguing that a judge should be compelled to tell former Vice President Mike Pence that he had the right to overturn the electoral college votes in President Joe Biden’s favor. (Pence in fact did not have this right.) The suit was dismissed twelve hours after its filing.

Many have speculated that Trump is attempting to overturn the election by cheerleading fallacious election audits in various GOP-led states, the largest of which has now dragged on for months now in Maricopa County, Arizona with no end in sight.

Michael Flynn should be sitting in prison awaiting trial for sedition: former White House attorney

Appearing on CNN on Tuesday afternoon with host Ana Cabrera, former White House ethics attorney Richard Painter expressed his disgust with former Donald Trump official Michael Flynn for his continuing comments about the 2020 election, saying his weekend comments about a military takeover should land him in court and in prison for sedition.

Despite efforts by the former Trump intelligence official to explain away his comments at a QAnon conference that a Myanmar military-style government takeover should happen in the U.S., Painter said it was long past time that the Justice Department open an investigation into Flynn for his actions that have come after Trump pardoned him.

“Ana, this is a call for a coup and this is not the first time that Michael Flynn has done this,” Painter began. “Back in November, after the election, he met with Donald Trump in the White House and they talked about having a military takeover with the United States military, entering Pennsylvania and other states to redo the election — that was sedition.”

“I wrote at the time that that was sedition and should have been criminally charged as sedition by Michael Flynn, and also, perhaps, Donald Trump as an accomplice,” he continued. “Michael Flynn has repeatedly called for a military takeover of this sort and this is sedition and it can be prosecuted as sedition; a pattern of conduct, particularly the overt acts in the White House back in November, not just one statement here”

“Second, General Flynn, retired from active duty, is subject to the Uniform Military Code of Justice and he should be court-martialed,” he added. “If a former general said this, they would have him in Leavenworth, Kansas right now, ready to face court-martial. This cannot be accepted.”

Watch below:

DOJ wants civil rights lawsuit against Trump over violent Lafayette Square clearing dismissed

Attorneys at the Department of Justice asked a federal judge to toss out a lawsuit filed against former President Donald Trump and former Attorney General William Barr for violently clearing out a throng of Black Lives Matter protesters from Lafayette Square last June, claiming that “presidential security is paramount.”

The suit, brought by The American Civil Liberties Union, Black Lives Matter, and other left-leaning civil rights organizations, was filed last June after Trump swept the area to pose for a photo op just outside of St. John’s Episcopal Church, with a bible in hand.

The demonstration in Lafayette Square, organized in protest of the police killing of George Floyd and others, was largely peaceful until Barr ordered military and law enforcement officers to disperse around 1,000 protesters with smoke grenades, tear gas and pepper balls. Law enforcement also used shields and clubs to physically clear demonstrators from the premises.

The suit in question argues that Trump, Barr, and others “unlawfully conspired to violate” the rights of protesters. However, federal attorneys have rebutted that the assault was necessary to protect Trump, according to the Washington Post. Citing a 2004 case in which a judge ruled that Secret Service agents could not be held liable for damages incurred by protesters in the name of presidential safety, Justice Department trial attorney David G. Cutler argued on Friday that the plaintiffs “seek to hold the attorney general personally liable for damages for actions taken to ensure a safe perimeter for the president of the United States.”

The presiding judge, U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, appeared to be open to Cutler’s reasoning, asking “How do I get over the clear national security concern over the president’s safety?”

ACLU attorneys have, however, disputed the notion that Trump faced any significant danger at the time, instead claiming that the former President used the opportunity to target protesters “because of their viewpoint, their message, their speech.” Dismissing the lawsuit, the lawyers concluded, would “authorize brutality with impunity.”

Randy M. Mastro, co-chair of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, who is representing plaintiffs in the case, said that the DOJ’s defense involved “shifting explanations,” pointing to a spate of Trump’s tweets leading up to the incident which indicated strong threats of violence.

Last summer, Trump took to Twitter to call on various state governors to “dominate your city and your state” amid the mass protests. “In Washington,” he said, “we’re going to do something people haven’t seen before.”

The former president even threatened to have protesters outside the White House be “greeted with the most vicious dogs and most ominous weapons I have ever seen.”

It’s in light of tweets like these that Mastro argued: “The conduct here was so flagrantly unlawful and so obviously unconstitutional that it requires a remedy, and we are here today, your honor, to see that nothing like this ever happens again in our country.”

Friedrich promised there would be a ruling on the case in the “near future.”

Texas Democrats stand up for democracy and send a loud message to Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema

This past Memorial Day weekend was bookmarked by two major events meant to continue Donald Trump’s efforts to overthrow democracy. On Friday, Republicans in the Senate used their filibuster power to shut down debate on the formation of a bipartisan commission to study the Capitol insurrection Trump incited on January 6. A million excuses were offered by Republicans, but of course, the real reason is that they support Trump and his efforts to undermine U.S. democracy. Thus on Sunday, Republicans who control the Texas legislature moved to pass a law that, along with draconian efforts to keep huge swaths of Texans from voting, would also make it easier to simply throw out elections if Democrats win them. 

Republicans gonna Republican. Both the base and party leaders are radicalized against democracy and show no signs of waking up or developing a conscience. But what was interesting in these two stories is the categorically different reactions that Republicans got from Democrats.

In the Senate, Democrats lamely rolled over for Republicans blocking the commission, even though they had a strong majority of 54-35 to support moving forward. The reason is simple: Centrist Democrats, mainly Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have decided that it’s more important to preserve the filibuster than to let the party that won the election —the Democrats, in case anyone forgot — actually govern. 

Sinema didn’t even bother to show up for the commission vote, once again going out of her way to remind her constituents of how much contempt she has for them. Manchin, on the other hand, made a big public stink about how “disheartening” it was to see Republicans do what pretty much everyone told him they were going to do, and vowed, “I’m going to fight to save this country.”


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


But while Manchin likes to talk a big game, he still refuses to do the one thing that would actually save the country: Get rid of the filibuster. He and Sinema, whose votes are necessary to change Senate rules, keep mindlessly insisting that the current situation is somehow good for bipartisanship and compromise. In reality, Republicans routinely use the filibuster to single-handedly block not just bills, but even holding Senate debates about bills. No “fight” is required in order to save the country. All that Manchin and Sinema need to do is agree to vote to end the filibuster, and voila! Legislation to save the country can start to flow through Congress. It’s as easy as having lunch and taking a nap, but Manchin and Sinema won’t do it. 

Meanwhile, in Texas, Democrats showed what actually fighting to save democracy looks like.

When Republicans tried to pass their Jim Crow-style assault on voting rights, Democrats in the legislature walked out Sunday night, denying the GOP the quorum necessary to pass the bill. “We knew today, with the eyes of the nation watching action in Austin, that we needed to send a message,” Democratic state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer told reporters the next morning, demanding “a national response to federal voting rights.”

To be certain, Texas Democrats can’t stave off the assault on voting rights forever. Greg Abbott, the Republican governor of the state, is going to call a special session to pass this bill, which has been bolstered by Trump’s infamous Big Lie. There are ways for Texas Democrats to escalate, including fleeing the state for a time, but eventually, they are legally obliged to show up for the vote and let Republicans go forward with their plans to gut basic voting rights and electoral integrity. Still, Texas Democrats are doing more than Senate Democrats to fight back against the GOP war on democracy – even though, unlike Senate Democrats, Texas Democrats don’t have a majority.

Senate Democrats, especially those who are upholding the filibuster, should be wracked with shame witnessing the situation in Texas. These state legislators basically have no real power and yet they are doing everything they can to preserve the basic notion that Americans have a right to vote for their leaders. But because a couple of centrist Democrats are infatuated with the filibuster, the actual Democratic majority in the Senate is hamstrung to do even the bare minimum to save U.S. democracy from Trump and Republicans’ scheming. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Trump is planning to restart his rallies next month, and, as Maggie Haberman of the New York Times reports, he “has been telling a number of people he’s in contact with that he expects he will get reinstated by August.” All of which is to say, Trump is clearly going to start turning up the already blazing hot temperature of the Big Lie and the accompanying demands that Republicans in power do more to make sure to end the practice of free and fair elections. Republicans across the country have already done a ton of work to dismantle the systems that ensured that the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election, Joe Biden, was able to assume office. With Trump escalating the pressure, it’s terrifying to consider how much worse this will get. 

Clearly, more is needed to fight back than Manchin putting out press releases whining about how he thought Republicans were better than this. The good news is that he and Sinema don’t have to do anything as drastic as flee the Capitol building, like Texas Democrats did. All they need to do is stop being such willfully stubborn asses who are standing in the way of basic democracy reform out of a misguided enthusiasm for a “bipartisanship” that never materializes. 

Butter pecan ice cream — without the ice cream machine

Big Little Recipe has the smallest-possible ingredient list and big everything else: flavor, creativity, wow factor. That means five ingredients or fewer—not including water, salt, black pepper, and certain fats (like oil and butter), since we’re guessing you have those covered. Psst, did you hear we’re coming out with a cookbook? We’re coming out with a cookbook!

* * *

It should come as little surprise that the path toward better butter pecan ice cream doesn’t start with cream or milk or eggs or sugar or any number of other ingredients. It starts with butter and pecans—and how you use them. Not with a shrug but with feeling.

As in other recipes, you will melt butter, add lots of pecans, and let them leisurely toast until your kitchen smells like there might be a pie in the oven. This simple step delivers assertively flavored nuts, polka-dotting the ice cream, adding crunch-crunch-crunch amid all the plushness.

But unlike other recipes, you won’t stop at that, not yet. Adventure is out there.

Into the emptied pan, toss in another hunk of butter, to melt, then huff, then puff, then brown. Stay close. Brown butter goes from just right to oh no in less time than it takes for me to type this sentence. But when you get it just right? You win more buttery aroma, more buttery flavor, more butteriness, period.

The pecans, too, we’re using more than once. Because while roasty nuts get a lot of hooting and hollering, raw nuts are worthy in their own way. Milky and mild, not unlike sweet cream. Which, now that you mention it, we’re also using. So why not put the two together?

You don’t need an ice cream machine for this recipe. Nor do you need eggs or granulated sugar or brown sugar. Because instead of making a custard, chilling it, churning it, and freezing it, we’re opting for a no-churn (aka no-fuss) template: condensed milk plus whipped cream.

The whipping part usually involves a hand mixer, or stand mixer, or whisk and strong arm. But today, a humble blender will do all the hard work: First, by blitzing pecans into powder. Next, by introducing this pecan powder to cold cream. And finally, by metamorphosing this pecan cream into whipped pecan cream.

This nutty floof not only simulates the airiness of an ice cream churner. It also ensures that every mouthful of ice cream is overloaded with pecan—pecanier, pecaniest—flavor.

And yes, you can and should make this whipped pecan cream on its own, to plop on any cake, especially chocolate. Or load up one of those flimsy foil pie tins and throw it at a loved one’s face. How fun would that be?

No-Churn Butter Pecan Ice Cream

Makes: 1 quart

Ingredients

  • 3 tablespoons unsalted butter, divided
  • 1/2 cups (171 grams) pecan pieces, divided
  • Kosher salt
  • 1 (14-ounce) can sweetened condensed milk
  • 2 teaspoons vanilla extract
  • 2 cups heavy cream

Directions

  1. Stick a quart container or loaf pan in the freezer. 
  2. Melt 1 tablespoon of butter in a large skillet over medium heat. Add 1 cup (114 grams) of pecans, plus a pinch of salt, and toss to coat. Toast for about 5 minutes, stirring often and lowering the heat as needed so the nuts don’t burn, until very fragrant. Transfer to a large plate and immediately stick in the freezer to chill out. (If there are any pecan bits or browned butter left behind, wipe out the pan with a towel.)
  3. Empty the can of condensed milk into a large bowl. 
  4. Add the remaining 2 tablespoons of butter to the emptied skillet and return to the stove over medium heat. Cook, watching closely, until the milk solids in the butter start to brown and smell like roasting hazelnuts. Pour the brown butter directly into the condensed milk, scraping every last bit out of the pan. 
  5. Add the vanilla to the condensed milk, plus another pinch of salt, and stir to combine. 
  6. Add the remaining 1/2 cup (57 grams) of pecans to a blender. Process until powdery. Add a big splash of cream and process to combine, scraping down as needed. Add another big splash and repeat. Now pour in the rest of the cream and blend until the cream is whipped. 
  7. Scrape the whipped cream into the condensed milk mixture and gently fold to combine. Now fold in the toasted pecans from the freezer. 
  8. Remove the container from the freezer and add the ice cream. Cover and freeze for at least 6 hours, until however firm you like your ice cream.

