Anyone else like me? Shampoo and Toilet Paper

Captain_Generic

Quick question, is this you?

bronte

kjl wrote: »

Shortish hair. you know shampoo was only invented like 80 years ago. What do you think they did before that? Back in the 60's shampoo was so strong you could only use it once a week, hence the expression "I'm washing my hair". The reason your hair gets so greasy is because when you use shampoo it strips away all the oil out of your hair, so your scalp starts making grease overtime to rehydrate your hair. After about 3 months of not using shampoo your hair goes back to normal, and you don't get so much grease build up.

Google "no poo", I know I'm not the only one who does that.

Uh-huh...tell that to a lady with highlights or lightened hair....ya gotta shampoo and condition like a fecker. I wash my hair every second day unless they have to do something crazy with it for work. Shampoo is milder now. You certainly don't have to wash hair every day but once in a while won't hurt.

kjl

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

That's so strange, I find conditioner actually makes the hair greasier instead of the opposite. Now if you used soap I could probably understand, as I recall my mother saying she used soap to wash her hair when she was younger and that her hair was in fab condition before fancy shampoos and whatnot came along, but nothing at all?

I get what you're saying about shampoos stripping natural oils and all that, but seriously washing your hair a couple of times a week has a very small impact in that regard.

Have you dreads? The only people I know who don't wash their hair ended up with dreads. Most of whom aren't the freshest smelling individuals either. No offense, not saying you smell.

No, I don't have dreads. Its funny that everyone is slagging, because I get some many complements on my hair its not funny. Loads of celebraties do it like Edward Cullen from twilight, Jessica Simpson, 4 of the guys in the coronals to name a few.

Jaxxy

kjl wrote: »

Edward Cullen from twilight,

He does give off that unwashed, hobo air, but to be honest I wouldn't feel too good about that comparison unless you're looking to attract twelve year old girls that want you to sneak into their room to watch them sleep.

Jessica Simpson,

Don't believe for a second that a woman with her own line of hair extensions doesn't wash her hair. Or have it washed for her by an army of stylists. Frequently.

4 of the guys in the coronals to name a few.

Anyway, you might have nice hair, good for you, but I don't think you'll find many people agreeing that having dirty hair is something they might be into. And yes, maybe your hair "regulated" itself after a number of months, but seriously, your scalp and hair must have felt absolutely disgusting until it did.

humberklog

kjl wrote: »

No, I don't have dreads. Its funny that everyone is slagging, because I get some many complements on my hair its not funny. Loads of celebraties do it like Edward Cullen from twilight, Jessica Simpson, 4 of the guys in the coronals to name a few.

And the irony is is that they are all arse wipes.

FreudianSlippers

humberklog wrote: »

And the irony is is that they are all arse wipes.

badabing!

Sticky_Fingers

Why do people find not using toilet paper disgusting? In many countries around the world people choose to clean their arses with soap and water which to my mind would leave you much cleaner. With toilet paper all your doing is smearing crap off your backside, it doesn't clean you it just gets rid of the large chunks of crap stuck to your stovepipe.
If you want to use paper just wipe with dry paper first and then repeat with some wet paper to make sure your clean.

rorymcgrory

Im not going to wash my hair or my bottom again...

Then we'll see who the tough guy...

Red Hand

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Why do people find not using toilet paper disgusting? In many countries around the world people choose to clean their arses with soap and water which to my mind would leave you much cleaner. With toilet paper all your doing is smearing crap off your backside, it doesn't clean you it just gets rid of the large chunks of crap stuck to your stovepipe.
If you want to use paper just wipe with dry paper first and then repeat with some wet paper to make sure your clean.

Remind me never to shake hands with you, erm....Sticky.

Sticky_Fingers

rorymcgrory wrote: »

Im not going to wash my hair or my bottom again...

Then we'll see who the tough crusty guy...

