The darnedest thing!

I came home after my last class - I have no more office hours today and I had a slight headache so I thought I'd eat a leisurely lunch, maybe practice piano a bit, and then decide whether to go back to campus to type my exam (it's easier to do that over there; some of the formatting I need to do is harder with my laptop keyboard)

After I got home, I went into the bathroom. Was ready to use the toilet.

There was what was either a largish mouse, or a small young rat in the toilet.

I am not, by my nature, the shrink-and-scream kind of girl. (Which is probably good, seeing as I wind up usually dealing with these kinds of things on my own). I stood there for a moment looking at it, going "How on earth did this happen?" (I was more puzzled by the fact of a mouse in the bog than I was frightened)

(They are working on the sewer lines down the street from me; perhaps the populations of critters that inhabit it have been disturbed. I guess I should be grateful it was not an alligator...)

I figured the only thing that could have happened was that it came up the drainpipe from the street (not a very long length), swam through the p-trap, and found itself in the toilet bowl. It was soaked and shaking.

I realized I had to get it out of there or else I couldn't use the toilet.

One option would be to flush and try to send it back the way it came, but I didn't, because (a) that seemed spectacularly inhumane, even to do to a disease-spreading vermin and (b) as I am not absolutely 100% certain that's how the mouse (I am preferring to think of it as a mouse, not a rat) got there, I figured it might not fit, and then I'd be faced with calling the guys at Blackburn out to come fish a drowned mouse out of my toilet drain.

So, I figured: if I can scoop it into the trashcan, I can dump it outside.

I donned the heavy rubber gloves I use for caustic cleaning - not that I was going to try to pick it up, but if it went rogue and tried to bite me, at least I'd be a bit protected. And I got a strainer from the kitchen (which will now be soaked in bleach before I use it again).

And I scooped it up. It was not that hard; it squeaked at me at first (which kind of made me go "awww" even though it is a disease-spreading vermin) but then climbed up on the strainer and let me dump it into the bathroom trashcan.

See:



And I took it outside and dumped it out at the end of the yard. I figured either it would find its way back to where it came from (and hopefully never return, after that experience), or it would become part of the cycle of life when a hawk or something found it, or it would just expire on its own - but at least it would be expiring out in the sun and the fresh air, instead of inside my commode.

I really can't quite believe it swam up through the pipes into the toilet - I thought such a thing was impossible, somehow - aren't there some kind of one-way valves in things? Or is that just in newer plumbing? But I'm forced to conclude that that's the most plausible way it got in. For one thing: I've been watching very closely for any sort of "mouse sign" - having had mice in past falls, I'm on the alert - and haven't seen any, so I have no evidence that they're in my house. And second, it seems bizarre that a mouse would get in, bypassing the much more pleasant and fragrant things it could go to (wool, and old books, and that box of butter cookies on my dining room table that I don't have entirely closed) rather than climbing the steep, slippery side of the commode, squeezing between the rim and seat, and plopping down in the water. (And that said - there are easier sources of water to find, if that's what it was seeking).

So I don't know. One of the stranger things I've seen of late.

I will say this seems to me to be another good piece of evidence in favor of the "seat down, lid closed" default position for the toilet. (Those of you ladies who share a house with a gent, who have argued about this: you're welcome to use my story as evidence in support of the seat-down, lid-closed position.)


(ETA: I am not crazy. It apparently is possible under certain circumstances. From the "Straight Dope" website:

you do have a problem if your john is at ground level or in the basement--that is, where the soil pipe runs horizontally or at a very shallow angle to the sewer. Rats are good underwater swimmers, and it's no problem--believe it or not, they actually have movies of this--for rats to stroll along a horizontal soil pipe from the sewer, swim through the water-filled piping inside the toilet, and emerge in the toilet bowl.

Yes to ground level. Yes to shallow soilpipe angle (I am better acquainted with my house's plumbing than I'd like to be, after the Tree Root Clog incident of this past spring)

Again: Lid stays closed in the future. If I ever have another one entering this way, I don't want it to actually get out into the house.

I know I don't talk politics much on here, in the interest of preserving some kind of peace and sanity.

But I have to make (yet another) comment on the Blagojevich mess: today, I heard on the radio that he was comparing himself to Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Gandhi.

I think we need some kind of reverse form of Godwin's Law: if a person who is very likely a scoundrel* compares himself or herself to any of those individuals, he or she automatically loses.

