So, I don't read the print version of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (one, I don't feel like buying it, two, I already HAD to subscribe to the WSJ, which I don't always get to read even though I am paying for it, and three, it's mediocre journalism at best), but I DO read the online version. I am not sure if what is considered the "lead story" on their website is actually the front page lead on the paper version, but if so, today's is just sad. I have not been a big fan of the paper since I was old enough to have an opinion on it (probably sometime in high school, when I learned how to write), and over the years I have seen more and more people end their subscriptions.
Anyway, if the Post editorial staff actually though that an article about the number of restrooms in the new Busch is front and center material, then there is something seriously wrong with them. Yes, we are very excited as a city/metropolitan area about our fancy-schmancy new stadium. But honestly. I am pretty sure that there are far more newsworthy (read: important!) topics that deserve that space.
I DID read the offendingly placed article, and of course, I have an opinion on it as well.
WHY is it ok for the city Building Commissioner to decide which building/plumbing code he wants to follow? And WHY are state laws that pertain to building standards NOT incorporated into the current codes? Otherwise, aren't they just pointless? I don't think that ignorance is any excuse, but I feel quite comfortable in saying that most contractors/architects, etc. are NOT going to go through the latest state laws and provisions to make sure that they didn't miss anything not mentioned in the building code. Getting people to follow the code is probably hard enough (though I don't make any excuses for a huge firm like HOK). Sidenote: Joni used to work for them, back in the day.
But as far as the whole women not getting an equal number of toilets as the men, well, get over it. There are more than in the old Busch, there is one more actual women's restroom than men's, and it's pretty damn obvious that urinals take up less space than the whole toilet, stall conglomeration. I personally don't think there is any reason to spend more than 1 minute peeing at the stadium (unless I have REALLY been drinking ;)), but even with all the distractions women tend to include in their bathroom trips, the lines really do tend to move quickly. Also, if they were to include the extra 30 or so stalls, that is just going to take away from revenue-generating square-footage and I hope everyone realizes how much money the new stadium will bring the City (once we pay for it, of course).
And FINALLY, what would women have to complain about if there were suddenly no more long lines at the restrooms?
Ha!
No comments:
Post a Comment