of the three urinals had not been flushed. Naturally, I used the third,
which happened to be on the left - and flushed. Then, acting from some
sort of temporary compulsive neurotic disorder, I flushed the other
two, something I would not normally do.
got me to wondering.
used those other two urinals? Had two individuals walked in
together, unzipped, urinated in unison, rezipped or not, and exited
interestingly, had one man used both urinals, pausing in
mid-stream to switch from one to the other? Then rezipping, or not,
left the men’s room satisfied he had compounded the possibilities.
also, of course, have used the lefthand urinal first,
paused, flushed, then moved on to the other two, diabolically leaving
the latter two unflushed.
there was the question of which order the urinals had been
used or not used. If all three had been used by one slightly noodled
person, there were six possible combinations - left, center, right;
left, right, center; center, right, left; center, left, right; right,
left, center; right, center, left.
which would have involved quite a bit of hopping around,
particularly if you were swinging, as it were, from extreme left to
people had planned the project, and urinated in concert then
the combinations change depending on whether they urinated together or
one at a time. And then perhaps one urinated while the other flushed or
failed to flush.
possible. Now I was caught up in what appeared to be a
deliberate effort to confound the pollsters who track the percentage of
men who do not flush public urinals.
too, there were no cigarette butts in any of the urinals, so we
must presume that these were non-smokers, or smokers who smoked with
one hand, or no hands - unless they held the cigarettes in both hands
and urinated hands-free. Which, of course, meant the smoker had to drop
at least one hand from the cigarette in order to rezip, or not drop a
hand if he did not rezip.
one was a smoker, one not, and the non-smoker rezipped, or
did not zip, for both - but in which order? Or perhaps they were both
smokers who had another method, such as placing the cigarette on top of
the urinal momentarily to rezip.
they were smokers with an aversion to smoking in bathrooms,
or maybe they had run out of butts - an unlikely scenario in a bathroom.
if there were three or more involved in the plot?
then? Who stood behind whom? Who waited for what combination of
urinating and flushing or not, rezipping or not, smoking or not? Was
someone watching the door to warn of an approaching potential urinater
who might compromise the scheme?
of the possibility, albeit remote, that it was a woman or
women, in disguise or not, despite the obvious physical difficulties?
Perhaps they smuggled the specimen, or specimens, into the men’s room.
Could they have been contortionists?
come it’s specimen in the plural instead of speciman, or speciwoman?
It’s to ponder.
about a man and a woman? Huh?
the porter have been called away suddenly, after cleaning the lefthand
urinal? And I entered at just that point.
about the possibility that the urinals were programmed not to flush
every so many pulls of the handle?
sophisticated enough to realize it was a problem that would perplex the
most inquisitive of minds?
Who realized the problem
was a pisser?