...to the love of my life and probably father of my child, Mr. Isis.
Dear sir,
You are a colossal asshat.
Earlier this evening we returned home together from work, as we always do. You and Little Isis went out back to play and I went to cook dinner. I went to the garage, where the large freezer is, to look for options and spotted a box of ice cream sandwiches I forgot we had. I vowed to myself, then and there, that I would return after Little Isis was in bed and partake in one of those ice cream sandwiches. It's been a long week and mama's been working hard lately.
After dinner and night-night time, I returned to that freezer. My mouth was already watering in anticipation of the perfect blend of vanilla ice cream and chocolate bread-cookie-wafery stuff. When I reached in, though, what did I find?
An empty box.
Who the balls leaves an empty ice cream sandwich box in the freezer to taunt their wife with?
Wasn't it enough for you that I squeezed your offspring out of my vagina? Wasn't it I who accepting a lifetime of peeing when I sneeze just to give you a son? You would think that the least you could do for me in return is to leave me the last ice cream sandwich. Or, at least be merciful enough to throw the box away.
Figure 1: I mean, wasn't this enough for you?
You are a cold and cruel man, Mr. Isis. But, I am at least glad to know where we stand. I am sorry that you have such little regard for me that you would perpetrate such cruelty. You're a mean one, Mr. Isis. You really are a heel.
All I am saying is that you had better sleep with one eye open and one foot on the floor tonight, my sweet love.
I hope you choke,
Dr. Isis
Life Science
Brain & Behavior
Comments
...
Nice pic . . .thanks for that.
I hope you choke,
I am pretty sure it is physiologically impossible to choke on an ice cream sandwich.
...tom...
P.S. Googling 'Isis hot' is not a good way to find your blog. 'Isis hot science' works much better and is MSFW.*
* Much Safer For Work
.
Posted by: ...tom... | June 17, 2009 10:29 PM
That pic is safe for work?
Posted by: becca | June 17, 2009 10:33 PM
...
@ becca...
"That pic is safe for work?"
...smalllol... Hell, I work in a large metro hospital. As CPP would say: 'that kinda fucking shit happens all the time around here..!!'
But I was referring (in my original comment) to finding the Isis blog from Google. Not whether or not the content is SFW once you do find it. I mean, some workplaces might be hot shoes intolerant..!!
...tom...
.
Posted by: ...tom... | June 17, 2009 10:38 PM
i have been existing on ice cream fucking sandwiches lately. i too would flip out if an empty ice cream sandwich box was in the freezer. except i would make beloved husband go and get me some more. because what i'm doing is more important. :P
leigh picked a good one, so he is totally cool with this arrangement... for now.
Posted by: leigh | June 17, 2009 10:54 PM
My husband would have done that 8 years ago. Now I think he figures that he has done bought the cow (who is totally hot).
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | June 17, 2009 10:57 PM
Revenge is an icecream treat best served cold. Leave empty beer bottles in the fridge so it looks like they have something in them...
Posted by: John S. Wilkins | June 17, 2009 10:58 PM
My official title is The Official Kingdom Of Coturnix Empty Box Remover And Destroyer Before Others Are Falsely Tempted. It is usually kids who do the crime, though....
Posted by: Coturnix | June 17, 2009 10:59 PM
Boxes?
I think I remember them.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | June 17, 2009 11:51 PM
Damn, Isis, you could WARN a girl before posting that junk! Ms. Virginia is having flashbacks over here...also now I want an ice cream sandwich. What can I say, I've had three kids and it's pretty much impossible to turn my stomach anymore...
Posted by: MFA Mama | June 18, 2009 12:00 AM
Empty beer bottles? Nonesense! Remove the caps, drain the liquid, and replace with water. Or ginger ale. Or some other liquid of your choosing. (One that is sometimes amber might work well, though you may need to take several steps to fill the bottles.)
Alternatively, you can "skunk" the beer: remove the tops and allow the bottles to sit, opened, at room temperature for several hours. Then replace tops and place in refrigerator.
