The Directors Guild of America reached a tentative agreement with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers,

Whether in cinemas or on streaming, movies have give us a lot to thrill and

After more than two decades as America’s best-selling beer, Bud Light has slipped into second place

Spooky season is about to get even more thrilling with these top-rated Halloween-themed sex toys.

This content originally appeared on Mashable for a US audience and has been adapted for

Amber Husain was cooking dinner for a friend when she suddenly realised the meat she was preparing was a corpse. She looked at the chicken in front of her and was overcome with a visceral sense of disgust. Instead of food, she saw “a carcass – plucked, beheaded, and fleshy”. Husain was 26 when she had this epiphany, and it served as a wake-up call not just for her stomach but her mind, too – as her personal tastes shifted away from meat products, her political outlook on the meat industry and food production more broadly also altered and expanded. Five years later, that moment of revulsion forms the opening of her new book, Meat Love, in which she scrutinises the idea of “ethical” meat consumption, and dares to ask how the contemporary middle classes have come to criticise “the worst violence against animals” while still happily feeding on their flesh. Why, for example, has well-heeled, middle-class London gone nuts for slurping bone marrow from the shin bones of baby cows? Why is offal on so many trendy menus? How has contemporary culture at large come to accept that factory farms are monstrous, but that if animals are cared for, cherished and loved while alive, we should feel better about killing them for our carnivorous pleasures? “For ages, I was one of those carnivores who felt mildly bad about eating meat but just turned that into this inane, self-consciously sadistic part of the pleasure of it all,” Husein tells me. “The more my diet started to revolve around stuff that wasn’t meat, the weirder meat started to feel. Interestingly, once my stomach had been radicalised, I found I had a much greater intellectual openness to thinking about the politics of meat.” Having freed herself from the conflict of eating meat but also feeling bad about it, she found she was able to go beyond those questions of morality – which she suggests can be “stifling” – and think politically. “Now that I have no desire to eat animals, there’s nothing to stop me reckoning with what it means that the meat industry [consists of] an underclass of both humans and animals who are exploited and – in the animals’ case – killed for pleasure and profit.” This is the essential crux of Husain’s argument, and it’s something often lacking in discussions around the “ethics” of meat consumption. For Husain, the question is not, “how can humans eat meat responsibly?” but “how are certain lives devalued to an extent that their suffering can be written off, in order to ‘make a killing’?” What she’s saying, in other words, is that whether the meat on the table has come from a factory farm or an organic farm, or whether you’re tucking in at Burger King or the River Cafe, the path to the plate is still paved with violence. And, while current cultural trends may claim it is better to love and respect an animal before killing and consuming it, perhaps what this cultivates is the ability to embrace exploitation “in a spirit of virtuous indulgence”. What does it really mean, for all living beings, if love is imagined as compatible with killing? “To slide your buttery hand between the flesh and skin of a thing that, if only for a moment, you have re-learnt to perceive as a corpse, is to give an invigorating massage to your sense of political possibility,” Husain writes in Meat Love. By the slim book’s end, her invigorated “sense of political possibility” has led to “a ravenous hunger – a desire for a different culture, a different society”; a new world “in which no one, neither animal, immigrant, worker, woman, or peasant, was considered a thing to be owned, controlled, killed, or left to die”. For many, the leap from a chicken breast on a plate to the exploitation of oppressed people around the globe might seem like a vast one. Yet, it certainly seems clear that there has been a marked shift in the way meat is conceived and consumed – among the middle classes, at least. Since the turn of the millennium, foodie figures like Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall have been promoting “seasonal, ethically produced food” as part of a broader commitment to caring for the environment. At the same time, a distinctly carnivorous spirit has taken hold – one that professes to be an “honest”, “grounded” and “down to earth” ethos. “Good food, good eating, is all about blood and organs, cruelty and decay,” Anthony Bourdain wrote at the start of the 1999 New Yorker article that would, eventually, catapult him into global foodie fame. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys Lewis Bassett Then there’s Fergus Henderson and St John – the illustrious London restaurant, born in 1994 on the premises of a former bacon smokehouse, which popularised “nose to tail” dining. This offal-centric “no waste” approach is neatly summed up in Henderson’s oft-quoted phrase: “If you’re going to kill the animal, it seems only polite to use the whole thing.” Traditionally “cheap cuts” are “elevated” from a source of sustenance for the working classes, to a source of virtue for the urban bourgeois. According to its own cookbook, St John dishes combine “high sophistication with peasant roughness” – that winning aesthetic formula that also sees middle-class urbanites flocking to farmers’ markets and chugging natural wine. In a sharp and searing piece for food and culture newsletter Vittles, writer Sheena Patel dubs this “Rich Person Peasantcore”, asking: “Why are these influencers pretending that they themselves till the land and eat like 17th-century French peasants when in fact their chopping boards cost more than most people’s rent?” In the face of swathes of small plates adorned with offal, and slices of ham served for upwards of £20, it seems like a pertinent question not just for influencers, but also for today’s trendiest restaurateurs and diners. Lewis Bassett is a chef and the host of The Full English podcast, which, over its two seasons, has dived into everything from the birth of “modern European” cuisine to high food prices, factory farms, and why Britain is in love with Greggs. “It’s interesting the way we create these fantastical worlds for us to eat within,” he says. “It is clearly a fantasy to imagine that you can have the rural experience of a peasant in France or Italy, in modern-day Britain.” Yet, he also says that this trend is far from new. The current “rustic” style – typified by “nose to tail eating” – is, he suggests, “intimately tied with what you could call a culinary and broader cultural movement that appears in the wake of countercultural movements in the Sixties, and eventually finds its way into food, especially as some of those countercultural people get a bit older and a bit more affluence”. Essentially, “it’s the same thing that manifested in places like Habitat,” he says, of the homewares and furnishings brand founded in 1964 by Terence Conran. Both design and dining were transformed, offering experiences to the middle classes that were both refined and casual at the same time. Alongside that cultural shift, and “that fashion for pared-down forms of eating out”, Bassett notes the arrival of a broader awareness of environmental and animal welfare concerns. “It’s obviously easy to ridicule these middle-class forms of culture,” he says, “but these concerns are ones I certainly share and I think should be considerations for everyone. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys.” So is there a danger that legitimate backlash to the “thrifty rural”, “nose to tail” trend – and bourgeois “peasantcore” more broadly – could spill over into an attack on all food industry attempts at sustainability? “I think people don’t want stuffy fine dining experiences,” Bassett says, “but at the same time, having the kind of pared-down, rustic, ‘peasant food’ – like, having ham served to you at St John costs you 20 quid – maybe people are slightly sick of that.” He quickly adds, though, that he is “not saying it can come any cheaper than 20 quid, because when you spend a lot of time and effort rearing animals properly, and paying chefs properly, and paying rents in your restaurants, that racks up”. It seems there is a tension, then, between practical and immediate ethical matters – such as paying food industry staff liveable wages or reducing food waste – and broader questions about what kind of society we wish to live in or create. Is the question of “ethical” meat consumption, as Husain suggested, “beyond morality” – a question of politics only? Or is it still, at heart, a moral dilemma, based on people’s personal sense of “right” and “wrong”? Summing up Husain’s attitude towards animals in Meat Love, Bassett suggests “she’s saying that, if you love them so much, why are you killing them? I suppose where Amber Husain and I would slightly disagree is that I’m not convinced that killing an animal is inherently wrong.” Away from the carnal appreciation and “peasantcore” of contemporary restaurant culture, meat-eating often seems to be conceived as either a “guilty pleasure” or a “grim necessity”. In all these cases, however, there appears to be an overriding sense that there is “no alternative” to a meat-eating status quo. The late cultural critic Mark Fisher famously used similar terms to define “capitalist realism”, meaning that capitalism is the only viable economic system, and thus there can be no imaginable alternative. Is it possible we’re also stuck in a kind of “carnivorous realism”? If so, it might be because the two are so interlinked. As Husain puts it, “meat is the inevitable outcome of an economic system that relies on cheap labour and cheap life. But that doesn’t mean meat is a necessity, it means a new economic order is a necessity.” Perhaps taking the leap from a vegetarian diet to full-scale social and economic revolution still seems unthinkable to many. But, in nasty, brutish and austere times, it has also perhaps never been more necessary to seriously consider who can eat, and who is made meat. “I think we need an avalanche of political will from within the food justice, land justice, climate justice and labour movements to radically transform society,” Husain says. With that as the goal, she believes it isn’t helpful “for us to be clinging to the idea of meat as a pleasure”: “If we can’t imagine something other than animal flesh to eat for dinner we might struggle to imagine an entirely different society.” ‘Meat Love: An Ideology of the Flesh’ by Amber Husain is out now Read More Between Brexit and Covid, London’s food scene has become a dog’s dinner – can it be saved? It’s time for booze bottles to have health warning labels Should I give up Diet Coke? With aspartame under suspicion, an addict speaks Food portion sizes on packaging are ‘unrealistic and confusing’, says Which? In Horto: Hearty, outdoorsy fare in a secret London Bridge garden Zero-fuss cooking: BBQ pork ribs and zingy Asian slaw

The era of establishing some order in our lives has arrived. On September 14, the new moon in Virgo will bestow its gifts upon us, pushing us forward and inspiring us to be productive in the areas of our lives that need it most. This energy will bring us a fresh, organized start — and you can use it to your advantage.

A new solar telescope in Hawaii has released a series of images of the sun

Americans are being asked more and more often whether they would like to tack a tip onto their check, sometimes facing a screen that reads "add a tip?"

Mobile devices have bigger screens than ever before, but sometimes your iPhone or iPad display

Amid the maelstrom swirling on the other side of the Ferrari garage in the last few days at the Las Vegas Grand Prix, Charles Leclerc has been razor-sharp. Fastest in the sole practice session on Friday, the Monegasque is so often ice-cool on the tight, twisty street circuits that so regularly crop up now in Formula 1. Such was his confidence – and previous qualifying form in similar conditions – Leclerc was actually favourite with the bookies for pole position ahead of Max Verstappen. The Ferrari man proved them right, sealing a Ferrari one-two with Carlos Sainz qualifying in second. Unfortunately however, the Spaniard will not be starting alongside his team-mate for the inaugural Saturday night race. Sainz’s ridiculous 10-place grid penalty for exceeding his gearbox allocation – which only came about due to the FIA’s incompetence after manhole-gate on opening night – has wiped out Leclerc’s most helpful aid to win the 50-lap race. For those desperate for an engrossing battle at the front, not least F1 and LVGP chiefs, it is a bitter blow. Leclerc will have to break an unwelcome streak, too. Since his last win 16 months ago in Austria, the 26-year-old has been on pole position eight times. Rather excruciatingly, six of those eight have still resulted in podiums. Ferrari’s race-pace has been their Achilles’ heel but Leclerc is optimistic after Sainz was victorious on a similar track layout in Singapore in September. “The race is where we lack performance so I hope we can put it all together,” he said post-qualifying. “We know that Red Bull are going to be very strong, but we’ve had positive signs on the high fuel [in practice] – hopefully we can convert that pole position to a win. “I think we are closer [to Max] than other races. If there’s one race to win [this year] other than Singapore, it’s this one.” Leclerc will need two things that have deserted him in order to taste victory in Nevada tomorrow: a peerless strategy and just a bit of luck. From lights out, Leclerc must get off to an exemplary start, while hoping Verstappen – who compared the track to the National League after qualifying – on the dirtier side of the track falls back into the pack. Early on, staying outside the DRS window of Verstappen behind ahead of the Vegas strip section – now the second-longest straight on the calendar – is imperative. But Ferrari must be bold with their tactical calls from lights out. The Scuderia have hampered themselves since producing a title-winning car at the start of 2022 with daft decisions from the pit lane. In a battle between Ferrari strategists and their rivals at Red Bull, there has been no contest. It is unlikely, given Red Bull’s outstanding race pace and straight-line speed. But Verstappen’s day to forget in Singapore two months ago should give Leclerc and the rest of the pack hope, even if it is simply a glimpse of an opportunity. TOP-10 - LAS VEGAS GRAND PRIX QUALIFYING 1. Charles Leclerc 2. Max Verstappen 3. George Russell 4. Pierre Gasly 5. Alex Albon 6. Logan Sargeant 7. Valtteri Bottas 8. Kevin Magnussen 9. Fernando Alonso 10. Lewis Hamilton Earlier in the day, Formula 1 and Vegas GP management did their no reputation no good with a lengthy statement explaining Thursday night’s titanic mess, which saw ticket holders witness just eight minutes of cars on track. Perplexingly, in amongst 600 words, there was no apology and no refund offered; instead, a $200 voucher to use at the Las Vegas Grand Prix gift shop. After a jumbled-up order in the final practice session, there was a sense of mystique surrounding who was the quickest team around this 3.8-mile street circuit. A circuit which, despite this week’s shenanigans, looks absolutely stunning from the sky. Think Singapore and Jeddah on steroids. On the track, Lando Norris admitted this week he “did not mind” where his first win comes – but it won’t be this weekend. Both McLarens, surprisingly short of pace, were knocked out in Q1 – Norris will start tomorrow’s race in 15th, Oscar Piastri in 18th. A recovery drive will be in order on Saturday night. It was also another day to forget for Lewis Hamilton. The seven-time world champion failed to qualify for the final session and will start the Vegas race in 10th. Resigned to his fate afterwards, he simply stated to race engineer Peter Bonnington: “Couldn’t go faster mate.” But his team-mate George Russell could – the Brit will start behind the top-two in third tomorrow and will be looking to steal a march on Verstappen heading into turn one. Yet the standout team in Vegas qualifying was Williams, with Alex Albon starting fifth and rookie driver Logan Sargeant producing his best qualifying performance of the season for sixth. And with it, the American could well have sealed his 2024 seat. Read More Charles Leclerc lights up Las Vegas to claim pole position for Ferrari Verstappen criticises Vegas GP: ‘Monaco is Champions League, this is National League’ F1 Las Vegas Grand Prix LIVE: Qualifying times and results in Sin City ‘It happens’: F1 fail to apologise or issue refunds to Las Vegas fans When does the Las Vegas Grand Prix start and how can I watch? F1 grid: Starting positions for Las Vegas Grand Prix

Super Sale Alert: Get up to $800 off mattresses at Avocado, now through June 26.