to use the gents' toilets?

[Hadalifeonce]

On arriving at Gatwick after our holiday, I was desperate for the loo; the queue for the ladies was almost to the baggage reclaim belt, being of a 'certain age' I was busting.
I told DH of my problem, he said he would go into the gents to see if there was a free cubicle, he called me in, I dashed into the 1st cubicle (one of many free) had my wee and dashed out again. I was getting my cleansing gel out of my handbag when a man, who had obviously been in the toilets at the time, made a pointed comment about some women not being prepared to wait their turn and to feeling free to go into the gents.
I turned round and stated that as a middle aged woman with no pelvic floor, I couldn't wait. This seemed to take the wind from his sails.
But was I being unreasonable to use the gents?

You can't please everyone all of the time. If the man was a racist who didn't want a PoC in the same bathroom you would tell him tough luck.

I recall hearing the Whitehouse has twice as many bathrooms as most federal buildings because it was built with coloured and non-coloured restrooms

Yes slarti better op use a tier any toilet than piss or shit herself in the middle of the airport. I personally would not care if a man used the ladies if it was an emergency like this.

I bet the main making the comment wod certainly use the ladies, if there were no other toilet.

I have a recognised disability and am pregnant too. If I need to go, I have a few seconds grace. If anyone has a problem with me relieving myself in a human way and not in my pants then they can tell someone that actually cares. As for the man, well, I'd say to him that he should have been done by now as it doesn't take long to put a party sausage away.

Mrs not everyone can, in this situation op cod not, so used a toilet. Op is not a teacher so itrelevant !

MRSRed your not quite getting it, some cannot because of medical easons, and op cod not, or she would have waited.

I wouldn't mind if it meant the indignity of him wetting or pooing himself. Kindness is important.

To all the people saying that men wouldn't have a problem with it and it isn't the same as if the roles were reversed... many men have been sexually abused and would be affected if a woman came into their space. You can't advocate for women only spaces when you deny men the same.

If a man was desperate for a pee and there was a massive queue outside the gents, and the ladies was virtually empty I'd not mind at all. I don't know anybody who would. It'd be a rare thing to happen though.

YANBU. I've used men's toilets many times when there were huge queues and I simply couldn't wait.

After falling down the stairs on the way back from the ladies at my local pub, knocking myself out and breaking 2 fingers, the landlady insisted I use the gents on the ground floor whenever I'd had more than 2 pints.

Surely everyone occasionally has ‘emergencies’ sometimes - when they need to get to the first available toilet sharpish? You don’t have to be disabled or have a chronic condition to sometimes have diarrhoea or a urinary problem. Surely in conditions like this most people are happy for someone to go to an unused toilet rather than wait in a queue or start negotiations with a long queue of people.

I’ve used the men’s toilets a few times in circumstances like this. I’m sure that nobody was cruel enough to have preferred that I soiled myself.

I think perfectly reasonable, and especially as your husband was there to find a vacant cubicle.

Of course ideally there should be more toilets.

Interesting how we are now telling OP to use the disabled toilet when she can use a normal sized cubicle, but would criticise a parent with a pram who cannot use a normal cubicle (due to not wanting the child kinapped) when they need the toilet

It's not a disabled toilet and should never be called one. It's an accessible toilet and should be used by anyone that needs it like OP. There are plenty of people with invisible illnesses and problems like no pelvic floor that just cannot wait to use the toilet.

You did the right thing. No real man is going to be offended or put out by a woman being in there, that's our job the other way around.

YABU.

Right very help Siwel, so you rather somebody wet themselves, than use a free toilet, nice, hope that it never happens to you!

Well me personally I wouldn't want a female In a male toilet and a man in a female toilet.

If she could have asked to skip the queue or used the accessible / disabled toilet I would have preferred that

You were very discreet. It was this or wet yourself in your mind. I would never ask to go to the front of the queue either.

Siwel123 are you the man who passed the comment btw. I gather that there wasen't an accessible toilet nearby, for me, I would not want to see the indignity of somebody soiling themselves when it could have been prevented by them using a free toilet. It just seems very petty really. It is undignifying asking to jump the queue, and having nasty comments as a result. Even if she was allowed to jump the queue, there might have been people occupying those cubicles. Live and let live I say, we need to be kind.

I am usually very pro separate spaces, but would be totally relaxed in an emergency which this was.

Once, while using a urinal, I was a little surprised when a lady with two children brushed past the back of me. (The toilets were compact and crowded.) I briefly wondered if I was in the ladies, then recalled I wouldn't have been able to have been standing at a urinal if that was the case. I looked at the sign when I left, and it indicated both ladies and men. This was toilet in a restaurant on the slopes of a French ski resort.

I'm not bothered by ladies using the gents, as far as I'm concerned, help yourself whenever necessary.

(The privacy issue is not a big deal. It's not the done thing for men to look at each other, eyes are focused anywhere else when peeing, so we're used to the concept that you can have your cock out and no-one will be staring.)