FYP

rorymcgrory

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Why do people find not using toilet paper disgusting? In many countries around the world people choose to clean their arses with soap and water which to my mind would leave you much cleaner. With toilet paper all your doing is smearing crap off your backside, it doesn't clean you it just gets rid of the large chunks of crap stuck to your stovepipe.
If you want to use paper just wipe with dry paper first and then repeat with some wet paper to make sure your clean.

Has mammy not showed you how to wipe your bum properly?

Sticky_Fingers

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Remind me never to shake hands with you, erm....Sticky.

Because I re-wipe with wet toilet paper. Thats it, no rim jobs for you

Mr Benevolent

Ahem.

Baby wipes.

That is all.

starbelgrade

There's a certain irony to this story.

The OP thinks that by not wiping his arse with toilet paper, that he's gonna save the environment, yet washes his hole with soap & water.

Now either I'm missing something, or that doesn't quite balance out the way he thinks it does!

kjl wrote: »

one person washes down almost 10 gallons of shampoo a year, which is water that can not be recycled. So maybe if we all did this it would help save the environment.

kjl wrote: »

I wash my bum with soap and water and my hands.

kjl

starbelgrade wrote: »

There's a certain irony to this story.

The OP thinks that by not wiping his arse with toilet paper, that he's gonna save the environment, yet washes his hole with soap & water.

Now either I'm missing something, or that doesn't quite balance out the way he thinks it does!

Well, its not the detergent in shampoo that makes it bad for the environment, its the foaming agents they put in it. Shampoo is full of chemicals, also the paper I am not using is less trees being cut down, so to answer you question NO there is not irony to this story.

PS look up the definition of irony

FreudianSlippers

kjl wrote: »

Well, its not the detergent in shampoo that makes it bad for the environment, its the foaming agents they put in it. Shampoo is full of chemicals, also the paper I am not using is less trees being cut down, so to answer you question NO there is not irony to this story.

PS look up the definition of irony

I think you'll find that it is in fact you who may need to look up irony.

FreudianSlippers

kjl wrote: »

yes, we have internet in the caravans now. ffs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXwTxySVuyQ

PS: I fúcking hate that song :mad:

kjl

OisinT wrote: »

I think you'll find that it is in fact you who may need to look up irony.

go on them Oisin, explain the irony for me. Perhaps if you didn't learn the definition from Alanis Morissette you would understand it better :P

mgmt

kjl wrote: »

So I suppose my question is, am I crazy? Is there anyone else out there like me. I read somewhere that 27000 trees are cut down everyday to make toilet paper for the world. And that one person washes down almost 10 gallons of shampoo a year, which is water that can not be recycled. So maybe if we all did this it would help save the environment.

Thoughts?

Trees are renewable. Why do hippies freak out about them being cut down??? They are a plant, like a potato. We will never run out of them. 99.99% of trees grown for paper production, are grown on farmland. When trees are cut down, more are grown in their place. BTW, recycling paper is a waste of time (and money). The chemicals used in the recycling process make it worse for the environment. Better off in incineration.

kjl wrote: »

water that can not be recycled

Don't know where you get this idea from. Wastewater Treatment Plants clean out the phosphorus and other substances in shampoo from wastewater everyday. In London, they drink the water that comes out the the Watewater Treatment Plants. Perfectly fine.

starbelgrade

kjl wrote: »

Well, its not the detergent in shampoo that makes it bad for the environment, its the foaming agents they put in it. Shampoo is full of chemicals, also the paper I am not using is less trees being cut down, so to answer you question NO there is not irony to this story.

PS look up the definition of irony

I know exactly what irony means. I also know that it has many uses & meaning depending on how & where it is used.

Irony, in a historical, dramatical or situational sense, is a factual truth which is highlighted by a persons ignorance of the fact or total belief of the opposite.

In this case, as you pointed out, there is no irony, but there's no need to be a smart arse about it.

starbelgrade

mgmt wrote: »

Trees are renewable. Why do hippies freak out about them being cut down??? They are a plant, like a potato. We will never run out of them. 99.99% of trees grown for paper production, are grown on farmland. When trees are cut down, more are grown in their place. BTW, recycling paper is a waste of time (and money). The chemicals used in the recycling process make it worse for the environment. Better off in incineration.



Don't know where you get this idea from. Wastewater Treatment Plants clean out the phosphorus and other substances in shampoo from wastewater everyday. In London, they drink the water that comes out the the Watewater Treatment Plants. Perfectly fine.

And therein, lies the irony.

kjl

starbelgrade wrote: »

I know exactly what irony means. I also know that it has many uses & meaning depending on how & where it is used.

Irony, in a historical, dramatical or situational sense, is a factual truth which is highlighted by a persons ignorance of the fact or total belief of the opposite.

In this case, as you pointed out, there is no irony, but there's no need to be a smart arse about it.

Don't you think?

FreudianSlippers

kjl wrote: »

go on them Oisin, explain the irony for me. Perhaps if you didn't learn the definition from Alanis Morissette you would understand it better :P

I am disappoint.

Google Socratic Irony and note the

starbelgrade

kjl wrote: »

Don't you think?

No. I don't.

Mr Marston

I find it strange that many people find the cleaning of the ass with soap and water strange. What do people think when they're on the continent and they see a bidet? Have people here assumed incorrectly and defacated/urinated in bidets or something? Personally, if I find there to be a lack of toilet paper, I get in the shower and go to town with shower gel and water. What does everyone else do? I had this conversation with a friend who was repulsed, said he uses a sock or something if he's stuck!

On a related topic, does everybody wash their ass in the shower? My friend (same as above), said he's never put his hand is crack. How does one get rid of potential dangle-berries!?

scientific1982

kjl wrote: »

Ok since we are getting gross here,

I wash my bum with soap and water and my hands. I use a bidet to remove the larger parts, and then use my hands after. When I am done, I clean my hand completely with hot water and soap.

I can assure you I do not smell, I never get skid marks and my underwear is always clean. You can all call me dirty all you want, but I think its dirty not to wash you bum and have sh!t in you ass the whole day. In fact when I am forced to use paper it always starts itching after a few hours and I need sudocream because I normally have a rash.

Mate you might not smell but thats really, really unhygenic. Unless you're washing your hands with a very strong antibacterial after, your spreading fecal coliforms around the place.

Mr Benevolent

Now I know the meaning of the term 'crusty' wrt hippies. Otherwise the OP is the cheapest mofo ever to walk to earth. Though if he's a hippy that probably explains a lot.

FoxT

A good shite is like a 1-night stand.
Above all other things, you want a clean break.

But, life isn't like that a lot of the time. Toilet Paper solves a lot of difficult problems. I think we're better off with it, than without it.

starbelgrade

kjl wrote: »

go on them Oisin, explain the irony for me. Perhaps if you didn't learn the definition from Alanis Morissette you would understand it better :P

What you are stating - that by not using shampoo & toilet paper, somehow is saving the environment - is factually incorrect.

The irony consists in you stating the contrary of what is actually meant.

As Alanis Morissette would say, isn't that ironic?

kjl

mgmt wrote: »

Trees are renewable. Why do hippies freak out about them being cut down??? They are a plant, like a potato. We will never run out of them. 99.99% of trees grown for paper production, are grown on farmland. When trees are cut down, more are grown in their place. BTW, recycling paper is a waste of time (and money). The chemicals used in the recycling process make it worse for the environment. Better off in incineration.

Don't know where you get this idea from. Wastewater Treatment Plants clean out the phosphorus and other substances in shampoo from wastewater everyday. In London, they drink the water that comes out the the Watewater Treatment Plants. Perfectly fine.

I hear this argument all the time, about trees being replanted. The fact that you are clearly forgetting about it that it takes a very long time for trees to regrow, somewhere upwards of 20 years. While they may farm some trees, I'm afraid I will need to see a source that says 99.99%, which no offence seems like a made up statistic.

