Should Public Restrooms Become Gender Neutral?

[Aurora Novus]

If it means replacing all the urinals with stalls, yes please. Those are icky. I really like to pee in private.

Or we could simply add more stalls (not to mention, combining male-specific and female-specific bathrooms will result in an increased number of stalls). Someone suggested before that there be a 75/25 ratio of stalls to urinals. I can see that working out just fine.

Of course, it doesn't really matter to me personally anyway; I never use urinals.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Easy:

Have men restrooms, women restrooms, and gender neutral restrooms.

As I've stated previously, this does not actually solve the problem at hand, as it does not justify the existence of segregated washrooms. It does not solve the fundamental injustice of the restriction.

what justification is there for the existence of separated washrooms? you may feel uncomfortable, but, well, tough.You shouldn't feel uncomfortable. you have no valid reason to feel uncomfortable around one person, simply because they have a different physical appearance than you. So society should not be expected to cater to your personal desire.

The problem isn't the lack of unisex washrooms, it's the existence of segregated washrooms to begin with.

I think it's patently obvious you have no understanding of the concept of injustice.

[Aurora Novus]

As I've stated previously, this does not actually solve the problem at hand, as it does not justify the existence of segregated washrooms. It does not solve the fundamental injustice of the restriction.

what justification is there for the existence of separated washrooms? you may feel uncomfortable, but, well, tough.You shouldn't feel uncomfortable. you have no valid reason to feel uncomfortable around one person, simply because they have a different physical appearance than you. So society should not be expected to cater to your personal desire.

The problem isn't the lack of unisex washrooms, it's the existence of segregated washrooms to begin with.

I think it's patently obvious you have no understanding of the concept of injustice.

Right.

Care to provide an actual counter-argument?

If there is no sound justification for the enforcement of segregated washrooms, to enforce it is an injustice. Do you dispute this? If so, what is your (warped) definition of an injustice?

[Minoriteeburg]

Holy crap this page exploded while I was gone.


(No pun intended)

[Minoriteeburg]

If it means replacing all the urinals with stalls, yes please. Those are icky. I really like to pee in private.

Or we could simply add more stalls (not to mention, combining male-specific and female-specific bathrooms will result in an increased number of stalls). Someone suggested before that there be a 75/25 ratio of stalls to urinals. I can see that working out just fine.

Of course, it doesn't really matter to me personally anyway; I never use urinals.

I only use urinals when there is no other option.

I don't ever see urinals being taken out of bathrooms permanently, at least not anywhere in the near future.

[Aethelstania]

1. Yes but it SO minor compared to those. Segregated toilets down to race is completely different - a black person forced to use a separate loo FELT like an injustice was done to them. Working people FELT an injustice done to them as they were disenfranchised. Your the first person I've spoken to that feels that segregation based on gender is an injustice most people male or female don't feel. I can't fault your logic but you have just taken an issue to a logical conclusion to the extent that it just becomes a bit silly!

It doesn't matter if one FEELS like it is an injustice or not; justice/injustice is not based upon subjective feelings. I'm sure there were some slaves who FELT it was good to be a slave, due to the indoctrination they received.

As for it being minor, that is again, irrelevant; minor evils are still evil. So either demonstrate how it is not an evil, or concede that it should be done away with.

2. All restrictions must be justified I agree. Men and women BOTH want separate toilets - why because BOTH groups (as a rule) feel more comfortable in gender separated bathrooms. Is both groups consenting to a restriction justification enough? It may be irrational, no one is pretending otherwise but thats how just about everyone feels.

It doesn't matter if both groups concede to it, that doesn't justify it. That is, again, an ad populem argument, and one that is still based upon subjective, personal desires. Which AGAIN, is NOT A VALID RRASON TO LEGISLATE SOMETHING.

"I feel uncomfortable sharing a bus with a black man baaawwwww."
"I feel uncomfortable sharing the vote with non-property holders baawwwww."
"I feel uncomfortable sharing a lifeboat with the poor baaawwwww."

3. My justification for banning you ^^ I agree minor evils are still evils but take the convocation example - I will stand outside the door wate for the woman to leave and we can continue our convocation.

That may be fine and well for you, but why should I have to do the same? What is your justification for preventing me from walking in and continuing my conversation, simply because I have a different body? IS the room somehow toxic to my body? Will my body somehow harm others unjustly?

If not, then why should my body not be allowed in a room with someone else?

For a practical reasons I can understand why you would argue for gender neutral bathrooms on a pracitcal level but as a matter of principle - mountains out of mole hills.

This is topic specifically dedicated to the idea of gender neutral bathrooms vs. segrgeated bathrooms.

If your entire premis is "It's not a big deal, stop complaining about it"...why the fuck are you posting i this topic to begin with?

1. Ok if its not based on subjective feelings then whats it based on? surely you feel that gendered toilets are injustice which is why it bothers you? What is an objective injustice? is an objective injustice legislating against something that you cannot logically justify. Am I free walk into a womans changing room at a gym and watch them change, I'm not hurting anyone in their am I? What is the justificaiton of keeping me out except for the fact that a woman may feel uncomfortable being naked in front a man she doesn't know.

2. I don't think its evil because I don't see it offending anybody - something being bad or unjust is entirely subjective

3. So if EVERYONE is in an agreement that theirs not an injustice their still is an injustice? not every piece of legislation has to be based on logic - say you restrict abortion laws so that you cant have one after 22 weeks. Is the only justifiable reason to oppose this because a chlid can survive outside the womb after this period?

4. Well I was scrolling through it bored - my opinion has always been "its not a big deal, stop complaining about it" but I read what you wrote and I wondered why you were so strongly opposed to gendered toilets and basicly said "why do you feel this because XYZ". You responded and I responded and here we are

[Seshephe]

Or we could simply add more stalls (not to mention, combining male-specific and female-specific bathrooms will result in an increased number of stalls). Someone suggested before that there be a 75/25 ratio of stalls to urinals. I can see that working out just fine.

Of course, it doesn't really matter to me personally anyway; I never use urinals.

I only use urinals when there is no other option.

I don't ever see urinals being taken out of bathrooms permanently, at least not anywhere in the near future.

If we are going to have unisex bathrooms they better remove them.

[Immoren]

Urinals are good when taking piss while shit faced.

[Meryuma]

Pretty cool step for trans people.

This is a perfect formula for a rape.

Do you not go in same sex public restrooms for fear of homosexual rape?

[Immoren]

Pretty cool step for trans people.

This is a perfect formula for a rape.

Do you not go in same sex public restrooms for fear of homosexual rape?

apparently not

[Manahakatouki]

Personally, I wouldn't be used to it, but I'm sure it would be fine if it was eased into our system...

I have nothing wrong with it, but I walk into the washroom pretty confident that there aren't any women there at the time...

It would mess up my groove...

[Aurora Novus]

1. Ok if its not based on subjective feelings then whats it based on? surely you feel that gendered toilets are injustice which is why it bothers you? What is an objective injustice?

What makes something an injustice is when doing it is not justified. That should be obvious.

In order for segregated washrooms to not be an injustice, there must be sound justification for segregating them.

Personal taste is not itself a valid means to justify that. Again, for the several examples I provided. God help us of law were ever regulated simply upon the whim of subjective desires.

2. I don't think its evil because I don't see it offending anybody

1) It's not about offending someone.
2) It's offended me, and several others who've posted in this topic, along with countless others in the real world. Just because we are not a popular majority, doesn't mean we don't exist. The fact that I am here, right now, debating the issue with you, is evidence that not everyone approves of the current setup.

- something being bad or unjust is entirely subjective

It is most certainly not, as I just described above. Injustice deals specifically with a lack of sound justification.

3. So if EVERYONE is in an agreement that theirs not an injustice their still is an injustice?

First of all, this is a misrepresentation, as not everyone is in agreement that it's not an injustice.

but yes, even if everyone agreed it wasn't an injustice, that still wouldn't make it just. Just like how if everyone agreed the world was flat, that wouldn't make it so.

Justice and injustice is not about subjective feelings; it's about objective facts and reasoning.

not every piece of legislation has to be based on logic

Holy shit I cannot believe I just read that.

So you honestly approve of people making legislation based on whimsy, without critical analysis?

"I don't like people with red hair, so I propose, on every Tuesday, red-haired people should be shot."

- say you restrict abortion laws so that you cant have one after 22 weeks. Is the only justifiable reason to oppose this because a chlid can survive outside the womb after this period?

No, we can oppose it on the basis that restricting a mother's ability to abort whenever she chooses is a violation of her bodily sovereignty.

See? Logic.

4. Well I was scrolling through it bored - my opinion has always been "its not a big deal, stop complaining about it" but I read what you wrote and I wondered why you were so strongly opposed to gendered toilets and basicly said "why do you feel this because XYZ". You responded and I responded and here we are

You didn't answer my question.

If you're so opposed to discussing the topic...why post in the first place? Why tell us to shut up? Why not just leave? This is a topic dedicated to discussing the subject. If you are of the mind that it's not worth discussing...don't post. But don't shame us for talking about it, and try to use "it's not a big deal" as a ground to dismiss our arguments.

[The Steel Magnolia]

I think it's patently obvious you have no understanding of the concept of injustice.

Right.

Care to provide an actual counter-argument?

If there is no sound justification for the enforcement of segregated washrooms, to enforce it is an injustice. Do you dispute this? If so, what is your (warped) definition of an injustice?

Not really. Your argumentation is nothing more than standard gender abolitionist, counter-factual ahistorical bullshit. To deny gender's importance is to be blind to the entirety of society, and to pronounce its evil is to decry the identities of billions of people.

