"My husband apparently believes it is perfectly acceptable-reasonable, even-to use the bathroom toilet plunger in the kitchen sink without washing it first. Not a new plunger. Not a "sink-only" plunger. The plunger. The one whose sole purpose in life is to do battle with human waste. His argument is that "it's fine," "it's basically clean," and my personal favorite, "it's just water.""
"When I expressed concern about fecal bacteria-E. coli, salmonella, the invisible horrors we cannot see but absolutely exist-he accused me of being dramatic. Dramatic. As if avoiding cross-contamination is a personality quirk rather than the foundation of modern public health. I tried logic. I tried to explain calmly. I tried saying the words "food safety" out loud like a spell. None of this worked. He maintains that plungers are neutral objects whose past sins are washed away by a quick rinse and vibes."
"If the plunger can visit the kitchen sink, what else is negotiable? Is the toilet brush next? Are we rinsing colanders in the bathtub? Will I one day come home to find raw chicken defrosting in the shower because "it all goes to the same pipes"? I am not asking for much. I am asking for a single, firm boundary between where we prepare food and where we confront human excrement."
An individual reports that their husband uses the toilet plunger to clear the kitchen sink without washing it, using the single plunger that is also used for toilets. The husband argues the plunger is 'basically clean' after a rinse and that 'it's just water.' The partner expresses concern about fecal bacteria such as E. coli and salmonella and emphasizes food safety and the need to avoid cross-contamination. The partner fears this practice could erode boundaries between bathroom and kitchen hygiene and asks whether insisting that toilet-cleaning tools remain in the bathroom is unreasonable or if purchasing a second plunger is necessary.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]