(by Lexie Walters and Alice Moy)
IN ONE MAJOR AREA we are still NOT equal.
If we had to wait longer than a man to be served in a bar or to use a cash machine, there’d be uproar.
But there are few complaints made about the fact that we have to hang around waiting for a stall to relieve ourselves while our partners with danglers rarely have to wait for a urinal.
“Ah!”, men say, “you’ve hit on it – we have danglers, you don’t!”
“So? – YOU also have beards, moustaches, bald heads, prostate glands, and adam’s apples which we haven’t. But they don’t result in either sex having to queue longer for service in a hairdressers’, doctor’s surgery, or hospital.
If men’s public conveniences contained razors, would we complain?
So there is NO WAY that anyone should complain about ours needing proper toilets in private stalls with liberal supplies of paper.
Because we need them!
It would be impractical, insulting, and immoral for our bodies to use urinals in full view of each other. Not to mention disgusting!
So we propose that whenever we are faced with a queue, and there is NOT one for the men’s toilets, we storm theirs!
Give them warning (a knock on the door and a shout should do it) and enter in twos – to ensure that there’s always one woman to stand outside a stall while the other one’s inside it. Wash our hands together (it’s unlikely there’ll be a line for that!) and exit.
A few months of that and we should get some action.
After all, what sort of example are we setting for younger girls if we go on accepting the current situation?
We’re suggesting that we support the idea that the owner of a penis has rights that we don’t have – in particular the right to pee when he feels like it.
(Lexie Walters/Alice Moy)