(*Or even is not likely a scoundrel, though I think it's almost the very depths of bathos** to compare oneself to Martin Luther King, Jr. (The VERY depths would be to say, "I'm just like Jesus, man! Just like Jesus!" [and after hearing someone make such a statement, I would very rapidly step away from them, for fear of being unintended collateral damage of the thunderbolt I would expect to follow]))

(** I am not quite sure that is the right word - I am thinking of something designed to tug the emotional heartstrings but purely inappropriate, like someone who was passed over for a promotion at work because they were a slacker comparing themselves to, say, Joan of Arc, who was burned at the stake)

Wow, two things deserving of the "ewwww" tag in one day...

Awesome, in a horrible sort of way:

Unicorn barfing a rainbow.

Now you know what that saying would actually look like. (And several commenters speculated on what would come out the, um, other end. I think most people voted for "roses and glitter")

What? Don't you ever experience someone who is SO upbeat and SO cheerful on a day when you're feeling not-so that you didn't feel kind of like this?

(Eglantine hastens to add that she does NOT do that. Very unladylike, not to mention messy)

Sure, they can wear them, but seriously, why would they want to?

(Oh, uh...if you're at work, you might not want to click on the site, there are a couple of scantily clad ads.)

Trust me, guys: pantyhose really are not all that. It's not like some kind of Ancient Female Secret that you're going to have to break through a reverse-glass-ceiling for. Having worn them for years (but not in the summer any more), I can tell you this:

1. They don't last long. And I bet the "mantyhose" (ugh, what an ugly word. We seem to have a proliferation of ugly words these days) aren't cheap.

1a. (just thought of this) They're not fun or easy to wash. Either you have to hand wash them (the expensive kind) or put them in a lingerie bag and hope for the best.
(And now I am laughing at the mental image of my going over to a chap's house...say, for dinner...and needing to use the washroom, and going in and finding all his "mantyhose" hanging up to dry over the tub rail. Oh dear.)

2. They're hot in hot weather, cold in cold weather.

3. There's the wee little issue of...body hair. One (additional) reason a lot of us ladies shave our legs, is that knit stockings + leg hair = nasty uncomfortable. So, does this mean guys start shaving their legs? That hardly seems fair.

4. They really don't cover any figure flaws. "Control top" really isn't. It's mainly a discomfort device aimed at preventing you from wanting to eat while you're wearing it.

5. Those patterned ones? Really, really not flattering. On women OR on men. Is it intended to be some way to look like you have tribal tattoos all over your legs without actually going under the needle? Kind of the tattoo version of a mullet? ("Business in the front, party in the back").

Look, Joe Namath could pull it off (as the author of the site points out). But he was *Joe* *Namath* (and he got paid a lot of money to do it). Regular guys, trust me, this is really not something you need to be doing.

(I know suits and ties are terribly uncomfortable and are largely passe, but one of the things I sigh over when I watch old movies on TCM? How NICELY men used to dress. There is a big difference for me in the appeal of a guy in a suit and tie (or even nice dress slacks and a blazer) and a guy in an old t-shirt and a pair of jeans with the knees blown out of them.

And yes, if men would go back to suits, I would wear a hat and heels. I'd actually sort of welcome hats becoming fashionable for women again. Hats are fun, and properly chosen ones can be a big enhancement to the face.)

Okay: This makes it a little better.

(Caption: "Slime mold grows on anything." Yes, apparently it DOES).

I don't know why I find pictures like that so amusing, I just do. (And it's goin' in my Gen Bio lecture. I may have to hew to some lockstep common syllabus but at least I can have a little fun while I'm at it.)

Life imitates the Simpsons, yet again:

Remember Skittlebrau ("that beer that has candy floating in it")?

Well, the new "Craft" (which came today) has a "recipe" for dissolving Skittles in vodka so you can make Skittles-flavored shooters.

Stolichskittles? Skittlenov?

I'm not a drinker but this sounds like a particularly repulsive idea to me.

And...it has to be said: "Taste the rainbow. Hurl the rainbow."

(I know I'm a bit emotionally overwrought but when I thought of that tagline it made me giggle for five minutes).

I wonder if the chest hair tastes like chocolate?.

Half-naked man on a cake: not entirely sure that's a good idea. Even if it's Tom Selleck.