 

 

Don’t put this baked feta on pasta

Big Little Recipe has the smallest-possible ingredient list and big everything else: flavor, creativity, wow factor. That means five ingredients or fewer—not including water, salt, black pepper, and certain fats (like oil and butter), since we’re guessing you have those covered. Psst, did you hear we’re coming out with a cookbook? We’re coming out with a cookbook!

* * *

Though it’s one of the world’s oldest cheeses—”a primitive form is even mentioned in the Odyssey,” according to the European Commission—feta has never been trendier.

In 2019, food blogger and artist Jenni Häyrinen shared a recipe for baked feta pasta. Tiny tomatoes, chopped chiles, a lot of olive oil. Roast until the cheese relaxes from uptight to loosey-goosey, soft enough to hug spaghetti or rigatoni or whatever else your pantry has in store.

Fast-forward to this February, which marked what Häyrinen dubbed the “third wave” of the baked feta whirlwind, sparking adaptations everywhere from The New York Times to The Washington Post. And yes, we wrote about it, too.

So perhaps you’re wondering why I’m showing up to the party late, months late, musing about baked feta in May. A couple reasons: First, because molten cheese never goes out of style. Second, and most importantly, because I was waiting for berry season.

Indeed, this is baked feta, but not The Baked Feta, not like that. There is no pasta. There are no tomatoes. Instead? An armload of plump strawberries.

Like tomatoes, these are red. Also like tomatoes, with enough time in the oven, their structure collapses and their flavor concentrates, going from great to greater to greatest. A little honey and olive oil, plus salt and pepper, are all you need to yield a sauce that’s halfway between sweet and savory, begging to be spooned atop salty, custardy cheese.

This blurriness between appetizer and dinner and dessert is the best part. That freedom to take the dish wherever you want to go.

My favorite destination is a crusty baguette, torn into hunks. But don’t stop there: Try Triscuits or Ritz. Or plop alongside a simple protein, from grilled chicken to fried pork chops to seared duck. Or put toward a peppery salad, say arugula or radicchio. Or what else, what else? You tell me.

Baked Feta With Honeyed Strawberries

Prep time: 5 minutes
Cook time: 50 minutes
Serves: 4

Ingredients

  • 1 pound strawberries
  • 1 tablespoon extra-virgin olive oil, plus more for drizzling
  • 3 tablespoons honey
  • Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper
  • 1 (8-ounce) feta block

Directions

  1. Heat the oven to 350°F. While that’s warming up, remove the strawberries’ green tops, then cut them in half. 
  2. Add the strawberries to a 9×13-inch (or similar) baking dish. Drizzle with the olive oil and honey, plus a little salt and a lot of pepper. Gently toss to coat, then spread out the strawberries into a single layer. 
  3. Roast for 25 minutes.
  4. Remove from the oven and nestle the feta block in the center. Drizzle the feta with a little olive oil, then return to the oven. 
  5. Roast for another 25 to 30 minutes, until the juices are starting to thicken slightly and the feta is starting to brown. Let cool for a few minutes before serving.

 

Republican attacks on democracy are a national emergency. Will Democrats ever fight back?

The Republican Party is attacking American democracy in plain sight. The party of Trump is doing this without fear, with little need for guile or subterfuge and with unabashed, bold confidence.

In essence, the Republican Party and its followers and allies have declared that no American election is considered valid unless a Republican candidate wins. This is obviously the stuff of fascist, white supremacist and anti-democratic regimes where the endpoint is a form of “managed democracy” similar to Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Viktor Orbán’s Hungary, where elections still occur but one party rules indefinitely.

Michael Flynn, the retired general who was briefly Donald Trump’s national security adviser, even appeared to endorse a military coup during an appearance at an event Sunday in Dallas “that was attended by prominent peddlers of the QAnon conspiracy theory and the Big Lie,” as CNN reports. A member of the audience reportedly asked Flynn why an event similar to the recent military coup in Myanmar — which has been celebrated by many in the global far right — couldn’t happen in the United States. “No reason, I mean, it should happen here,” Flynn said.

Sidney Powell, an attorney associated with Trump’s efforts to steal the 2020 election, also appeared at the Dallas event and reportedly said Trump should be “reinstated” as president, suggesting that a “new inauguration day is set.”

Republicans behave as if they possess secret knowledge that predicts or preordains their future victories. Perhaps they know something that the Democrats, the news media and the American people do not?

In comparison, Democrats behave like a sports team that’s badly losing a game. In effect, they protest to the referee that the opponent is cheating and flouting the rules. Republicans respond by laughing in their faces, having concluded long ago that winning is all that matters. 

For the most part, the American media has no idea how to cover such a game. Its major commentators and institutions keep referring back to the old rulebook, which the Republicans have now made obsolete.

In his newsletter Press Run, Eric Boehlert explains the media’s failure — or willful inability — to grapple with the Republican Party’s self-seduction into fascism:

Unfortunately, the Beltway press has no idea how to cover this story. It still refuses to use the proper tools and language to put the troubling actions of the GOP in context via its straight news coverage. Hiding behind Both Sides journalism, timid language, and purposeful naïveté, news outlets still aren’t being honest about the dire threat Trump Republicans now pose to the country. …

The GOP and its followers have become consumed in deliberate lies, yet the press still views the party as a serious entity whose views deserve to be treated respectfully.

“It’s time the media stop covering the GOP as a political party — it’s not,” tweeted SiriusXM radio show host [and Salon contributor] Dean Obeidallah. “Today’s Republican party is a white nationalist, fascist movement and those exact words need to be used by the media so everyone gets the threat the GOP poses to our nation.”

The Republican plan to overthrow multiracial democracy must be understood as a multi-spectrum attack. Across the country on the state, local and federal levels, Republicans are using such tactics as gerrymandering, imposing onerous ID requirements, restricting mail-in and absentee voting, closing polling places in Black and brown communities, removing drop boxes, conducting phony audits to manufacture evidence of fraud, and placing party loyalists and operatives in key positions to guarantee that their preferred candidates will always “win.”

In a video leaked to Mother Jones, the executive director of Heritage Action for America — a lobby group affiliated with the right-wing Heritage Foundation — was recorded at a private fundraising event in April bragging that her organization was writing Republican voter suppression laws across the country, and observing how easy it is to subvert democracy.

Common Cause Texas recently discovered an online briefing in which a Republican official outlined a Jim Crow-like plan to deploy poll watchers tasked with intimidating Black and brown voters in the Houston area, the state’s largest and most diverse population center — and home to a high concentration of likely Democratic voters. 

Republican elected officials and other spokespeople have publicly declared that their efforts to “protect the integrity of the vote” from “fraud” are really designed to reduce the number of votes, especially from Black and brown people and other groups who support the Democratic Party.

Even Rep. Liz Cheney, the “respectable” Republican “patriot” and supposed hero of democracy who has been celebrated by the chattering class and mainstream news media, has supported her party’s efforts to replace multiracial democracy with a new Jim Crow regime.

Even if a Democratic candidate for president (or other high office) manages to survive this new gauntlet of anti-democratic “reforms,” Republicans have now established a precedent with Donald Trump and the 2020 election under which they will feel free to invalidate Electoral College votes and use their power in gerrymandered state legislatures to decide the real “winner.”

Furthermore, if a Democratic candidate somehow manages to survive that concerted campaign by Republicans to override the people’s, then right-wing terrorists and other paramilitaries may also be used to nullify the election. Donald Trump’s coup attempt and the attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters offered us a preview of that future.

Fox News and other elements of the right-wing media are playing a central role in propagandizing their public to believe in the Big Lie about the 2020 election and to prepare them for whatever means may be necessary — up to and including lethal violence — to prevent Democratic Party and its voters from obtaining or holding political power.

Why are Republicans and their supporters so bold and unafraid in their attacks on American democracy?

Essentially, they view President Biden and the current exceedingly narrow Democratic majorities in Congress as a type of speed bump on their road to inevitable victory. That is not unreasonable, since to this point Trump-supporting Republicans have faced no serious consequences for their systematic attacks on American democracy and the rule of law. Many Republicans and Trumpists sincerely believe themselves to be “patriots” who are on the correct side of history, and therefore believe that anything they and their allies do to win and keep power is justified. (Others, no doubt, view this struggle in far more cynical terms.)

Today’s Republican Party and larger right-wing movement has become a type of religion. Its followers are united by faith and committed to their “truth,” which exists outside of human reason and empirical reality.

Moreover, many of Trump’s followers — especially among right-wing evangelicals and Christian nationalists — literally consider Donald Trump to be a type of savior or messiah, perhaps prophesied in scripture.

The American far right has yearned, hoped and schemed to overthrow democracy for decades. Trumpism is a symptom of a deep crisis in American society — especially in white America — about the inherent legitimacy of multiracial democracy. It is not the cause.

Ultimately, the bulk of the Republican Party and the broader right-wing movement have concluded that Democrats are weak, naïve, shortsighted, divided and unwilling to do what is necessary to stop them. To this point, that conclusion appears correct.

In June of 2020 I interviewed Bosnian-born novelist Aleksandar Hemon for Salon. Watching the tumult in America over the past year, culminating in Trump’s coup attempt and the Republican Party’s embrace of neofascism and authoritarianism, I have thought a great deal about what Hemon said about how a society breaks apart, drawing on what happened in Yugoslavia during its civil war:  

With Trumpism the news media has to change the entire way in which they interpret and engage with reality. The American news media, for the most part, cannot do it. They cannot make that pivot. The rules are different with an authoritarian such as Donald Trump.

At the same time, the advantage of Trump and his movement is that they do not care about reality or the truth. They are a death cult. They are not afraid to die. The Trumpists and Republicans are excited and motivated by the possibility of remaking reality itself, because they are in revolutionary mode. The Democrats and everyone else are, by comparison, trying to find a magical way to retain the status quo. Which, even if the status quo was somehow good enough, is now impossible to salvage. The American right’s, and the global right’s, revolutionary process is far too advanced at this point.

The Republican Party’s attacks on democracy are a national emergency. Will the Democrats stand up and fight, doing everything possible to defend American democracy? Or will they simply roll over for the forces of authoritarianism, protesting the whole time about rules and norms and the tremendous unfairness of the process? 

No one really knows the answer, least of all the Democrats themselves. They and we — and all people around the world who still look to America as a symbol of democratic possibility — are running out of time.

Amazon, Facebook and other tech giants paid almost $100B less in taxes than they claimed: analysis

Bolstering demands for a global minimum tax to rein in corporations’ evasive tactics, a new analysis released Monday showed that a half dozen Big Tech companies based in the United States paid almost $100 billion less in taxes over the past decade than stated in their annual reports.

Between 2011 and 2020, Amazon, Facebook, Alphabet (the owner of Google), Netflix, Apple and Microsoft — known as the “Silicon Six” — paid roughly $219 billion in income taxes, which amounts to just 3.6% of their $6 trillion-plus in total revenue, according to the Fair Tax Foundation. Income tax is paid on profits, not total revenue, and researchers said these tech giants are adept at reducing their tax liabilities by shifting profits to offshore tax havens.

Had the “Silicon Six” paid the prevailing tax rates in the countries where they operate, they would have given global tax authorities over $149 billion more than they did over the past decade, researchers said. Moreover, not only did these corporate behemoths fork over nearly $150 billion less than would be expected under a stronger international taxation regime, but they also inflated the value of the tax payments they did make.

According to the Fair Tax Foundation, these six companies reported paying approximately $315 billion in income taxes between 2011 and 2020, which is 23.2% on nearly $1.4 trillion in profits. That’s significantly higher than the 16.1% rate the companies actually paid over the past decade, however, resulting in a gap of more than $96 billion between tax figures cited in annual financial reports and real contributions to public revenues.

Paul Monaghan, chief executive of the U.K.-based nonprofit, said the study provided “solid evidence that substantive tax avoidance is still embedded within many large multinationals and nothing less than a root-and-branch reform of international tax rules will remedy the situation.”

None of the six corporations “is an exemplar of responsible tax conduct,” the report noted. “However, the degree of irresponsibility and the relative tax contribution made does vary. Amazon has paid just $5.9 billion in income taxes this decade, whilst Apple has paid $100.6 billion and Microsoft has paid $55.3 billion.”

Source: Fair Tax Foundation

The Fair Tax Foundation identified Amazon and Facebook as the worst offenders, prompting responses from the two tech giants.

As The Guardian reported:

An Amazon spokesperson disputed the calculations as “extremely misleading.”

“Amazon is primarily a retailer where profit margins are low, so comparisons to technology companies with operating profit margins of closer to 50% is not rational,” the company said. “Governments write the tax laws and Amazon is doing the very thing they encourage companies to do — paying all taxes due while also investing many billions in creating jobs and infrastructure. Coupled with low margins, this investment will naturally result in a lower cash tax rate.” …

A Facebook spokesman said: “All companies pay tax on their profits, not revenues. Last year we paid $4.23 billion in corporate income taxes globally, and our average effective tax rate over the last 10 years was 20.71%, which is roughly in line with the OECD average.”

In response to the corporations’ complaints, the Fair Tax Foundation said that the majority of Amazon’s profits in the last three years were derived not from retail but from cloud services, where profit margins are between 25 and 30%. The Fair Tax Foundation also noted that over the past decade, Facebook paid an income tax rate of just 12.7%, resulting in substantially lower contributions than would be expected according to prevailing corporate tax rates as well as the company’s effective tax rate.

The Fair Tax Foundation’s new analysis comes just weeks after IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig admitted that tax dodging is depriving the U.S. government of as much as $1 trillion or more per year.

Monaghan said that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s recent push for a global minimum tax on corporations “[lit] a fire beneath the multilateral discussions that have been slowly progressing under the auspices of the OECD.”

According to Monaghan, the Biden administration’s proposals for global tax reform “would see many of the incentives underpinning profit-shifting to tax havens removed, and would see the very largest multinationals taxed not just on where subsidiary profits are booked, but where real economic value is derived.”

“This would have a seismic impact on the likes of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft (who have tax dodging hard-wired into their organizational structure), with billions of additional taxes paid across the world,” Monaghan continued.

“We could be on the cusp of a once-in-a-generation moment,” he added, “but world leaders at the forthcoming G7 and G20 world leader summits need to grasp the nettle, step up and engage with the agenda much more positively — the benefit to public services across the world could be immense.”

When will the first baby be born in space?

When the first baby is born off-Earth, it will be a milestone as momentous as humanity’s first steps out of Africa. Such a birth would mark the beginning of a multi–planet civilization for the human species.

For the first half-century of the Space Age, only governments launched satellites and people into Earth orbit. No longer. Hundreds of private space companies are building a new industry that already has US$300 billion in annual revenue.

I’m a professor of astronomy who has written a book and a number of articles about humans’ future in space. Today, all activity in space is tethered to the Earth. But I predict that in around 30 years people will start living in space – and soon after, the first off-Earth baby will be born.

The players in space

Space started as a duopoly as the United States and the Soviet Union vied for supremacy in a geopolitical contest with loud military overtones. But while NASA achieved the Moon landings in 1969, its budget has since shrunk by a factor of three. Russia is no longer an economic superpower, and its presence in space is a pale shadow of the program that launched the first satellite and the first person into orbit.

The new kid on the block is China. After a late start, the Chinese space program is surging, fueled by a budget that has recently grown faster than their economy. China is building a space station, the country has landed probes on the Moon and Mars, and it is planning a Moon base. On its current trajectory, China will soon be the dominant space power.

But the most exciting progress is being made by private space companies that are marketing space for tourism and recreation. Elon Musk’s goal for SpaceX is to carry 100 people at a time to the Moon, Mars and beyond, although in public presentations he is coy about giving a timeline. Jeff Bezos’ company, Blue Origins, also aims to colonize the solar system. Such grandiose plans have skeptics, but remember that these are the two richest people in the world.

Governments will continue to launch rockets, but it would be safe to say that the future of private space flight arrived in 2016 when, for the first time, commercial launches outnumbered launches by all the world’s countries combined.

Living on the Moon or Mars

For a spacecraft, the trip to Mars is about 1,000 times farther than a trip to the Moon, so the Moon will be humanity’s first home away from home.

China is partnering with Russia to build a long-term facility at the Moon’s South Pole sometime between 2036 and 2045. NASA plans to put “boots on the Moon” in 2024 and establish a a permanent settlement called the Artemis Base Camp within another decade. As part of the Artemis mission, NASA is also planning to launch a lunar space station in 2024 called Gateway. NASA is teaming up with SpaceX for this and future lunar projects, and the lunar station will make it easier for SpaceX to resupply the future lunar colony.

After the Moon comes Mars, and the collaboration between SpaceX and NASA is accelerating the timeline for getting there. NASA’s plans are purposeful, but the organization hasn’t given a timeline. Elon Musk, on the other hand, has loudly proclaimed that he intends to have a colony on Mars by 2050. Humanity’s attempt to colonize the Moon will give us a good sense of the challenges we might face on Mars.

Sex and babies in space

For a civilization to be really free from Earth, the population needs to grow, and that means babies. Living on the Moon or Mars will be arduous and stressful, so the first inhabitants will probably spend only a few years there at a time and are unlikely to start a family.

But once people do take up permanent residency off-Earth, there are still many unknowns. First, little research has been done on the biology of pregnancy and reproductive health in a space or low-gravity environment like the Moon or Mars. It’s possible there will be unexpected hazards to the fetus or mother. Second, babies are fragile, and raising them is not easy. The infrastructure of these bases would have to be sophisticated to make some version of normal family life possible, a process that will take decades.

With these uncertainties in mind, it seems likely that the first off-Earth baby will be born much closer to home. A Dutch startup called SpaceLife Origin wants to send a heavily pregnant woman 250 miles up just long enough to give birth. They talk a good story, but the legal, medical and ethical obstacles are formidable. Another company, called Orbital Assembly Corporation, plans to open a luxury hotel in orbit in 2027 called the Voyager Station. Current plans show that it would hold 280 guests and 112 crew members, with its spinning-wheel design providing artificial gravity. But the breathless news reports omit any discussion of the difficulty and cost of such a project.

However, on April 12, 2021, NASA announced that it is considering allowing a reality TV show to send a civilian to the International Space Station and film them for 10 days. It’s plausible that this idea could be extended, with a wealthy couple booking a long-term stay for the entire process from conception to birth in orbit.

At the moment, there’s no evidence anyone has had sex in space. But with about 600 people having been in Earth orbit – including one NASA couple who kept their marriage a secret – one space historian was able to gather plenty of Space Age salacious moments.

My guess is that sometime around 2040, a unique individual will be born. They may carry the citizenship of their parents, or they may be born in a facility operated by a corporation and end up stateless. But I prefer to think of this future person as the first true citizen of the galaxy.

Chris Impey, University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy, University of Arizona

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How catfishers exploit basic human neuroscience

During the pandemic, millions of people turned to online dating apps or social networking sites to find company. That meant millions more marks for scammers who use dating sites to find their victims. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the number of romance scams and confidence scams increased dramatically, by 22 % in 2020. The pandemic created ideal conditions for such scams to thrive, as individuals had good excuses about why they could not meet in public, and many individuals were searching for ways to connect with others.

The term “catfishing” refers to these kinds of dating site scams, in which scammers create a fictious online social media identity and use it to cozy up to one’s victim with the goal of gleaning money or personal information from them. The term has been normalized by shows (like the eponymous MTV reality series) and widespread media coverage of catfishing scams in the past few years. Given all this awareness, one might be prone to wonder: why do so many people continue to fall for such centuries-old scams?

To answer that requires turning to science. Indeed, research from translational neuroscience explains why the centuries old scam of catfishing continues to flourish despite increased media attention. Needs for social binds and the resulting reward of neurotransmitters reinforce behaviors such as reaching out and connecting even when faced with diminishing returns.

Social connections are fundamental to the lives of many different animals. Living in social groups can have strong evolutionary advantages. It is easier to acquire necessary resources such as food, finding a mate, and raising the offspring when living in a group. The long-term bonds associated with affiliative behavior — or the motivation to approach and remain close to another individual — likely evolved a long time ago from shorter-term social connections, such as reproduction and parenting. The tendency towards longer term affiliative relationships is one that humans share with many of our primate evolutionary cousins.

Animals form bonds through a number of chemical messengers acting in the brain to regulate social connection, such as oxytocin, vasopressin, glucocorticoids, endogenous opioids, and hormones, including androgens and estrogens. Studying multiple species of voles, a small rodent, has given incredible insight into the mechanisms of bonding. For example, infusing oxytocin into the brains of a female, non-monogamous prairie vole accelerates pair bonding, and infusing vasopressin does the same for male prairie voles. The reward system also plays a key role. Blocking the effects of opioids in the reward system of baby chickens using naloxone also blocks the comfort gained from physical, social contact.  

Other evidence for the rewarding nature of human bonding comes from psychopharmacology. Numerous studies have shown over the past few decades that the brain has a specialized system that underlies the brain’s reward response. This brain circuit, the mesolimbic dopamine system, begins in the ventral tegmental area, a cluster of neurons located in the midbrain that produce and release the transmitter dopamine. The ventral tegmental area connects and communicates with the nucleus accumbens, another brain region involved in the regulation of the brain’s reward response.  When this system is activated in response to a rewarding stimulus, dopamine is released that results in the experience of pleasure.  Activities involving natural rewards such as food, water and sex activate this system encouraging us to repeat these behaviors, thus ensuring survival and reproduction of our species.  Drugs of abuse such as alcohol, nicotine, methamphetamine, and other addictive drugs “highjack” this system, resulting in abnormal dopamine release that may result in addiction.


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


Many brain transmitters, neuropeptides and hormones are known to modulate the mesolimbic dopamine system. One such substance is oxytocin, the so-called “love hormone,” which has been shown to be involved in social and sexual interactions along with mother-infant bonding. Given the role of this region in addiction, it is not unreasonable to speculate that abnormal activation of the mesolimbic dopamine system by oxytocin may predispose some to developing a type of bonding or love addiction.

Further, studies of individuals in the throes of romantic love, as well as mothers of young children, indicate that both groups show differential increased activation in brain regions rich in vasopressin and oxytocin receptors, when shown images of their lover or children, respectively. That underlines how exposure to these other individuals are processed as rewarding.

But, what’s more, exposure to images of these same persons also results in decreased activation in areas associated with the judgment of the intentions of others. In other words, arguably, the experience of being in love increases our feeling of reward around our beloved, while at the same time decreasing our critical faculties directed towards the objects of our affection.

This is a recipe for being catfished.

Neuroeconomics researchers have examined brain activation during game theory–type tasks that are specifically designed to examine trust. In this paradigm, an investor can either keep their capital or invest with a trustee. The trustee “invests” the money and then decides how much to share with the initial investor.  

In the aforementioned study, participants were told that they were either investing with a friend versus a computer or non-friend. Not surprisingly, they were much more willing to invest more with a friend. However, what was surprising was that this remained the case even though the outcomes were designed to be the same regardless of condition and in fact they were always investing with the computer.

Nevertheless, these “catfished” participants demonstrated greater reward activation when they believed the wins were with the friend. Likewise, they were much slower to learn the contingencies when trust was high.  Administration of oxytocin during similar games was found to increase the initial “investment” as well. 

Humans are necessarily social animals, and our underlying neurophysiology is designed to reinforce and reward human bonding. Connecting with another individual is reinforced through neurotransmitter systems such as dopamine and oxytocin. These systems, when activated, also suppress aspects of deliberative reasoning, as we are more likely to trust the object of our affection and less attentive to the contingencies of their behavior.

Sadly, catfishers exploit these properties by amping up the reward aspects (daily calls, frequent communication) hoping to suppress skeptical thinking. Understanding our hardwired biases is critical to help support the victims who often blame themselves and feel isolated through the experience.

How to make the best grilled scallops

The best grilled scallops are crisp on the outside and tender on the inside—perfect to plunk on top of arugula salad, buttered spaghetti, creamy risotto, you name it, or served alongside everything from potato salad to charred corn. The worst grilled scallops, meanwhile, are overcooked and rubbery and not at all what we want.

To help you reach Peak Scallop Perfection (it’s out there!), we called in food writer and classically trained cook Christine Burns Rudalevige, who shares her top nine cooking tips below—plus, a ruby red grapefruit and chile glaze that the scallops totally love. (Psst: They also love an extra-cold rosé to go with.) And for even more A+ grilling recipes, tips, and tricks, check out our book Any Night Grilling by Paula Disbrowe. Now, fire up the grill and let’s get started. 

I recently saw a bumper sticker on a Subaru with Maine plates that read “Real friends visit in March.”

Thankfully, I have several of those types of friends. But I am also grateful for the many more who visit in the summer. These fair weather comrades typically want two things: to go to the beach, and to eat as much seafood as possible. 

In the two years we’ve lived in coastal Maine, scallops have become my après beach summer seafood of choice. They are elegant, easy, and tailor-made for the grill. Because scallops are a bit pricey, I’ve picked up a half dozen or so tricks to make sure they come out succulent, silky, and sweet after a short stint over the fire. 

Here are nine easy tips to make them the best they can be: 

1. Buy the biggest dry-packed scallops on offer. The bigger the sea scallop, the sweeter it will be. These big boys are more forgiving on the grill, meaning they won’t go from raw to rubber as quickly as smaller ones do. If you can find them, go for jumbo (usually about 10 scallops per pound) or giant (usually between 15 and 20 per pound).

