Convention Committee Chairman (ccc): So, we are going to have another Clinton in the White House.

Committee: whoops, stands up, applauds.

CCC: And she's a Democrat!

Committee: members stand on chairs, bang the tables, go woot-woot and generally behave like chimpanzees being offered a cup of PG Tips, but more childishly.

CCC (shouting) AND SHE's A WOMAN

Committee: silence. Everyone sits down, looks at their feet, pretends to read notes, slips their phones out of pockets, stares out of the window. No one speaks, no one looks at the chairman.

CCC: what? WHAT?

Committee member 1: well, about that "she's a woman" thing.

CCC: [pause then speaks slowly]: go on

Committee member 1 looks around the room for support: we have all heard the rumours, that really she's... er ... kind of lost all claim to being a woman as we understand it.

CCC: are you saying she's had surgery, or taken drugs? I mean, don't all women of a certain age grow moustaches that they remove by one of various means?

Committee member 2: it's more than that: there are constant rumours that she's ..... become a-sexual.

CCC: Are you saying she has no gender or just that she's celibate? Or that she's bi-sexual?

Committee member 3: I don't think we can use the term bi-sexual any more. It's pejorative to the various degrees between male and female, and even alternatives.

CCC: WHAT?

Committee member 3: I think we have to refer to "all genders" so we don't offend, sorry, so we expressly do not exclude those who select one or more, or part of, a gender.

Committee member 4: It's not a selection, it's a recognition of a mismatch, in many cases. We can't use the term "select" in these circumstances

Committee member 7: and we have to say "gender" not "genders" as part of the new vogue of removing Ss from where they should be so we can put them where they don't belong.

CCC: What the fuck are we talking about? S or no S, someone explain to me.

Committee member 5: in the bad old days, we had bathrooms, before we called them restrooms, that said "no blacks." So far as various groups that do not define themselves as male or female are concerned, these are the bad old days. We should make a statement that we are inclusive and we should have restrooms that do not differentiate between men and women.

CCC: So we are going to make dickless humans, whatever label is attached to them, stand to pee?

Committee member 3: No, of course not. We just won't have standing stalls or urinals

CCC: hang on: this isn't about gender, it's about practicality. The venues all have roughly the same number of restrooms for men and women. But our Congress is dominated by men, so they have to queue, especially if they want to shit. So your solution is to allow men to use the women's toilets if there is a long wait.

Committee member 4: it's an important gender equality issue.

CCC: There are two genders and neuter. The others are not genders: they are by reason of choice, surgery or medication living as a gender other than that they were born to. Why are we even having this discussion.

Committee member 2: because we are in more shit than the toilets can hold. Donald Chump is appealing to the American masses in ways we have traditionally done and he's eating our market share by presenting self-help as a way out of economic and social failure. We need to learn from Tony Blair: he bolstered his campaign by appealing to minorities and promising them what they wanted. Of course he got what he wanted: a government full of weedy, weak willed, inexperienced yes-persons who were happy to see their agenda pushed but had no concept of what was good for the country. Just think: if we take a very public stand over gender discrimination, we can grab the support of so many minorities.

CCC: I can see that. Short term gain and long-term pain. After all, Blair ran the UK like his own personal fiefdom, regardless of democratic process, benefiting his pals and supporters and then walked away with a smile just as it all began to fall apart. Very presidential. Hillary would love it

Committee member 1: and just think of the publicity value of Hillary using an asexual toilet.

Committee member 2. We will be the first to do it, we will get fantastic publicity. The media will love us for being so innovative.

Committee member 4: I'm sure we can get various media outlets to make videos outside it, finding people we might expect, from looking at them, to suffer discrimination, and to let them say how this is a huge step forward for mankind, sorry, personkind. What do you think, Mr Chair.

CCC: I'm a chairman, not a chair. Don't be stupid and don't be trendy. We have one objective: to win the election and to keep winning elections. Will this help?

Committee member 5: yes, Mr Chairman, it will. It will define us as a party of unity, a party where every American, no matter who and no matter what can come to the Democratic Party and say "this is the shape I want to see America growing into."

CCC: are we going to abolish the disabled toilets because more fat people than disabled people use them? Or are we just going to tie this to a gender issue?

Committee member 8: speaking on behalf of fat people, I find that offensive. I have to use the disabled toilet because I can't fit in the stalls in public toilets.

CCC: oh, fuck. Don't start on that. It was an argument, not a proposal. So we are going to require the venue to convert all toilets to unisex?

Committee member 3. No, not unisex. That sounds like a hairdressing salon. All-Gender. And no, of course not. Only one. Just after registration so all the media see it when they come in. We'll blank off the men's room with a large poster so no one can find it and put cardboard signs up over the signs outside the women's.

Committee member 2: and we'll install condom machines alongside the tampon vending machine.

Committee member 5: you mean there aren't already condom machines in female toilets? And here you are bitching about equality? Why is it presumed to always be my responsibility to be prepared? That's one of the most sexist things yet.

CCC: hang on, we're getting diverted. Let me understand: we're going to fake gender neutrality by closing the men's room?

Committee member 3: well, we have to make them use it. If we don't create compulsion, they will stay with their old habits.

CCC: you mean men will use men's rooms and women will use women's rooms?

Committee member 4: exactly. How else do you think socialism works? A group like us makes up policy then we compel the masses to do as we say.

CCC: but we will do only one, one the media can't miss and where there will be people milling about. And in a place where there won't be long lines at the men's room anyway?

Committee member 3: it's all about image. Like Hillary's hair.

CCC: can't we use the men's room? With Hillary standing to pee? People would pay to see that and if we want viral content across the web, that'd work.

Committee member 2: we don't want to be ridiculed, just to present a believable picture for a few days.

CCC: and this won't come back to bite us on the bum?

Committee members in unison: of course not. How could it?

--------------

The US Democrats are so far behind the times, it's not funny: unisex toilets have been common in London for more than two decades, including at Waggamamma, a restaurant in Covent Garden which used to be so trendy it is inconceivable that no one in Clinton's campaign didn't go there.

And yes, the videos did get made: here is Forbes' party political broadcast on behalf of the "Trump's a Chump" campaign.

Video: http://for.tn/2adkIJ8

-------------- Update -----------------

A man has been beaten and kicked so badly that he has had to be taken to hospital for treatment. The incident happened just inside the Democratic Party Convention where a group of angry women attacked the man shouting "put the toilet seat down." DPC organisers said that the women had every right to be angry at this affront to their dignity but that violence was not the answer. Men were advised to use the men's rooms on other floors.