Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

maydayp
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:10 am UTC

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby maydayp » Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:51 pm UTC

AndyG314 wrote:
maydayp wrote:On the two bathrooms one stalls one urinals, I find it very icky. Two bathrooms for men to use,, one for everyone else. Because non sic people will not be able to use it, for the same reasons they face issues choosing which bathroom to use now. More so even, since female presenting non sic gendered people are at a higher risk then male presenting people, and they generally would be the only none sic men to be able to use urinals.

(There's more but my brain is struggling to find words. Also apologize for grammar errors, using a tablet to write this.)

Remember that even though you don't use a urinal, doesn't mean you don't benefit from it, in the form of diverted traffic. That said, a separate room for urinals seems silly if we are all using the same room for toilets.

A) sexism, it would emphasize it, and make it worse for women and non-binary people. Bathroom deals *do* exist. Guys/male bosses do force women (and other men) into male bathrooms to talk (I saw this mentioned on/in Ask a Manager).

B) it doesn't help because less then 50% of the population uses the urinals, and 100% of the population uses stalls. It would actually make it longer, compared to 2 bathrooms without urinals (which is better, since you can close one to clean it, and still let people use the other).

Drauts
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:32 am UTC

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby Drauts » Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:35 pm UTC

  • maydayp wrote:less then 50% of the population uses the urinals, and 100% of the population uses stalls

    Unless the under 50% number is zero, you're stating that people use the urinals as pregame to toilets. They don't.
    EDIT: I know that the population all uses stalls in the long run, but the long run never actually happens, so it doesn't matter; the only point of analysis would be hypothetical restroom populations, and it's going to be a rarity that nobody uses the stalls. DOUBLE EDIT: Meant urinals there.
  • I doubt that a unisex urinal would be an impossibility.
  • Urinal usage is a choice; if you really don't want to be seen at a urinal, you don't have to. It's actually quite common for stalls to be the preferred choice among people who already can use.
  • Lastly, having a stall per 3 urinals or so would make everybody wait longer, which includes non-urinal users; if you need a citation, just look at Azreal's posts near the beginning of the thread. While you can emphasize that a male-specific urinal would be an inequality in an abstract sense, it would result in a much more concrete increase in waiting times; excluding them for equality would do nothing but posture like it had done something, and would be a great disservice to the very people you'd be trying to serve with your all-stalls implementation

FINAL EDIT I PROMISE: I'm not an advocate of separating the urinals from the toilets

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby KrytenKoro » Fri Jun 19, 2015 9:45 pm UTC

Drauts wrote:[*]Lastly, having a stall per 3 urinals or so would make everybody wait longer, which includes non-urinal users; if you need a citation, just look at Azreal's posts near the beginning of the thread. While you can emphasize that a male-specific urinal would be an inequality in an abstract sense, it would result in a much more concrete increase in waiting times; excluding them for equality would do nothing but posture like it had done something, and would be a great disservice to the very people you'd be trying to serve with your all-stalls implementation[/list]

FINAL EDIT I PROMISE: I'm not an advocate of separating the urinals from the toilets

That's an important fine point, I feel. Artificial differentiation between men and women, such as for job searches or which bathroom to use, that's sexist. But if it's something that's a physical, no-frills reality, like ability to get a hysterectomy or use a urinal, that shouldn't be considered verboten. We shouldn't be trying to force the entire world to use tampons so that no one is different, sort of thing.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2089
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby Sableagle » Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:23 pm UTC

leady wrote:Why would women want to share bathrooms with men ? Have you seen the state we leave ours in and oh lordy the smells....


Two weeks as the store cleaner at a supermarket. Had to clean the grocery aisles with one set of kit, the store in general with another and the toilets with a third, all colour-coded. The male toilets had urine splatters on the floor under the urinals every single time. They did not, however, have used tampons on the floor. :shock: :(

I think we have a problem of habitually making a big deal out of things. In the UK, people dress provocatively, scandalously or conservatively. On French beaches, women sunbathe topless and nobody minds because it's normal there. In Germany, a man rides his motorcycle wearing only flip-flops and gets charged with failure to wear a helmet but nobody cares about the nudity, and there's a sign in the sauna saying Schwimmkleidungen verboten because getting your swimming costume all sweaty then taking it into the pool would be disgusting. In the USA, a singer's nipple is visible as a single pink pixel for 0.6 seconds and people spend hours discussing the psychological impact of that on the children who saw it on TV.

Breast-feeding's natural. You can say women should have a place to do this natural thing where people won't stare and drool. Fair enough, but they should never be made to go out of sight to do it. "Yes, bloke, women do indeed have breasts. Well noticed. Now move along, will you?" We make far too big a deal of it.

I don't actually believe men and women are The SameTM. There are some differences, in general. In a fifty-axis plot, there would be two 50-dimensional clouds with dense centres and vague, thinner "edges" plus outlying points, and there'd be a lot of overlap but there'd also be spaces where the densities of the two were very different. I do think there's a lot more overlap than some bishops, rabbis or mullahs would make out. I also think that focus on the differences ("Oh me yarm BOOBIES!" "Aaaaah, a penis! RUN!" "Yikes! That person has no Adam's apple! Creepy!" "Mmmmmm, peeeenisss.") is foolish and emphasises a false dichotomy.

"False dichotomy? You mean people aren't one or the other?"

I do indeed. For a start, we've got the sex v gender thing, where someone can have been physically examined at birth and identified as one but identify as the other, so it's a two-way dichotomy. More than that, though, it's not a dichotomy when you take into account that XY, XXY, XXXY, XXXXY, XO and XX genotypes present more than two possibilities and people don't have to identify as one or the other. Well, they don't unless society tells them to, but why should they? Why shouldn't men wear skirts, frilly pastel blouses, lace-trimmed floral dresses, bobble socks or whatever? Why shouldn't women wear trousers, plain shirts, neckties, sensible shoes, stetson or trilby hats, tailcoats or whatever?

Maybe we're the first generations who've made friends over the internet, playing Asheron's Call or City of Heroes with strangers and communicating only in text, seeing the default "male" or "female" set of polygons and knowing that the character's physical sex makes no difference at all and isn't indicative of the player's sex, gender or orientation, and learned to judge the playstyle, the talent for casting the right spell on the right person at the right time, the tactical acumen and so on instead of the hairstyle, the make-up, the curves, the shoulders, the depth of the voice or whatever else. Maybe it's past time the rest of the world caught up.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby Mambrino » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:51 am UTC

Sableagle wrote:the sauna saying Schwimmkleidungen verboten because getting your swimming costume all sweaty then taking it into the pool would be disgusting..


(Sorry for hi-jack, but this is relatively important.) While the quote is not untrue, often a more important reason is that breathing chlorine (common swimming pool chemical agent) is not healthy. Many swimming facilities fail to communicate this.

Continue.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2089
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Segregated Bathrooms [Thread Split]

Postby Sableagle » Sun Aug 02, 2015 9:55 am UTC

I hadn't thought of that.
I should have thought of that.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests