Watching the South Park episode"The Cissy" I wondered. Suppose someone identified themselves as the opposite gender (not sure if that is the right terminology) so they want to use the “other” bathroom. Are there any laws about that? Would there have to be some sort of outward identification such as clothing to indicate that despite physical parts, they identify as the opposite gender?
I don’t know about any laws, but there definitely is an issue in some places with trans women being refused access to women’s restrooms by whoever is in control of the restroom. I have heard trans women say that they simply organise their lives as much as possible so that they don’t have to use public restrooms. Going into the women’s isn’t worth the hassle, going into the men’s isn’t worth the risk of being violently assaulted (which unfortunately happens kind of often).
Transphobic radical feminists, and their allies among far-right religious conservatives, seem to use this trope the same way homophobes use “gays in the locker room”, as if the threat of allowing trans women into women’s rooms comes from the trans women themselves. When in reality they’re far more likely to be on the receiving end of any threats.
I believe you’re talking about transgenders. As far as I’m aware, there is a growing movement to allow them to use the restroom of the gender they identify with. I know California has legislated allowance for transgendered students to choose which bathroom they use in the public school system. Many states already have laws that prohibit discrimination in public accommodations based on gender identity.
Besides, there aren’t any laws that explicitly disallows any person from using a restroom of their choice. However, that doesn’t mean they couldn’t be charged with some catch-all misdemeanor like disorderly conduct, even though unlikely. Unless you’ve been told to stop it but continue to do so. Unless you’re transgender, in which case they would not have the right to tell you to stop (in some states).
Keeping in mind that this is GQ, where we focus on facts rather than opinions, I’d like to ask what motivates society to establish segregated restrooms in the first place. It has always seemed to me that a bathroom is - by its very nature - a place where one’s private plumbing is potentially exposed, and we want the privacy of excluding people who might want to invade that privacy. In a fully heterosexual world, segregated restrooms are a very simple way to insure that privacy.
But in a world that concedes the reality of homosexuals and transgenders, I don’t know how to insure that privacy to any meaningful degree. If I am in a restroom designated for people of my plumbing, and someone walks in who appears to be of the same plumbing, I have no way of knowing whether that person is: a heterosexual who would not be interested in me sexually, or a homosexual who would be interested in me sexually, or a transgender who (depending on the direction of transition) would or wouldn’t.
Given all the indeterminacies, I gotta wonder if it might be simpler to abandon the idea of separate gender restrooms. In a world that concedes the reality of all these varied sexualities, what purpose do they serve?
Back in the early 1970’s I worked in an office at U. C. Berkeley where there was only one bathroom, which had two or three stalls. On the door were two separate cardboard signs hanging on strings from two separate thumbtacks. When entering or leaving the bathroom, you could turn the signs around so one side or the other was visible.
One sign said “Occupied” on one side and “Vacant” on the other side.
The other sign said “Bashful” on one side and “Gregarious” on the other side.
(There was no sign saying anything about the topography of the user.)
Way back in the early 70s I went for a drink in a pub in the Earls court area of London. After a couple of pints I went off to the lavatory (nb - we do not “bathe” or “rest” in there). While I was standing at the urinal, an attractive woman stood beside me, lifted ‘her’ skirt and relieved himself.
When I got back to my friends and related the story, they creased up laughing. It was only then that I realised the quite a few of the ‘ladies’ in the bar were in need of a shave.
One could certainly argue that urinals are reasons that women should not be allowed in the men’s rooms. There is not, AFAIK, any corresponding reason that men would disturb a women’s room. But–and this gave me a turn the first time it happened–in France at least there are often female attendents in the men’s room. You are expected to turn around and pee in the urinals (and also leave a small tip for the attendent).
When we were living in an apartment in Switzerland that happened to abut a farm, my wife looked out the kitchen window one day and saw one of the workers turn his back to the row of housing and let fly.
Finally, I might mention that the students (or maybe just the student newspaper staff) at McGill is lobbying for unisex johns. It is not clear whether they will accept urinals or are insisting on stalls.