Also you refer to water treatment plants, yes they can purify the water, nobody said they couldn't anyone with a basic understanding of chemistry should know all they have to do is boil it off, but do you understand that that take energy. If less people used shampoo then less energy is spend in the water treatment. Multiply that globally and you DO have a significant amount of environmental damage.

But I'm sure your one of those people who don't believe in global warming because of the cold weather we are having now.

And, it's still not ironic.

lil_lisa

It doesn't equate. You're right.

Lets take an average sh!tty morning.

Option 1:

You do your business, you move over to the bidet/shower, spray some water and a bit of soap that eventually goes down the drain. You then grab a cotton towel (which is made using a lot of water and you will end up putting into the washing machine soon anyway, hence using more water) and wipe your bum!

Option 2:

You buy some recycled toilet paper (not that cheap rash making kind, you can go a little bit better and still look after the environment). You do your business, grab some toilet paper. Toilet paper, which comes from trees which are planted in the billions every year. And you wipe your bum.

Hmm, which option is better for the environment?

Personally, I don't think the environment is a reason to not wipe your behind!

lil_lisa

kjl wrote: »

The fact that you are clearly forgetting about it that it takes a very long time for trees to regrow, somewhere upwards of 20 years.

Its a good thing we've been planting them for over 20 years!

kjl

starbelgrade wrote: »

What you are stating - that by not using shampoo & toilet paper, somehow is saving the environment - is factually incorrect.

The irony consists in you stating the contrary of what is actually meant.

As Alanis Morissette would say, isn't that ironic?

Your initial statement was that because I use soap to wash myself that it counteracts the fact that I don't use shampoo, this is the statement I told you to look up the definition of irony. This is not ironic because the amount of soap used to wash myself is less of an impact than the shampoo and paper used by everyone else.

It would only be Ironic if I used the same toilet paper to clean my hair and the same amount of shampoo to clean my ass.

You feel because you have jumped onto someone else's argument that your initial statement was correct. Ich don't think so honey.

AND we still are actually waiting on proof that it is factually incorrect.

FreudianSlippers

I wish I could stay up all night and discuss your arse wiping habits, but alas I must retire for the evening.

lol @ this fúcking thread btw.

starbelgrade

kjl wrote: »

Also you refer to water treatment plants, yes they can purify the water, nobody said they couldn't anyone with a basic understanding of chemistry should know all they have to do is boil it off, but do you understand that that take energy. If less people used shampoo then less energy is spend in the water treatment. Multiply that globally and you DO have a significant amount of environmental damage..

So if everyone wiped their arses with soap & water, would that cut down on the need to treat waste water?

I have only a rudimentary understanding of chemistry, so maybe you know more than I do... does the soap actually clean the poo & make the water potable?

kjl

OK, even if I admit that I am wrong about the tree thing, which in fairness overwhelming evidence. The transport the toilet paper from the manufacture to the shops and then to your house would have an impact. The actual production of the stuff would impact the environment. So if everyone stopped using it, globally it would make a huge difference.

kjl

OisinT wrote: »

I wish I could stay up all night and discuss your arse wiping habits, but alas I must retire for the evening.

lol @ this fúcking thread btw.

Something new anyway night and sleep tight.

kjl

starbelgrade wrote: »

So if everyone wiped their arses with soap & water, would that cut down on the need to treat waste water?

I have only a rudimentary understanding of chemistry, so maybe you know more than I do... does the soap actually clean the poo & make the water potable?

The sh!tty water would need to be treated regardless, does your rudimentary understanding understand that you don't want to be drinking sh!t water?

OutlawPete

You don't like shampoo?

You think wiping after a poo is a sham?

I think I see the problem.

When you when young, someone shoved a shampoo bottle up your bum.

whatdoicare

Eeeeeeew.........


I have a feeling a girl isn't in the picture...

starbelgrade

kjl wrote: »

The sh!tty water would need to be treated regardless, does your rudimentary understanding understand that you don't want to be drinking sh!t water?

