Althouse: When it comes to the 3 aspects of softness — surface smoothness, bulky feel, and drapability

September 24, 2009

When it comes to the 3 aspects of softness — surface smoothness, bulky feel, and drapability — we love our old-growth toilet paper.

"It's unbelievable that this global treasure of Canadian boreal forests is being turned into toilet paper. . . . I think every reasonable person would have trouble understanding how that would be okay."

60 comments:

Bob said...: I foresee this thread becoming a too-detailed set of stories of people yammering about their individual toilet habits.

*shudders*; 9/24/09, 9:33 AM
Triangle Man said...: I buy whatever is on sale at Costco.; 9/24/09, 9:34 AM
miller said...: Trees are just slow-growing corn. I mean, plant a tree if you cut down a tree. I don't see a problem with that.; 9/24/09, 9:38 AM
chickelit said...: I foresee this thread becoming a too-detailed set of stories of people yammering about their individual toilet habits.

Where's Titus when you need him?; 9/24/09, 9:42 AM
Sofa King said...: I think I'll stick to my singele-ply, no-frills, no-lint, short-fiber Scott 1000-sheet rolls.; 9/24/09, 9:46 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: The answer is a re-usable ass wipe.

A machine that takes a dirty rag on one end and dispenses it clean out the other end.; 9/24/09, 9:47 AM
MadisonMan said...: I can't use the TP at my parents' house -- they have that lotion-embedded TP and it's dreadful beyond all measure.; 9/24/09, 9:50 AM
Sean E said...: Fistly, as a Canadian I want to say that we can manage our own forests without the guidance of some environmentalist from New Jersey, thank you very much.

Secondly, I strongly suspect that whether or not people prefer softer paper has nothing to do with the "marketing machine". The arse wants what it wants.; 9/24/09, 9:54 AM
rhhardin said...: I always thought the fluffed version was for the female market.; 9/24/09, 10:03 AM
KCFleming said...: The Green authoritarians will take a keen and relentless interest in every goddamned thing you do, eat, read, say, watch, and touch, all for your own good.

The Green boot is now on the neck, pressing down, demanding we obey, and even worship.; 9/24/09, 10:04 AM
Peter said...: Decades ago people used dried corn cobs.

Peter; 9/24/09, 10:06 AM
Bissage said...: Am I the only one here who flosses with kite string?; 9/24/09, 10:08 AM
Sofa King said...: Okay, I take it back; this is my favorite brand. By far the best toilet paper ever, though a little hard to find in stores for some reason.

And it cleans up Barf!; 9/24/09, 10:09 AM
Sofa King said...: Decades ago people used dried corn cobs.

Also Sears catalogs, I've heard.; 9/24/09, 10:10 AM
traditionalguy said...: Their new Sin of the day is not just soft toilet paper, it is a guilt issue to be atoned for because miserable Humans are not only existing on Gaia's Earth but they are having the brazenness to freely cut Her trees. People who believe this crap are literally insane. Too bad they lost the anchor of traditional Christianity and are left as utter fools without a clue to what is real and what is false.; 9/24/09, 10:15 AM
John Richardson said...: While I, like Sofa King, prefers no-frill Scotts, I sure as heck don't want to have that stuff I had in the UK and Ireland years ago that was like waxed donut papers. Ugh!; 9/24/09, 10:37 AM
Moose said...: I'm no Gaia worshipper by any stretch of the imagination, but I do hate waste. Using old growth trees for toilet paper is beyond silly. Its stupid.; 9/24/09, 10:38 AM
miller said...: Why is it a "waste" (pardon the pun) to use it for toilet paper? If it's so valuable, use it for something better.; 9/24/09, 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: But Sean E., environmentalists know better! They care!

And what could possibly go wrong?
Conservation Blamed for Breaks; 9/24/09, 11:07 AM
$9,000,000,000 Write Off said...: By definition, I think, "reasonable" people don't have "trouble understanding" things.; 9/24/09, 11:13 AM
bagoh20 said...: Not a square to spare.; 9/24/09, 11:28 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: ...old trees cut down for the briefest and most undignified of ends.

My end may be brief, but it is most certainly dignified.; 9/24/09, 11:39 AM
prairie wind said...: Not to brag about how green I am, but I have one of those canvas bags from the grocery store and I use it all the time. It hangs on my doorknob and I stuff all my plastic bags in it.; 9/24/09, 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: 60 grit sandpaper for everyone.

Just deal.; 9/24/09, 11:59 AM
miller said...: I thought you were going to say you used the canvas bag.; 9/24/09, 12:00 PM
rhhardin said...: Insulated grocery bags get the milk home in the summer without compromising its 2-week refrigerator life.

It doesn't hurt to pack the milk with the frozen lima beans.; 9/24/09, 12:03 PM
Joe said...: What utter bullshit; tree farms are used for this kind of thing. People aren't cutting down "old growth" forests (which is largely a myth anyway) to make paper. High quality paper comes from fast growing trees bred to be high in just the right pulp content.; 9/24/09, 12:13 PM
ricpic said...: Last I heard forests regrow. So what's the problem?; 9/24/09, 12:27 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: I am extremely skeptical of the claim that old growth forest is used for toilet paper. Like Joe, I'm fairly certain that most paper comes out of tree farms. Are environmentalists aware that trees are farmed? Notice how this article constantly blurs the distinction between farmed trees and old growth forest trees.

If you want more trees, don't recycle paper. Then more farmland will be used to farm trees. If someone has the land and can't make money farming trees, they're going to farm something else, not leave the land to become some sort of pristine eco-paradise.; 9/24/09, 12:30 PM
miller said...: This is just "Bambi" for old-growth trees.

NASTY MEN COME INTO FOREST AND CUT DOWN TREES! BAD MAN! MOTHER!!!!; 9/24/09, 12:39 PM
Original Mike said...: "It's unbelievable that this global treasure of Canadian boreal forests is being turned into toilet paper.

Yep. Unbelievable.

I don't believe it. I'm from the paper making region of central Wisconsin, and where the trees come from is on display for all to see. Birch and aspen. Fast growing species taken from land that has been cut over more than once already. The Environs are trying to push recycled paper, which is a religion for them, by making false claims.

Old growth my ass!; 9/24/09, 1:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Maybe we should recycle the paper in a mulch pile? Yeah, that's green!

Mulch Pie Causes Fire; 9/24/09, 1:05 PM
Kylos said...: Well, double-ply Scotts is my preference. That quilted, fluffy stuff is just uneconomical overkill. I can't understand why people buy it. And I hate Charmin. I don't want to know about bears and their klingons. TMI.; 9/24/09, 2:13 PM
Anonymous said...: I prefer the three shells.
Or one of those continuous towels that hang on the wall.; 9/24/09, 2:25 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Serious paranoia from Pogo:

The Green boot is now on the neck, pressing down, demanding we obey, and even worship. .

Dude. That's a green sandal. Keep your stereotypes straight.; 9/24/09, 2:30 PM
Original Mike said...: I've never learned how to use the ^%##! three shells.; 9/24/09, 2:30 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: I was going to try to make a case that cutting down ancient forests to wipe our pampered asses is bad practice.

But to what end?

Instead, who wants soft toilet paper? It falls apart, your finger pokes through more easily, it leaves wads of paper up one's arse.

Oh, I see. Because decades of TP marketing tell us we want it!

Big Business telling us how to live = A-OK in con book.

Enviros suggesting we not shit all over our natural heritage and conserve some for next generation = bad, bad, bad.

Conservatives sure are weird.; 9/24/09, 2:34 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: And doesn't The Bible tell us to be good stewards of the earth?

Why is that particular Biblical directive ignored so much by Bible-thumping conservatives?; 9/24/09, 2:36 PM
Original Mike said...: If the claims in the article are accurate, I too would oppose using old growth for toilet paper. But I just ain't buying the claims.

