Sometimes an idea comes along that’s so dash cunning, it is both incredible and instantly understandable why it hasn’t reached mass adoption. The Wet-Wipe Manifesto sheds light on one of the clumsiest human behaviors with the excellent use of analogy.
Let it also be known that the first person I thought of upon finishing this read was my ludicrous coworker Rory Blyth.
[via kottke.org]
This post is tagged
23 Comments
In American homes, and some public restrooms, there’s usually a sink near the porcelain. It’s pretty easy wetting some paper to replicate that European experience. The paper which by the way is WAY cheaper, doesn’t need as much energy to produce, and doesn’t create as much pollution since it doesn’t come in molded plastic containers.
These dudes are LAME
Thanks so much for the kind words first of all. That was some of the best praise we’ve gotten.
joeyj:
It sounds like you actually agree with nearly everything we wrote, you only disagree with total specific solution? Remember you are advocating a “wet wipe” too. We didn’t bring this up because it’s gross, but wetting toilet paper makes it rub off on you and produces the infamous DBs. It’s disgusting. You should look into the facts- it’s TP is not way cheaper because you have to use SO much more of it. Furthermore, you only need to buy the plastic container once and from there on out you purchase refills. I think if you’ll really consider it with an open mind you’ll find that’s it’s a wise idea in almost every fashion. My coblogger and I are very interested in the environmental impact.
Anyway thanks for reading it guys!
I’m right with you on the cleanliness aspects, and I’d like to believe the environmental advantages are there as well. The other design potential that comes to mind is fragrance, which as we all know is the great American marketing tool. I retold your story to a handful of people who had just finished their own dinner party last night actually!
As for Joey, he’s known for his flamboyant commentary around here, so don’t take him too seriously ;)
did that not get thorugh?
I just wrote an exquisite piece about this, and the stupid tubes didn’t post it when I hit the submit button (ironic yes?). I gotta run so here’s the short version.
Though I believe the number to be realistically around 3 or 4, I’ll be generous and give you 2 of the wipes per session. These wipes are “Made with pure water and a new texture of thousands of soft cleansing buds”, and also have aloe. Sounds nice right? Amazon sells them at $31.53 for 864. So at 2 wipes per session you get 432 sessions per pack for a per session cost of .07. Not bad, you may be on to something here.
That is until you check the math on TP. Amazon sells an eco-friendly (but nice 2-Ply) TP for $52.95 for a 48 role pack. Each role contains 500 sheets. At 50 sessions per role and 48 roles per pack that equals 2400 sessions for $52.95. That’s .02 per session.You rich kids and your real jobs. You’ve changed man.
So if I may, because I “SO” deserve this.
FLAMBOYANT COMMENTARY MY ASS!
PSYCH!
“His mind just doesn’t function like a normal human’s.” –Rini, on my couch, after hearing this ’short version.’
Seriously though, how much is a truly clean anus worth to you?
Exactly man.
Even if I was generous and DOUBLED the amount of TP squares, it would still cost less than these frigtard wipes. Like Shakira said, numbers don’t lie, or whatever.
The numbers aren’t what’s important. I’ll pay a premium to feel confident in the knowledge that I am cleaner and more evolved than most of these wild, yowling beasts that pass for humans.
This entire thing is based on an assumption we’re all making. That water/wetness = clean. Haven’t we all taken highschool science? You did the wahsing experiments right? You know, wash your hands with water, wash with soap, and that for the amount of time most people wash their hands, using soap makes no difference. Turns out you have to wash for a certain time. I want to know what our benchmark is here.
Cause right now, I think the key word you’ve used is “feel”. And the key point is that you’re feeling is based on a relative comparision to others. I prefer that if we continue, we do some testing. We need to find out the wiping benchmarks. I have some research methods already laid out, and have been using them the past 24hrs to check. For instance, depending on you GI health and type of food consumed, I’ve determined that while 10 squares is sufficent for a healthy session (and I believe I’ve found a way to cut this dramatically), 14 is optimal for cafeteria consumption.
For science. For humanity.
I’m with Joey J. The analogy to washing dishes is spot on. These wet-wipe lobbyists (anybody checked whether they have a stake in this) are ignoring the fact that simply wiping the dishes with a wet paper towel does not really make them an order of magnitude cleaner than using a dry towel.
