The war on men peeing is being lost. Well, it’s being lost by men. It’s being won by statists, specifically society’s most vocal and irrational “feminists” – men and women alike, liberals all, who envision for their progressive, utopian America a sexless land in which the state rules all and every citizen lives in government chains. Evidence this mindset has reached the highest level of our government is found in the announcement, last month, that the United States Navy will not install urinals in its new “gender neutral” aircraft carriers.

“The change heralded by the Gerald R. Ford class of carriers,” reports CNN, “is one of a number of new features meant to improve sailors’ quality of life and reduce maintenance costs. … Omitting urinals lets the Navy easily switch the designation of any restroom … helping the ship adapt to changing crew compositions over time.”

The real reason for the change, of course, is to accommodate female crew members, as acknowledged in the CNN piece. If the maintenance issues associated with urinals were truly a concern, these would have been done away with many years ago. One would think that the rampant pregnancy problem aboard Navy ships would be of greater concern. In 2005, the Navy Environmental Health Center reported that 64 percent of all pregnancies among enlisted female sailors were unplanned. Then there’s the Navy’s very serious problem with sexually transmitted diseases. Against these figures, whether male sailors are standing to pee seems fairly unimportant … but in a world ruled by hostility toward traditionally expressed male heterosexuality, forcing men to sit to pee is the dominant issue in the libs’ tiny minds.

For years, the complaint has been that it takes women longer to use the restroom than it does men, a situation deemed inherently unfair. The American Restroom Association even has a term for it – “Potty Parity,” which it defines as “advocacy efforts and actual legislation that addresses the longer lines for women often seen at public restrooms.” This disparity is deemed the result of out-of-date building codes that mandate an equal number of restroom fixtures for men and women based on building occupancies.

The logical solution to this problem is simply to increase the women’s restroom capacity in new construction. Liberal logic, however, is never to help when it can instead hurt. Progressives do not believe in a rising tide lifting all boats if, instead, the boats riding higher can have holes bored through them. Parity, to the liberal mind, is always achieved by diminishing others. Advocacy groups by definition cannot be advanced unless this comes at someone’s expense.

The result is as we’ve seen in the new, sexless, yet hopelessly oversexed Navy: Men will now experience longer lines because it is faster to use a urinal than to use a toilet. Because they will still stand to urinate, their bathrooms will be less clean. This, in the minds of the libs and their gender-obsessed activists, is how equality is achieved.

The next step will be, as a matter of policy, to force male sailors to sit down to urinate, emasculating them by forcing them to behave as women in their most personal of daily activities. If you think that’s unlikely, you need look no farther than Sweden to see it proposed as policy.

Sweden’s Left Party suggested recently a law ordering men to sit to urinate. Claiming that forcing men to urinate like women somehow affords those men medical benefits – completely contradicting understood medical facts about the process of eliminating bodily wastes – Sweden’s leftist totalitarians apparently are “studying” the issue, at least in part because they’re not yet certain how to enforce it.

The urge to nanny one’s citizens is certainly not isolated to Sweden, as New York City’s Dictator for Life, Michael Bloomberg, continues to demonstrate. But Sweden is particularly susceptible to irrational, anti-male governmental policy, owing to its history of dominance by radicalized and gender-based political groups. Greg Canning, writing for A Voice For Men, cites commentary on the Swedish political climate: “From being admired and envied by many as beacons of sexual enlightenment from the ’60s, the Scandinavian countries today have some of the most repressive sex laws in the Western world. Sweden is the most draconian. The message conveyed by recent laws is clear – your sexuality is the property of the state, and the state will claim its right to regulate and punish that sexuality wherever you may be.”

“Despite being acknowledged as one of the most gender equal societies in the world,” writes Canning, “feminist politicians regularly describe average Swedish men as comparable to the Taliban and Sweden as like Afghanistan so far as its treatment of women is concerned. The outrageous claims regarding sex trafficking and the supposed ramping-up of prostitution in Germany in ‘preparation’ for the FIFA World Cup in 2006 highlighted to an international audience the insanity of Sweden’s state delusions. Calls were made for the U.N. and Amnesty International to intervene and Sweden to withdraw from the EU in protest. This would be comparable to the U.S. government acting on the [myth that domestic violence rises during the Super Bowl] amplified thousands of times.”

Only a miserable lib could believe it is ever the appropriate role of the State to govern how you pee. Yet that is the campaign now being waged in contemporary society. The dirty little secret, implied but not acknowledged, is that men possess an ability, biologically, that women do not. They can easily and accurately urinate while standing. To the liberal mind this disparity, this grievous lack of biological equality, must be corrected.

It is not enough that men be inconvenienced by removing their urinals and reducing their bathroom space; they must be punished for having penises. Thus, they will be ordered to urinate sitting, as women do, to teach them a valuable lesson about how a good liberal Democrat treats his fellow citizens. Thus shall we all march – er, sit – into the brave new world leftists are building for us.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.