The framing on these isn't great, but timing was critical and I was more concerned with getting a decent exposure. Oh, and ISO noise is a stupid bitch.
I bought a lot of books today. I sat at Trident with Ally and tried to finish the one I'm currently on so that I can start on my new ones. I love that feeling of excitement to crack open a new (or used) binding.
And we now continue with Part II of the "Michael Visits A Bathroom Every Day" series here at RWM:
I was in the bathroom of Cantina Laredo tonight, and there was already a guy occupying the single urinal. As I stood there watching him deftly aim his dong at that one little sweet spot that all urinals have that minimizes spashback, I thought about how such a decently large sized restaurant/bar (you thought I was going to say wiener, didn't you? Get your mind out of the toilet [he shoots, and swish!]) should have more than one pisser. Then I tore my eyes away from Pissy McGee and noticed that there were in fact two sinks. Now it's been proven that men tend not to wash their hands after taking a jingle, so why would they ever need TWO sinks for the ONE guy taking the piss?
Neither mathematics nor common sense explained this phenomenon. But then...
I didn't realize that there was also a guy in the pooping room. That's just the reason I didn't notice him in the first place: the toilet isn't in a stall, it's in its own little room. He finished his business at the exact same moment as the urinater did, and they both proceeded to the sinks and simultaneously washed their hands.
Okay, I'll admit that after seeing this unlikely coincidence unfold, I decided that I was slightly wrong in my initial judgment, but I still stand by my conclusion that two sinks are unnecessary. They could have used the space that the second one took up to put in another urinal, doubling the liquid volume per unit time exiting bladders. It often takes longer to pee than to wash hands (especially if you have
Let's say that for ever hundred men that enter that bathroom with the intention to piss, only fifty of them might wash their hands. Now let's say that these hundred all enter one right after another, and that they average thirty seconds at the urinal and those that wash their hands average thirty seconds at the sink (ha, not a likely scenario!). It would take them fifty minutes to pee in the single urinal, and only thirteen and a half to wash their hands. That means the single urinal will be seeing a lot more action than the two sinks, and ergo there will be more waiting for it. If they replaced one of the sinks with a urinal, the respective times at each would equalize at 25 minutes a piece.
With the occasional pooer thrown in, there might be a little bit more of a line at the sink than at the toilets, but the guys in line for the sink are just pussies anyways and should just skip it like a real man.
4 comments:
Seriously, I don't know how your mind comes up with this stuff! I mean it makes total sense, but I guess I just don't ever contemplate that (though, it would be nice to have the same number of fecal/urine receptacles in the women's restroom as there are in the men's. We all need to sit down, though, so you can't squish as many locations into the same size restroom, so there's always a line for the women's room).
Um, yeah. So I'm happy to finally be the first person to comment on your post of the day!
BEST.
POST
EVERRRRR.
the key? troughs. why? cause men will pack as many as possible into one long channel to piss in. looks comfortable for two? well...it looks like four can piss there. thusly, the mind of men. we win. all the time.
Does that mean that the chips we were sharing after you came back may have been....tainted? I thought the guac was especially tangy!
Absolutely hilarious image :))
Post a Comment