Ear hair

Ear hair. Why why why?

Now, you thirty-something (and beyond) guys, when you consider how much plucking, waxing, electrolysis, dyeing, cold-creaming etc that girls have done to be attractive to you - the least you could do is attend to that little outcrop in your ears.

They may never enter your head but they will shoot out of it, they will be noticed and they will not score you any points. (A little nostril alertness wouldn’t go amiss either...)

Toothpaste

Why why why squeeze toothpaste from the top?

This is more than observing simple quirks of practice – it is one of the classic societal rifts – separating the top squeezers, bottom squeezers (and the less often sighted, middle squeezer) brings to light indications of each group’s overall character and tendency.

The curious thing is that all members of all groups understand the physics involved at an intrinsic level, yet choose to respond in their own particular, revealing way.

No one can dispute that the tube’s contents must travel from the sealed end to the open end. And yet…

Something in the top squeezer’s mind says to perform the action near to the point the paste is dispensed and completely overlook the (undisputed) fact that that same action also pushes the majority of the contents in the wrong direction.

The bottom squeezer can only see the rational – the contents must move from the bottom to the top, he knows that the desired end product of his actions will appear (and continue to appear) therefore this is the only place to apply pressure - for him there is no other option.

The middle squeezer? Something more primal is going on here that I can’t fully comprehend – but not giving a damn is probably wrapped up in it.

A degree of not giving a damn is likely on the top squeezer’s mind as well, especially if they co-habit with a bottom squeezer. They know that the BS compulsion will restock their top-of-tube needs and their instant-gratification-with-no-thought-to-later-consequences needs are met.

What I find most telling (as a BS) is that when presenting the logical case to a TS there is no hint of desire to change their practice.

As a rational, if I am presented with a modification in behaviour that demonstrates clear advantage, I need no persuasion – the improved method is actively adopted until something better comes along.

The TS mentality betrays a broader tendency to contrarily not take on a clearly more rational behaviour for the very reason that someone has pointed it out to them. (And I’m looking at you, every single woman in the world, ever)

Burnt Toast

Why why why bother with burnt toast?

I guess it just comes down to personal values, but if I’ve burnt a piece of toast so badly that, to approach an edible state, I have to scrape off layers of blackened ash, it’d have to the last piece and I’d have to be desperate.

Just, you know, make another piece. (You can be sure it won’t take as long as it took to burn the first piece...)

3 Choices with Steam Rice

Why why why do we tolerate paying more for "2 choices with steam rice"?

When you're making your selection from the bain-marie bounty, you're not buying a service - you're buying a product.

OK - there is a tiny amount of extra work involved in slopping out the 2nd or 3rd option (situated centimetres away) but never-the-less, what you are really paying for is quantity - and you ain't getting any more of that just because there's 3 different flavours. 

Sure, in an a la carte situation, this practice is valid.

But every dish forming its tantalising skin in front of you was prepared in advance - there's been no special preparation required and so no reason to justify charging up to 50% more for exactly the same amount of food.

Is this being all hard on those poor, struggling mall caterers trying to make an honest buck? 

Clearly, I think not. 

And the first establishment that promotes as many variations as you want to squeeze into one container for the one price - is going to be popular.

Elevator pitch

Why why why try to enter an elevator before letting others exit?

You know, one sees - daily - instances of actions performed that suggest that those performing them are doing so for the very first time in their lives.

What else could explain the complete ignorance (utter lack of consideration?) of the consequences of something so fundamental as... trying to get on to an elevator at the same time as others are attempting to get off? (Say...)

Time and time and time again, I'll be the position of egressor (is that a word?) - the one getting off - and someone else  waiting on that floor to get on... WILL NOT WAIT until I complete my obviously intended manoeuvre. 

They'd rather barge in, against the current as it were, then - here's the niggly part - then react as if the resultant clash has never occurred anytime previously in their entire existence. 

Ha? Wha? 

There's no answer, I know - but it doesn't stop me wondering how the HELL they can't see that simply allowing those who wish to, the space to get off, THEN stepping in - unimpeded - is the way to go.

And yet - despite the fact that that clash MUST have happened to them in the past - the practice persists.

Sigh - there is no rest for the rational.

Toilet Paper - the wrong way

Why why why put toilet paper on its holder the wrong way?

There’s a wrong way? Oh, yes.

Installing the roll with the flow towards the wall (under) is just plain inefficient - it’s harder to reach the end and trickier to tear when you do. 

Have you ever walked into a hotel bathroom and seen it that way? No.

(And you know what group commits this malpractice the most often? Well, you'll see this entry has a 'Sexism' tag)

(You know what else? If I find it 'wrong' - I make it right - that's how strongly I feel about it)

Away from the wall (over) makes all the sense. End of story.

(But stay tuned for the toilet seat myth - it's a doozy)

Women and jumpers

Why why why do women remove their jumpers inside-out?

I’m not going to generalise and say all women do it all the time (you can’t really generalise about anything), I’m just saying it’s definitely frequent enough to warrant comment...

For me, though, it typifies a 'general frequency' of the female reluctance to adopt a practise - EVEN THOUGH THEY KNOW IT IS SUPERIOR - (there's trouble, right there...)

See, if you take jumpers off right-way-out to begin with, you don’t have to revert them - every... single... time. 

The funny thing is, once you figure out how to do that (not difficult in itself) - I think it's actually easier than doing it, well, 'wrong'.

How is it done? Simple! Don’t pull from the bottom - grip the top by the collar and when you’ve got that bit past your head, remove from arms by grabbing the cuffs. Voila!