What If The Labour Party Got Rid Of...
Politics0 min ago
Why Masks Are Good
32 Answers
I heard an interesting analogy today - which makes it clear why everyone wearing masks makes sense :
Imagine we are all walking around naked from the waist down - eeurghh - and the bloke next to you can't hold it in any longer and has an unexpected wee - eeurgh again.
If you are in the firing line your legs will get wet.
But ... if you are wearing trousers they may reduce your wetness just a bit.
But ... But ... if he is wearing trousers the stream will be largely contained and, if any does escape through, then your own trousers may just sop it up before it reaches your skin.
So - we wear masks for two reasons :
1. To protect others from our emanations (the main reason)
2. To protect ourselves just a bit (a minor reason, but still possibly useful)
Sanitary Dave xx
Imagine we are all walking around naked from the waist down - eeurghh - and the bloke next to you can't hold it in any longer and has an unexpected wee - eeurgh again.
If you are in the firing line your legs will get wet.
But ... if you are wearing trousers they may reduce your wetness just a bit.
But ... But ... if he is wearing trousers the stream will be largely contained and, if any does escape through, then your own trousers may just sop it up before it reaches your skin.
So - we wear masks for two reasons :
1. To protect others from our emanations (the main reason)
2. To protect ourselves just a bit (a minor reason, but still possibly useful)
Sanitary Dave xx
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sunny-dave. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
What if the guy who is desperate to wee is not directly facing you? Maybe he's facing the guy on the other side of you. Could you have a 50% chance of getting your trousers wet? Would that make a difference to you?
Sunny-dave, what you heard is not an anology. An anology is a comparison between one thing and another usually to provide some form of clarification. What you have heard is an attempt to attach some form of reasoning to the situation and regretfully, the tale falls outside all the known types of reasoning.
Is this guy so nonchalant that he wouldn't think twice about emptying his bladder contents all over you rather than finding somewhere less innoffensive to do the job?
The fact that he "can't hold it in any longer" would not stop him from looking for somewhere else to empty his bladder in preference to you no matter how desperate he is. Consider that just maybe he would have the decency to empty his bladder elswhere.
If you are happy to transfer your logic regarding the guy with the weak bladder to the need to wear masks, that's great. All the same, given that your arguments are flawed and uncertain in the first section of your post, there is no certainty that the two assertions you claim at the end of your post are correct.
Sunny-dave, what you heard is not an anology. An anology is a comparison between one thing and another usually to provide some form of clarification. What you have heard is an attempt to attach some form of reasoning to the situation and regretfully, the tale falls outside all the known types of reasoning.
Is this guy so nonchalant that he wouldn't think twice about emptying his bladder contents all over you rather than finding somewhere less innoffensive to do the job?
The fact that he "can't hold it in any longer" would not stop him from looking for somewhere else to empty his bladder in preference to you no matter how desperate he is. Consider that just maybe he would have the decency to empty his bladder elswhere.
If you are happy to transfer your logic regarding the guy with the weak bladder to the need to wear masks, that's great. All the same, given that your arguments are flawed and uncertain in the first section of your post, there is no certainty that the two assertions you claim at the end of your post are correct.
Is the assertion incorrect because of the flawed comparison, or because masks aren't necessarily worth it whether or not men should wear trousers?
Put another way, would government advice to wear masks be politically-motivated, or is it a sensible measure that is likely to have a noticeable (if perhaps small) positive benefit on reducing spread?
Put another way, would government advice to wear masks be politically-motivated, or is it a sensible measure that is likely to have a noticeable (if perhaps small) positive benefit on reducing spread?
If someone has a known problem with unexpected wees then they should avoid coming close to others or should be wearing something such more effective at soaking up the flow than just a pair of trousers. And once his trousers are sopping wet then if he wees again before he gets home the trousers have lost most of their effectiveness.
But wee is less of a problem than a sneeze or cough- wee in such cases tends to dribble/pour down due to gravity unless... no I won't go there- whereas droplets from a sneeze go pretty much horizontally at great speed for several metres and can be blown by the wind into the eyes.
Analogies aside, I'd only wear a mask if everyone else was and I'd still stick to social distancing with strangers in supermarkets/trains and avoid crowded places.
But wee is less of a problem than a sneeze or cough- wee in such cases tends to dribble/pour down due to gravity unless... no I won't go there- whereas droplets from a sneeze go pretty much horizontally at great speed for several metres and can be blown by the wind into the eyes.
Analogies aside, I'd only wear a mask if everyone else was and I'd still stick to social distancing with strangers in supermarkets/trains and avoid crowded places.
