To ask why women would be uncomfortable with unisex bathrooms

This is why the door gap exists: www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgzgnw62k4o

I must be one of the few who massively prefers floor to ceiling toilets. I hate the gaps under toilet stalls

Floor to ceiling toilets generally have an emergency opening (with a coin) on the outside. This can and does get opened by entitled and dodgy people - usually male.

Makes accessible toilets out of the question when you've had somebody open it when you're using it - so a mixed toilet where there is no alarm cord to pull to at least draw attention to there being a problem is absolutely out of the question in my opinion.

And I am responding to your posts. The concepts you have written about in your posts about ‘unisex toilets’ in people’s homes.

None of that was mentioned in the OP's initial post. I was just responding to what was written.

I went in a gender neutral toilet today at work. One toilet only and a man came out just before I went in. You've never seen me move so quickly. Wee all over the floor and it stank wicked. I'd rather piss my pants.

Exactly this. What was wrong with separate toilets for men and women? Why should safety and convenience be jettisoned?

But it is your answer and the fallacy about mixed sex toilets at home that is the fallacy.

Because no toilet at home is being used by strangers coming off the street to use the toilet in the way a public toilet is used. Or do you allow anyone who knocks to use your toilet at home ?

Plus, a female who lives alone and occasionally allows a male friend to use the toilet not only has the right to say to the male friend that they shouldn’t visit. Therefore they can completely restrict access.

But even if they allow access, they already have prior experience with that male person that they can fall back on to shape their prediction of future risk of attack (or even mess.) So they can assess their likelihood of being attacked with very high rates of accuracy before making the decision to either allow that well known male to use the toilet or for that woman to use the single cubicle toilet in the house with the male being present in the other rooms while she is using the toilet . Archeryannie points this out.

Plus it is a single cubicle and the resident of that home is not trying to use the adjacent toilet cubicle as well.

I think you will find your analogy is the fallacious one and that the ‘home toilet’ analogy was always a false analogy at worst, or a very weak one full of very obvious holes at best. When I read your post, I thought you were posting sarcastic humour because the ‘unisex toilet at home’ analogy has been pointed out to be so badly flawed.

In case I wasn't clear enough, I was just pointing out the inherent fallacy of her writing.

i was in an abusive relationship, the idea of being alone in an enclosed space with a strange man terrifies me and likely would set me straight into a panic attack. About 1/3 women go through an abusive relationship or sexual assault at some point in their lives so forcing them to be uncomfortable in a place where they have to partially undress knowing men would be on the other side of the door is terrifying.

With the statistics stated and women being more or less half of the population, the minority of non binary people that inclusive toilets are trying to cater to is crazy when they’re the minority and the people uncomfortable outweighs the people who would benefit from it.

Lol yes meant mixed sex! Blame Jan 1st and a late night .

yes I think it’s because many of us, myself included, do want to be sympathetic to trans people. Get it that for them mixed sex facilities are preferable. However, it’s a bit like if you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail isn’t it…the problems isn’t about toilets. Or gender division in sport’s competitions. The whole situation of some people feeling they need to change sex and declare it to the world and then be discriminated and persisted for it in turn, is the bloody patriarchy in the first place. If there’s wasn’t such a need to insist that some characteristics were female and some male in terms of gender roles and rights, I think people would just feel
comforTable living in what we now perceive as a feminine or masculine way even if that didn’t match their genitalia. All the division and stereotyping which creates rigid structures and misogyny and gender based violence.
But this is a huge huge power dynamic to challenge and change. And while it has not been solved, We have to face the real world. And that’s a world in which women are subjected to violence and sexual harassment by men at a regular basis. So women don’t want to take their pants down in a room where a stranger man may be in the next cubicle.

