“New Yorkers have been waiting for relief for a long time. In 1975, the state outlawed pay toilets because it was argued that coin-operated stalls in public restrooms discriminated against women.”
There is no explanation for this statement given, and I must admit, I am at a loss. Can someone explain this to me?
I’ve thought of two possibilities, 1) women are more frequently the primary care giver for children. This probably results in more trips to the restroom, ergo, extra cost to women. 2) Men are more likely to duck into an alley to “take care of business” thereby avoiding the cost of a pay toilet. However, this seems like tacitly acknowledging the acceptability to an unlawful act on the part of men. 3) Oops wait! It says coin operated stalls were discriminatory. I guess that makes sense if somehow the urinals are free. However, I got the impression that these new pay toilets were like phone booths and that you paid just to get in the door. It doesn’t seem like this 1975 ruling should have delayed the construction of stand-alone units.
Well, I may have answered my own question, but if anyone else has additional thoughts I’d love to hear them.
It was judged discriminatory because men generally only use stalls to defecate. Women must use stalls for urination, while men pee for free at the urinal.
Yep, as stated, it was the Urinal/Stall debate - I dimly remember this.
As to why the big deal about the new toilets: The main problem with putting new toilets on the street was funding and politics. I believe the article talks about the experiment with the French company JCX placing 6 pay toilets around NY during the mid-90s. They were a success and heavily used. When the test period ended, they were removed and plans were made to have a whole ‘street furniture’ (including street kiosks, newstands, litter bins) franchise(s) put out to bid [supported by Advertising on the kiosks and pay tiolets]. For absolutely no reason that anyone could think of - this plan just came to a sudden halt around 1997, and has been gathering dust every since to everyone’s bemusement.
That’s why all New Yorkers still memorize the location of stragetically located accessible toilets (in libraries, department stores, fast food places, and hotels) in the areas of Manhattan (and in the outer boroughs too) that they most frequent.
The JCX toilets stopped for a reason ( good or not is another story).There were going to be some larger,wheelchair-accessable toilets.Since the larger toilets could be used for other purposes, they were going to be locked, and require a special card to open ( which would be given to those who needed these toilets).Some group or another complained that if the non-disabled didn’t need cards, then neither should the disabled, and that was the end of it.
Actually, the discrimination charge against pay toilets was based on the fact that they had been phased out of men’s rooms while still remaining in women’s rooms.
I work at a McDonalds that’s right off the highway. After 8 pm or so, 90% of the people who come inside just use the restroom and leave, without buying anything. During the summer, we go through about 15 economy sized rolls of toilet paper a week, and most of those “customers” aren’t even purchasing food. We’re losing money off them. My manager tried to get permission to install pay toilets (with proceeds going to the Ronald McDonald House, of course!), but he was denied. Something about discrimination, I don’t remember all the details. Personally, I think it’s only fair that we charge, at least from people who aren’t buying anything.