At work we have rows of cubicles in a non gender specific toilet area, each cubicle has a toilet, a sanitary bin, a sink, a mirror, paper towels and hand wash. Lots of grumbling about it by some but seems to work ok.
raybanwomble
We’re uncivilized dude.
Having had to clean the girls and boys toilet & bathroom in my uni house after my housemates all conveniently ****ed off at the end of the year without doing it, I can categorically state that girls are less civilised.
Do you think they become more civilised than us as we age? I mean - I do remember horrifically messy women at uni, mostly alcoholic ladette types. But overtime the truly horrific shit, which makes you question your own moral compass for hanging out with said person , that’s been from guys. Taking a shit in a clients kitchen and drunkenly pissing on audio visual equipment in a private cinema springs to mind.
I once saw a girthy turd in a urinal in the "gents" in a pub in Barnsley. I assumed it was left by a bloke but after reading this thread...
Daughters school has had mixed toilets for the entire time she's been there. So that's 7 years, apparently it was done as a more open policy to avoid bullying.
Male privilege alert.
From what I understand, the issue with toilets is that they are a small secluded room which you have to go into. If it's just a woman and a bloke, this puts the women in a potentially dangerous situation. For many if not most women, any man is a potential threat.
"Oh, but I'm a man and I could be beaten up in a toilet!" I hear you say. Sure, in theory, but take a look at #metoo on twitter. I could indeed be beaten up at any point, and yet I don't feel afraid that it might happen every time I leave the house.
From what I understand, the issue with toilets is that they are a small secluded room which you have to go into. If it’s just a woman and a bloke, this puts the women in a potentially dangerous situation.
We should have Boris-only toilets in that case.
I thought that, per piss, urinals use less water than stalls. Unless you only flush after a crap.
So shouldn't we all be using urinals for number ones (ladies included)?
MOdern toilets have a short and a long flush button depending on what you deposit - and of course there is the old Aussie adage " if its yellow let it mellow, if its brown flush it down"
MOdern toilets have a short and a long flush button
Ah, but how do you know which is which?
Is it small button for small flush, or big button because that's the most-used and most-likely option? And I'm sure different toilet makers take a different view on the matter, just to confuse the poor user even more.
MOdern toilets have a short and a long flush button depending on what you deposit
I think the short flush still uses more water than a modern urinal.
From what I understand, the issue with toilets is that they are a small secluded room which you have to go into. If it’s just a woman and a bloke, this puts the women in a potentially dangerous situation. For many if not most women, any man is a potential threat.
Whilst this may be true, a little drawing of someone in a skirt on the toilet door isn't going to change that. In terms of preventing attacks it's about as useful as a "no raping" tee-shirt.
Are attacks in toilets particularly common even? They're generally well-lit public spaces and in terms of unisex bogs you're basically talking about a room with a few sinks in. We'd be far better off banning dark alleyways.
Whilst this may be true, a little drawing of someone in a skirt on the toilet door isn’t going to change that.
You're a man, explaining to women why they're wrong to be afraid of gender neutral toilets? You're at risk of mansplaining here.
By labelling it as a women's toilet you demonstrate that any many going into it is up to no good - and if caught, he has no defence. If a woman sees a man in a women's toilet she can leave straight away. It's not foolproof, but it's the only idea we currently have.
And if women don't like the idea of gender neutral toilets then they should be listened to by men rather than dismissed because safety is much more of a women's issue than it is a men's issue.
No thanks, it's a step too far for this old girl.
I think yo and me are dinosaurs on this one CG!
Well I have a valid point here...we look at is as a one is cleaner than the other...NOT TRUE..I've cleaned enough toilets in my time to know were all dirty animals..and the 'vulnurable/fear' argument dont cut it..it donesnt stop a man going in womens or vice versa ..schools ...NO..I know school kids and they aren't usually that nice..so it's a liability of being humiliated(very hard to recover from..)..but as adults..why not?..were all accepting and open minded..I dont give a crap if I'm in a cubical next to women man or anything else for that matter.. I have to go regardless ...i dont care..
To argue that when are more vulnerable..BS..men can get assaulted,physically and sexually,humiliated and everything else under the sun..were as vulnerable as they are but just shut the F*** up about it and get on with it..if your women turned man ...fine..man turned women ..fine..its all the same stuff..wheres the problem..I would use the bathroom with the door open as I just dont give a shit ..but it makes OTHERS uncomfortable.. gender neutral is a non argument here..its all the same human parts..who cares..use men or use women's.. just decide..
Worked in a few places where bathrooms were shared - but were an array of single occupancy rooms with solid doors and walls.
