Flushing with Pride
The Left has been at war with the flush toilet for years.
Their hatred for the intellectual brainchild of Sir John Harrington and the famous Thomas Crapper has a long and venerable history, going back to the 1970`s at least; they hate it because it uses too much water (a situation they ``remedied``by having Congress pass laws reducing the amount of water consumed by the privy to a meager 1.6 gallons from 6 gallons and guaranteeing a visit from the plumber at least once a year), it stops people from composting their waste (as Ann Coulter pointed out, most people want to get their defecation OUT of their houses, not play with it!), it uses paper products, and encourages an unnatural, slothful manner of living (``you can walk to the privy in the rain and never wet your feet, they`ve gone about as fer as they can go, yessir!``)
I would take this even further, and say that, while not often considered because of a lack of glamour, the flush toilet is, in a number of ways, responsible for the civilization we now enjoy. Before the flush toilet people had to walk outside to perform their natural function, in rain, sleet, snow, and hail. (Let me tell you; my cabin offers such amenities, and there have been winter nights where I have had to go desperately but chose to stay awake all night and suffer rather than tramp out into the cold and dark.) Diarrhea was a nightmare, in the old days! Cities were limited in how large they could grow without adequate lighting and toilet facilities; outhouses were smelly, insect infested places ripe for disease. The quality of life suffered in pre-toilet cities (as it does in some Third World cities today) and one wonders if it would even be possible to have cities like New York without a modern flush toilet and sewer system. (In the old days tank trucks came through alleys to pump out the sewage from the ``convenience``.) Cholera was a party favor back in these ``good old days``.
I would put the flush toilet on a par with Edison`s incandescent light bulb-something under attack by environmentalists today as well!
The Left, ever eager to turn their backs on advancement, have started a movement to return to a more ``natural`` er, movement; among other things, they are trying to bring back the outhouse under a new name (composting toilet). Now, I travel all over St. Louis, and have seen any number of pre-flush toilet houses. Each and every one of them has an add-on bathroom; nobody wanted to live with an outhouse. Yet here we have the regressive liberals actively working to bring back pre-indoor plumbing!
(I once had an argument with a liberal, and demanded to know why Congress should make it illegal to purchase or possess a 6 gallon toilet; he began yammering about water shortages and the need to conserve. Now, I lived through TWO of the worst floods in American history, and our problem here in `the Lou` is too much water, not too little! Low flow toilets are about as useful as a mule`s testicles, and every bit as convenient. This point seemed to go right over my liberal interlocutor`s head.)
In fact, they have called the flush toilet an environmental disaster by allowing people to have guilt-free eliminations. How dare we flush and go, while polluting the Planet? We should feel remorse for heeding the call of nature! We should cherish our feces, nurture and coddle them for the greater good!
One wonders if that isn`t at the heart of the artwork Christians have found so offensive; is ``Piss Christ`` or the Blessed Virgin covered in Elephant dung really a sign of liberal veneration? Perhaps we have misunderstood, perhaps these are not attempts at insult, but heaping piles of the highest praise? Perhaps we should thank a liberal for their honoring us when they call us pieces of you-know-what? It may mean they are saying we are a valuable and important resource!
I intend to return the favor, and go out of my way to so compliment my many liberal friends in the future! I think they`ll be thrilled that I ``get it``!
Despite my newfound comity, I still do not intend to adopt a return to bygone days, and will continue to honor that noblest of mankind`s creations, just as these people have made it a practice. Without the toilet our lives would suffer a serious dearth of quality while being overfull in other ways. Rudy Giuliani argued that New York City suffered from ``quality of life`` problems, and he cleaned up that great toilet of a city by fixing broken windows, cleaning up vacant lots, etc. Imagine if we all were forced to endure the flies, the stench, the inconvenience of ``dry toilets``? One wonders if cities such as Nairobi aren`t full of poverty and squalor because of a lack of proper sanitation? Giuliani`s success illustrates the old adage that cleanliness is next to Godliness, and it must be remembered that America`s cities used to be dirty and poverty ridden until the spread of the flush toilet. I suspect the toilet has done far more than we realize.
Anyone who calls the Left ``progressive`` should consider the meaning of the term. I suggest they ponder it the next time they labor in their thinking rooms.
(Hat tip to SEPP for the toilet links.)
