Thanks Shoshana, see you in the powder room! 
Exactly, thank you, Hon. This does bring up the point: since the advent of ibuprofenwhich is a godsend with being able to get to work with cramps, women just soldier on at work. But, still, it does suck, and is a hard row to hoe. Hence, my above post about the Barca Loungers. Most women just grit their teeth and go to work, even with horrid cramps. Might go to work and hope for a couch, then, back to work.
Barca-longer is a laugh!
That’s what makes the custom seem sort of old-fashioned to me. If you just need to lie down, why do you need to do it in a secret room where no one of the opposite sex will see you? I guess the existence of the menstrual cycle was considered a state secret.
Bathrooms are already built for privacy. So it seemed natural to put a couch in there so that women could be comfortable.
Even if the couch-in-restroom thing started as a place of repose to deal with menstruation and cramping, it still has utility. As I and others have posted upthread, women use them for a variety of reasons that may have nothing to do with one’s female issues. When my son was still young enough to use the women’s room, I’d sit on the couch while I waited. It’s a comfortable place to sit, it allowed him some privacy, and I was still close enough to render appropriate assistance. I’m glad those couches were there.
Robin
The absolute answer is that women have many more complicated reasons for utilizing a public facility than men do : from personal health issues to caretaking for children, so a place to sit/lie down is deemed necessary enough as worthwhile.
There was a time, not so very long ago, when people knew things but thought they didn’t have to talk about things.
That was before reality shows, talk shows, blogs, and cell phones.
Some of the secrecy was harmful prudishness or religious antediluvianess. Some of the secrecy depended on notions of privacy and dignity that are seldom in evidence today, but probably should be.
All of the complaints here, I note, come from men. I have a firm policy.
Never pay attention when a white says that racism doesn’t exist; never pay attention when a straight says there is no discrimination against gays; and never, ever pay attention when men say that women have it easier.
Oh, no, dear. Thank you.
Did you just call me “a white”? Oh no you didn’t! Oh it’s about to get restituted in here.
Might’ve been there so the coke dealers and their customers had a private yet comfy place to sample the goods and conduct business? That’s the first thing that comes to my mind, anyway, especially if the club’s owner(s)/manager(s) were in on the action.
The building I work in was built in 1907, i think. And being as it is office space, now largely unused, it’s interesting to note the weird things about this building.
For example, on my floor, there is not a bathroom labelled “men”. There is a ladies room.
On the floors above me, the ladies rooms have seperated areas, often with couches or chairs.
Another odd note: I’m pretty sure the urinals that are in the mens rooms are “female urinals”. I could practically sit on the dang things, if I were so inclined.
That certainly makes a lot more sense than providing a comfy place where two of my closest friends can watch me urinate.
I would assume said loveseat is for, well. . . loving.
Considering it faces the toilet (the only ladies’ toilet in the establishment), that is an assumption which may seem obvious but that I didn’t want to entertain. 
I too am trying hard not to be antagonistic. And I’m also trying hard to be sympathetic, so please don’t misconstrue this question:
Why do you call it a health issue? I admit that it is a biological function, but that doesn’t mean it is unhealthy, does it? Would it be okay to call it a serious pain issue? Or comfort issue? Or something like that? Perhaps the problem is that the word “health” underscores the seriousness, and other terms treat it more lightly?
Did you quote me by mistake or does this have something to do with what I said?
No mistake. You both wrote about menstruation being secret.
Sorry, I was actually asking why Exapno Mapcase quoted me. Didn’t mean to cause confusion.
My guess would be that the cramps can be accompanied by sudden heavy flows and/or clots. So that being in the bathroom when they hit is strategically advantageous clothing-protection-wise.
I’ve only ever used them for migraines. Are women more suseptable to migraines? Were they considered to be, in the 1900’s? That could have been an accompanying reason and/or cover story for their inclusion into office layout. And the idea of a Victorian fainting couch did not hinder them in any way. Although those were tucked into withdrawing rooms (I’m guessing), most offices don’t have those. They have bathrooms, though.
Wonder if it’s part of the feminine mystique. They never do anything undainty in front of men, so perhaps it’s a place where a girl can go rip a good fart and enjoy the approval of her peers.
Sally, that was a ripper! Light a match, girl!! :eek:
In post #23, WF Tomba wrote: “I guess the existence of the menstrual cycle was considered a state secret.”
In post #26, Exapno Mapcase quoted the above, and commented about that secrecy: “There was a time, not so very long ago, when people knew things but thought they didn’t have to talk about things. That was before reality shows, talk shows, blogs, and cell phones. Some of the secrecy was harmful prudishness or religious antediluvianess. Some of the secrecy depended on notions of privacy and dignity that are seldom in evidence today, but probably should be.”
In posts #35 and #37, WF Tomba asked why Exapno Mapcase quoted WF Tomba. It seems to me that Exapno Mapcase quoted WF Tomba, because WF Tomba wrote about secrecy, and then Exapno Mapcase wrote more about that secrecy.
Does this answer the question that WF Tomba asked in posts #35 and #37?