Much better than ‘unisex’ facilities - no urine on floor, no towels or tampons I ever saw and no ‘pebbledashed’ toilet pans.
No fuss. No issues with male/female facility ratio. No barrier to non-binary etc. Faultless and foolproof.
I think yo and me are dinosaurs on this one CG!
Sounds like it doesn't it tj! Mind you I could envisage a few complaints from the men once they've been in the vicinity of those wimminz who liberally spray themselves in ghastly perfume. They'll be an 'OUT OF ORDER' sign on the door before you know it!
Locally in France the ladies happily spill over into the men’s zone whether it be in the men’s showers at the swimming pool or toilets anywhere. However, men never spill over into the ladies’ showers and very rarely into ladies’ toilets.
Yes, I've come across that in Bordeaux airport, bit of a shock at first to see all these ladies in the gents
and the ‘vulnurable/fear’ argument dont cut it
No you just don't get it.
To argue that when are more vulnerable..BS
You really don't get it. How the **** would you know what it's like to be a woman? Maybe you should try listening to #metoo
were all accepting and open minded
Unfortunately some of us are sexual predators and like preying on people half their size.
Having gender neutral toilets doesn’t prevent there also being women only toilets. What some of you are getting upset about is that some women weren’t born women, and that allowing them into women only toilets might also allow dangerous individuals to abuse that and be in women only toilets and threaten women.
See the Manchester Uni approach… big public gender neutral toilets in busy locations. Women only toilets elsewhere. No idea what restrictions they place on the women only toilets, but I’d hope they are ready to act on anyone that is a threat anywhere on campus.
You’re a man, explaining to women why they’re wrong to be afraid of gender neutral toilets? You’re at risk of mansplaining here.
No, I'm a man explaining to another man (unless there's something you've not told me since we last met) why I think that as risk mitigation goes, a sign on the door is as close to "none" as makes no odds.
By labelling it as a women’s toilet you demonstrate that any many going into it is up to no good – and if caught, he has no defence. If a woman sees a man in a women’s toilet she can leave straight away. It’s not foolproof, but it’s the only idea we currently have.
No defence? You're honestly telling me that you've never in your life accidentally walked into the wrong toilets?
In the hypothetical situation that a man is going to exploit the fact that shared facilities exist in order to molest someone then they're going to wait until there's no bugger else around, rendering any signage pointless. Christ, if you were that determined to infiltrate the ladies' crapper, a janitor's overalls and a mop isn't hard to come by.
For the avoidance of doubt, because you appear to be picking the wrong fight with me: I am in no way trivialising or dismissing anyone's concerns, whether perceived or actual. I'm simply saying that the dangers present in a shared bathroom is the same as one in a unisex one. Or for that matter, any public place - someone could just as easily get grabbed in a shop.
I don't believe that gendered toilets should be removed entirely because as CG demonstrates she for one wouldn't be comfortable with it and I expect she's far from alone here, and that's absolutely fine, but the fact is that non-gendered toilets solve a lot of issues for some people. Aside from the obvious non-binary / trans folk, they must be great for dads out with their young daughters or mums with sons. Dads having to choose between bringing their little girls into a room where there's a load of fully grown blokes with their cock in their hand, or into one where he's seemingly a serial rapist just by dint of being there, must be quite the dilemma.
Anyway. TL;DR - choice good mmkay.
Frankly I'd be worried about encountering madmechanist, see his post a little way up.
For me it's not especially about safety and all to do with wanting relative privacy in a relatively clean environment. Of course this may well depend on the type of establishment but, seriously, who'd want this facility where alcohol is served. Not being generalistic and not intending to cause offence either, just to be clear.
Two things I never thought I’d admit on a public forum.
1: Urinals are ****ing horrible things. Stink and there is generally piss everywhere. I’ll use a stall and sit down where possible. Browse this place, read the news or something. It’s a break.
2: I have difficulty taking a piss or a shit if the toilets are crowded. No idea why, but if there’s talking it just puts me right off. Bizarre and annoying and would be made worse with some sort of open plan toilet area.
And if women don’t like the idea of gender neutral toilets then they should be listened to by men rather than dismissed
That, to me, seems like the only statement worth listening to.
But… you can have gender neutral toilets AND women only facilities, on the same site. And that can be a damn useful solution to lots of problems. Women objecting to the abolition of all women only toilets makes perfect sense. Women who object to gender neutral toilets existing at all, and especially men speaking for them, often turn out to have dubious true motives.
Women who object to gender neutral toilets existing at all, and especially men speaking for them, often turn out to have dubious true motives.
You what??
Women who object to gender neutral toilets existing at all, and especially men speaking for them, often turn out to have dubious true motives
interesting. What would these 'dubious motives' be?