2. Scallops grill best naked. Marinades can hide the scallops’ delicate flavor and cause flare-ups that create a scorched crust. You only need a simple finishing glaze with a sweet undertone and a finishing kick. (In addition to the ruby red grapefruit glaze, borrow some inspiration from these salmon recipes and try out: maple-cardamom, or ginger-soy, or Buffalo, or teriyaki.) 

3. Keep your scallops as dry and cold as possible. Use a paper towel—or Unpaper Towels—to blot each scallop dry, then place the scallops on a baking rack sitting inside a baking sheet, and refrigerate until you’re ready to cook. Get your grill grates as clean as can be, then coat well with a neutral, high-smoke point oil (such as grapeseed or canola). This juxtaposition of cold flesh and a hot, oiled grate prevents any sticking.  

4. Let the scallops ride by themselves on the skewer for easy, fast cooking times (without worrying about how done the other skewered bits are). If the skewers are wooden, remember to presoak them in warm water for about 45 minutes before cooking. 

5. Season them generously all over with kosher salt and freshly ground pepper just before you slap them down on the heat.

6. Cook the scallops on one side for about four minutes to get great grill marks (like those ones above!). Cook on the second side only until they are just opaque in the middle, to avoid overcooking. Cut one open if you have to.

7. Slide the thin edge of a fish spatula under all of the scallops on the skewer and then carefully flip them. Using tongs at this juncture would be a mistake.

8. Only apply the glaze to the scallops for the very last minute that they sit on the grill. Otherwise, the glaze will burn. You can certainly reglaze them on the plate just before serving. 

9. And lastly, eat them immediately, while they are still hot.  

Grilled Scallops With Ruby Red Grapefruit & Chile Glaze

Not scallop-ed out yet? Here are some additional ideas from the editors: 

Bay Scallop Chowder

On the East Coast, chowder is ubiquitous during the summer, but typically clams steal the spotlight. In this recipe by Food52 co-founder Amanda Hesser, bay scallops shine. They’re meatier than clams, with a more buttery texture, making this creamy chowder taste extra-luxurious.

Simple Pasta With Leeks & Scallops

This pasta may seem too sophisticated for a Wednesday night meal at first, but the recipe is really as simple as it gets. Buttery caramelized leeks are the perfect complement to rich scallops, and a little lemon zest on top does wonders to cut through all the fat. Keep this recipe in your back pocket for a weeknight win.

Tom Colicchio’s Pan-Roasted Scallops With Scallop Jus

Double the scallop, double the delicious. This Genius Recipe hails from restaurateur and television host Tom Colicchio. He employs the part of the scallop that’s usually discarded (the muscle) in a flavorful scallop jus to accompany absolutely perfectly seared scallops.

Scallop Crudo With Coconut Milk & Lime

If you’ve never had raw scallops, don’t fear! Uncooked, their sweetness is accentuated, plus the buttery texture really shines. As recipe developer Josh Cohen writes, “The key to this dish is finding the highest quality scallops possible,”—great advice for any raw seafood recipe. If raw seafood isn’t possible for you, this cool creamy coconut marinade would be just as delicious on cooked shrimp.

Seared Sea Scallops With Gingered Pea Purée & Cilantro Gremolata

These aren’t your grandma’s mushy peas. Instead, this pea purée packs a punch with hits of spicy fresh ginger and lemon juice. It plays the perfect sidekick to seared sea scallops with a bright gremolata—that smartly swaps cilantro for the traditional parsley—to tie the whole dish together.

Fried Scallop Sandwich

When in doubt, bread and fry your seafood, then throw it on a sandwich. Turns out scallops are no exception. They’re meatier than clams, more exciting than white fish, easier to prep than softshell crabs—and onced dredged in a spicy cornmeal batter and served on a bun, totally irresistible.

Photos by James Ransom

How will bars survive in a post-pandemic world?

It was a long, cold winter for Toby Cecchini and other bar owners, but warmer weather brings hope.

In May 2020, in the thick of the pandemic, Cecchini—a writer and native Midwesterner who has tended bar in New York City since the 1980s, is credited with creating the Cosmopolitan cocktail and owns the Long Island Bar and the Rockwell Place in Brooklyn—explored an existential question in an opinion piece for the New York Times: Can anyone save New York’s bars and restaurants? Since bar and restaurant operating costs rely on full bars, close contact and intimate conversations, how could these establishments possibly survive in a socially distanced world?

Sadly, many are gone, but some have pushed through. Barely a year later, Cecchini and other bar and restaurant owners across the U.S. have managed—with grit, hustle, agility and faith, and the support of loyal, ever-thirsty regulars—to survive the pandemic’s crushing economic toll. As the weather thaws and more people become vaccinated ahead of an expected summertime surge in business, how will bar owners and other hospitality pros keep their establishments afloat while navigating hurdles like staffing shortages, ongoing limited capacity and the threat of another shutdown?

“Obviously we lost money, and we’re still losing money,” Cecchini tells Salon. As winter loomed, he considered shutting down but ultimately decided to “hang on by the fingernails.” 

Even during the busiest days last summer, however, “we were still doing up to about a third of our normal revenue, which is not going to get you anywhere near a profit,” Cecchini says. “You’re running at a loss—paying money in order to serve people 12, 14 hours a day and bust your ass on the sidewalk. It’s kind of this long experiment in suspended disbelief. ‘Is this crazy? Are we going to be doing this for the next two years? Or is this just a question of hanging on for a year, things will bounce back, and this will all be kind of a bad dream?'”

Support from local drinkers proved a lifeline. “We’re kind of a small neighborhood tavern,” Cecchini says. “Our customers, the people who kept us afloat, were unbelievably kind and welcoming. We got this incredible outpouring that gave us a big boost of morale and made it, in a way, so much easier to deal with all the hardship of working on the sidewalk having lost a lot of your staff.” 

Then, fortunately, the vaccine arrived, and on March 19 indoor dining capacity in New York City expanded to 50%—the lightest restriction since the city first shut down dining rooms in March 2020. “With that and warm weather and outdoor dining coming back, the prognosis looks much less bleak than it did eight months ago,” Cecchini says.

Meanwhile, in Harlem, Alibi Lounge—one of the city’s only Black-owned LGBTQ bars—has fought relentlessly to stay alive. The bar, which opened in 2016, has survived vandalism and robbery; in March 2020, owner Alexi Minko reportedly was brutally beaten inside the bar by six strangers and sent to the hospital. Alibi struggled to pay rent and utilities since the start of the pandemic, yet Minko kept the bar afloat by cobbling together funds from the bar’s sales and donations from a GoFundMe campaign created last May. 

“Myself and my team, we’ve worked extremely hard to survive all the challenges and obstacles thrown at us,” Minko tells Salon. “It’s love, it’s sweat, it’s tears, it’s blood—and it’s the support of the community. It’s what I like to call a perfect storm.”

Indeed, Alibi might have shut down long ago if it weren’t for Minko’s resolve to keep the place going. “The basic thing is I didn’t want Alibi to close, because of the importance it has for the community” he says. “That means waking up every single day to make sure we were adjusting to the new reality—sometimes, it meant asking for help—but also to keep doing the work.” Thankfully, “the end seems to be in sight” as more people get vaccinated and warm weather draws drinkers to the bar’s sidewalk and patio, which is “a huge plus” boosting revenue, Minko says. “We still worry because you never know—is [COVID-19] going to come back? Is it gone forever? Are people going to come out of their homes and trust us and trust themselves? But for now, things are looking up.”

It’s also been an uphill battle for Alibi’s Harlem neighbor, Clay. “We’ve had to dynamically shift our style of service, while still making sure that people understood our heart was in hospitality,” bar director Andrea Needell Matteliano says. “It’s a tremendous challenge.” Additionally, Clay lost a bulk of business from outside its own neighborhood. 

“We had become a destination for a lot of folks who would come in from New Jersey, Connecticut, Westchester, Brooklyn and Queens, and of course all of that died immediately,” Matteliano adds. Fortunately, locals stepped up to fill the void. “I was blown away by the number of people within our own community, both regulars and new guests, who said, ‘We’re going to make sure that we dine or order takeout from you at least twice a week, because we want to see you survive,'” Matteliano says. “It was overwhelming.”

While that helped Clay keep its doors open, staffing up for summer is another anxious-making struggle. “We’ve hired some outstanding new talent, but we need so much more,” Matteliano says. “We’re relying heavily on our core team, asking for extra shifts, and it’s tough, because these shifts are not just physically tiring anymore—they’re emotionally draining. At the end of the day, the fact that we still have the restaurant we dreamed of and created keeps our fires lit. But we’re also worn very thin because it becomes completely consuming.”

The pandemic has also wreaked havoc for bar and restaurant owners far beyond New York. But chef Deborah VanTrece, owner of Twisted Soul Cookhouse and Pours in Atlanta, Georgia, refuses to give up. “What’s helped us survive is really just determination,” VanTrece says. “A refusal to quit. There’s been so many things thrown at us throughout this pandemic—shutdowns, rules for carryout only, limited capacity seating, outdoor-only seating—and we’ve realized that the only way to maneuver is relying on flexibility and a prayer.”

Similar to the Long Island Bar, Rockwell Place, Alibi and Clay, Twisted Soul is a rock for the people who drink and eat there. “We’re very strongly seated in our community,” VanTrece says. “When the pandemic started, our first pivot was to come back and start feeding people. Things were shutting down left and right, people were concerned, and our first thought was, ‘We can try to help.'” Initially, Twisted Soul offered food on a “pay-what-you-can” basis, VanTrece says. “It was obvious from the very beginning, when I had a landlord that wouldn’t renegotiate my rent, that I couldn’t do anything but keep going,” she adds. “I realized whether I could pay my bills or not, I could still feed people. And that’s what we did.”

Still, it’s been a turbulent ride. Twisted Soul went full circle, from a full-service restaurant to all carryout before reopening its dining room last June at limited capacity with rigorous safety protocols. Part of the motivation to reopen, VanTrece says, was to provide a haven at a time when social unrest over racism and police violence targeting Black people was roiling America. “Atlanta is the birthplace of the civil rights movement,” she explains. “When we watched a Black man [Rayshard Brooks] get killed on TV, it also [underscored] the importance of restaurants as a gathering space to strategize and just talk.”

She continues: “People needed a safe space at that moment, and we had done everything we could to make sure we had one—not just from a physical standpoint, but from a social standpoint—a place where we can gather, we can cry, and it’s OK. Because as a country, we were going through something that was bigger than anything we’d all experienced. Not just a pandemic—we were going through somewhat of a civil war.”

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp announced that all remaining COVID-19 restrictions in the state would be lifted starting April 8, but VanTrece isn’t rushing to resume full-capacity service. 

“We’ve not made that decision yet because we’re not comfortable with it,” she says.  “We’re trying to balance survival of our business with survival of the human race. It’s hard for me to say we’re out of the weeds, because this is not over and we can’t predict the future, but we remain steadfast in our commitment to just keep going.” 

Despite the uncertainty, she insists Twisted Soul has “done more than survived—we have thrived”—to the point where she’s looking to expand the venue into a bigger space. “It’s a little bit scary, but our faith is stronger than fear,” VanTrece says. “We’re going to move forward to grow our business in spite of the things that are going on, believing that this is all going to work out.”

Ticonderoga Club, also in Atlanta, initially switched to a to-go-only model before staging a limited, reservation-only return to in-person dining. “At best, this has gotten us back to well below fifty percent of [pre-pandemic] gross sales,” partner Paul Calvert says. “But it’s something, and we have seen a little bit of growth from the basement we were in last March.” 

Georgia moved “relatively quickly” in allowing businesses to serve to-go alcohol, Calvert adds, which helped Ticonderoga Club stay afloat. There’s now a bill sitting on Gov. Kemp’s desk that, if signed, would allow to-go cocktails in the state to become permanent. “If we ever return to something that resembles January of 2019, [and we’re] still able to sell to-go cocktails, that will be really helpful for the bottom line,” Calvert says. But at the moment, “all we can do is just try to be safe, cautious, take care of our debts, take care of our staff, and hopefully grow our business back.”

Across the U.S., ample outdoor seating has proved crucial for struggling bars, restaurants and other hospitality businesses. Michelle Foik and Katy Pizza, co-owners of Eris Brewery and Cider House in Chicago, adjusted to the pandemic by expanding their outdoor service area, as well as trimming their menu and investing in cans. 

“We converted our parking lots to extend our patio, which created about 96 seats for us to be able to host people who were willing to support us,” Foik says. “Summer 2020 gave us a lot of hope,” Pizza adds. “Winter was pretty bleak, but we set up to-go orders for food, beer and cider, which was primarily our revenue.” 

