This is a random rant on one particularly stupid aspect of
sexism; The toilet seat.

Actually, I shall touch upon several aspects of sexism,
and use the toilet seat as a convenient (or
convenience) example.

Let us begin with the basic premise of sexism - inequality
of treatment between genders. Some people argue that this
inequality is "wrong".
Now, let us look at just one difference between the genders.
One of them can get pregnant. This can put them out of
commission for several months, and affect them for much
longer.
(The man, too, can be affected by the child, of course,
but the pregnancy time is still pretty much the domain
of the woman)

Now, given that there is this intransient difference, is
it right to suggest that all else must be equal?

Now, consider, a man and a woman walking into a store,
not together, but one just behind the other. The woman
walks in and releases the door. This is slightly rude,
but by no means unexpected.
The other way around, suddenly the man is very rude and
will quite possibly hear a tirade if the woman happens
to be of Jerry Springer material.
This is inequality. We don't hear feminists arguing that
this shouldn't happen, however. Nor do we hear masculists
arguing so, because for some reason there is nobody to
stand against the inequalities that favour women.

Now consider the toilet seat. This is where a much more
logical light can be cast.
Consider the 4 toilet seat scenarios.
1. Current 'right' way.
   Man goes to toilet. Raises seat, pees, lowers seat.
   Woman goes to toilet, sits, pees, leaves.
   Man has to move toilet seat twice. Woman no times.
   This is for some reason the 'right' way.

2. Balanced, equal way.
   Man goes to toilet. Raises seat. pees, leaves.
   Woman goes to toilet. Lowers seat. pees, leaves.
   Man has to move toilet seat once, woman once.
   This is, we note, balanced.

3. Balanced, over-polite way.
   Man goes to toilet, finds seat up, pees, lowers seat, leaves.
   Woman goes to toilet, pees, raises seat, leaves.
   Again, once each. Balanced.

4. Unbalanced the other way. This is obvious.

Now, though 2 and 3 seem equal, and 3 is more 'polite'.
Now consider, either party going to the toilet twice
before the other goes again.
I shall use the symbols U for putting seat up, D for
putting it down, M for man arrives, W for woman arrives
and P for peeing.
So, scenario 2, man goes twice in a row (seat starts down):
MUPMPWDP
we see three toilet seat actions total.

In scenario 3, when the man goes twice in a row (seat starts up):
MPDMUPDWPU
we see /five/ toilet seat actions.

Unless someone has another suggestion of a working model,
it is my opinion, therefore, that the most efficient and
balanced model for toilet seat usage is that you leave it
where you use it.
The way men do and (some) women moan about.

Another favourite gender-based inequality of mine is
military things. I don't see any women campaigning for
the right to get drafted. I don't see any men campaigning
for /equal/ right to not get drafted. (Though I don't doubt
some have campaigned just generally for that right, in
a non gender-based way)

Sexism: It's not all one-sided.

Not that I mind. Only my sleeping brain would bother to
consider the logic behind toilet seat positioning.

--RavenBlack