Good god no – have you seen the queues outside the ladies at events – I’m getting to the age that I’d likely piss myself if I had to wait that long.
Many years ago, actually around 1984, I went see U2 at Cardiff Arms Park, and the queues for the ladies nearby were immense, and while I was in the men’s one young lady obviously had had enough and marched in past all the blokes to an empty cubicle, cue a few raised eyebrows! I just thought, good for you!
Do you think they become more civilised than us as we age? I mean – I do remember horrifically messy women at uni, mostly alcoholic ladette types. But overtime the truly horrific shit, which makes you question your own moral compass for hanging out with said person , that’s been from guys.
A company I worked for in Chippenham for some time, and which had a fairly high female workforce, particularly in the areas I worked in much of the time had to put up notices about the state some women were leaving their loos in, which appeared to be deliberate soiling of the walls...
interesting. What would these ‘dubious motives’ be?
I can understand, and support, the objection to having gender-neutral toilets instead of unisex ones. I cannot see any credible reason to object to facilities literally anyone can use as well as having traditional unisex ones other than bigotry. It's like arguing against wheelchair ramps.
Many years ago, actually around 1984, I went see U2 at Cardiff Arms Park
Cool. Was that the tour for The Unforgettable Fire?
Ahh! Back when U2 were good...
But… you can have gender neutral toilets AND women only facilities, on the same site.
That's all well and good until the private sector and/or public services decide they can save money by ordering wimminz to use gender-neutral toilets thus making the wimminz-only ones surplus to (men's) requirements. Reduces maintenance, reduces cleaning and you end up with extra space. What's not to like?
That’s all well and good until the private sector and/or public services decide they can save money by ordering wimminz to use gender-neutral toilets
Whilst a good point,
a) Has that ever happened in the history of ever? And,
b) If that looked likely to occur then surely that's what you should be protesting against, rather than being against their existence at all, no?
Those damned disabled ramps, soon councils will be saving money by not building steps.
It's not really like arguing against wheelchair ramps though, is it?
At the moment lavatory provision is arguably biased against women: although there is usually the same amount provided for both sexes women take about twice as long on average (because they have to undress a bit more, because they have extra things to do - such as change sanitary items, and because using a cubicle takes longer than using a urinal). This means that even with current provision women have to queue longer - something we have all seen at gigs and theatre events.
Women also generally prefer women only lavatories. There are many reason why, but I don't think they should even have to justify this - if that's what they prefer then that's what they should get (sex (not gender or gender identity) is a protected characteristic under the 2010 equality act).
As women generally don't like mixed sex toilets these in effect become male toilets, meaning men now get 2/3 of the provision (assuming equal amounts of male, female, mixed) while women are left with 1/3.
Of all the things going on in the world mixed sex lavatories is about 1000th on the things that personally bother me, but many, many women do not like them. I think we should listen to them.
At the moment lavatory provision is arguably biased against women
No arguments here, providing "the same amount" for both isn't appropriate. Female toilets - in higher-footfall areas at least - require more real estate than men's due to both time taken as you said and cubicles taking up more space than urinals. That they don't always get this space is nothing more than poor (probably male-led) design.
The problem with insufficient women's toilets isn't the presence of gender-neutral toilets, it's the lack of women's toilets.
This means that even with current provision women have to queue longer – something we have all seen at gigs and theatre events.
Sure. I've seen plenty of gents' toilets at concerts over the years containing more women than blokes. Probably because of the previous point.
Women also generally prefer women only lavatories.
[Citation needed.]
As women generally don’t like mixed sex toilets
[Citation needed.]
(sex (not gender or gender identity) is a protected characteristic under the 2010 equality act).
Interesting that you felt it necessary to make that distinction. You're aware that gender reassignment is also a protected characteristic under that self same act, yes?
mixed sex lavatories is about 1000th on the things that personally bother me
Why does it personally bother you at all? Don't like them, don't use them.
but many, many women do not like them. I think we should listen to them.
[Citation needed.] The evidence we have presented to date on this thread is that one woman doesn't like them.
I don't like football, I square this circle by not watching football rather than trying to ban it.
Situation: a shop sells oranges and apples.
Problem #1: there aren't enough oranges to meet demand.
Problem #2: some people don't people really like either oranges or bananas.
Solution: Hey, we'll focus on selling bananas instead, but oranges and apples will still be available to those who want them.
Argument: But some people don't like bananas! We should listen to them. What do you know about oranges, you apple-eating mofo?
Sorry, I didn't realise that after 50 or so posts we suddenly needed citations when up until now we just asserted.