Insisting on mixed sex toilets is equivalent to taking away welfare and expecting all the poor people to just magically starting to feed themselves. Come to think of it, that’s what the right wing has done in the US, with their ridiculous myth of meritocracy and bootstraps. Other countries that have implemented unisex toilets are China and Japan, countries with notoriously uneven gender roles. Oh, and Canada, where at least they’re trying to implement gender equality at a national scale through various initiatives, but have also jumped the gun on the unisex toilet thing and put the cart before the horse.

Did you mean "mixed sex" bathrooms?

You make a really good point though about this almost magical thinking. That if we deny it, it means the (statistically demonstrated) problem of misogyny and male violence against women will magically go away, as if it's caused by us merely thinking about it and will disappear if we don't. It seems to be quite a fashionable view at the moment.

It's incredibly uncomfortable for a lot of women, myself included, to realise that there are a lot of men who really do hate us and that we too could become a victim of violent misogyny, just by virtue of being female and, for instance, in the wrong place and at the wrong time. I do think it's how uncomfortable the reality and realisation is that's part of the reason for the denial (and victim-blaming, the kind of "Well, I'm not as pathetic as SHE was to go and let herself get raped/beaten up by her husband, I'm one of the strong women, we're not some pathetic Victorian era couch-fainting victims " type of thing.) It's tricky.

I don't want to listen to members of the opposite sex doing their ablutions and I don't want them overhearing mine

I don't want to use a toilet if anyone has. It's by no means confined to men.

I don't like unisex where there are individual cubicles and communal sinks etc. That said, I don't mind communal changing villages in leisure centres, but the loos are single sex in my local centre.

But individual loos like the generally available accessible loos in small cafes and the like are fine (and are generally all you get anyway).

As for womens loos being messy, I learnt yesterday (due to overhearing a conversation in the next cubicle) that that is down to mothers taking their kids into the loos with them when they are desperate - they miss the loo because they are in such a hurry and the mothers don't clean up after them!

It’s so weird. It’s as if people think this if we behave as IF male violence and misogyny doesn’t exist, it’ll just cease to exist. Let’s get rid of patriarchy and misogyny, and then start having same sex bathrooms as the norm. Having same sex bathrooms won’t help gender equality.

It's so fucking depressing that in 2025 women are still having to defend wanting to retain single sex spaces, and the 'I'm fine with it so everyone else should be' brigade don't seem to be able to grasp that you cant give consent away on behalf of those who aren't.

Geez.

Again, I do think often those who are saying how fine they are with it appear to be forgetting that they aren't able to give consent on behalf of the very many women and girls who aren't fine with it at all, perhaps have different experiences from themselves, didn't consent, know that any impacts on them weren't even considered, and weren't ever asked.

Wholesale removing other women and girls' right to boundaries and privacy, even though they're now loudly saying no, because you don't personally feel you need the same is not a minor issue.

The ones at my work which are mixed are just a bit grim - pubes in the sink, wee on the seat, so I avoid them.
I don’t feel safe in them in bars and clubs at night particularly when set back and avoid places with mixed toilets in the evening. It’s coming out of the loo and jumping cos there is a man stood there - makes me feel vulnerable.

This

@LakieLady they are more dangerous for anyone one that is medically vulnerable and for women and children - two groups that are more likely to be assaulted. They are more difficult to clean and less hygienic.

I've worked in a building with unisex toilets since 2007. Each cubicle has doors and walls that go down to the floor and a washbasin. Half of them are accessible to people with disabilities.

They're absolutely fine, and far cleaner than the women-only toilets in the place where I used to work.

Yes, agree. This was exactly the problem we had in Wagamama.

It DOES harm women though.

Which is one of the BIG reasons they were fought for in the first place, wasn't it? And why they are still fought for as a women's human rights issue elsewhere in the world.

That's the entire point. Guess you missed that.

And of course it's customary to at least ask the people who will be most impacted before you decide to unilaterally REMOVE a right that they've had for years and that people expect. In this case for over a century. Failing to do so is ignorant, authoritarian and wholly non-democratic.

I don't particularly want to use a toilet if some bloke has just pissed on the seat.