Should Public Restrooms Become Gender Neutral?

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

All restrooms should be gender neutral. End of story.

[Aurora Novus]

And the restrictions are inherently harmful stance is fucking stupid.

It's not stupid, it's reality. Being told "you are not allowed to do something, and will be forcibly prevented from doing it" is a harm to your freedoms. It's stripping you of your ability to do certain things. It is denying you the ability to, in certain situations, fulfill your desires.

In order to justify this, it must be countering some greater harm.

[Ethel mermania]

And the restrictions are inherently harmful stance is fucking stupid.

It's not stupid, it's reality. Being told "you are not allowed to do something, and will be forcibly prevented from doing it" is a harm to your freedoms. It's stripping you of your ability to do certain things. It is denying you the ability to, in certain situations, fulfill your desires.

In order to justify this, it must be countering some greater harm.

to say you cant piss next to someone of the opposite sex is causing harm?

[Ostroeuropa]

It's not stupid, it's reality. Being told "you are not allowed to do something, and will be forcibly prevented from doing it" is a harm to your freedoms. It's stripping you of your ability to do certain things. It is denying you the ability to, in certain situations, fulfill your desires.

In order to justify this, it must be countering some greater harm.

to say you cant piss next to someone of the opposite sex is causing harm?

To segregate genders and reinforce the perception of difference between the two is to cause harm to both genders.
To force you to drink out of a different water fountain because you are black isn't a harm either, unless viewed in the wider context.

[Linux and the X]

to say you cant piss next to someone of the opposite sex is causing harm?

To segregate genders and reinforce the perception of difference between the two is to cause harm to both genders.
To force you to drink out of a different water fountain because you are black isn't a harm either, unless viewed in the wider context.

Segregated drinking fountains discriminated against people of colour, who protested against the segregation. What group do separated bathrooms discriminate against, and are they protesting against it?

[The Steel Magnolia]

And the restrictions are inherently harmful stance is fucking stupid.

It's not stupid, it's reality. Being told "you are not allowed to do something, and will be forcibly prevented from doing it" is a harm to your freedoms. It's stripping you of your ability to do certain things. It is denying you the ability to, in certain situations, fulfill your desires.

In order to justify this, it must be countering some greater harm.

We restrict freedoms all the time. It`s really not a problem, and to characterize it as a problem is, as I said, fucking stupid.

[Ostroeuropa]

To segregate genders and reinforce the perception of difference between the two is to cause harm to both genders.
To force you to drink out of a different water fountain because you are black isn't a harm either, unless viewed in the wider context.

Segregated drinking fountains discriminated against people of colour, who protested against the segregation. What group do separated bathrooms discriminate against, and are they protesting against it?

They discriminate based on gender. That both genders are effected is irrelevant.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Segregated drinking fountains discriminated against people of colour, who protested against the segregation. What group do separated bathrooms discriminate against, and are they protesting against it?

They discriminate based on gender. That both genders are effected is irrelevant.

Not all discrimination is inherently harmful.

Christ why do I even need to explain this.

[Ostroeuropa]

They discriminate based on gender. That both genders are effected is irrelevant.

Not all discrimination is inherently harmful.

Christ why do I even need to explain this.

Explain /=/ Claim

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

They discriminate based on gender. That both genders are effected is irrelevant.

Not all discrimination is inherently harmful.

Christ why do I even need to explain this.

Why do we need to discriminate?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Not all discrimination is inherently harmful.

Christ why do I even need to explain this.

Why do we need to discriminate?

Because different groups have different needs and we can't treat everyone the same if we want an equitable society?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Not all discrimination is inherently harmful.

Christ why do I even need to explain this.

Explain /=/ Claim

I have. Repeatedly.

[Ethel mermania]

to say you cant piss next to someone of the opposite sex is causing harm?

To segregate genders and reinforce the perception of difference between the two is to cause harm to both genders.
To force you to drink out of a different water fountain because you are black isn't a harm either, unless viewed in the wider context.