If I can be arsed I'll go and find some, but to be honest as nobody ever convinces anyone online forums I don't think I'll bother.
Ask the women you know if they prefer single sex or mixed sex toilets. That's what I did.
Thanks for being mostly civil.
It's called "burden of proof" and it's not a radically new phenomenon when one is presenting statements as facts. I'll happily revise my opinion if you can show me the studies you're referencing. Be arsed, or concede that you need to drop that argument as random nonsense you've just made up.
Because, simply, anecdotes are not evidence. If I asked say half a dozen women I knew what they thought then I'd either get six hating the idea, six loving the idea or something in between. This is insufficient to then be bold enough to speak on behalf of what "most women" prefer, it's the quality of data beloved of skin cream adverts.
And in any case - so what? As I've said several times now, don't like them, don't use them. What's the problem here, why do you remotely care?
We got to the third page before anyone asked for a citation, I thought we were just sharing opinions. For example, you earlier said "the dangers present in a shared bathroom is the same as one in a unisex one", a statement presented as fact.
I know it's a little unfair to trawl through your comments then jump on the one that can be made to fit my argument - my point is that suddenly asking for citations after 80 comments is also a little unfair.
I didn't 'randomly make up nonsense', I asked people what they thought. I know that's not dissertation standard evidence, but it's not 'making up nonsense'. Come on Cougar, it's been a pretty civilised discussion on a tricky subject up until now, don't start making it personal.
I found it harder than I expected to find any evidence. As I said earlier my opinion was formed by talking to women, who nearly all said the prefer single sex provision, and many of who said they would simply not use mixed sex provision. Anyway, here are a couple of articles that go some way to agreeing with me:
TODAY.YOUGOV.COM 
But seriously, ask the women you know. Don't give any opinions first, just ask if they prefer single sex or mixed sex toilets. And don't argue, just listen to what they say.
I didn't really get what you were saying with your fruit shop analogy, so I'm not even going to attempt to answer that.
And why do I remotely care? As I said earlier it doesn't bother me personally, but women I've spoken to feel that some or all of what they consider to be 'their' toilets are being changed to mixed toilets that they do not want to use, that as usually women are losing out. If extra toilets were being provided they wouldn't be bothered.
At the risk of repeating the exact same point only to be repeatedly ignored by those with an axe to grind… If a site keeps nearly all its women only toilets, and turns its biggest men only toilets into suitable toilets for all… or creates additional toilets and makes them available to all… is that a problem? Is the problem with the removal of women’s toilets in significant numbers (an understandable complaint) or with having gender-neutral toilet facilities at all?
I opened this thread assuming it would be about the toilets at the Old Vic Theatre.
Last year, the theatre crowd-funded £100,000 towards refurbishment of the toilets. Front and centre was a pledge to “double the number of ladies’ toilets.
Following nine months of renovation, the new toilets have been proudly unveiled AND THEY ARE ALL GENDER NEUTRAL.
Quote from @oldvictheatre twitter
"Our loos now offer ‘self-selection’ rather than being labelled male or female. This takes a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, approach following advice from surveys conducted with focus groups."
I wonder what 'focus groups' they consulted with?
Historic Scotland have done something similar (making all toilets 'gender neural' aka mixed-sex.
They did actually carry out an EqIA (Equality Impact Assessment) before doing so. What is an EqIA? An Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) is a way of systematically taking equal opportunities into consideration when making a decision.
The Historic Scotland one found that the proposed changes would have a NEGATIVE impact on the protected characteristics of SEX, PREGNANCY/MATERNITY, and ETHNICITY. But they went ahead and made the changes anyway.
Whilst a good point,
a) Has that ever happened in the history of ever? And,
b) If that looked likely to occur then surely that’s what you should be protesting against, rather than being against their existence at all, no?
a) This is exactly what is happening
b) No one is protesting against the creation of additional gender neutral (mixed sex) toilets
It’s a pub – very few men are going to need a “sitting down” toilet
Some of my favourite ‘log flumes’ were achieved in sit-down pub toilets. Very handy places. Beats crapping in the urinal.
In those specific examples… having no women only toilet facilities at all is a really bad move… for many reasons, agreed. Of course, you can have both gender neutral toilet facilities and women only ones, on the same premises, and plenty of places are making this work for everyone. I only mentioned the Manchester University example because on visits there in the past year, for an open day and a gig, they seemed to have got this absolutely bob on, and anyone genuinely concerned should check out what they have done. Hopefully their example will spread.
If you have women only toilets then you must have men only toilets - equality doesn't run in just one direction.
Just do away with urinals and only have traps everywhere - so all toilets are 'gender-neutral' - what's the problem?
