Willets Hall is equipped with many luxurious amenities that pleasantly surprise unsuspecting freshmen and entice upperclassmen to place it highly on their housing lottery form. These range from the crusty carpets, hardened by years of spilled beer and vomit, to the pungent smells that whisk your nose down memory lane like Marcel Proust’s Madeleine reminding him of lost time, or Remi’s Ratatouille instantly transporting the fine restaurant food critic back to his mother’s kitchen.
But the most underappreciated feature of these accommodations is that the toilet seats are frequently covered in urine. This can come in the form of wet urine, which was recently deposited, or dry urine, which has had time to evaporate and leave just a crusty yellow outline.
There has been a spirited debate among those who enjoy having urine on the toilet seat when they sit on it, regarding which of these forms is more desirable. While wet urine is a more authentic and immersive experience because it distributes evenly on the sitter’s cheeks, dry urine has an advantage in its permanence, since it remains adhered to the toilet seat even after several sets of sitters.
While their numbers are fewer, the Willets residents who don’t enjoy sitting on urine also happen to be mired in a similar argument, split along the same lines but for different reasons. Those who are less annoyed by wet urine than they are by dry urine argue that it is easier to clean up (with just a quick wipe of toilet paper) so it is a less painful experience. On the other side of the aisle, those who are more disturbed by wet urine believe that the time differential from when it was originally deposited makes it less disgusting to clean up someone else’s urine (though they admit that the dryness certainly does not make the physical experience of cleaning any better).
While Willets has for many years openly and happily harbored people of all persuasions, from wet urine lovers to dry urine haters and everyone in between, a recent policy change is set to alter the landscape of Willets bathrooms for years to come. In an announcement email sent on Nov. 13 by RCC Daniel Norris, co-signed by Willets RAs, Norris announced that “Standing While Peeing Privileges” of all Willets residents would be revoked effective immediately.
“Peeing while standing is a privilege, not a right,” said Norris. “It is a privilege contingent upon a hall’s ability to behave in a way that adheres to the community guidelines and upholds our shared responsibility. The current use and abuse of this privilege is disrespectful to our community and creates a hostile environment.”
These sectarian disagreements, which have existed in one form or another since the 1958 establishment of Willets, flourished in the years of coexistent stalemate between the urine lovers and the urine haters. But with this sudden shift of status quo the subgroups finally united against the other combined group, their natural enemy.
“I think it’s kind of hypocritical to say that we’re creating a hostile environment,” said Rudolph Cohen ’22. “Because by not allowing us to piss on the toilet seat, they are literally creating an environment that is hostile to us.”
Cohen was firmly a member of the dry urine camp, but a recent crisis of conscience following the announcement led him to cross the aisle and ally with wet urine fans, who he otherwise would never have dreamed of working with.
“Cohen’s a good guy,” said Cameron Perkins ’23. “Regardless of the fact that he doesn’t understand that the best part of having piss on the toilet seat is that your pants get all soggy after you pull them back up after sitting — and that just doesn’t happen if the piss is dry,” he said.
Perkins similarly spoke out against the new policy, adding that it restricts his freedom.
Facing powerful solidarity from the pro-urine camp, the anti-urine camp found itself struggling against the reactionary counterpush that assembled to oppose the ban.
“Call me unfeeling, but I really just can’t empathize with people who enjoy sitting on piss,” said Kim Boyd ’23. “This isn’t kinkshaming; it’s really just about basic decency.”
In an unprecedented show of cooperation, Boyd, who is personally more annoyed by wet urine than by dry urine, worked together with Hugh Hudson ’21 on a statement of support for the new policy.
“It’ll be a bittersweet ending,” said Hudson. “I’ve always seen myself as a piss hater — specifically a dry piss hater at that. I’ve really enjoyed my three years of hating piss enthusiasts, and hating wet piss apologists even more so. But regardless, I know this change will be for the better. No piss is better than wet piss, I’ll admit that.”
At press time, Norris and the RAs hinted at a potential future ban on vomiting in either the lounge or the water fountain, which might finally bring an end to the age-old debate regarding which location is more well suited for such an activity.