Female Expectations vs Energy Conservation

There is an age old argument … well for as long as lidded toilet seats have been in existence … that centres around the expectation, by women, that men will return the toilet seat into the down position after they have finished using the facilities. The nub of this argument is the inconvenience that is caused to women by having to lower the seat every time that they wish to use it after a male has been using said device in an upright position. It has also just been pointed out to me, by my wife, that one of the other reasons is a question as to why should women have to handle a dirty toilet seat?

Now, let me preface this debate by saying that in my house this topic is not an issue … as we have cats and a toddler. As such, the toilets are always returned to a fully lidded position by all adult users in order to prevent swimming (by the two members of the first party) and unauthorised dunking of household and toy’ish objects (by the latter party).

In essence, the argument about dirty toilet seats is negated by the fact that, in this new world of equality, it is just as unfair to ask the male parties to have to handle the seat in the upwards direction, as it is for females to assist it back to the lowered position. As well, the point often made about the ratio of the lowered position use by women (100% of the time) to utilisation by men (possibly, and with no research apart from my own behaviours to support my numbers, 25% of the time), the fairest you could say would be that in a fixed population environment, men would be expected to return the seat to a lowered position 3 times as often as women should be expected to raise it after they have used it.

In order to reach the appropriate compromise, I believe the debate has a scientific solution. The toilet seat has weight and requires energy to lift it to the upright position. In the upright position, the only energy required is that used to prevent it slamming onto the bowl. I propose that all toilet seats should have a user identity system as well as a counter system. Sophisticated software. teamed with appropriate measurement devices to determine total energy used in either direction could keep a tally and output it to some form of digital display. This way, the occupants of the facilities can keep a running score of the amount of energy used, rather than some arbitrary, subjective measure based on antiquated feminist arguments to provide an accurate balance of who’s turn it is to lift or lower the seat.

As well, should there be any parties who need to increase the amount of incidental exercise in their day to rach specific health goals (possiblilities of increased risk of infection through tocuhing soiled surfaces aside), they could set a higher target ratio of raisings to lowerings … or indeed, even volunteer to lift the seat for other users.

There, now we can all move on to a better world of fairness and compromise