This Week in Trayf News
A battle over swine semantics gets deadly
The New York Daily News (unsurprisingly) picked up this story out of St. Louis.
John Cunningham, 43, was having a heated discussion early Monday with his maternal uncle, Lessie Lowe, 44, about the pork they were planning to cook, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported Tuesday.
The imbroglio stemmed from Cunningham calling the meat “pork steaks,” while Lowe referred to them as “pork chops,” the newspaper said.
From there, the two had to be separated by another person in the home before Cunningham allegedly grabbed a shotgun and fired at Lowe, police said.
This is, obviously, a very dark story, but what followed in the press account was also pretty macabre. From the Post-Dispatch:
Lowe died later at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. Cunningham, who was correct about the meat, was taken into custody.
Beyond the irony that the victim was brought to a Jewish hospital, the fact that the winner in the debate about the cut of pork was determined is also slightly insane. The Riverfront Times, took it one step further and called an expert on pork named Joe LeGrand to explain the issue. Here’s how the issue was summed up:
A pork steak is cut from the pig’s shoulder (which is also confusingly known as a “pork butt,” because it apparently used to be shipped in barrels called “butts”). In a cow, the analogous cut would be chuck roast.
A pork chop, however, is cut from the back loin. In a cow, the analogous cut would be T-bone.
“People tend to overcook pork,” LeGrand says. But pork steaks contain more fat and take longer, so they tend to turn out better for most folks (because people accidentally cook them correctly).
So whether you’re grilling or arguing with a family member, the concept is the same: Do not overheat.
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.