Shower takers win round one, but there could be a price to pay . . .

When I posted my bath vs. shower poll a couple of weeks ago, I assumed it would be a 50-50 split and I would prove my point: that we bathers are a powerful voting block.

I was wrong. We got whooped. The totals so far on this question:

Which is more important, a great shower or a great bath?

Shower 77% (190 votes)
Bath 23% (56 votes)

Oh, that smarts. I suspect some of those aggressive shower types voted twice. But that doesn't account for the gap. Still, I want to caution the shower takers not to discount the needs of the minority bathers. Why?

I'm going to relate this to the just-ended California state budget impasse. I don't want to get too political, but some say the majority Democrats ran roughshod over the minority Republicans for a long time and so Republicans did what they could to exert power, which meant the budget was delayed until they got what they were asking for. (Read this L.A. Times story: Wielding power from the bottom of the heap.)

Could this happen to majority shower takers who deny the needs of minority bathers? I think it could. I think this tiny minority of bathers could — if not treated well with deep tubs and marble surrounds and Jacuzzi-type jets and maybe a fireplace and a flat screen TV — could well rise up and cause their own impasse.

I'm not saying this is a warning. It's just something to be aware of.

(Photo: Remodeled bathless bathroom of Southern California videographer Justin Sloggatt)