They also purchased a canning machine so that people who loved their cider but had stopped going to bars could drink it at home. “Previously we were [sending beer and cider] in kegs to different pubs around town, but of course none of the pubs had business,” Pizza says. “Getting it out there in cans was huge. We’re looking at adding more capacity for cider production because we think that’s going to help us a lot” in 2021.

As it did for so many others, 2020 upended Brian Bartels’ plans, causing the bartender and author of “The United States of Cocktails” and “The Bloody Mary” to delay opening his Settle Down Tavern in Madison, Wisconsin. Instead of March, the tavern opened in May, but only for takeout and curbside pickup, Bartels recalls. “There were just four of us working, and the world got worse and worse,” not just from the pandemic but also the protests ignited by the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin. “We’re located about half a block from the Capitol, so there was a lot of unrest from a civil and social standpoint for everyone,” Bartels says. “There were businesses being boarded up and businesses being looted over on State Street, so our early days came with a lot of tension and anxiety, and it kind of snowballed for months and months.” 

An extended outdoor patio with around 50 additional seats boosted business over the summer, but then came winter. “We found ourselves in some really difficult times in November and December when the weather got colder, so we decided to get creative,” Bartels says. “We created something called the ‘Tundra Club,’ where people who were brave enough could sit outside and have a burger and a drink in harsh temperatures—and they really got into it.”

As Settle Down Tavern’s one-year anniversary approaches, Bartels says it’s been “the hardest year of my professional life, but we’re making the most of it, people are supportive and that’s the silver lining.” As far as the next few months, he too is concerned about staffing. 

“We definitely need a lot of people on weekends since we have a big outdoor patio,” he says. “Even on days I’m not scheduled to be a manager, I’m behind the bar bussing glassware, taking out garbage, clearing tables, hosting—kind of doing everything to make sure” the bar functions. “The reality is the future is wildly unpredictable,” he adds. “It’s this delicate juggling act of finding your center between the day-to-day and the inevitability that something else could happen down the road. You have to prepare for these situations more now as a result of the last year, which largely means maintaining your labor, not exceeding or wasting product and just being diligent about those little margins.”

Bar veteran and cocktail book author Eric Alperin, co-owner of The Varnish in downtown Los Angeles, believes that ultimately, bars will survive, albeit not quite the same as they did pre-pandemic. 

“This last year and a half taught us a lot of ways to operate differently, whether how we set up our rooms with tables and bar stools, or if we’re fortunate enough to have an outdoor space where we can host people,” Alperin says. “I think our local and state governments are going to see that those outdoor spaces are necessary, and hopefully they’ll allow us to operate outdoors through the end of the year, and maybe consider” making them permanent. 

Jeffery Morgenthaler—bar manager at Clyde Tavern in Portland, Oregon, which closed for winter but is looking to reopen come June—adds that certain kinds of bars, like basement speakeasies where people tend to be “all crammed in next to each other like sardines,” probably aren’t going to come back “for a very long time.”

While many bars and restaurants in New York and beyond simply could no longer afford to pay their rent, there are owners who decided, “Come hell or high water, I’m going to hold onto this place,” Cecchini says.

Even if it meant struggling with an attenuated staff and still running at a loss for a couple years.

“Everybody had to make all kinds of strange commitments to try to keep afloat during the pandemic,” he adds. “A lot of people lost staff that are not coming back because they found something else. It’s crazy upheaval, but at least now it feels like there’s light on the horizon. People are vaccinated, people are coming out.” Still, he estimates it’ll be “a solid two years before places like ours are back on their feet.”

Minko shares a similar faith in the future. “I just want to work,” he says. “I want to be able to open my doors to a safe environment for my customers, like I’ve been doing for the past five years. Nobody opens a business thinking, ‘I’m just going to use government grants or community support.’ We have a message, a mission to accomplish. I’m bringing new blood into the business. Fingers crossed—for myself, and for the hospitality industry to get back, somewhat, to where we were before.”

 

A ground-level look at America’s health care system

The Covid-19 pandemic has illuminated systemic problems in health care in ways that some people never took notice of before: health inequities, racism, ableism, and social and economic structures have all come to the forefront. But for those living with it, none of this was a surprise. Those inequities also exist at the structural level with hospitals, the subject of journalist Brian Alexander’s book “The Hospital: Life, Death, and Dollars in a Small American Town.”

Alexander explored the economic realities of small-town America in his previous book, “Glass House,” and it’s clear that he’s knowledgeable and comfortable with the topic in his new book as well. “The Hospital” begins in 2018, when health care had become America’s largest industry, making up 18 percent of the economy and accounting for about $3.6 trillion annually. Health is big business, Alexander writes, but hospital economics are not like regular economics, which is the backbone of the problem for the Community Hospitals and Wellness Centers (CHWC) location in Bryan, Ohio.

Health inequities were commonplace in Bryan: Plagued by unemployment, depression, addiction, and poverty, life expectancy varied, as did utilization of health care — not to mention the residents’ ability to pay medical bills. Most of Alexander’s reporting took place in 2018 and 2019, when CHWC was in the red, and struggling to avoid being swallowed up by bigger, more lucrative health systems. He was given close access and allowed to observe the workings of the hospital by then chief executive officer, Phil Ennen. He attends board meetings, rides along in ambulances, and meets many of the patients who are in dire straits due to a lack of medical care and health insurance.

Alexander takes a hard, almost cynical, look at the health care industry, and at one point writes, “The only question was whether you were grifting to benefit people or to cash in.” This quote could, perhaps, explain much of the book. Alexander juxtaposes countless examples of large corporations and political decisions that would fall on the side of grifting, consistently acting in their own best interest, alongside the struggles of the hospital and the economic juggling that was done in order to stay open and fully functional.

Despite Alexander’s misgivings about the larger economic factors of the industry, it is clear that at CHWC, the doctors, nurses, and certain administrators, including Ennen, saw their work as more than a job. Many doctors not only provided medical care to the uninsured and underinsured patients who came through the doors, but handed them cash for prescriptions and food, and raised money for funerals and other costs that their patients couldn’t afford. It was more than a hospital: It was part of the social fabric of the community.

The story of CHWC and the economics of health care are interwoven with stories of the hospital staff, patients, and residents of Bryan. Some are followed sporadically throughout the book, which ends during the early months of the pandemic in 2020. We see how the depressed economy led to job cuts and factory closures, especially in northern Ohio towns like Bryan and Litchfield. Many of these factories, like toolmakers, metal stampers, and glassmakers, supplied the big automobile companies. When the auto industry collapsed, it also caused these suppliers to close. Workers were forced to take lower paying jobs at other factories where they had no experience, or wherever they could find work, simply to stay afloat.

These jobs don’t often come with health insurance, but even if they do, the deductibles are high, discouraging doctor’s visits, and some sick patients are burdened with thousands of dollars of debt. Despite working full time, many workers are also on food stamps and Medicaid. For many, it’s cheaper to pay the penalty for not having insurance than it is to pay an insurance premium. And lack of access to affordable healthy food, combined with genetic predispositions to illness and various social determinants of health, often intersects with the lack of regular doctor’s visits.

The book is perhaps less about medicine than it is about economics, what the health care industry values, and the effects on public health. It’s clear that the doctors and staff profiled care about their patients and communities. But money has steadily taken over health care. Insurance companies provide breaks and financial incentives to the bigger hospitals and health companies while marking up those same products and services for smaller hospitals, making it hard for hospitals like CHWC to survive independently.

Ennen ends up being formally suspended over his handling of a sexual harassment case with two employees and related promotions, and ultimately resigned in 2019. Throughout the book, Alexander writes about Ennen’s juggling of jobs and finances — anything to keep the hospital afloat. Once Ennen leaves, the reader can sense a shift in tone at the hospital without his presence. The hospital started to achieve a profit margin every month, goals were set, and physicians agreed to stay. There is a quick wrap-up in which we learn that the hospital has managed to get a handle on its finances, but after more than 200 pages of intricate economic detail about its struggles, we never really learn much about how CHWC stabilized itself so quickly. And discussion of the Covid-19 pandemic is similarly compressed into the final section.

Alexander writes of “a jumble of ill-fitting building blocks: the doctoring industry, the hospital industry, the insurance industry, the drug industry, the device industry. They’d all been able to tweak and sand the corners of proposed ‘solutions’ to benefit themselves.” One wonders if CHWC was able to do just this, in order to ensure their survival.

Over and over, Alexander illustrates contradictions: Hospitals need money, and they need partnerships with insurance companies and drug companies. They need to be flush enough to pay doctors and specialists to provide care for communities, especially rural and underserved communities. This may involve being absorbed by larger corporations in order to preserve access to health providers. At the same time, grassroots approaches to public health are needed in small towns that manage to cut across political and social barriers.

At times, it’s not clear what Alexander’s central goal is: Is he following the patients of Bryan, in his pages and pages of social observations and local history? Is he chronicling the drama of hospital life and Bryan’s job crisis? Is he offering economic commentary on the health care system? While the plethora of side stories tends to complicate the main message of the book, overall it is a compelling snapshot of small-town America and how business is intertwined with health care.

While there is a happy ending in some ways — the hospital remains open and independent — Alexander’s account raises a lot of unsettling questions about systemic and local issues that continue to linger. As Alexander writes, “Bryan, Ohio, wasn’t much different from many other places. It was a microcosm of America’s sickness.”

* * *

Jaime R. Herndon is a medical and parenting writer who also writes about popular culture in her spare time. Her work has appeared in New York Family magazine, Book Riot, Fiction Advocate, Today’s Parent, Motherly, Healthline, and Health Union, among other publications. She is currently working on an essay collection.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

The Asian men I never knew

Time and again I have heard that the phenomenon of Asian women in relationships with white men is due to white men’s fetishization of Asian women — which is no doubt partially true. American stereotypes of Asian women as ultra-feminine, sexual, and subservient have fit well in our hyper-hetero society with stereotypes of white men as manly saviors and providers. But this explanation only sees the story from the white male perspective. So, the question I have found interesting is: Why did my Japanese American mom and so many other women in her circle choose to be with white men?

As a kid growing up in Berkeley in the 1970s and ’80s, I was surrounded by Asian women and white men. All wonderful human beings who unconditionally loved and cared for me, a half-Asian, half-white only child who oddly preferred the company of grownups to other kids. But there was always an absence at our social gatherings, one that I never fully noticed until I was older. There were no Asian men. Not one. So, despite the joy, I received a clear, if unconscious, message: for Asian women to find love, happiness, and security, they must be with white men.

The exception was when, once a year, we’d drive to Los Angeles to see my mom’s family. These trips were precious to our family and provided a glimpse of something rare to me: a world with Asian boys and men. My boy cousins and uncles, like my girl cousins and aunts, were warm, witty, good-looking, confident – in short, they defied all the stereotypes about Asian men that I had consciously and unconsciously absorbed throughout my childhood, and I loved them all. But this world was fleeting; soon we were heading back up Highway 5 to Berkeley and my fellow hippie-ish, mixed race and white friends.

* * *

My mom, who was imprisoned as a child during the Japanese American incarceration, had a difficult relationship with her father, my Jichan. She experienced him as physically present, yet emotionally absent. To this day, she grieves not having been able to connect with him and works to make peace with his ambiguous shadow. One barrier between them was language; by the time my mom, the youngest in her family, came along, her parents were fearful of their kids speaking their mother-tongue, as anti-Japanese racism was on the rise, so they encouraged them to speak English. But the barrier between my mom and her father was more than language.

After the incarceration, or “Camp,” as everyone called it, my Jichan withdrew into himself. Speaking with other families who experienced Camp, I’ve learned my family wasn’t unique; many of the first generation Issei men “went silent.” A popular theory about the reason for this silence is that it was cultural – that in Japan, especially at that time, men were stoic in the face of hardship and felt great shame if they were unable to provide for their families. Japanese culture also tends to value introversion compared to the western preference for extroversion.

But there was more to these men’s withdrawal than cultural tendencies.

Before the incarceration of all people of Japanese descent on the west coast, the FBI swept through communities, eventually arresting over 5,000 Issei men with no due process, targeting those they identified as strong community leaders. These men were held in small, temporary detention centers and, to this day, we have little idea what happened to them. Yet, knowing what we do about prisons with little to no public oversight, especially those born from wartime and racist hysteria (Abu Ghraib comes to mind), we can only imagine what these men suffered. Afterwards, most of these men coped with their trauma by not talking about it. With no resources for therapy or other social services, limited English, their families still locked away and their homes and businesses gone, these men were not simply culturally quiet in the face of shame; they were forced quiet.

The terror waged on these men did exactly what it was intended to do: break their spirits and weaken them, their families, and their communities, for generations to come.