Apparently there is a new movie version of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" coming out. I have to admit a certain disappointment in what I've heard, for three reasons:

1. They set it in the present day. PRESENT DAY, people! They took what could have been a truly stylish and beautiful piece of steampunkery, and dressed the people acting in it in clothes from J. Crew or somewhere. To me, the reset is kind of like the people who "reset" Shakespeare's works, but instead of doing them interestingly and intelligently and in such a way that there's more depth and meaning to the play, they decide to do something like reset Romeo and Juliet in a circus setting, and the Montagues and Capulets are two competing families of clowns, or something dumb like that.

There is a character on the IMDB page for this movie known only as "gum-chewing girl." That in itself tells me I do not want to see this movie.

Also, the story of Journey... is so ridiculous, given what we know in this present-day about the actual center of the earth, that it really only works, IMHO, as a late-Victorian piece. You know, at a time when people DIDN'T know for sure that the center of the earth was a hot ball of melted iron.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just being overly petulant that what could have been a wonderfully stylish late-Victorian piece is actually going to be full of people going "Duuuuuude!"

I realize that Journey to the Center of the Earth isn't the be-all end-all masterpiece ever (actually I tried reading it again not very long ago and found I could no longer adequately suspend disbelief, though I may try yet again sometime soon). But I have a certain affection for the book, as it is what ended a long "dry spell" of reading for me at about 12 or 13...I felt I had "outgrown" the children's section of the library, and a disastrous first foray into the "grown-up" section (I picked out a book that was waaaaaay too old for me. And I don't mean that the words were difficult...it involved people doing what I knew people theoretically DID, but which I had only just learned about and still could only imagine doing if I was really desperate to have a baby [there being no other option that I could see for getting to the state where one could have a baby]. So reading a book where people did this thing promiscuously, and apparently for FUN, and in ways I couldn't even really understand or imagine....well, it kind of put me off reading for a while.

Until I found "old" books - like Verne or H.G. Wells. The ones where that particular activity was not only NOT described in detail, it was not even mentioned. And that saved me, that kept me out of the "YA doldrums" (there was a Young Adult section at my library but they were mostly "junior romance" novels which, though safe and "pure," bored me to tears). And I started reading again, and the first book I read was Journey to the Center of the Earth. So it's kind of an iconic book for me.)

2. They apparently changed the story somewhat. (It looks like there's a "love interest." Of course there would be.) And I don't remember any "discredited scientist searching for his missing brother" bit from the book (though it's been a good 20 years since I last read it). They also changed the names, though that's actually got a precedent - I knew "Axel" as "Henry/Harry" and "Professor Lindenbrock" as "Professor Hardwigg" because of the particular translation I read.

3. It has Brendan Fraser in it. You know, Encino Man? George of the Jungle? (Yes, I know he was in lots of other stuff but I tend to think of him as a wooden-skulled lunkhead. Who is also apparently the new King of the Remakes - his imdb page also indicates he was in a remake of "The Quiet American," (seriously: the heck?) And he was Dudley Do-Right, at least the movie version of him.)

Yeah, you're free to be a Fraser fan if you want. I'm just not a fan of his work and thinking of him starring in a bastardized version of a story I remember loving makes me a little nauseated.

Another little (silly) thing: We have the Oklahoma Academy of Science, right? And they have a journal, named Proceedings of...., right?

And of course, we abbreviate that as POAS.

Well, if you're looking for the online archives of said journal, do not do a Google search with POAS as your only term. Because this site is the first one that comes up.

(SFW, just not something you might want to be contemplating over lunch)



(It's been a while since I pulled out the Ewwwwww tag).

One of my colleagues just told me about this:

student newspaper editor fired for plagiarizing an article.....on plagiarism.

I honestly don't know whether that's more funny or sad.

The "ewwwww" tag returns for this one.

Steampunkified version of Pac-Man ("That's Pac GENTLEMAN to you" as the website says).

As I often say: I am amazed by the creativity of people. This one made me laugh. (From Craftzine Blog).

Also from Craftzine blog, a Do Not Want. There's a new book out with knitted patterns for dolls in the form of famous people (or famous characters played by people). They have a Borat doll (which you saw if you clicked on the link, and you are probably sorry for clicking now). "Borat" was one of those movies that someone I cared about said "You HAVE to watch this, it's hysterical" and then I spent the next several days watching Miyazake films trying to get the images (particularly one...a "chase" scene in a hotel...you will know what I'm talking about if you saw the movie) out of my mind. And unfortunately, it was unsuccessful.

And a question: In situations like that, are the famous people asked permission for their traits and images to be used? Can they request that their image not be used in the patterns? I mean, yeah, that Amy Winehouse doll doesn't look THAT much like her. But if I were famous, I'd be a little ooged out by the whole concept.