The thing you folks seem to forget, the reason "separate by equal" was struck down was because it wasn't. black schools did not have equal funding, the building codes were not the same, the curriculums were different. The schools were in no way shape or form equal. (neither were the water fountains)

bathrooms are divided by sex, not gender.
most folks i know prefer separate bathrooms. i dont know if any long term impartial studies have been done as to public preference, but except for the transgender community i dont know a lot of folks advocating this. So unless shown otherwise i think it is safe to assume the majority of american's disapprove.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Why do we need to discriminate?

Because different groups have different needs and we can't treat everyone the same if we want an equitable society?

What different needs are there? I think a toilet in a stall and a sink with soap and water and paper towels works for everyone.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Because different groups have different needs and we can't treat everyone the same if we want an equitable society?

What different needs are there? I think a toilet in a stall and a sink with soap and water and paper towels works for everyone.

Urinals and waste disposal issues are one, perception of safety and a requirement for safe spaces are another.

I treat bathrooms like safe spaces. Most women I know do.

[Linux and the X]

both genders

Yeah, well, screw you too then.

bathrooms are divided by sex, not gender.

Well, no. Binary trans* people almost always use the bathroom appropriate to their gender, not their sex, and most laws and rules stating one way or the other clarify that this is acceptable.

except for the transgender community i dont know a lot of folks advocating this

And as seen here most trans* people have no problem with gendered bathrooms as long as gender-neutral bathrooms are also available.

[Ethel mermania]

both genders

Yeah, well, screw you too then.

bathrooms are divided by sex, not gender.

Well, no. Binary trans* people almost always use the bathroom appropriate to their gender, not their sex, and most laws and rules stating one way or the other clarify that this is acceptable.

except for the transgender community i dont know a lot of folks advocating this

And as seen here most trans* people have no problem with gendered bathrooms as long as gender-neutral bathrooms are also available.

1. n/a

2. i dont know what that means.

3. i have no problem with single folks using the family bathrooms (which are always single occupancy). most new construction in the us does have a family bathroom available. So i am amiable to that.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

What different needs are there? I think a toilet in a stall and a sink with soap and water and paper towels works for everyone.

Urinals and waste disposal issues are one, perception of safety and a requirement for safe spaces are another.

I treat bathrooms like safe spaces. Most women I know do.

No one needs a urinal. Toilets work fine. Who says we can't have a waste basket in gender neutral bathrooms?
Instead of saying, "Gendered bathrooms to stop assault" why don't we say "No more assault"?

[Linux and the X]

2. i dont know what that means.

Trans* people who fall within the gender binary (men and women) use the bathroom appropriate for their gender, not there sex. That is, MtF people use the women's room and FtM people use the men's room. In most places, there is no law stating whether one should use the bathroom appropriate for their sex or for their gender. However, where a law does exist, it usually says that one should use the bathroom appropriate to their gender.

3. i have no problem with single folks using the family bathrooms (which are always single occupancy). most new construction in the us does have a family bathroom available. So i am amiable to that.

The main problem is older buildings. At my college, for example, there are only two pairs of single-occupancy restrooms I'm aware of (and both in the same building at the far north end (and the campus is longer north-south than east-west)), and even those are gender-marked, though it doesn't seem anyone cares if someone else ignores that.

[Ethel mermania]

2. i dont know what that means.

Trans* people who fall within the gender binary (men and women) use the bathroom appropriate for their gender, not there sex. That is, MtF people use the women's room and FtM people use the men's room. In most places, there is no law stating whether one should use the bathroom appropriate for their sex or for their gender. However, where a law does exist, it usually says that one should use the bathroom appropriate to their gender.

3. i have no problem with single folks using the family bathrooms (which are always single occupancy). most new construction in the us does have a family bathroom available. So i am amiable to that.

The main problem is older buildings. At my college, for example, there are only two pairs of single-occupancy restrooms I'm aware of (and both in the same building at the far north end (and the campus is longer north-south than east-west)), and even those are gender-marked, though it doesn't seem anyone cares if someone else ignores that.

2. help? Pre op or post op, or both? Post op, that makes sense, and i think most state law agree's. Pre op i can understand the primary gender having a legitamte objection to it.