The Issei men that weren’t taken by the FBI were also taken from their businesses and homes, imprisoned with their families with no legal process and no idea what their fates would be. They were rendered unable to do what they had been raised to believe a strong man should do: protect his family. Even with masterful English, but especially without it, how do you explain to your English-speaking kids that this country that you have sacrificed everything for in order to give them a better life looks at their young faces and sees the enemy? How do you speak out against this injustice when you might get deported or much worse?

Some Issei men did in fact speak out in protest, despite these efforts to silence them. But for those who didn’t, silence was a rational choice, a response to emotional trauma, and a direct result of the government’s campaign to assert white supremacy on the Japanese American community.

As a girl, my mom longed to know her father. She once shared a memory with me of sitting outside her parents’ bedroom door one night in the 1950s, wishing she could walk in and talk to them about life, philosophy and all she was going through as a typical, confused teen. But she didn’t because she knew they wouldn’t have been able to communicate; she would have stumbled over her Japanese and they over their English. Her father would have been embarrassed at his inability to give her what she wanted, and this awkwardness would have just amplified her loneliness. So she returned to her room. Recalling this memory made my mom tear up, and it made me cry, too. I so wanted to go back in time to help her cross that threshold. While my grandmother’s English was also limited, she was emotionally expressive, and she and my mom managed to have a close, if strained, connection. But for my mom, her father was beyond reach.

* * *

The media has always worked in tandem with government institutions to support racist policies against people of color. From the Yellow Peril, to yellowface vaudeville acts, to depictions of bucktoothed, monkey-like traitors during WWII, to grotesque, buffoonish characters like Long Duk Dong from “Sixteen Candles,” we’ve seen Asians dehumanized, with Asian men often cast as evil and asexual. In his essay “‘Good Looking for an Asian’: how I shed white ideals of masculinity,” author Matthew Salesses discusses the history of anti-Asian racism in America and how, beginning in the late 19th century, white men were threatened by the presence of Chinese men who had immigrated here to work on the transcontinental railroad and feared these men would steal “their” women and jobs. He states that the stereotype of the asexual Asian man was born from this white male insecurity. We see parallels throughout history, with stereotypes of Black men as alternately lazy and predatory, and of course during the 2016 presidential election, we heard Trump cast Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists, coming to steal “our” women and jobs.

(One notable exception to the stereotype of Asian men as asexual is one of Hollywood’s first heartthrobs, Sessue Hayakawa, a Japanese man. But his legacy goes widely unnoticed in the mainstream memory – another erasure of an Asian man that sexually threatened white male dominance.)

Each relationship is complex and unique; to try to speak for all Asian women who have chosen to be with white men would be insane. However, given this history, it doesn’t surprise me that my mom, as well as many of the women closest to her, turned toward white men. Everywhere they looked in American culture – the government, business, media – they saw enticing images of white men painted as strong, safe, emotionally available providers, while images of Asian men were either nonexistent or weak, frightening, and shameful. Meanwhile, memories of their fathers and other male leaders in their communities being taken from them – if not physically, then emotionally – for the “crime” of being Japanese were still raw, open wounds.

As a girl, I never allowed myself to consider Asian boys as options for dating. I never thought, “I’m not attracted to Asian boys,” or “My mom chose a white man, so therefore I will.” And yet I remember, when I saw Asian boys in elementary and high school, feeling a strange sort of clamping sensation in my gut. I remember quickly looking away and looking instead to my mixed race and white friends. Even now, the memory of this sensation makes me sad and sick. I’m trying to remember the conscious thought connected to this sensation, but the closest I can come is not so much a thought, but more of a confusing, ghostlike outline of an absence.

As a young adult, I sought role models in the fields of writing and dance. I hungrily read books by Maxine Hong Kingston, Amy Tan, Bharati Mukherjee, and Jessica Hagedorn, and joined Asian American Dance Performances, a politically conscious dance company run by women. But I found few men speaking out about their experiences as Asian Americans. This absence fit my unconscious bias of Asian men as somehow in hiding, not wanting or able to process their feelings and most certainly not wanting to express them publicly. I chalked this up to that explanation I’d heard so often: “Their silence is cultural.” Placing responsibility only on them and Asian cultures rather than on American history. Discovering non-American Japanese male authors like Kazuo Ishiguro and Haruki Murakami was pivotal for me – these men hadn’t been subjected to the particular brand of anti-Asian racism cultivated here, and their expressiveness had an ease and freedom to it that, up until then, I had mostly associated with whiteness.

In my 20s, I started to notice that when I introduced myself to white guys I met at parties as my more recognizably Japanese name (Kimiko, as opposed to Kimi), I’d see a spark of interest in their eyes. I recognized a certain currency in this. Like everyone, I saw who was running the country, who had the most access to power and security. I had experienced the benefits of white male privilege growing up with my white father. But I didn’t just want to be with a white man; in some ways, I sought to become one! My education up until college was centered on the ideas and works of white men; why shouldn’t I have aspired to this apparent greatness? I remember mimicking the confidence and entitlement of my white boyfriend, and found that moving through life in this manner, with him at my side, doors swung open faster and wider than when I was alone. I was unconsciously emulating the idea that a white man needed to be the main character of my story, as I’d seen in so many films, like “Amistad,” “Dances with Wolves,” and “Come See the Paradise,” where stories about people of color are told through the eyes of white men.

* * *

Only now, at age 50, am I becoming more keenly aware of the losses in my life caused by my turning toward whiteness and the racism – external and internalized – that made me look so quickly away from Asian men. I feel the lack of Asian men in my family’s daily life. I grieve the absence of the Asian men I never knew.

After reparations for Japanese Americans, some of my family members who had been reluctant to discuss Camp were more willing to talk about it. Something in this official, public acknowledgment of wrongdoing, along with what our country values most – a paycheck – allowed them to step out from the darkness into the light. The money didn’t make up for the incalculable costs, but it was validation. It makes me think how necessary and overdue reparations are for Black and Indigenous communities in this country, who have been subjected to government-sponsored genocide and terror for generations.

Terror doesn’t just stop; its emotional and practical effects are inherited.

The recent resurgence in anti-Asian violence – fueled by Trump’s rhetoric as he sought to place blame for the mishandling of the pandemic away from himself – has been horrific. Seeing our elders attacked in broad daylight, often seemingly from nowhere – so much hate just waiting to physicalize – brings up old wounds and creates new trauma. It’s yet another reminder that human rights can’t be taken for granted, but must be vigilantly fought for and protected.

In spite of this, I am hopeful. I love that today there are so many thriving Asian men visible in all fields – strong, thoughtful men who even seem to be allowed to be complex and vulnerable (allowed to be human, the ultimate freedom). Authors like Salesses, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Brandon Shimoda, and others are expanding literature and poetry with their inspired voices; hot movie stars like Steven Yeun are becoming household names. My daughters and other young Asian Americans have these men to look to as role models and crushes.

To be American is to be culturally mixed, no matter one’s ethnic background. All my relationships are interracial, because I am. There has always been genuine love between me and my white partners, between my parents, and between me and my dad – a human love that I truly believe transcends race and gender. That said, we can’t deny the various insidious ways that white supremacy infiltrates our minds and most intimate spaces.

The other day, when somehow the subject of an imagined future husband came up in a conversation with my teenage daughter, she casually stated, “Oh, he probably won’t be white.” I had to smile a bit at her nonchalant sentiment, so different from mine as a teen. Of course, who knows who she’ll love, and I hope she’ll choose her partners based on love, not race. We all deserve the right to choose the loves of our lives from self-love, awareness, and empowerment, without the fear that being with someone who looks like us will be dangerous or, worse, the fear that they will be taken from us.

[CORRECTION: A previous version of this essay did not indicate that some of the Issei men chose to and were able to speak out. The story has been updated.]

Meet the microscopic animal that can survive being shot out of a gun

Imagine a fleshy microscopic caterpillar that lumbers around on its eight legs like a bear and seems to have a primitive camera lens jammed in the middle of its face. In a saner world, this would be a half-hearted Halloween costume depicting a child’s poorly executed idea of an insect blob monster. Alas, we inhabit a reality where such a creature actually exists: It’s known as a tardigrade (nickname: water bear) and is one of nature’s most notoriously hardy animals (read: hard to kill). In fact, it can survive being shot out of a high-speed gun. Figuring that out wasn’t just a mad scientist’s lark, but had a real (and fascinating) scientific purpose. 

As reported in Live Science, a group of researchers at the British college the University of Kent fired some water bears out of a “two-stage light gas gun,” which shoots out the objects faster than a normal gun. The scientists first froze the creatures so that their metabolism would fall to only a fraction of its normal state; then they fired them from the gun at different speeds, so they could analyze how that variation might effect them. They found that the tardigrades could survive speeds of 3,000 feet per second and a pressure upon impact of roughly 1.14 gigapascals. Anything above those levels — which, in their own right, would kill the vast majority of life forms — and the water bears too will perish, according to the research they published in the journal Astrobiology.

This experiment, though arguably cruel, had a larger purpose — and the fact that it was published in a journal called “Astrobiology” might be your first clue as to what that purpose was. According to Science Magazine, a Ph.D. student at Queen Mary University of London named Alejandra Traspas led the study after she heard about a 2019 Israeli moon mission called Beresheet. There were tardigrades on board the lander that the public did not know about, and after it crashed on the Moon’s surface, many scientists were concerned that they may have contaminated the lunar soil. Because the shock pressure generated from the lander’s metal frame when it crashed would have been much higher than 1.14 gigapascals, Traspas told Science that “we can confirm they didn’t survive.”

While the water bears may not be living on the Moon right now, that does not diminish their reputation as one of the toughest critters known on Earth. Because they can enter a state known as cryptobiosis, one in which they expel all water from their tiny bodies and tuck in their legs (they then become known as tuns), they can protect themselves against extreme heat, extreme cold, dehydration, the crushing pressures of the deep ocean, the vacuum of space and pretty much anything else you might throw at them. Even an asteroid would have to be really, really big to wipe out every single tardigrade on the planet.

It is also worth noting that the new paper on tardigrades does poke a hole in the panspermia hypothesis, which posits that life may have developed on Earth after being brought here by an asteroid or other celestial body that slammed into our planet. While it is possible that an alien creature even tougher than tardigrades could have survived such a journey, the new research reveals that it is at least more unlikely than previously thought that this could have realistically happened.


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


The 50 most streamed one-hit wonders

In 2011, mainstream music listeners were introduced to Belgian-Australian singer-songwriter Gotye through his cross-genre chart-topper “Somebody That I Used to Know,” featuring Kimbra. Though he’s released plenty of other music since then, he has fallen short of recreating the magic of that one unforgettable indie breakup ballad. This has inspired many people to make the exact same joke about Gotye’s now being somebody that we used to know.

As a one-hit wonder, however, he’s among the best. UK-based broadband comparison service broadbandchoices.co.uk compiled a list of the 50 most popular one-hit wonder songs based on the 20 most followed one-hit wonder playlists on Spotify. After ranking the hits by number of Spotify streams, “Somebody That I Used to Know” won the unofficial blue ribbon with more than 810 million plays.

You could probably divide the list into three categories: Songs Whose Titles and Artists You Recognize; Songs Whose Titles You Recognize But Whose Artists You Swear You’ve Never Heard Of; and Song You Don’t Recognize By Title or Artist (But Would Definitely Know Them If You Heard Them). For anyone around during the 1990s, “MMMBop” by Hanson — number 31 on the list — likely falls in the first category, and diehard Hanson fans might even claim the band isn’t a one-hit wonder at all.

Unless you’re especially well-versed on the Second British Invasion, you may not remember (or maybe you never knew) the name of the band behind 1982’s “Come on Eileen.” The perennial pub banger, in fourth place, was recorded by Dexys Midnight Runners. Other songs that often fall in that second category include “Macarena” by Los Del Río (46th place) and Eiffel 65’s “Blue (Da Ba Dee)” in 10th place.

See how many one-hit wonders and their hits you recognize in the full list below. And to help jog your memory about all the songs you’d remember after the first few bars, broadbandchoices.co.uk has also created a Spotify playlist with all 50 hits, which you can listen to here.

  1. “Somebody That I Used to Know” by Gotye
  2. “This Girl” by Cookin’ on 3 Burners
  3. “Stuck in the Middle With You” by Stealers Wheel
  4. “Come on Eileen” by Dexys Midnight Runners
  5. “What’s Up?” by 4 Non Blondes
  6. “Dancing in the Moonlight” by Toploader
  7. “Mambo No. 5” by Lou Bega
  8. “Walking on Sunshine” by Katrina & the Waves
  9. “Hooked on a Feeling” by Blue Swede
  10. “Blue (Da Ba Dee) ” by Eiffel 65
  11. “Torn” by Natalie Imbruglia
  12. “IAmChino” by Ay Mi Dios
  13. “What Is Love” by Haddaway
  14. “Bad Day” by Daniel Powter
  15. “Tainted Love” by Soft Cell
  16. “Save Tonight” by Eagle-Eye Cherry
  17. “Watch Me (Whip / Nae Nae)” by Silentó
  18. “Escape (Pina Colada Song)” by Rupert Holmes
  19. “Spirit in the Sky” by Norman Greenbaum
  20. “Teenage Dirtbag” by Wheatus
  21. “Send Me on My Way” by Rusted Root
  22. “(I Just) Died in Your Arms Tonight” by Cutting Crew
  23. “(I’ve Had) The Time of My Life” by Bill Medley
  24. “Stacy’s Mom” by Fountains of Wayne
  25. “Ice Ice Baby” by Vanilla Ice
  26. “You Only Get What You Give” by New Radicals
  27. “99 Luftballons” by Nena
  28. “Video Killed the Radio Star” by The Buggles
  29. “Black Betty” by Ram Jam
  30. “My Sharona” by The Knack
  31. “MMMBop” by Hanson
  32. “Don’t Worry Be Happy” by Bobby McFerrin
  33. “It’s Raining Men” by The Weather Girls
  34. “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” by Deep Blue Something
  35. “Better Off Alone” by Alice DeeJay
  36. “Brandy (You’re a Fine Girl)” by Looking Glass
  37. “Turn Me On” by Kevin Lyttle
  38. “Sugar Sugar” by The Archies
  39. “She’s So High” by Tal Bachman
  40. “Play That Funky Music” by Wild Cherry
  41. “Black Velvet” by Alannah Myles
  42. “Walking in Memphis” by Marc Cohn
  43. “Tubthumping” by Chumbawamba
  44. “Dragostea Din Tei” by O-Zone
  45. “I’ll Be There For You” by The Rembrandts
  46. “Macarena” by Los Del Río
  47. “Jordan Belfort” by Wes Walker & Dyl
  48. “There She Goes” by The La’s
  49. “Bi***” by Meredith Brooks
  50. “Dancing in the Moonlight” by King Harvest

Our first Memorial Day since Trump’s coup: Is America ready to move forward — or stuck in reverse?

American history is a mess. None of this is simple. These last days of May 2021 contain a powerful convergence of dates and events.

This Memorial Day coincides with the 100th anniversary of the white supremacist pogrom in Tulsa, Oklahoma. In that literal and symbolic attack on Black America’s prosperity and freedom, hundreds of Black people were murdered and hundreds of millions of dollars in income and wealth were destroyed and stolen.

It has also been just over a year since George Floyd was publicly murdered by a white police officer in Minneapolis, in the 21st-century equivalent of a lynching. Floyd’s murder became one of the principal sparks for a summer of protest and a nationwide people’s uprising for civil rights and human freedom and dignity.

This is also the first Memorial Day since Donald Trump’s attempted coup and his supporters’ attack on the U.S. Capitol in January, when they overran and defiled the literal heart of democracy. Last Friday, Republicans in the Senate voted against a full investigation of the crimes of that day — and in doing so effectively admitted to being co-conspirators with Trump and his followers.

Tyler Stovall, author of the new book “White Freedom: The Racial History of an Idea,” told me by email how he makes sense of these events. “The confluence of these dates underscores the ways in which ideas of freedom and of race are intertwined in America, past and present,” he wrote. “It also shows how Americans are becoming more and more conscious of the African American presence as central to this country.”

Any major moral reckoning and campaign of democratic renewal — which America surely needs — would take place in the context of a nation whose history and present are messy, complicated and contradictory. This is especially true, as Stovall’s book suggests, of the color line, a story of change and reaction, push and pull, progress forward and stumbling or falling backward.

There have been three revolutions in America. The first established the country. The second was the Civil War, the end of white-on-Black chattel slavery and the first blossoming of multiracial democracy during Reconstruction. The third American revolution saw the long Black Freedom Struggle tear down the de jure white supremacy of Jim and Jane Crow.

These revolutions were confronted by white rage, white backlash and in at least one example a white counterrevolution. After Reconstruction, that counterrevolution was so strong that a 100-year reign of white supremacist terror and a de facto police state was established across the South and in other parts of the country.

If there is a fourth revolution or second Reconstruction to protect America’s still-nascent multiracial democracy from the new Jim Crow politics of the Republican Party and the larger neofascist movement, it will be met with a titanic response from white reactionaries and others invested in defending white supremacy at any cost. As public opinion and other research has shown, many white Americans would rather live under an authoritarian regime than share equal political and social power with black and brown people.

Since it was first published in the New York Times 10 years ago this week, I always make time on Memorial Day to read historian David Blight’s essay on the origins of the holiday.

In “Forgetting Why We Remember,” Blight wrote:

But for the earliest and most remarkable Memorial Day, we must return to where the war began. By the spring of 1865, after a long siege and prolonged bombardment, the beautiful port city of Charleston, S.C., lay in ruin and occupied by Union troops. Among the first soldiers to enter and march up Meeting Street singing liberation songs was the 21st United States Colored Infantry; their commander accepted the city’s official surrender.

Whites had largely abandoned the city, but thousands of blacks, mostly former slaves, had remained, and they conducted a series of commemorations to declare their sense of the meaning of the war.

The largest of these events, forgotten until I had some extraordinary luck in an archive at Harvard, took place on May 1, 1865. During the final year of the war, the Confederates had converted the city’s Washington Race Course and Jockey Club into an outdoor prison. Union captives were kept in horrible conditions in the interior of the track; at least 257 died of disease and were hastily buried in a mass grave behind the grandstand.

After the Confederate evacuation of Charleston black workmen went to the site, reburied the Union dead properly, and built a high fence around the cemetery. They whitewashed the fence and built an archway over an entrance on which they inscribed the words, “Martyrs of the Race Course.”…

The war was over, and Memorial Day had been founded by African-Americans in a ritual of remembrance and consecration. The war, they had boldly announced, had been about the triumph of their emancipation over a slaveholders’ republic. They were themselves the true patriots.

It’s a tragic, heroic and inspiring historical anecdote. But this Memorial Day feels unmistakably different to me, Blight’s words are now colored and shadowed by Trump’s coup attempt and the Capitol attack. 

At its core, the events of that ignominious day were an attempt to overturn multiracial democracy and to advance the cause of American apartheid. Trump’s white rage mob carried Confederate flags and a white Christian fascist cross. There were Nazis, Kluxers and other open white supremacists and paramilitaries (and others obviously sympathetic to their cause) leading the assault on Congress.

The Capitol Building itself was built by Black human property. Black and brown police officers fought back against Trump’s brigands. Once Trump’s forces breached the defenses, they rampaged and ran amok, sometimes hurling racial slurs at Black police officers who risked their lives to protect members of Congress and their staff from being assaulted or perhaps killed. Some members of the white-rage mob smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol building and urinated on the floor. Black and brown maintenance people would then be tasked with cleaning up white America’s mess — a job that black and brown people have been doing for centuries from slavery to freedom as we repair and renew the country’s democracy. 

Ultimately, on this Memorial Day, with all these important coincidences of events and dates that intersect with it and surround it, I keep asking: What kind of country is this? What kind of democracy? What kind of nation is being forged in this historical moment? What will freedom look like in this new America?

To admit this is almost a sin for people who write and think in public, but my answer is clear: I don’t know.

One can draw upon the wisdom of the Black prophetic tradition and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s inspiration and warning that the arc of the moral universe bends towards justice — but that same arc of justice can encounter walls, mazes, mirrors and other obstacles along the way. Moreover, we cannot know how long that journey to justice will be, or whether we will be alive to witness its destination.

I asked Tyler Stovall for his thoughts on what a new American reckoning should accomplish. He offered some hopeful clarity: “I would underscore two issues. One, a rejection of Republican voter suppression which aims at the preservation of ‘the white to vote.’ Two, a commitment to reparations for the descendants of African American slaves. These two acts would show me that America has definitely moved beyond white freedom.”

But perhaps I know one thing with certainty about such a reckoning. History is a great teacher, and it tells us there will be tremendous white rage and white backlash in response to any American reckoning that aims to save multiracial democracy — and there will also be resistance and struggle and dignity by Black and brown people in response to that white backlash and rage.

Almost on cue, the Department of Homeland Security announced last week that the 100-year memorial and other remembrance ceremonies for the Tulsa massacre may be targeted by white supremacists or other right-wing terrorists.

In too many ways, that tension and that possibility, suspended between hope and violence, is the story of America from before the founding through to the 21st century — and likely beyond.

Kyrsten Sinema “would’ve voted” for Jan 6 commission, spokesperson says — but she skipped vote

Although a bill calling for a commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection was recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, it suffered a defeat in the U.S. Senate on Friday, May 28. Sen. Kyrsten Sinena of Arizona, a centrist Democrat elected in 2018, did not vote on the bill, although a spokesperson is saying that she would have voted “yes” had she been present.

Most of the U.S. senators who voted on the bill were in favor of it; there were 54 yes votes and 35 no votes. But under the rules of the filibuster, most legislation requires 60 or more “yes” votes in order to pass.

Business Insider reporter John L. Dorman notes, “Sinema was not at the Senate roll call vote and has not yet given a definitive explanation for her absence. The senator’s spokesperson, Hannah Hurley, told the Arizona Republic on Friday that the senator backed the bill ‘and has said so publicly, and she will be entering into the congressional record that she would’ve voted yes.”

Ten other U.S. senators also missed that vote, most of them Republicans — including Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota, Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho and Sen. Mike Braun of Indiana. However, Patty Murray of Washington, a Democrat, didn’t participate in that voter either.

Most of the Republican senators who participated in the May 28 vote were against a January 6 commission, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. But there were six Republican senators who voted in favor of it: Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah; Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio.

12 best grilling tools to stock up for the summer

If there was a noise that marked the start of summer, what would it be? Kids splashing in a pool, or maybe the crack of a bat at a baseball stadium? Personally, I think it would be the sizzle of meat on a grill—I can’t help but associate warm weather with endless evening cookouts, surrounded by my friends and family (aka my happy place).

To prepare for the beginning of grilling season and ensure you have all the necessary supplies to pull off an amazing backyard barbecue, you’ll want to stock up on the essentials: tools, accessories, and ingredients that’ll help you step up your grilling game. Here are some of my hands-down favorite grilling items that you’ll want to snag before the season gets into full swing (they start to sell out quickly once summer is here).

* * *

Go-To Grilling Tools

1. OXO Grill Tools, $29.99

Even if you buy nothing else for your grill, you’re going to need a high-quality set of tools to flip, rotate, and otherwise tend to your food. This grilling tool set from OXO includes a durable stainless- steel turner for flipping burgers—I absolutely love its double-bend design, which gives you improved leverage—and a set of tongs for grabbing hot dogs and veggies. The best part? The tongs have a bottle opener built into the handle, so you can open a drink without missing a beat.

2. FlipFork Boss, $22.99

For big-batch grilling, you need a large, versatile spatula like the FlipFork Boss. This 5-in-1 tool does it all: It has a fork for lifting meat, a sharp knife-edge for slicing, a serrated edge for tenderizing tough cuts, and even a bottle opener; it’s basically the Swiss Army Knife of grilling tools. Made from stainless steel with an attractive acacia wood handle, it even comes with a lifetime warranty.

3. Barebones Living Grill Skewers, $20

There’s nothing you can’t grill with these handy stainless-steel skewers. Vegetables, kebabs, chicken satay—it’s all fair game. The metal design saves you from having to soak the skewers like you would with wood, and the hooked ends make them easy to rotate, pick up off the heat, and hang for storage.

4. OXO Grill Basting Pot & Brush Set, $24.99

Keep extra marinade or BBQ sauce within reach with this convenient basting pot and brush set. The stainless-steel pot can hold up to 18 ounces of your favorite dressing, and it features an easy-grip handle and silicone lid that will keep bugs out of the sauce. Plus, its matching brush has angled silicone bristles that deliver the perfect amount of marinade to your meat, minimizing splatter and mess.

5. ThermoPop Thermometer, $35

The secret to great grilling? A fast, reliable instant-read thermometer. The ThermoPop in particular is a favorite among many cooks, thanks to its fast readings, large display, and superior accuracy. The ergonomic design comes in a rainbow of pretty colors, and it will let you know if your meat is done in just three to four seconds, allowing you to close the grill lid faster and minimize heat loss.

6. Weber Gourmet Pizza Stone, $47.99

No pizza oven? No problem! This handy pizza stone is designed to be used right on your grill, and delivers an amazingly crispy, restaurant-quality crust. The secret’s in the 13-inch cordierite stone, which helps absorb moisture while cooking. Bonus: The stone comes with a carry rack that makes it easy to move your pizza from grill to table.