It seems that you have a rudimentary understanding of sarcasm.

mgmt

kjl wrote: »

I hear this argument all the time, about trees being replanted. The fact that you are clearly forgetting about it that it takes a very long time for trees to regrow, somewhere upwards of 20 years. While they may farm some trees, I'm afraid I will need to see a source that says 99.99%, which no offence seems like a made up statistic.

Also you refer to water treatment plants, yes they can purify the water, nobody said they couldn't anyone with a basic understanding of chemistry should know all they have to do is boil it off, but do you understand that that take energy. If less people used shampoo then less energy is spend in the water treatment. Multiply that globally and you DO have a significant amount of environmental damage.

But I'm sure your one of those people who don't believe in global warming because of the cold weather we are having now.

And, it's still not ironic.

Yeah your right, the statistic is probably 100%. There is no shortage of trees in the world. If there was, the farmers in Ireland would be jumping on the skyrocketing paper prices bandwagon and planting trees.

You clearly know nothing about wastewater engineering. It is a mechanical/biological process that can pretty much run itself. No boiling whatsoever. The Wastewater plant in Ringsend for example produces its own gas (generates 3MW of power). Other byproducts such as sludge can be sold off as fertilizer.

starbelgrade

mgmt wrote: »

Yeah your right, the statistic is probably 100%. There is no shortage of trees in the world. If there was, the farmers in Ireland would be jumping on the skyrocketing paper prices bandwagon and planting trees.

You clearly know nothing about wastewater engineering. It is a mechanical/biological process that can pretty much run itself. No boiling whatsoever. The Wastewater plant in Ringsend for example produces its own gas (generates 3MW of power). Other byproducts such as sludge can be sold off as fertilizer.

So, he's wrong about the trees, wrong about the waste water treatment process & wrong about... something else... oh yes, the irony of it all.

I love it.

Rudimentary lesson learned, methinks.

admiralofthefleet

bet u have awful willnots op?

dubtom

I too am not a lover of paper,I've been using wet wipes so long now normal bog roll fells like sand paper to my delicate self.Have to say washing seems like too much effort,I assume you need to remove the strides before the wash,other wise the rinse would leave you soaking. Please elaborate.

TeddyTedson

whatdoicare wrote: »

Eeeeeeew.........


I have a feeling a girl isn't in the picture...

Or if the OP is gay no loving in the dirty bum!:D

flas

kjl wrote: »

OK, even if I admit that I am wrong about the tree thing, which in fairness overwhelming evidence. The transport the toilet paper from the manufacture to the shops and then to your house would have an impact. The actual production of the stuff would impact the environment. So if everyone stopped using it, globally it would make a huge difference.

bidet's dont just grow on trees! they have to be manufactured too!!!

and they dont have legs to just walk to your bathroom, they also need to be transported! you have not thought this through!

shebango

Saoirse Thankful Barter wrote: »

Thanks bidet god.

:pac::D

kjl

starbelgrade wrote: »

So, he's wrong about the trees, wrong about the waste water treatment process & wrong about... something else... oh yes, the irony of it all.

I love it.

Rudimentary lesson learned, methinks.

kjl wrote:

So maybe if we all did this it would help save the environment.

you see the word maybe, perhaps you should look that up too.

I'm sorry if you feel that I was mocking you about your understanding of the word ironic. People of lesser intelligence always feel threatened when they are made a fool of. Perhaps my argument about trees and water were incorrect, which in fairness we still don't know for sure. I would love to see some proof about the eco-friendly nature of water treatment plants.

but the fact does not change that you didn't use the word irony correctly, and trying to piggyback your point onto other peoples posts simple shows me that you are incapable of creating your own argument.

Oh and just a final point on my communication to you, even if I am incorrect about it helping the environment, which fyi I never actually said, it's still not ironic so maybe you should go back and have a look at your 1st year English book and try to educate yourself a little more before constantly berating me with your waffle.

kjl

flas wrote: »

bidet's dont just grow on trees! they have to be manufactured too!!!

and they dont have legs to just walk to your bathroom, they also need to be transported! you have not thought this through!

Well, you can always use the bath tub