Darling, you aren't worth my time. You are worth no one's time.

[Aurora Novus]

Not really. Your argumentation is nothing more than standard gender abolitionist, counter-factual ahistorical bullshit. To deny gender's importance is to be blind to the entirety of society, and to pronounce its evil is to decry the identities of billions of people.

Darling, you aren't worth my time. You are worth no one's time.

Right then.

In other words, you refuse to provide a counter-argument. You claim I do not understand injustice, but do not argue against my definition of injustice. You claim my arguments about gender not being important are wrong, but do not bother to explain how, and instead resort to passive-aggressive ad hominems. Yet you still expect people to listen to you and take you seriously.



On your way then.

[Arcturus Novus]

Not really. Your argumentation is nothing more than standard gender abolitionist, counter-factual ahistorical bullshit. To deny gender's importance is to be blind to the entirety of society, and to pronounce its evil is to decry the identities of billions of people.

Darling, you aren't worth my time. You are worth no one's time.

Right then.

In other words, you refuse to provide a counter-argument. You claim I do not understand injustice, but do not argue against my definition of injustice. You claim my arguments about gender not being important are wrong, but do not bother to explain how, and instead resort to passive-aggressive ad hominems. Yet you still expect people to listen to you and take you seriously.



On your way then.

This is off topic, but my daughter in the RP forums is named Aurora. That's freaky.
On-topic, I don't see how we could do that in today's society. But the Romans had gender-neutral restrooms, so I say why not?
Then again, they also had corruption and slavery... but we still have those to some degree.

[Aurora Novus]

This is off topic, but my daughter in the RP forums is named Aurora. That's freaky.

Looks like your daughter is a dirty commie. Watch out.

Na, I originally just wanted to use the name "Aurora", as it is the name of a nation central to a story I'm writing, but the name was already taken. So I just added Novus on, as it gets across the same basic message. New dawn.

[Densaner]

Reminds me of Ally McBeal...

[Rio Cana]

There are restrooms which are uni-sex but they are small thus only one person at a time. The restrooms has a door and lock thus any other person who wants to use it must wait outside. But if they built those public restrooms to be used by many people at once, even if they have stalls with doors and sides going all the way from the floor to the cieling, they will be asking for trouble.

[Greed and Death]

I find the argument that coed bathrooms would assist transgender flawed. Bigots do not bash because someone violated a sign they bash because they are bigots.

[Aurora Novus]

But if they built these public restrooms to be used by many people at once, even if they have stalls with doors and sides going all the way from the floor to the cieling, they will be asking for trouble.

Care to elaborate? How woud making all public restrooms desegregated be "asking for trouble"?

[Hircus]

I spent St. Patties and other assorted drunken holidays at bars where the bathrooms were so full. I was at a urinal with some gal squated next to me in an open urinal. Everyone was drunk no one seemed to care about it.

[Rio Cana]

This is off topic, but my daughter in the RP forums is named Aurora. That's freaky.

Looks like your daughter is a dirty commie. Watch out.

Na, I originally just wanted to use the name "Aurora", as it is the name of a nation central to a story I'm writing, but the name was already taken. So I just added Novus on, as it gets across the same basic message. New dawn.

You are lucky. There already is a song that goes with that name.

Video of that song -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-b3kG7J_XQ

[Dusk_Kittens]

Someone will decide to roll a bladder-check and need the bathroom and everyone goes "We'll come with you and also urinate!"

I had to quote this, because it's got to be included in the list of quotable statements some NSGers compile.

[Arcturus Novus]

This is off topic, but my daughter in the RP forums is named Aurora. That's freaky.

Looks like your daughter is a dirty commie. Watch out.

Na, I originally just wanted to use the name "Aurora", as it is the name of a nation central to a story I'm writing, but the name was already taken. So I just added Novus on, as it gets across the same basic message. New dawn.

Nah, communists are pretty cool in my book.
Anyways, your argument?

[Aurora Novus]

Looks like your daughter is a dirty commie. Watch out.

Na, I originally just wanted to use the name "Aurora", as it is the name of a nation central to a story I'm writing, but the name was already taken. So I just added Novus on, as it gets across the same basic message. New dawn.

Nah, communists are pretty cool in my book.
Anyways, your argument?

My argument on what? You mean your question that you don't see how we could do it?

Well, that's not necessarily even relevant. Even if something isn't possible, or would be very difficult to achieve, that doesn't make it's opposite good.

Beyond that though, I'm not seeing how it would be a problem. We got rid of all the "whites only" and "coloured" segregated fountains, bathrooms, and other facilities in the civil rights era. This would hardly be as difficult as that. Just remove gender specific signs, and knock down some walls. Most male and female bathrooms are right next to one another anyway. It wouldn't take much effort at all to combine them into the same room.