Maybe eliminating the urinals altogether and just have stalls for privacy. Another suggestion could be powder mirror/sinks, and washing sinks(i.e. a mirror/sink setup where one fixes themselves, the other for washing only).
Other than that, I got nothin’
as opposed to… what? peeing on the floor?
My university has unisex bathrooms. They just had stalls.
It would be a big deal, for about five minutes during freshman orientation. After that, people got over it quickly.
Yeah, the first time I heard of this I thought OMG NO. Then after thinking about it for 2 minutes I decided this whole business of “men’s” and “women’s” bathrooms didn’t matter at all. Not sure where the initial reaction came from honestly. Culture can surprise you that way.
Of course at universities there are also dorms and locker rooms in which the students shower and dry off after a shower. Having private stalls would reduce the number of showers you could have particularly as each one has to be large enough that the extra humidity is not a problem.
I don’t think dorms have had communal showers for decades. Some locker rooms may still be communal, but I don’t think many people are suggesting integrating locker rooms.
My university had single-sex facilities available, but most students quickly decided it wasn’t worth going out of their way to use them.
Seems to me that letting people choose the bathroom they want to use defeats the purpose of even having gender-segregated bathrooms altogether.
Since I think the OP has been answered… Trust me ladies–. you do NOT want to go into the men’s room. We hold our farts in all the time when we’re around you, we need one place where we can just let it go, let it GOOOOO!
What annoys me are the single-use bathrooms–the bathroom is one room with one toilet and one sink–and there are two side by side, and one is labeled “men” and the other “women”. What’s the point of that? I get the point of segregated multi-user bathrooms. But for single occupancy bathrooms why not “bathroom A” and “bathroom B”?
Based on a review of the purely stall-based, all-gender bathrooms at YouTube, by Good Mythical Morning, YouTube ended up having to designate some stalls female-only because of all the backsplash caused by men peeing into the toilet standing up.
*lav·a·to·ry
late Middle English: from late Latin lavatorium ‘place for washing,’ from Latin lavare ‘to wash.’
*
I note the conspicuous lack of “place for shitting” in the etymology.
Virtually all words for bathroom are euphemisms, lavatory included. I’m fairly sure that the only non-euphemistic terms (pisser, shithouse, etc.) are considered vulgar.
Last week I walked into the ladies room at an airport. A man walking out passed me. I was a little surprised. Was he a transgendered woman for whom I should be supportive, or was he a he, whom I could give a dirty look?
Life was easier in the 50’s. I never had to make these rapid decisions when going to the can.
Anyway, he gave me a sheepish look and muttered “Oops.” and walked to the men’s room.
Anyway, a more profound problem to me are neurotic mothers who drag their teenage sons into the ladies room. I run into this situation a couple of times a year. I really, really, really want to tell these mothers they’re psycho.
We didn’t have true unisex bathrooms but we might as well have. The dorms were generally coed separated by floor except for the one single-sex women’s dorm. My girlfriend lived on the floor under mine and I used the one on her floor all the time even to take showers. Most other people, both men and women, just used the one that was the closest even if it was technically designated for the opposite sex. Despite what people imagine, it doesn’t turn into an instant porno flick just because you share bathrooms. We all walked around barely dressed freely every night anyway.
As you say, the novelty wears off after about 5 minutes. I was one of the few people that even had an intra-dorm relationship and most people seemed to prefer to date people from outside of their own dorm because seeing someone in every state possible day after day tends to put a damper on romantic attraction.
I don’t think there were ever any incidents related to that rather laid back attitude but, then again, it was the 90’s and we were not as enlightened about all possible forms of perceived mental anguish as some people claim to be today. There were also some very popular nightclubs in Boston that had unisex bathrooms at least in the 90’s. People did use those for everything under the sun but most people just picked a stall, did what they needed to and then got out.
I do not believe unisex bathrooms promote any type of deviant behavior that people so inclined wouldn’t engage in anyway and they may help suppress some of it.