Liberals sure are dense/disingenuous (take your pick).; 9/24/09, 2:38 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Original Mike, you might look at the article. It's a paper executive saying it:

"At what price softness?" said Tim Spring, chief executive of Marcal Manufacturing, a New Jersey paper maker that is trying to persuade customers to try 100 percent recycled paper. "Should I contribute to clear-cutting and deforestation because the big [marketing] machine has told me that softness is important?" .

You are blinded by your hatred of liberals.; 9/24/09, 2:40 PM
Original Mike said...: You read it again: a New Jersey paper maker that is trying to persuade customers to try 100 percent recycled paper.

I'm tellin' ya, they make paper out of scrub trees.; 9/24/09, 2:43 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Sean the Canuck:

Fistly, as a Canadian I want to say that we can manage our own forests without the guidance of some environmentalist from New Jersey, thank you very much. .

Fistly? Sure you're not on the wrong board?

I agree, though. Fuck new Jersey.

Oh, wait. What about an environmentalist from Canada? From the article you didn't read:

"The problem is not yet getting better," said Chris Henschel, of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, talking about logging in Canada's boreal forests. He said real change will come only when consumers change their habits: "It's unbelievable that this global treasure of Canadian boreal forests is being turned into toilet paper. . . . I think every reasonable person would have trouble understanding how that would be okay."; 9/24/09, 2:44 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Another puzzling contradiction with conservative ideology:

They pretend to be "pro-life" but they oppose efforts to preserve biodiversity (you know, preventing species extinction).

So old growth forests provide habitat for far more LIFE than tree farms.

But conservatives don't give a shit!

And don't get me started on their hard on for executin.; 9/24/09, 2:46 PM
Original Mike said...: I'm conservative and I'm strongly in favor of protecting old growth forests and biodiversity.

Wrap your head around that, nimrod.; 9/24/09, 2:48 PM
Original Mike said...: Oh, yeah. And I also support a women's right to choose.; 9/24/09, 2:49 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: No, you read the article!

The environmental group had spent 4 1/2 years attacking Kimberly-Clark, the makers of Kleenex and Cottonelle toilet paper, for getting wood from old-growth forests in Canada. But the group said it is calling off the "Kleercut" campaign: Kimberly-Clark had agreed to make its practices greener.

By 2011, the company said, 40 percent of the fiber in all its tissue products will come from recycled paper or sustainable forests. .

nyah nyah!; 9/24/09, 2:50 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: Original Nimrod:

I'm conservative and I'm strongly in favor of protecting old growth forests and biodiversity.

Wrap your head around that, nimrod. ..

Congratu-fucken-lations. You're an outlier.; 9/24/09, 2:51 PM
Original Mike said...: Congratu-fucken-lations.

I like that. I think I'll borrow it. I'll have to practice it, though. It's a tonque twister.; 9/24/09, 2:56 PM
AlphaLiberal said...: years of practice...

and, "nimrod?" Dude, you're showing your age.; 9/24/09, 3:02 PM
Original Mike said...: Maybe I'm from Watersmeet. (where, by the way, they harvest pulp trees.); 9/24/09, 3:04 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: You're an outlier.

No, he isn't.

Again, notice how the article conflates farm trees and old growth trees.; 9/24/09, 4:52 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Look at how poorly written the article is:

But for the "at home" market, the paper customers buy for themselves, 5 percent at most is fully recycled. The rest is mostly or totally "virgin" fiber, taken from newly cut trees, according to the market analysis firm RISI Inc.

Big tissue makers say they've tried to make their products as green as possible, including by buying more wood pulp from forest operations certified as sustainable.

But despite environmentalists' concerns, they say customers are unwavering in their desire for the softest paper possible.

People like "virgin" fiber. Okay. Companies say they've been getting more from sustainable forests. Okay. Then there's a "despite" out of no where that doesn't make any sense in context and the first fact is basically restated again.