Posted by: Harold | June 18, 2009 12:03 AM
I'm really weirded out that the doctor in the pic is, like, 'posing' or something. WTF?
Posted by: ElectroFizzz | June 18, 2009 12:16 AM
I've never understood this particular phrase. It's not as if sex is like milk in a meaningful way. At any rate, I would totally get my fiance' a box of ice cream sandwiches, even if it was the middle of the night, from the shady liqour store on the corner, because I love her. *
*And I totally know that future Mrs. Tales reads Isis' blog
Posted by: Whitecoat Tales | June 18, 2009 12:16 AM
I'm going to go eat some ice cream with oreo cookies
Posted by: ScientistMother | June 18, 2009 12:19 AM
Hail, Isis. It's like you reached into the dark recesses of my mind and plucked out the words that I have been silently screaming all these years. Spot fucking on. Right down to the stress incontinence. Damn.
Posted by: Jennifer B. Phillips (aka Danio) | June 18, 2009 12:24 AM
Perfectly innocent mistake...coulda happened to anyone....no harm no foul.
Posted by: BikeMonkey | June 18, 2009 12:39 AM
Since he has already demonstrated his love for ice cream sandwiches, why not buy him a whole box for himself, and put it somewhere he can't miss it? Like, say, the front seat of his car.
To get the full effect, you would need to remove the wrappers from each sandwich and then place them back in the box.
You could also leave unwrapped ice cream sandwiches in his shoes. But that would mean you'd be getting innocent shoes involved in a potential retaliatory strike.
Posted by: Harold | June 18, 2009 1:17 AM
well all i have left to say is, lucky me. ;)
Posted by: leigh | June 18, 2009 1:24 AM
hmmmm, that ice cream just hit the spot...
Yes I know you hope I choke. Perhaps I'll go choke on some more ice cream.
Posted by: ScientistMother | June 18, 2009 1:46 AM
*stares in horror*
Isis? You've just ensured I am NEVER having kids.
Somewhere deep down under the mental screaming, I agree, your husband is a heel. My condolences.
Posted by: Ace | June 18, 2009 5:42 AM
Looks like that hospital has a machine that goes *ping*. Well done.
Posted by: Zarquon | June 18, 2009 6:24 AM
Is this a fake picture? The reason I ask this... wtf is going on in the right edge of the picture with the side of her left leg? It looks like it's been cut off at the knee and there is some kind of weird flap of skin there instead? Am I just not seeing this right (like one of those 3d pictures?)
Posted by: canuck_grad | June 18, 2009 7:01 AM
Dude, check out the image credit (the linky part of Figure 1). It's a movie or TV image. Yes he's posing, he's an actor. And it's probably a dummy "mother." But that doesn't make the ice cream sandwhich sound any less good.
Posted by: ScienceWoman | June 18, 2009 7:23 AM
My theory with ice cream sandwiches (and their infinitely superior analog, Schwan's Golden Nugget Bars) is that it is better to eat the entire package all at once. 'Cause otherwise, it sits there, open tempting you. If they're all gone, then you can't have any of them. Perfectly sensible.
Posted by: DamnGoodTechnician | June 18, 2009 8:18 AM
That was pretty brutal, Isis. I detect a serious ice cream lust.
FWIW after 3 kids, here's how it's going to evolve: you open the freezer/fridge/cupboard, and discover the box/package/jug/etc. not technically empty, but with a minute quantity. Too small to gain any satisfaction from, just meeting the threshhold for not disposing of the container. Brilliant! The hubby and children will participate about equally.
BTW, this also applies to TP rolls (leave a single square so as not to be the one to change it), soap, Q-tips, gas tank, ad infinitum.
Posted by: TGAP Dad | June 18, 2009 8:50 AM
If you feel this strongly about it, then spike his food with Lactobacillus spp., which make hydrogen in copious quantities when they get lactose. I can attest from personal experience that having Lactobacilli making prodigious quantities of hydrogen in my gut is extremely unpleasant and has ensured that I don't often pursue ice cream any more.
Posted by: Toaster | June 18, 2009 9:15 AM
wtf is going on in the right edge of the picture with the side of her left leg?
Also notice, she doesn't even have a right leg below the knee. Methinks it is like a mannequin.
My family is worse - not only do they leave empty boxes, but often containers with less than 50 ml of whatever was in there left, so they can claim "but it wasn't empty!"
Posted by: Carlie | June 18, 2009 10:22 AM
I agree with Ace - I have been fully convinced that I will never be having kids. That's what adoption is for, right?
Posted by: Katie | June 18, 2009 11:16 AM
PATRIARCHAL APOLOGIST!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | June 18, 2009 11:35 AM
"Probably father"? Low blow. =)
Posted by: abb3w | June 18, 2009 12:14 PM
I like Harold's suggestion best (#16). Ice cream shammiches melted all over the car. and in his shoes. And his desk drawer. And to drive the message home, if he wears a hat, in his hat. Yup. :)
I'm also a huge fan of those people who leave a spoonful of ice cream in the container. You see the carton in the freezer, get all excited, and there's barely a lick left! They should be relegated to one of the lower levels of hell.
Posted by: ktbug ladydid | June 18, 2009 12:16 PM
See... loved this one. Now this is good. May I repurpose for my own use?
Posted by: Kenna | June 18, 2009 12:32 PM
"Also notice, she doesn't even have a right leg below the knee. Methinks it is like a mannequin."
I think you're right. Could Isis be a double below-the-knee amputee with a shoe fetish? Her prosthetic legs look so real in those shoe-shots!!
Posted by: Catharine | June 18, 2009 12:59 PM
"mama's been working hard lately"
killing animals unnecessarily
maybe you should do your hideous experiments on that thing in the photo coming out between your legs.....
Posted by: DR K | June 18, 2009 3:11 PM
Hey DR K,
Maybe you should vow to forego any product or treatment which involved animal research in its development. Don't fret - I'm sure you can find a witch doctor or shaman to treat your next illness, with chanting, spells and potions. And it looks like you'll be bathing in the river, without soap from now on. Let us know how that works out for you.
Posted by: TGAP Dad | June 18, 2009 3:26 PM
As a matter of fact I've never used big pharma products, never been ill - maybe a connection there.
I don't use synthetic toileteries either.
You contemptibles here no doubt mainly directly or indirectly earn a living from big pharma
so a somewhat vested interest methinks.
Posted by: DR K | June 18, 2009 3:34 PM
In my house empty boxes are frequently found in cabinets and the freezer. Since blame cannot be assumed with 16 and 49 year old males, either ghosts have done it or the cat is guilty. Get used to it. I personally demand jewelry for this annoyance...
By the way, there are days when experimenting on one's offspring is tempting.....
Posted by: Pascale | June 18, 2009 3:39 PM
Hey TGAP Dad- are people who think we should be cautious of our behavior with respect to how we respond to authority hypocrites if they also believe the Standford prison experiment was morally reprehensible (after all, they too are making use of the knowledge gained via immoral means)?
Posted by: becca | June 18, 2009 7:08 PM
becca,
I assume you meant "Stanford."
The (in)famous prison experiment was not necessarily "morally reprehensible" per se. That is a conversation for smarter people than me. I mean it was conducted to assess just how people would react to their assigned roles in the prison/guard scenario. As I recall, strictly from memory, the experiment was shut down early due to the psychological trauma being inflicted upon the subjects. And just suppose you were a psychologist in the pre-Stanford years and wanted to study these effects on humans. You might design something exactly like it. And, you could not conduct this experiment on animals, you'd need human subjects.
Dr K,
"Natural" doesn't make something better. Mercury, snake venom, asbestos, and tar are all natural. The way we determine of something is harmful is to conduct testing, first on animals, then on humans. It was my impression that all cosmetics products are required to undergo testing to assess their possible harmful effects (I may be wrong on this). In any case, it is in the manufacturer's best interest to test their products as a way to minimize any possible legal liability. You simply cannot tell whether the all-natural bark-and-berry eye shadow you've developed can harms someone's eyes without animal, and eventually, human, testing.
