Sam L vs Benjamin Stringer
Round 3 of 3
Original postAgainst the Barbarism of the Overhand: A modest defense of underhanded civilizationby @axioms1st
Against the Barbarism of the Overhand: A modest defense of underhanded civilization
The underhand toilet paper orientation is the only arrangement consistent with reason, restraint, and a minimally civilized society. The overhand faction, predictably, mistakes exposure for progress. They celebrate the vulgar spectacle of freely cascading paper, as though hygiene were improved by theatrical display. Underhand, by contrast, imposes a modest discipline—a small, civilizing friction between impulse and action. It frustrates the anarchic ambitions of cats, children, and other agents of entropy. Moreover, it rejects the gaudy curl of overhand excess in favor of quiet, wall-bound discretion. In short, underhand is not merely preferable; it is the last fragile defense against domestic barbarism masquerading as convenience.
Suppose one's choice of toilet tissue orientation not only facilitated hygiene, but prevented injury, all while conforming to the intended purpose and intended design of an object. What would be more civilized than this? Instead, you insist on jettisoning the intention and design of the toilet paper while subjecting knuckles to abrasion and hands to certain collision with unsanitary objects. It seems your position that is most barbaric.
Seth Wheeler, who invented perforated toilet paper, illustrated his design1 with drawing that show the paper passing over the top and toward the observer. I suppose he could have drawn from the perspective of the wall, but this seems unlikely since he was illustrating for other humans to read. Coupled with the slant of the holder away from the viewer as if it were attached to the wall, it seems clear that he intended the paper to roll over the top.
In addition, freely cascading paper prevents abrasion of knuckles against the wall and helps reduce the transfer of feces and feces-adjacent materials from the hand to the wall and vice versa. Perhaps such pain and filth are of no concern to a barbarian such as yourself, but they matter to civilized people like me.
1 citation
- 1.Wheeler; Seth. Wrapping or tolier paper roll. Accessed April 23, 2026.
Should automobiles still come with hand-crank starters and spoke wheels? While this might conform to their "intended purpose and intended design," it is clearly no longer the pinnacle of civilization in 2026. Conditions have changed and the world has progressed. Unless you still wear red longjohns with a flap in the posterior on your way to an outhouse made of roughly-hewn timber full of splinters, I assure you it's quite safe to allow the leading edge of the TP to rest a little closer to the wall. Most of us now have drywall or another modern material.
There is no danger of dragging knuckles against the wall for those of us who are not habituated to dragging our knuckles. This might be hard for you to grasp (though no harder than grasping the edge of the paper when it lies even slightly out of view), but those who have figured out how to walk upright and abstain from smearing feces need not be infantilized by a rectangle of white paper condescendingly dangled before us. We also have sufficient object permanence to realize the end of the paper does not vanish entirely when tucked away. The underhanded roll acknowledges man's inherent nobility and stature as a reasoning being. Let's not surrender our culture to the knuckle-draggers.
Round 2
S
Sam LWhile it is true that the design of some objects does, indeed, move forward, the reality is that precious few modifications have been made to toilet paper since Wheeler presented his genius idea over a century ago. If you desire to drive a crank start automobile, you best use it as designed or risk an untimely end.
Has the fundamental shape of rolled toilet tissue changed since Mr. Wheeler's design? It has not. The hollow core with perforated squares of paper remains almost entirely unchanged. Sure, some companies now market MEGA rolls or some other size (all of which make the risk of abrasion and contamination greater, not less), but the fundamental design is unchanged and should be used as designed.
PS. Jimmy knew about the bug in highlighting, I believe. Check for a ticket before creating a new report!
PPS. Is there no way for me to state why I'm contesting the flick? While I did use an ad hominem, I didn't do so to dodge the substance of the claim. Personally, I think that this differentiation is going to lead to hung juries and insults should be flickable more generally.
Round 2
Benjamin Stringer
Benjamin StringerThe shape of toilet paper and bums may not have changed, but the entire infrastructure in support of the defecatory act has been remade entirely. In some countries like Japan washlets are now standard, meaning that paper now has a drying function exclusively. If you have the misfortune of having to answer nature's call in a splintery old outhouse, by all means hang the roll facing forward. Using a crank-start automobile as intended means puttering along on quaint country roads. An overhanded roll in a modern lavatory is as out of place as a model T in 8 lanes of traffic.
RE PS. I didn't see a bug report filed on the live site. For technical reasons I can't currently access the development site, so I can't see what changes have already been applied there. Consequently, from time to time a may file redundant reports.
RE PPS. When you issue the red flick the window presents the following option: "I flicked this because it is a label or descriptive phrase which… (select all that apply) 1. dodges the argument 2. is non-constructive.
I wanted to see whether I could still issue the flick without selecting either, and it turns out I could. I think selecting the reason for the flick should not be optional, so I've already entered a note about it. We currently don't have an option for entering a note when contesting a flick. I've thought about it, but I'm afraid it would turn flicking into a parallel sideline conversation. I think if people want to make their case they can say something in the body of the duolog. I'm kind of on the fence about it, to be honest.
Insults are generally flickable on grounds of being "non-constructive."
You conceded that "The shape of toilet paper and bums" have not changed, and yet you advocate preparing the former for use on the latter as culturally necessary. Using a Model T on an eight-lane highway is foolish because a highway is fundamentally different than the roads for which the Model T was designed. Your position might have validity if you had demonstrated that the human buttocks or excrement were fundamentally different than a century ago, but of course this is absurd -- as you concede.
Another flaw in your argument which I did not previously point out, is that there are many ways to defend against "domestic barbarism masquerading as convenience." Cooking one's sweet potatoes in an oven rather than sticking them plastic-wrapped into a microwave, choosing to peel one's own garlic rather than reaching for pre-minced cloves in some liquid preservative, using and cleaning a mop rather than wiping your floors with disposable Swiffers who carry your dirt and their un-rotting carcasses to the landfill: these and many other choices are means of maintaining civilization. Misusing toilet paper is not now and will never be the solution to creeping barbarism.
Ah, but you misunderstand the analogy. Cars do not perform a function for the sake of roads; it is done for the travelers they convey. The road is a supporting infrastructure, analogous to the septic systems, indoor plumbing, and various accoutrements (such as TP holders) which facilitate the moving of the bowels. This infrastructure has evolved dramatically, and so too must the manner in which defecators of refinement hang their TP. Your false summary of my concession is naught but a rhetorical dingleberry. Here is where your entire argument has unraveled, much in the same manner as a forward-facing roll of toilet paper is wont to do. If you must persist in hanging the roll like a caveman, at least have the decency to tuck the corners under into a little triangle shape. That might be an acceptable compromise.
BTW I randomly flicked a lot because I want the jurors testing this to get a good look at what it looks like to judge every flick type.