There is a movement to take away urinals to reduce inequality. Yes, transgender people want multi-stall all-user restrooms to fight proclaimed cisgender intimidation. Haven’t heard about that? Read an amazing book entitled Fifty-Six Things The Left Will Take Away From You that details the whole scenario. Transgender activists want one bathroom for all, while feminists just object to seeing urinals—urinals empower men, and well, they are just gross (the urinals, yes, and the men, probably). What’s left for men?

Take a seat.

Adding support to the argument is that leveler of all things once normal and common sense, that great excuse, the tool of the Left, the coronavirus.

Did you know urinals may spread the coronavirus?

Yes, “toilet plume,” that swirling cloud of aerosolized microscopic particles of water and whatever else may be in a toilet burped out by every flush has long been recognized by scientists and spoken of in impolite company. Now welcome “urinal vortex” to the conversation.

A study just out models the urinal breeze created by every flush. It’s not good. Within six seconds, the malevolent mist rushes up and out, with the majority of the aerosolized particles escaping the confines of the urinal and reaching a height of 33 inches off the floor. Get rid of those pandemic fountains!

There are a few problems with the case to be made, however. First, 33 inches reaches only up to mid-thigh on most men. Very little virus coronavirus transmission has been shown to be through the thighs. A man would have to be on his knees in the restroom for it to hit him in the face. Why would a man be on his knees in the restroom? Oh? Yes, I understand. Yes, I’m sorry. I take that back. Don’t want to discriminate!

Second, the scientists or scholars or whatever you may call them warning of the danger never actually observed it. They modeled it, which is another way of saying they calculated it, which is another way of saying they fabricated it. That’s what a model is—a simulation built, or fabricated, assumption by assumption. It’s like the climate change models that predicted the end of the earth to occur a couple years ago—the same kind that just 50 years ago were predicting a global ice age based upon the assumptions in vogue then.

Third, the calculations are necessarily inaccurate. Urinals, like the men greeting them, come in all shapes and sizes. Some are flat and tall, some jut out, some are troughs with a kind of sprinkler above, and most importantly, increasingly some don’t flush at all. They are waterless, with the urine disappearing under a floating layer of oil. They seem the ultimate barrier for disease transmission.

Fourth, it’s not like the alternative is anywhere near better. Toilets also spew a heady stew of bacteria. They promote fecal-oral transmission—a concept that shouldn’t even be thought of during daylight hours. Coronavirus is still being studied, but it surely looks to appear in both feces and urine. But women can really stop toilet plume by closing the lid first. Sure, if most public toilets actually had lids in addition to seats. Most do not, to minimize cleaning and expense. Urinals can’t be accused of fecal-oral transmission.

Fifth, the fabricators of the model appear to be funded by the Chinese government. On one hand, they are clearly the experts on the virus from Wuhan. On the other hand, isn’t it just a bit too clever to unleash the virus and then cement your notoriety with scholarly study of its many manifestations? And the translation? Are we to take Chinese scholars seriously when this is the best they can do: “’Can a male-oriented urinal promote the virus transmission?’ is the question needed to be answered with the assistance of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in this Letter as urinal flushing, where turbulence can be observed from daily life experiences, occurs frequently as well”? That’s little better than the instructions to power on your child’s $5.99 toy: “Pressure round disc for operational activate.”

Of course, there are those out there ready to embrace the new world order for their own benefit. With hospitality industry leaders, the managing director of the British Toilet Association is ready to step away from urinals. If he had his way, the British tourism industry would say, “Come see our castle, come see our beaches, come see our state-of-the-art toilets.”

The CEO of Waterless.com would like to sell more waterless urinals, which is probably good. Unfortunately, his additional advice sounds like more “friendly” woke instruction for men: “Have posters made encouraging men to urinate at a 90-degree angle. ‘Urinating in the water causes the most splatter and aerosolization,’” and “Gentleman might consider sitting instead of standing; the stream is five times faster when standing at a urinal than when sitting in a toilet.”

Yes, gentleman should take a seat—everyone agrees it’s better to pee less forcefully. It’s a treatment for toxic masculinity!

Until this all gets worked out, follow the distancing dictates strictly. More than one Lefty has been seen standing obediently on the social distancing marker six feet away from the urinal and coming up short. Do it for humanity!

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment