Let not any cynical reader dismiss the above question as frivolous query, or just another challenging tongue-twister, or cruel and unusual punishment of people who tend to spray when dealing with a sequence of alliterative "p" words! It is, rest assured, none of the above.
   Rather, it casts the garish light of reality and the soft glow of compassion on a scourge that bedevils fully half of all Americans who have advanced beyond childhood diaperdom and who are out and about in that daunting world beyond the comfortable cocoon of home life.
   I refer (although surely you have already concluded as much) to the outrageous discrimination against women in the area of public plumbing facilities.
   How, I ask (cutting to the chase, as is the occasional wont of this column), can any caring person of either sex and at any level of authority fail to recognize the dramatically disparate length of waiting lines at the rest rooms designated for the two most commonly defined sexes?
   Aside: Why, one is moved to ask, are they usually called "rest rooms" in America, when nobody with even a park bench as an alternative would even consider actually resting there?
   And why do our genteel British Brethren and Sisteren opt for the "loo " or the "W.C." rather than the more descriptive "toiletten" espoused by my Germanic ancestors? And why do the aforementioned Brits prominently display signs directing the gentry to "Disabled Toilets," which, it would seem, are no more useful than sterile roosters?
   Ah, well, back to the subject matter (also the occasional wont of the aforementioned column)!
   It has long been a boilerplate precept in architecture that form follows function, but this guiding principle is ritually ignored by the designers of most buildings where people gather and, consequently, seek relief from the discomfort of excretory urges.
   When "to pee or not to pee" is no longer an option, but an urgent necessity, common civility should dictate that adequate facilities be amply provided and easily accessible.
   With respect to the male of the human species, this requirement is somewhat modified when shrubbery and dark alleys are nearby, but such alternatives are, understandably, spurned by all but the lowest echelons (or most desperate) of "les gals."
   The allocation (i.e., form) of plumbing facilities should relate to their function, requiring forethought no more scientifically challenging than a comparison between zipper and pantyhose manipulation in the before-and-after procedures involved. (Note that we're struggling here to define the problem without engaging in gratuitous indelicacy.)
   The simplest of time trials should long ago have impressed on the architectural fraternity (for surely a sorority would have reckoned it at once) that the number of potties per capita (or per whatever is more descriptive) should be much greater in the "Ladies'."
   Add to that the standing rule that men can function nearly shoulder to shoulder at adjacent stalls with reasonable privacy, while women require cubicles to enjoy the same benefit.
   Despite these pathetically obvious realities, the female restroom lines (and faces) are long during entr'actes at the theater, halftimes at the stadium, recesses at school and break periods during convention seminars.
   I confronted an architect friend with this apparent injustice and he (a "he," wouldn't ya know?) -  with a perfectly straight face, mind you - reported that an early remedy, called the "Potty Parity Regulation," failed miserably. Seems, sez he, that it prescribed one and a half times as many fixtures for females as for males, resulting in no lessening of the waiting lines, as the ladies quibbled over who had to use the half-john.
   Now, I understand that this architect was being arch, but it told me that he and his colleagues were approaching the situation with a wink and a nod, seeming to see it as a self-serving pity party among the gentler sex, rather than the pithy problem that it really is (pun accidental, I swear!)
  Recently (and belatedly, you're bound to agree), the Big Apple's City Council, flushed with commiseration,  passed a law requiring a 2-to-1 fixture allocation in NYC's future buildings, both new and renovated.
   Okay, I'll admit that my view is skewed by the influence of Firstwife and seven daughters, but I plead innocent of squaw-man or girlie-man defection from my masculine roots.
   Like Superman, who was my boyhood hero, I stand staunchly for truth, justice and the American way of life...of which potty parity is clearly a critical component!
 
Freelance wordworker Joe Klock, Sr. (joeklock@aol.com) is a winter Floridian and summer New Hampshireman. For more of his "Klockwork," visit www.joeklock.com.