3. Yeah, to immediately effect that sort of change would be enormously expensive in old buildings. not to mention what do you do with a building that has been landmarked? Usually the way building code works, new construction has to comply with the code. old can stay.

[Linux and the X]

2. help? Pre op or post op, or both? Post op, that makes sense, and i think most state law agree's. Pre op i can understand the primary gender having a legitamte objection to it.

Both. Given that one generally doesn't see what's in someone else's pants in a bathroom it tends to be fine.

3. Yeah, to immediately effect that sort of change would be enormously expensive in old buildings. not to mention what do you do with a building that has been landmarked? Usually the way building code works, new construction has to comply with the code. old can stay.

Well, just getting rid of the signs would be quite inexpensive. Of course, in buildings with only one pair of restrooms, this presents its own problems (though I still say between gender-neutral only and gendered only, the losses of gendered only are greater than of gender-neutral only), but in buildings with multiple sets of bathrooms (for example, almost every building on my campus has at least three pairs of restrooms), making one pair gender-neutral while leaving the others as-is would let everyone have somewhere they're okay with.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Urinals and waste disposal issues are one, perception of safety and a requirement for safe spaces are another.

I treat bathrooms like safe spaces. Most women I know do.

No one needs a urinal. Toilets work fine. Who says we can't have a waste basket in gender neutral bathrooms?
Instead of saying, "Gendered bathrooms to stop assault" why don't we say "No more assault"?

Yeah, we'll just say "No more assault" and just like fucking magic, there won't be any more assault.

Mother fucker, why did I not think of that years ago.

Christ. It is so fucking simple a caveman could do it.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

No one needs a urinal. Toilets work fine. Who says we can't have a waste basket in gender neutral bathrooms?
Instead of saying, "Gendered bathrooms to stop assault" why don't we say "No more assault"?

Yeah, we'll just say "No more assault" and just like fucking magic, there won't be any more assault.

Mother fucker, why did I not think of that years ago.

Christ. It is so fucking simple a caveman could do it.

That's not what I meant and you damn well know it.
And ftr, a sign saying "Women" won't keep a man out if he wants to assault someone. You think a predator is going to stalk a girl, then wait patiently outside the bathroom door?

[New England and The Maritimes]

No one needs a urinal. Toilets work fine. Who says we can't have a waste basket in gender neutral bathrooms?
Instead of saying, "Gendered bathrooms to stop assault" why don't we say "No more assault"?

Yeah, we'll just say "No more assault" and just like fucking magic, there won't be any more assault.

Mother fucker, why did I not think of that years ago.

Christ. It is so fucking simple a caveman could do it.

Yep. Rapists are so conscientious of social mores that they will avoid segregated bathrooms, and that's why they violate the loose-taboo of "Don't rape people."

[Ethel mermania]

2. help? Pre op or post op, or both? Post op, that makes sense, and i think most state law agree's. Pre op i can understand the primary gender having a legitamte objection to it.

Both. Given that one generally doesn't see what's in someone else's pants in a bathroom it tends to be fine.

3. Yeah, to immediately effect that sort of change would be enormously expensive in old buildings. not to mention what do you do with a building that has been landmarked? Usually the way building code works, new construction has to comply with the code. old can stay.

Well, just getting rid of the signs would be quite inexpensive. Of course, in buildings with only one pair of restrooms, this presents its own problems (though I still say between gender-neutral only and gendered only, the losses of gendered only are greater than of gender-neutral only), but in buildings with multiple sets of bathrooms (for example, almost every building on my campus has at least three pairs of restrooms), making one pair gender-neutral while leaving the others as-is would let everyone have somewhere they're okay with.

2. the only experience i have in the area was with a fellow who went mtf at work, the women were very uncomfortable with her (after surgery) using the womens bathroom. She was uncomfortable using the mens room. The companies solution at the time was to build her her own bathroom.

3. it would be much more than that, you would have to renovate every bathroom, get rid of urinals, and install floor to ceiling covering stalls. You also have issues with how many bathroom slots have to be provided per building. There are codes that regulate this stuff, and two stalls take up more space than 4 or 5 urinals. it would probably work the other way around, in old buildings they would stay the way they are. new construction would have to comply