Well, Mr. Rooter still gets an "A" from me. Or maybe even an "A+," based on how hard they had to work.

They came out at 3 - again, THE TIME THEY SAID THEY WOULD. (this is a big deal to me after dealing with workers who give a vague window and then show up after the end of that window)

First, they went up on the roof (they warned me "this is going to be loud" but it was no worse than the chap down the street from me who has a boom car, when he's driving around with it cranked up to "11."). They snaked out the standpipe from the vent - found no blockage. (Which is not surprising, I suppose, considering that every other plumbed appliance drained normally).

The guys then came in and said they'd have to "try" to snake from the p-trap. (They hadn't wanted to because of the more fragile old pipe). But they tried it. No joy there. They tried to figure out the (apparently rather odd) configuration of how things drain from my house. (I guess the sink is the last on the line, or on its own separate line, or something). They called another guy in, who apparently had more experience with weird old houses, and HE worked for a while.

(All this time, I sat in my living room, trying to read a magazine and secretly despairing of them being able to fix it...and having visions of them having to crawl under the house like that Okie plumber on "Dirty Jobs," and cut out a bunch of pipe and re-weld things, all that mess. And if I have to have people doing Dirty Jobs around me, I want Mike Rowe serenading me [did you know he used to be a minor opera singer? No fake. That makes me love him even more. Yeah, Mike Rowe is kind of one of my tv boyfriends.]).

Then there was a general sound of approval and relaxation, coupled with one of the guys saying, "Put it back together and run water through it."

Then I heard the water run for like five minutes. And no sound of collecting it in a bucket afterwards (which had been the followup of the previous trials). Then, "Go get some of that enzyme cleaner and put it through just for insurance."

So I went to see.

They had pulled out a large snarl of hair - possibly not mine (I do not wash my hair in the sink for the very reason that caused the hair-snarl. I have one of those little plastic dealies that fits over the tub drain to catch the shed long hairs).

The water was draining. It's possible - considering how far in they had to snake - that that plug had been there for a while, allowing some slow drainage (that sink ALWAYS drained slowly), and finally just got shifted or clumped or something so it plugged the whole thing up.

They cleaned up, and I asked if I could buy the enzyme stuff - I figured if I could use it as a preventive-maintenance thing, I might save myself some tsuris in the future. (And I'm all about saving myself the tsuris). It was expensive but it's a huge bottle and you only use it once a month (though I see it can also be used in larger quantities if a drain becomes plugged: good to know).

It was more expensive than originally anticipated (with the snaking and the cost of the bottle of enzyme-stuff) BUT it is fixed.

Or I hope it's fixed. I can't quite let myself believe it's fixed. That's always the case when I get something fixed - for days after my hot water heater was installed, I turned the H tap on very tentatively and steeled myself for the possibility of no hot water. (But they assured me they'd come back out and take care of it if it wasn't fixed right).

So maybe now I can relax. And start washing my face in the "right" place again.

I also called my two favorite places in Longview - Stitches n Stuff and Barrons - just to be sure, you know, that they were still there. (They both are). AND I found a "25% off your entire purchase at Michael's" coupon in the new Better Homes and Gardens (one of the magazines I tried to distract myself with while listening for any sounds of success or giving-up from the plumbers). There's a Michael's in Longview - and I like them FAR better than Hobby Lobby for general craft-stuff - and there are a few general craft-type items I want to obtain, so I think Michael's will be another stop on Thursday.

AND - and this is really the most important thing, more important than drains or shops - the 80-something-year-old mother of a good friend, who feel on Sunday, has been sent back to her assisted living center - no broken bones, no serious injuries.

So I feel like I can breathe a slightly bigger sigh of relief now.

SO disturbing on SO many levels:

James Watson bobblehead doll

And it's not even "young geeky-cute James Watson"! It's "Dirty Old Man James Watson"!

(I say that because I read an excerpt of his recent autobiography and was disappointed that he seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time contemplating the women of Cambridge and how to get into their pants. He's also turned out - given some of his statements on fat people and what should be done with babies that are born with a disability - to be quite a cranky old man, and not cranky in the entertaining sort of way).

If I ever become famous, I'm inserting a codicil into my contracts - and also into my will - that they can never make a bobblehead doll of me. (There's really no danger of that, though, considering that I'm pretty much fated to labor in obscurity.)

For this one, I am initiating a new label category: "ewwww"