The colloquial phrase ‘not to be able to do something for toffee’ means to be incompetent at something, and the earliest evidence we’ve found for its usage is from 1896. That doesn’t mean that’s the first time the phrase was used, just that it’s the earliest use we’ve found so far. The phrase appears in a collection called New Sporting Stories by ‘G.G.’ in the following extract: “Flitters said that I could not ride for toffee.”
Starting from 1896 we can then trace this usage through the decades. For example, in a 1905 report of a cricket match we read that the Australian team cannot “bowl for toffee”. A 1914 article about the Great War in the Illustrated London News reports that "their opponents cannot ‘shoot for nuts’ (or ‘for toffee’, as one Tommy more expressly put it)", and Margaret Kennedy’s 1951 novel Lucy Carmichael describes “those dreary girls you get in every Drama School who can't act for toffee”.
As the 1914 quotation shows, the phrase ‘for nuts’ was used in the same way as ‘for toffee’ and at the time it was a popular way to describe incompetence. Now, however, ‘for nuts’ is rarely used and ‘for toffee’ has become the more common expression. It first appears in the late 19th century and the earliest evidence we have on file is from 1895 in William Pett Ridge’s book Minor Dialogues, which contains the line: “An' the eldest gal she thinks she can play, and, if you'll believe me, she carn't play for nuts.”
Toffee or nuts were seen as something good which might be offered as a reward. So it seems to me that the phrase means that someone is so incompetent that he or she can’t do a given task even if they are offered a reward of toffee.
I understand the phrase slightly differently. "Toffee" here means something of small value. A variation would be "tuppence" (i.e two pence), as in "he can't ride for tuppence". So the basic meaning is, he has so little riding skill it isn't even worth tuppence, or in this case, toffee.
I myself, was a pastry chef from the age of 18-21 years old. I relocated and I now live in Hong Kong where I work with children. So I have since taken a break from the hospitality business.
Through my personal experience, I think there are so many female chefs mainly because of the physical endurance of being a chef in general. For myself, I was thrown in at the deep end. I was in college one day a week and working in one of the top ten restaurants at the time. They later gained a Michelin star not long after I left. So being in such a high-profile kitchen took its toll. The hours were very unsociable. I was also running a section all alone, with the occasional help of other staff members. This was due to understaffing. A typical day would be me arriving at work between 7-8am and leaving at midnight, a little before or sometimes after. It was mentally, emotionally and physically tiring. I would not change my experience for the world, as I learnt so much, but it was very draining. I also think that, because there aren't so many female chefs, it can seem quite daunting to take the leap and follow your dream in a kitchen where males are dominant. Some staff members wouldn't treat you any differently, however, you are female, so at times it felt like you were being picked on and that you had to be as good as the men.
I am lucky to have studied and attended a boarding school before becoming a chef. This prepared me for the behaviour and 'talk' that boys/men have with one another, especially in the kitchen. I gained a hard skin from school, so any 'banter' or sexual references in the kitchen, I took on the chin. Boys will be boys.
Yes, without a doubt. If you notice there has been a recent trend towards high-end gins and vodkas. The industry is sending us a very clear message that drinking high-end spirits is sophisticated and that tends to appeal to a younger, more affluent audience. I wouldn’t necessarily say they are aimed specifically at women – but it’s clear these are the drinks women consume more than men.
The alcohol content in these upmarket spirits is pretty high, they’re strong drinks. They tend to have a much higher alcohol content than the spirits you’d ordinarily find in pubs. In pubs they’re about 30 per cent, and the higher end ones are nearer to 40 per cent. So they tend to be stronger.
"The drinks industry has, by and large, got men fairly sown up as habitual consumers of alcohol. So they’ve had to create a new market – young people and women in particular."
RTDs (Ready to Drink – typically drinks like Smirnoff Ice that are combination of a spirit and a mixer, typically lemonade), are almost an invention of the last 15 years. These are clearly aimed at women because they’re sweet drinks. They came from the alcopop boom originally. I’m not sure home drinking was the driver for these drinks. The main driver was the need to create a new market for the product. The drinks industry has, by and large, got men fairly sown up as habitual consumers of alcohol. So they’ve had to create a new market – young people and women in particular. Not least because women have every bit as much disposable income as men these days – certainly younger women.
Eat around an hour before. That way you’ll have enough fuel to work with and enough time for your body to digest everything.
I tend to have a yoghurt with berries before training, and a black coffee. The yoghurt gives me good fats and a small amount of protein, which is vital in repairing my muscles after exercising. Coffee is also great because it acts as a stimulant and there’s some evidence to suggest that the nutrients it carries are helpful for fat burning. It’s good to eat some protein afterwards: fish, nuts, pulses etc, plus carbs because they contain glycogen – fuel for the body. If you don’t top those levels up afterwards you won’t get your bounce back, and the body won’t have the required energy to burn off fats and repair muscle following your hard work.
All that said, it’s personal. A little trial and error is essential when working out a routine. Eat too close to training and you might feel heavy; too far away and fatigue might set in earlier on. One of the principle reasons we warm up before exercise is to move the blood away from the intestines – where it’s needed for absorbing food and digestion – to the more peripheral ends of the body that can be engaged during exercise. You really don’t want the body to be confused about exercising and eating.
I think charities spending a lot of money on advertising can occasionally backfire from a PR point of view, but it’s fair to say that you have to look at whether the advertising is actually effective or not.
If they spend £1,000, but receive extra donations of £2,000 as a result, then presumably that’s a good thing. It also depends if the advertising’s any good or not: if so, it increases revenue to allow them to continue the good work that they do.
My assumption would be that people object less to money being spent on marketing and advertising per se, but rather on excessive bureaucracy and inflated salaries within charities. There are then the questions of how much should directors of charities should be paid and whether there should be limits, but thankfully you did not ask me that!
The human stomach can hold approximately 4 L of food. Various mechanisms, such as vomiting will prevent further distention. 4 L is about 25 shredded carrots, so you will probably be sick if you eat this amount all in once.
Going further into the nutritional value of carrots. Carrots are a good source of β-carotene, which can be converted by the body into the Vitamin A. Vitamin A is toxic in high doses, but in form of the β-carotene, the body can maintain the required levels of vitamin A, hence preventing hypervitaminosis. The excess of β-carotene stored in the fat tissues. The side effect of high intake of carotenoids is the yellowish skin colour, which quickly gets to normal when you stop consuming high amounts of beta-carotene.
Adequate intake of carrots is good for you, 25 carrots at once will make you sick.