Terrible.; 9/24/09, 4:54 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: And look at this:

The reason for this fight lies in toilet-paper engineering. Each sheet is a web of wood fibers, and fibers from old trees are longer, which produces a smoother and more supple web. Fibers made from recycled paper -- in this case magazines, newspapers or computer printouts -- are shorter. The web often is rougher.

Fibers from old trees are longer. Okay. Fibers from recycled paper are shorter. Okay. What about fibers of regular farm trees? Oh right, they aren't mentioned at all because that would break the narrative.

The first sentence should read "trees," not "old trees."; 9/24/09, 4:57 PM
Original Mike said...: Yep, Freeman. Dishonest author.

And did AL call us a lier?; 9/24/09, 5:04 PM
Cedarford said...: m00se said...
I'm no Gaia worshipper by any stretch of the imagination, but I do hate waste. Using old growth trees for toilet paper is beyond silly. Its stupid.

An "old growth tree" is no more sacred than a "new growth tree". I mean, by all means do not repeat the mistake we made of cutting down every pocket of old growth timber up to the West Coast....

But guess what??? If we had nothing but "Old Growth Redwoods" coast to coast, 500 million acres of the stuff, we'd figure out ways to USE a lot of it.

That is what Canada and Russia have with Boreal forests, except its in the billion acre range. And cutting part of it actually BOOSTS wildlife population diversity, because number and diversity of species is severly stunted when all you have are scrub, low nutrition value fir and spruce trees for hundreds of kilometers around any given point.

Cutting it is no different than cutting Southern US pulpwood or harvesting corn. Except it grows 3 times slower than wood in warmer latitudes.

Basically, you are talking about people mentally conditioned to worship "old growth" flora despite the lack of fauna if "old growth" of one species is all you have for thousands of square miles in an ecosystem. Menatlly conditioned by people who teach other people there is no difference between Old Growth Giant Sequioas on a few remaining sqaure miles of land and the whole of the Baja interor filled with "old growth desert scrub" or outside boreal forests, the "sacredness" of 14 million acres of "old growth Arctic mosquito-breeding tundra".; 9/24/09, 6:24 PM
Methadras said...: The last thing environmentalists know anything about is the environment. All they do know is how to get hysterical at the application of wants, needs, desires as a function of commerce, income, profit, and capitalism and their outright hatred of all of it for the sake of a set of religious beliefs that presumes that the environment or namely the earth is a living, breathing, thinking entity. Gaiaists/environmentalists are morons.; 9/24/09, 9:13 PM
Sofa King said...: Enviros suggesting we not shit all over our natural heritage and conserve some for next generation = bad, bad, bad.

Enviros are free to suggest anything they wish, and I will give them a fair hearing. But the second they presume to use the government to boss me around at the point of a gun, I'll refuse to cooperate on general principle.; 9/24/09, 11:29 PM
kentuckyliz said...: I use virgin old growth trees. Not TP, the tree itself. A whole tree every time I go to the bathroom.

Srsly if they are concerned with cutting down old growth forests, they're a couple of centuries too late.; 9/25/09, 6:32 AM
Robert W. said...: Homework Assignment for this Weekend: Look in the cupboards of your Obama friendly friends. If they have anything other than 1-ply toilet paper then use shaving creme to write a large "H" on their bathroom mirror ... H for Hypocrite!!!; 9/25/09, 1:24 PM
theCork said...: "The problem is not yet getting better," said Chris Henschel, of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, talking about logging in Canada's boreal forests."

"Boreal forest" does not mean "old growth forest". It's dishonest to imply otherwise. Language is everything with such discussions. We're talking about tree crop-land that happens to be in the boreal region. 60% of Canada's land is in the boreal region.

What does "old growth" mean? Not logged in 40 years? 100? Never? American aboriginal populations logged and they've been here a long time. We don't seem to be discussing "old growth" in any case but "boreal"... a term few here seem to understand.

Eco-nuts are not going to make the American public reach into their rears after they do their business. It simply is not going to happen... so wake up nutters.; 9/26/09, 6:46 PM