Long live the ass-wiping status quo.
Thanks Nem. It’s an Bill O’reilly style argument; simple appeals to people’s emotional reactions toward poop. I’m advocating the use of science. They’ve even started a dedicated blog: http://wetwiperevolution.blogspot.com/
Their latest post is Jerry Falwell does lab experiements. Someone needs to be the voice of reason to their lavendar-scented-anus voice of… doom.
I’ve never realized how much I’ve wanted to type that until I just thought of it right now.
These people are anarchists. I’m waiting for Jesse to declare this the greatest advance in the history of feces.
The question about why baby wipes are for babies is patently dumb. Two seconds of thought is all it takes to figure out that their skin is more sensitive, requiring a softer, more expensive wiping mechanism — it has nothing to do with effectiveness. However, it does remind me of something that’s been bothering me regarding baby shampoo. Namely: I know I’m old enough to keep my eyes closed when I’m showering now, but I wonder whether that’s even necessary. Does our hair change so drastically between the ages of 7-10 that we need to use a stronger shampoo at the risk of occasionally stinging our eyes? Is it just a cost issue? If so, why can’t somebody come along and make a competing baby shampoo for less?
I agree. What they’re really paying for are the “thousands of soft cleansing buds”. They’re paying for but massage and thinking it somehow means cleanliness. And we all remember what happened last time someone made that mistake.
They may however prove useful on an extended doveresque expedition.
So if we’re out in the wildreness, then somehow you’re alright with this more costly alternative to TP? You and Wiener are both focused on the current state of wet wipes as if they’re the only way to go about raising the clean-anus bar. Is it so hard to imagine a wet wipe with included disinfectant and a fresh lavender scent?
You want to wipe your ass with rubbing alcohol, be my guest. Other than that, no less an authority than the CDC has declared anti-bacterial soaps a public health threat, so I doubt they’d be too happy about the possibility of making fecal matter immune to antibiotics. And seriously, check these people’s stock holdings. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were getting some form of kickbacks or compensation for their work here. They may be the same people who convinced an entire nation of a children that there is such a thing as a blue raspberry.
So quickly do those who enter the beltway circle of hell begin to question the motivations of everyone around them. It’s a simple equation that doesn’t require much more thought than this: use the solvent qualities of h20 (and perhaps a little splash of your cleansing chemical of choice) to freshen up one’s end.
But at what cost. . .
I see how it is. Thinking carefully about this would require you to change positions. Therefore, you choose to assert that the issue “doesn’t require much more thought.”
Here is a brief list of the logical fallacies you are employing in your “argument.”
Guilt by association — My being in Washington D.C. for a week has nothing to do with my ability to assess whether or not this argument is so stupid that only a crooked person could support it. At least, is bears less than on the issue than your “career” in high-tech inclines you to accept purportedly innovative solutions to things that are not broken in the first place. (leading to the next two).
Appeal to novelty — The fact that nobody else does this does not make it a good idea.
False dilemma — Unless you’re going to attribute the rise of colorectal cancer to improper wiping techniques, there’s really no “there” there.
Burden of proof/appeal to ignorance — You have not presented any evidence that this is actually more sanitary, just relied on my inability to disprove your assertion.
Fallacy of composition — A related fallacy in which you equate anuses to dishes, when one is ceramic and the other is attached to an immune system.
I declare this argument over.
Point: Jew.
Nothing like seeing someone with fresh, untested skills bringing them to bear against a problem that clearly doesn’t require such heavy intellectual lifting.
Shouldn’t it be as simple as when do you *feel* more clean: After wiping yourself with a wad of paper, or after a soapy shower? No one has presented a significant argument against experimenting with new cleaning ideas.
It’s also worth pointing out the correlation between following the laws of Kosher and following the ass-cleansing status quo. In both cases, your Jewishness seems to want to stand in the way of innovation.
Anti-Semite.
That’s it; resort to your age-old defense mechanism instead of admitting that your silly spiritual laws are nothing but a health code. You can’t admit it, because at that point you’d be forced to aknowledge that it’s high time we saw some evolution in our restroom behaviors as well.
Incoming Links
Leave a Reply