Spooky Stuff

Image Source:
Bluwmongoose on Flickr

We had decided that tonight we would turn off all the lights, ignore the people outside and quietly hide in the basement, miserably eating mini Kit-Kats and Coffee Crisps - but then we remembered it was Halloween! So out with our regular routine and in with the spirit of the day!

I figured that I'd go to my 1950s housewife vault and dig you up something Halloween-related (rather "Hallowe'en" - that's how they most frequently spelled it then) from my magazines - and you know what? There wasn't anything in them! My cookbooks had a few recipes for Halloween-themed cakes and other baked goods, but that was pretty much it. Mind you, I don't have a ton of September and October issues from that decade - but of the few I do, there's not a lick of info or advertising pertaining to Halloween. It makes me wonder if that's an indication that people didn't shit themselves over this holiday nearly to the extent we do now.

It should come as no surprise that I'll be answering the door in a tried and true costume, one that I've been doing since 2005. Well, that or answer the door topless.

BOObs!

But you know what costume I won't be? The one someone searched online for and somehow ended up on my website:

Gross.

I hope that person, whose IP was from a rather prominent university, was simply researching for a paper they're writing titled, What Horrible People Dress Up As For Halloween: A Seasonal Study of Douchebaggery.

But probably not. Do we really need to point out that dressing up as someone who's the victim of a real violent assault isn't funny or clever? Sigh.

But enough finger wagging ... instead, I shall leave you with a find from my favourite 1950s cookbook, the Good Housekeeping 10 PM Cook Book. There, I spotted a picture of people in costumes that I found interesting, especially considering everyone (including me) acts like "sexy costumes" are something new.

I give you the 1958 Sexy Devil:

Yep, Grandma embraced Halloween as an opportunity to tramp it up, too.

Trick or Treat!

Read more...

He's Lucky He's Cute

Maybe I just like to play with fire. I'm about to post something that falls under the headline of Cruel Wife Publicly Picks On Her Husband, despite the fact that Patrick is in possession of a very embarrassing, very cringe-worthy video clip starring moi. It isn't kinky. It isn't politically incorrect.

It's a video of me attempting to climb over a fence.

Like the sex tape we will never make, Patrick swears he will never show it to anyone but wants to keep it for his own private and personal amusement. I'm probably testing that promise with this blog entry, but I think this is funny and I'll risk almost anything to entertain you faceless strangers. And, wow, that is fucked up.

So here's the scoop: For some reason, Patrick either wasn't exposed to a wide variety of foods growing up or simply never paid attention to them until he met me. I've documented his picky eating habits quite a bit, but I haven't shared with you my other strange observation: he doesn't know what a lot of food even is.

I'm not talking trendy foodie snob stuff or ingredients from those "ethnic" aisles - I'm talking about what I presumed was everyday, regular food.

Can I give you some examples of things that I've put on grocery lists vs. the things he came home with? And no, none of these were things he accidentally picked up or misunderstood. These are things he really, really had never been exposed to, so he made his best guess. It gets progressively alarming as you scroll down.

I asked for:

I received:

I asked for:

I received:

I asked for:

I received:

I asked for:

I received:

And then this week, the pièce de résistance ...

I asked for:

I received:

Sometimes I wish we had hidden video in our home so you could see the progression of facial reactions I had when I pulled Milkbones out of the bag, but we don't, so you'll get the next best thing: one of my MS Paint re-enactments:

Edited to Add: I sort of knew he wouldn't know what lamb chops were, so when I put them on the list, I made a point of mentioning to him that they were the types that "looked like they were mostly bone." So - my bad? He later told me he thought I wanted "lamb chops" in case our friend Barry stopped by with his dog. But still. THAT'S what he thought lamb chops were.

I ...? I ...? I ... am now drinking.

Read more...

"And She's Living With A Waiter!"

I honestly have a hard time convincing myself that the people on Fox & Friends actually believe the shit that comes out of their mouths. I mean, no one can really be this heinous and hypocritical, right? This is an Onionparody, right?:

Read more...

Now Vs. Then: Toilet Paper Edition

Here's something you probably already know: When advertisers have nothing clever to say about their product, there's a tendency to make up a problem that doesn't really exist and then claim their product corners the market in solving this fake issue.

Like what?

Oh, like having the CONSTANT PROBLEM of toilet paper pieces sticking to your anus. Uh-oh, that's not going to "pass inspection" (by whom, I'd rather not ponder too long on).



What do you mean that doesn't happen to you?

Oh, that's right, because that happens to NO ONE.

The thing is, I bet people now think this really is an issue because we're all somehow too embarrassed to admit out loud that this commercial is based on pure fiction and that our rectums aren't, in fact, made of Velcro (my bum, however, DOES get all Twilight-y when I clean it. Doesn't yours?).

And what's with the rubbing of the toiler paper against the face? Have any of you been so impressed with your toilet paper's softness that you took a bit with you for a post-wipe cuddle?

Have advertisers always been this silly?

Scott Soft-Weve ad from 1958

Yes, yes they have.

This ad isn't just goofy because no one ever stopped in awe over the luxuriousness of "facial quality" toilet paper, but because of what she's wearing in the ad. If you read the copy, you find out that that isn't an evening gown - she's in what advertisers suggest are essentially pyjamas:

Is it pathetic that, despite finding it all rather ridiculous, I sort of love how overly glamorous that ad is? In any case, it sure beats a sales pitch anchored around the idea of toilet paper "bum crumbs".

Edited to Say: Ok, a few of you have emailed and a few of you have commented to say that Charmin actually does address a real issue with its "toilet paper bits left behind" shtick. WHA? I don't ... understand. Is there a way you guys can explain this to me without me throwing up? How does hair (and how much hair could people possibly have around there?!?) cause bits to shred off and cling?

Read more...