7. Wildwood Grilling Grill Planks, $20 To $30

Grill planks are an easy way to infuse more flavor into your favorite foods, whether it’s fish, steak, or vegetables. This sampler pack includes planks made from five different types of wood: Western red cedar, alder, maple, cherry, and hickory. Find your favorite flavor, then all you have to do is soak the plank for an hour and put it right onto your grill with food on top. Easy, right?

8. Cuisinart Grill Press, $19.99

If you’re cooking a particularly fatty cut of meat or just want to get those picture-perfect sear marks on your food, a grill press will be your best friend. This cast-iron press weighs just under three pounds, and you can use it to press excess fat and oil from meat or hold burgers flat on the grill. It’s also great for making paninis or grilled sandwiches on the stovetop, and the cast-iron construction will last forever if cared for properly.

9. Boska Cheese Barbeclette, $40

If using a cheese barbeclette while grilling is wrong, we don’t want to be right. After all, the only thing that can make an expertly cooked hamburger even better is a slice of melted cheese. These mini nonstick pans are just the right size to melt a slice of cheese, and they come with a spatula that lets you slide the ooey-gooey goodness onto your burger.

10. RVZHI Barbecue Grill Light, $19.99

Grilling at night is tricky if you don’t have a well-lit patio, but you can ensure you never overcook a burger again with the help of this handy grill light. It clips right to the handle of your grill, and the cordless design can be angled in any direction to light up your space as needed. It has 10 super-bright LED bulbs, and it’s both heat- and water-resistant, making it safe to leave outside.

11. BK Grilling Outdoor Cookware Collection, $50 To $70

You can cook even more recipes on your grill this summer with these carbon steel cookware pieces. Whether you opt for the fry pan, roaster, or grill tray, you’ll be able to put the cookware right onto your grill, giving your favorite meals a delicious smoky flavor that’s tough to replicate indoors.

12. Weber Grill ‘N Spray, $10.67

Don’t ruin a juicy steak by getting it stuck to your grill grates. Weber’s Grill ‘N Spray is a non-flammable formula that you can spray directly onto your hot grill, and it will prevent food from sticking (without affecting its flavor). Plus, as an added bonus, it will also make clean-up that much easier—a win-win, if you ask me.

* * *

Let’s Get Grillin’

This post contains products independently chosen (and loved) by Food52 editors and writers. Food52 earns a commission on qualifying purchases of the products we link to.

Texas Democrats abandon House floor, blocking passage of restrictive voting bill

The sweeping overhaul of Texas elections and voter access was poised from the beginning of the session to pass into law. It had the backing of Republican leaders in both chambers of the Legislature. It had support from the governor.

Democrats who opposed the bill, chiding it as a naked attempt of voter suppression, were simply outnumbered.

But on Sunday night, with an hour left for the Legislature to give final approval to the bill, Democrats staged a walkout, preventing a vote on the legislation before a fatal deadline.

“Leave the chamber discreetly. Do not go to the gallery. Leave the building,” Grand Prairie state Rep. Chris Turner, the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a text message to other Democrats obtained by The Texas Tribune.

Senate Bill 7, a Republican priority bill, is an expansive piece of legislation that would alter nearly the entire voting process. It would create new limitations to early voting hours, ratchet up voting-by-mail restrictions and curb local voting options like drive-thru voting.

Democrats had argued the bill would make it harder for people of color to vote in Texas. Republicans called the bill an “election integrity” measure — necessary to safeguard Texas elections from fraudulent votes, even though there is virtually no evidence of widespread fraud.

Debate on Senate Bill 7 had extended over several hours Sunday as the Texas House neared a midnight cutoff to give final approval to legislation before it could head to Gov. Greg Abbott‘s desk to be signed into law.

In between their speeches opposing the bill, Democrats seemed to be trickling off the floor throughout the night, a number of their desks appearing empty. During an earlier vote to adopt a resolution allowing last-minute additions to the bill, just 35 of 67 Democrats appeared to cast votes. Around 10:30 p.m., the remaining Democrats were seen walking out of the chamber.

Their absence left the House without a quorum — which requires two-thirds of the 150 House members to be present — needed to take a vote.

By 11:15 p.m. about 30 Democrats could be seen arriving at a Baptist church about 2 miles away from the Capitol in East Austin.

The location for Democrats’ reunion appeared to be a nod at a last-minute addition to the expansive bill that set a new restriction on early voting hours on Sundays, limiting voting from 1 p.m. to 9 p.m. Over the last two days, Democrats had derided the addition — dropped in during behind-closed-door negotiations — raising concerns that change would hamper “souls to the polls” efforts meant to turn out voters, particularly Black voters, after church services.

Standing outside the church, Democrats said the walkout came only after it appeared Democrats’ plan to run out the clock on the House floor with speeches wasn’t going to work because Republicans had the votes to use a procedural move to cut off debate and force a final vote on the legislation.

“We saw that coming,” said state Rep. Nicole Collier, a Fort Worth Democrat and chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus. “We’ve used all the tools in our toolbox to fight this bill. And tonight we pulled out that last one.”

With about an hour left before the midnight deadline, House Speaker Dade Phelan acknowledged the lost quorum and adjourned until 10 a.m. Monday morning. Midnight was the cutoff for the House and Senate to sign off on the final versions of bills that have been negotiated during conference committees.

After adjourning, Phelan took aim at the Democrats and noted that their actions killed other legislation.

“Today, on the second to last day of session, a number of members have chosen to disrupt the legislative process by abandoning the legislative chamber before our work was done,” Phelan said in a statement. “In doing so, these members killed a number of strong, consequential bills with broad bipartisan support.”

State Rep. Eddie Morales of Eagle Pass was among a handful of Democrats who appeared to stayed in the chamber. Morales said earlier in the day, House Democratic leadership had asked him to come up with a list of questions to ask during the chamber’s debate on SB 7. He stayed back, he said, because he was adhering to the original plan.

“I had those series of questions, and so I wanted to stay back and fight it,” Morales said. “I was gonna vote against it and I was gonna be there to actually attack the bill.”

SB 7 was one step away from the governor’s desk. It was negotiated behind closed doors over the last week after the House and Senate passed significantly different versions of the legislation and pulled from each chamber’s version of the bill. The bill also came back with a series of additional voting rule changes that weren’t part of previous debates on the bill, including new ID requirements for voting-by-mail, restrictions on Sunday early voting hours and a higher threshold for who can qualify to vote by mail based on a disability.

But while Democrats were able to defeat the legislation Sunday, Abbott quickly made clear he expected lawmakers to finish the job during a special session.

“Election Integrity & Bail Reform were emergency items for this legislative session. They STILL must pass. They will be added to the special session agenda,” he said in a post on Twitter. “Legislators will be expected to have worked out the details when they arrive at the Capitol for the special session.”

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate, echoed the call for a special session to pass SB 7 and other Republican priorities that have died in the House.

“The Texas Senate passed all these priority bills months ago and we will again. The TxHouse failed the people of Texas tonight. No excuse,” Patrick tweeted.

Over the last few months, SB 7 has been at the forefront of Republicans’ broader efforts to further restrict voting after the state saw the highest turnout in decades in 2020. With Republicans in full control of state government, the odds that it would make it to the governor’s desk were always high.

Still, the legislation evoked heated debates between Republicans and Democrats — the last ones in the House and Senate taking a particular focus on the last-minute additions to the bill. The final version of the bill grew well beyond what the House and Senate originally passed into a wide-ranging 67-page bill with many additions that were only revealed to the full House and Senate on Saturday.

Portions of the bill were specifically written to target voting initiatives Harris County used in the last election — such as a day of 24-hour early voting, drive-thru voting and an effort to proactively distribute applications to vote by mail — that were heavily used by voters of color. But under SB 7, those options will be banned across the state.

It would set a new window for early voting from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. and make it a state jail felony for local officials to send mail-in ballot applications to voters who did not request them. It would also be a felony to provide those applications to third-party groups, like the League of Women Voters, that get out the vote. It also expands the freedoms of partisan poll watchers, granting them “free movement” within a polling place, except for when a voter is filling out a ballot.

​It wasn’t immediately clear when Abbott will call lawmakers to return for a special session, though lawmakers are expected to be back in the fall to redraw the state’s political maps. Patrick previously called for an additional special session in June.

Reese Oxner and Patrick Svitek reported to this report.

The Tulsa Massacre, race and America: I finally understand my personal stake in writing this history

At first glance, two of the dominant narratives of my personal and professional life would have little in common. The first is my close friendship with Fred Rogers, the icon of children’s television, that began in 1995 and lasted until his death eight years later. The second is my work as a writer over the last 20 years to help restore the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 to history.

But in recent weeks, as the centennial anniversary of the Tulsa tragedy approaches, I’ve realized that there is an important nexus between the two stories. Allow me to briefly explain.   

I met Fred in the fall of 1995 when I was profiling him for my Texas newspaper. He and I became close friends then, and in a letter to him the following summer, I laid out the details of what was a very difficult period of deep depression. At the heart of it all, I told Fred, was this sense that all my life I had been trying to get my father to be proud of me, but had always felt I had come up short. So I asked Mister Rogers this somewhat desperate question, “Would you be proud of me?” Fred’s answer was one for the ages. (He said, “Yes,” of course, and much more.)

But not long after that healing exchange, Fred wrote to ask me about my dad. What was his childhood was like? I told my friend that I didn’t really know because I had never really inquired. Then I started to, and what I learned about my dad’s early years broke my heart — it was a time of deprivation and neglect. I also understood for the first time that he had given me so much more than his father had given him.

The point here is that learning my dad’s story fundamentally changed the way I looked at him. For the first time I saw my father as a person, as another suffering human being, not as the godlike figure of my youth. In addition to his shortcomings, I came to appreciate his kindness, devotion, integrity and so much more. When he died of Alzheimer’s disease a decade ago, all I felt was the most pure and profound sorrow.

Which brings me to Tulsa. I was raised in a small town in the Upper Midwest where there were no African American residents. I grew up oblivious to our country’s racial history, perhaps willfully so. That continued to be true after I moved to Texas and started to live and work around people of other ethnic backgrounds. Race just wasn’t relevant to me, I thought.

Then, in early 2000, I first learned of the Tulsa Massacre, when a white mob numbering in the thousands obliterated one of America’s most prosperous African American communities, leaving hundreds dead, thousands homeless, and emotional and economic scars that linger today. I first wrote a newspaper story about the massacre, then a book called “The Burning,” learning then that what happened in Tulsa was not some horrible one-off, but completely consistent with that time in the United States.

Similar atrocities had been perpetrated in cities and towns across the United States, albeit not quite on that scale. In some American communities, lynching was a spectator sport. African American veterans of World War I were strung up in their uniforms. The nation’s first movie blockbuster, “Birth of a Nation,” was a celebration of the Ku Klux Klan, invoking the most odious racial stereotypes. The 1915 movie by filmmaker D.W. Griffith was endorsed by President Woodrow Wilson and the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Not to mention the only slightly more subtle and dehumanizing back-of-the bus aspects of the Jim Crow era, separate drinking fountains, restrooms, movie theaters and on and on.

I was initially horrified by what I learned. But as my education continued, I noticed that something else was occurring inside of me, this previously oblivious white boy from northern Minnesota. I was beginning to look at people different than myself in a new way, with greater curiosity and compassion. What was it like to grow up in families and communities that had suffered that way? I also came to appreciate that a terrible wound existed just below the surface of our society, one that was largely unaddressed, and I became committed to do what I could to help in the healing.

Yet it wasn’t until recently that I more deeply understood my own feelings. It wasn’t until I made the connection between Fred Rogers, my dad, and my feelings about race. I realized what had occurred in both instances was that through learning the history, I allowed the humanity of others to be revealed. I also discovered a deeper humanity in myself.

I’ve long had this theory—that the hearts of millions of other white Americans like me, people of good will, will be changed, as mine was, when they learn the true nature of racial history in the United States. Too many remain unaware.

Today there is much talk about how to confront systemic racism in the United States. That is as it should be. But when it comes to racial healing and reconciliation, I think we are missing a necessary step. It is so important that Americans, particularly white Americans, take it upon themselves to learn the real story of race in our nation.

It is not an easy or pleasant task, given that history’s painful nature. But neither need it be an exercise of guilt or blame or white shame. Fred Rogers famously said that it’s much easier to love someone when you know their story. It occurs to me now that’s why he asked me about my dad. He wanted me to learn the story. I hear his voice now, in this moment in our history, regarding race.

I think we owe it to ourselves to learn. And only good things can come from a journey to discover a common humanity. I’m convinced that it is in that journey that true solutions will be found.