The recession has the corporate world implementing cost-cutting plans with a vengeance, and sometimes I'm inconvenienced, but mostly I understand, and try to do my bit to help save whatever resources I can. But here's a weird side effect of cost cutting...
They've recently introduced movement-sensor-driven light fixtures in the office loos, which are all very fine, but do the new high-tech systems have to be anti-women? Consider the following example.
I sit when I use the loo cos I'm a woman and proud of it. But when I'm in the middle of my little task, the light goes off. And why? Cos there's nothing below it. The sensors in the stalls have been placed exactly above the place I would stand in front of the commode if I were a man. As this spot remains unoccupied once I'm seated, the @#$% object assumes that there's no one in the loo and switches off!
My workaround for the problem is to do leg lifts. Might as well get some exercise while I'm at it. At the current rate, I can book a reduction of 1 mm off my tummy by the end of the 1st quarter.
5 comments:
im confused... why would the men stand and pee into commodes? that's what they have standing urinals in men's loos for! what's the design then i don't understand? anyway, tummytucks are good..
Standing urinals? The urinals stand? As opposed to sitting commodes?
But I get your point. So men wouldn't be standing in front of the commodes either. Which explains why some men have been looking slimmer lately.
Too gud, I was actually visualizing the whole damn thing...hmmm, every time i use a commode i am sure to have a hearty laugh.
Oh! I do these little piano moves with my fingers to switch the lights back on.
The other day I was in the loo and no amount of leg lifting or hand waving brought the lights back on. Then I realized that the electricity had gone off!
Post a Comment