That said, I am also an advocate for the humane treatment of animal test subjects, and only where non-animal tests cannot be used. All animal research is rigorously scrutinized for humane treatment of test subjects.
Posted by: TGAP Dad | June 18, 2009 8:19 PM
Well, I'm inclined to think the Stanford experiment would no sooner get past an IRB in this day and age then a plan to not treat people for syphilis. It was not shut down before some pretty impressive emotional harm was done.
But in any event, that is not addressing my question. The question isn't "do you think it was an immoral experiment?" but instead "given that an individual considers a study morally reprehensible, are they hypocritical to use the knowledge gained through it?"
Posted by: becca | June 18, 2009 8:32 PM
becca
Thanks for the clarification. It presents an interesting ethical/philosophical topic. I agree with you that Stanford inflicted real, long-lasting psychological harm on the participants. I am not ready to condemn the researchers because of this. They ere investigating a legitimate question, and shut it down once its effects were indisputable and clearly very bad. Still, I'm not ready to lump this in with Tuskegee. The effects of syphilis were fairly well understood when it was conducted, and the African-American subjects were denied any real treatment during the course of the experiment. Then there is the glaringly-obvious ethical problem of racist exploitation of African-American subjects, even in 1930s Alabama.
Personally, I don't think the lines of demarcation are all that clearly drawn. Clearly, the Nazi WW II-era experiments, which seemed designed more to dehumanize the subjects rather than are the extreme case where I would advocate burning all of the research labs and records. (Same with the Tuskegee Syphilis study.) The rationale behind that is analogous to the courts' exclusionary rule for illegally-obtained evidence: remove the fruits of the act, and you remove the motivation behind it.
Again, I am not well informed of the Stanford experiment, but part of the fallout was that subsequent research underwent far more rigorous ethical reviews. Behavioral psychology was still young in those days. Heck it's STILL pretty young.
HOWEVER,
If you, as a consumer, feel that research was reprehensible, then I think you owe it to yourself to adjust your consumption accordingly. Thus I think that under the narrow parameters of your question, you would be hypocritical to use that knowledge.
But again, it's not quite so clear. Let me draw you an example:
Suppose that researchers had discovered, through their research, a clean, renewable, carbon-free energy source, but their research had inadvertently destroyed a large tract of land populated by several Amazonian tribes who knew no other lifestyle. Could we use that research, or are we ethically bound to destroy it? What if it required follow-up research, which we know would unavoidably destroy more rain forest and displace more remote tribal populations?
I think these are interesting questions, and I, as a member of the public, would want to be kept informed of this discussion. I would want more information.
I sense that were we to meet, a spirited discussion may ensue wherein we probably would not reach consensus, but may come to understand, and even respect, each other's opinion.
Peace,
TGAP Dad
Posted by: TGAP Dad | June 18, 2009 9:52 PM
What I do not understand is, was it an empty box to begin with? If so and he left none for you then asshat. Otherwise, lazy.
Posted by: Danimal | June 18, 2009 9:53 PM
I think as long as Mr. Isis presents you with a beautifully cooked meal, a cleaned house, a foot rub, a home made sundae of your favorite flavor, a cocktail, and a pledge to do all grody household chores for the rest of his life you can forgive him.
Posted by: sea creature | June 18, 2009 11:21 PM
Bwa ha ha!! you crack me up Isis!!!! My kids do that all the time. Argh. I don't have a Mr. Wendee to leave empty ice cream sandwich boxes around, but if and when I do, he will be on full alert to not do this! (as if... i can't even get my kids to stop). You can do google alerts on your name so you don't have to google yourself :)
Posted by: Wendee Holtcamp | June 18, 2009 11:37 PM
Wasn't it I who accepting a lifetime of peeing when I sneeze just to give you a son?
Hah! So I'm not the only one with this particular lovely little "memento" of pregnancy.
I like the suggestion about skunking the beer. That seems like an appropriate revenge. :D
Posted by: Wendy | June 19, 2009 2:32 AM
I also vote for the Empty Beer Bottles plot.
Posted by: Cara | June 19, 2009 11:53 AM