Their hatred for the intellectual brainchild of Sir John Harrington and the famous Thomas Crapper has a long and venerable history, going back to the 1970`s at least; they hate it because it uses too much water (a situation they ``remedied``by having Congress pass laws reducing the amount of water consumed by the privy to a meager 1.6 gallons from 6 gallons and guaranteeing a visit from the plumber at least once a year), it stops people from composting their waste (as Ann Coulter pointed out, most people want to get their defecation OUT of their houses, not play with it!), it uses paper products, and encourages an unnatural, slothful manner of living (``you can walk to the privy in the rain and never wet your feet, they`ve gone about as fer as they can go, yessir!``)
I would take this even further, and say that, while not often considered because of a lack of glamour, the flush toilet is, in a number of ways, responsible for the civilization we now enjoy. Before the flush toilet people had to walk outside to perform their natural function, in rain, sleet, snow, and hail. (Let me tell you; my cabin offers such amenities, and there have been winter nights where I have had to go desperately but chose to stay awake all night and suffer rather than tramp out into the cold and dark.) Diarrhea was a nightmare, in the old days! Cities were limited in how large they could grow without adequate lighting and toilet facilities; outhouses were smelly, insect infested places ripe for disease. The quality of life suffered in pre-toilet cities (as it does in some Third World cities today) and one wonders if it would even be possible to have cities like New York without a modern flush toilet and sewer system. (In the old days tank trucks came through alleys to pump out the sewage from the ``convenience``.) Cholera was a party favor back in these ``good old days``.
I would put the flush toilet on a par with Edison`s incandescent light bulb-something under attack by environmentalists today as well!
The Left, ever eager to turn their backs on advancement, have started a movement to return to a more ``natural`` er, movement; among other things, they are trying to bring back the outhouse under a new name (composting toilet). Now, I travel all over St. Louis, and have seen any number of pre-flush toilet houses. Each and every one of them has an add-on bathroom; nobody wanted to live with an outhouse. Yet here we have the regressive liberals actively working to bring back pre-indoor plumbing!
(I once had an argument with a liberal, and demanded to know why Congress should make it illegal to purchase or possess a 6 gallon toilet; he began yammering about water shortages and the need to conserve. Now, I lived through TWO of the worst floods in American history, and our problem here in `the Lou` is too much water, not too little! Low flow toilets are about as useful as a mule`s testicles, and every bit as convenient. This point seemed to go right over my liberal interlocutor`s head.)
In fact, they have called the flush toilet an environmental disaster by allowing people to have guilt-free eliminations. How dare we flush and go, while polluting the Planet? We should feel remorse for heeding the call of nature! We should cherish our feces, nurture and coddle them for the greater good!
One wonders if that isn`t at the heart of the artwork Christians have found so offensive; is ``Piss Christ`` or the Blessed Virgin covered in Elephant dung really a sign of liberal veneration? Perhaps we have misunderstood, perhaps these are not attempts at insult, but heaping piles of the highest praise? Perhaps we should thank a liberal for their honoring us when they call us pieces of you-know-what? It may mean they are saying we are a valuable and important resource!
I intend to return the favor, and go out of my way to so compliment my many liberal friends in the future! I think they`ll be thrilled that I ``get it``!
Despite my newfound comity, I still do not intend to adopt a return to bygone days, and will continue to honor that noblest of mankind`s creations, just as these people have made it a practice. Without the toilet our lives would suffer a serious dearth of quality while being overfull in other ways. Rudy Giuliani argued that New York City suffered from ``quality of life`` problems, and he cleaned up that great toilet of a city by fixing broken windows, cleaning up vacant lots, etc. Imagine if we all were forced to endure the flies, the stench, the inconvenience of ``dry toilets``? One wonders if cities such as Nairobi aren`t full of poverty and squalor because of a lack of proper sanitation? Giuliani`s success illustrates the old adage that cleanliness is next to Godliness, and it must be remembered that America`s cities used to be dirty and poverty ridden until the spread of the flush toilet. I suspect the toilet has done far more than we realize.
Anyone who calls the Left ``progressive`` should consider the meaning of the term. I suggest they ponder it the next time they labor in their thinking rooms.
(Hat tip to SEPP for the toilet links.)
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 6:29 AM
3 Comments:
A waterless dry toilet, which generally costs about $2,000, collects human urine and feces and requires emptying by humans on a regular basis. Advocates claim the resulting matter can then be composted and used as fertilizer for food crops.
Excuse me, but this is exactly what sewage treatment plants are doing today.After the sewage is treated it is separated and then laid out to dry. Once dried it is transported to farms and disked into the soil with lime to future break it down.
Great points, Mike!
I had looked into buying a waterless toilet for my cabin, but was shocked at the price! Two grand seems a bit excessive for what is literally a bucket of crap.
I purchased a new toilet for my home for about a hundred bucks, and it gets the waste OUT of my home; why invest all that money for the priviledge of cleaning out the fruits of my morning labor ever couple of weeks? Enviromentalists are plain silly.
Bird, this subject is one that you are definitely qualified to discuss!
Post a Comment
<< Home