What were we thinking?
Now that we are seven horrid months into the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s time to revisit one of the strangest occurrences that happened at the outset of this saga. It’s an event that has been overshadowed by all the other evidence that we are in a sadistically-run Sims game. It’s time to break down the toilet paper panic.
What was the reason for hordes of people rushing to the toilet paper aisle? It was the fear of a pandemic caused by an airborne virus that is spread between people in close proximity.
You remember the panic. It seemed like everyone was lactose intolerant and preparing for the aftermath of a milk-drinking contest. That would have been a much better reason for buying that much toilet paper. There are only three other reasons you should buy that much toilet paper: you dress like a mummy everyday, you really enjoy collecting the processed remains of dead trees or you’re a shill for big toilet paper.
I don’t mean to be too hard on people just trying to be prepared for the worst, but what was the plan here? The nocturnal, flying-rat plague ravages the globe, society collapses and in a post-apocalyptic world, I’m definitely going to die. No question.
Who will the survivors be? The people who can hunt and forage for food? The clever? The psychos who were just waiting for an opportunity to kill people? No. Apparently most people assumed it was those of us who stocked up on the most toilet paper––a product they could only use to wipe.
Still, I do wonder what the toilet paper one-percenters are doing now. Most reasonable people would slowly utilize all of that over a lifetime, maybe pass some down to their next of kin. But these are not reasonable people we’re talking about. These are gluttons, flaunting their four-ply toilet paper. These are entrepreneurs who are now probably waiting for the Center for Disease Control to approve the use of toilet paper masks. These are the idiots still trying to get rid of all that toilet paper.
Written By: Ean Kimura — firstname.lastname@example.org
(This article is humor and/or satire, and it’s content is purely fictional. The story and or names of “sources” are fictionalized.)