Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: chat

Yay - a solution to the queue for ladies - urinals

201 replies

HDDD · 07/06/2021 16:10

The Peequal: will the new women’s urinal spell the end of queues for the ladies’?
Designed by women for women.
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/jun/07/the-peequal-will-the-new-womens-urinal-spell-the-end-of-queues-for-the-ladies
Not for me. Ever.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
TheSockMonster · 09/06/2021 21:21

I have to admit when I was at university I did not identify strongly with women (or men) outside my direct experience. I believed we had pretty much achieved equality and that shouty hairy old feminists should just shut up and chill out. Have you read Gone Girl? Well, I was Cool Girl.

Then life happened and the blinkers came off.

So when people start suggesting solutions to problems they have only very limited life experience of I am suspicious. These two Cool Girls spotted a problem (women at festivals queue longer than men who have access to urinals) and came up with a very direct solution to that problem (provide urinals for women).

Fair enough, it may very well reduce queue times but it is certainly not creating “pee equality” and it is that claim that I object to most fiercely.

Men can urinate without removing their clothes in public, getting into awkward positions and risking peeing on their clothes. To provide “pee equality” would be to afford women the same experience with the same queue times.

What they have designed is a compromise, it is not equality.

CharlieParley · 10/06/2021 00:12

Exactly, TheSockMonster, their problem-solution analysis went wrong.

Problem:
Women queue six times longer than men

Examine the issue:
Men have urinals, women don't

Conclusion:
We must reduce the time women take in the toilet. If women used urinals they would be faster. Therefore the lack of urinals must be why women queue longer

Solution:
Provide urinals to women

When it actual fact it should be:

Examine the issue:
Women have different biology.
Women frequently have different caring duties.

Unlike men, women need to undress and sit to pee. This means they take longer.

Unlike men, women deal with various biological issues that also require time in the toilet and/or require more toilet visits:

->menstruation - various issues related to this,
->pregnancy - pregnancy-induced vomiting, increased frequency of urination, in later pregnancy, size causes balance and mobility issues
->childbirth-related issues and so on

All of this means they take longer.

Unlike men, women are more likely to be accompanied by dependant children or elderly relatives who also need help with toileting. This means they take longer.

Men have two choices to pee - urinals and cubicles. They have different biology meaning they do not need to undress and fewer reasons to visit the toilet. They also are less likely to be accompanied by dependent children or elderly relatives.

Conclusion:
We cannot substantially reduce the time women need in the toilet. If more women could use the toilet at the same time, the queue would move faster. Therefore the standard calculation of how many toilets we need per the expected number of women must be wrong, leading to women being insufficiently provided for if they are allocated the same space/number of toilets as men.

Solution:
Provide more toilet cubicles for women. At least three times as many as men. (Women take on average three times longer in the toilet. Of course, timing alone does not account for increased frequency of toilet visits, but this would be an improvement.)

deydododatdodontdeydo · 10/06/2021 08:37

And that's why you ought to widen your market research to include all kinds of women before you market your product to all kinds of women.

But every product does not have to be targetted to all groups.
Lots of products are marketed at the 18-25 age group.
You don't have to include all demographics in your market research if it's not marketed to all demographics.
I think they will appeal to the group they are marketed at.

SoMuchForSummerLove · 10/06/2021 09:18

Yes, but then the problem becomes 'well, we provided five Peequals instead of 50 portaloos and you're still complaining. As if our problems have been solved but we just keep whinging.

When actually, the problem is only solved for a % of women, who are young, slim, physically fit, and, er, don't mind putting their hands (or have their long hair trail) on the toilet floor as they piss.

And they will be targets for men. Of course they will.

merrymouse · 10/06/2021 09:22

The picture of the woman squatting is problematic. Whereas men stand up and only open a zip, she is hands on the ground and scarf trailing on the ground. Her dungarees are still on. She'd have to take them down and hold the bib and bottoms off the ground. Then, the straps would probably join the scarf trailing down in the pee splashed floor.

And how on earth does this save time?

TheSockMonster · 10/06/2021 09:30

But every product does not have to be targetted to all groups. Lots of products are marketed at the 18-25 age group.

I totally agree. But that’s not what they’re marketing themselves as.

From their website:

We constantly test ideas and prototypes with our users. This is important to us as we want to represent all women.

Our mission: Pioneer pee-equality that is safe, sanitary and sustainable.

I’d have no problem if their mission was just to provide supplementary toilet facilities at festivals. I suspect it would work well among that demographic and free up cubicles for women who need them. My fear is that by claiming to provide something for “all women” it runs the risk of actually making things less equal.

This has already happened with another women’s urinal, Lapee, which started off as a solution for festivals and outside events before being suggested as a solution for refugee camps

DinosaurDiana · 10/06/2021 09:32

No thanks, I’ll queue for a cubicle.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/06/2021 09:37

And the media reporting it as some sort of breakthrough is beyond irritating, as we'll now all be expected to shut up and be grateful.

YY.

Hallyup6 · 10/06/2021 10:16

Even if I was desperate my body would say fuck that. The size of the cubicles though. You'll be almost on top of the person next to you. That's if you fit in there at all!

SoMuchForSummerLove · 10/06/2021 10:20

I'd never heard of the Lapee. Anyone want the whole world watching while they pull their pants up? God forbid a tall women.

Yay - a solution to the queue for ladies - urinals
SoMuchForSummerLove · 10/06/2021 10:24

This sentence drives me wild. So the actual starting point of designing something FOR WOMEN is to adapt when men use. Which has NOTHING to do with what we need.

SoMuchForSummerLove · 10/06/2021 10:25

Should have included the quote...

The designers studied the form of male urinals to create a solution for people who need to sit down to urinate*

merrymouse · 10/06/2021 10:25

I think I understand this now. It is aimed at the small number of women who would be perfectly happy to squat and wee anywhere.

The goal isn’t to provide better facilities but to coral them into a specific area.

ASpoonfulofDust · 10/06/2021 10:29

What is with the constant erosion of women's need for privacy and dignity.

Women are on their periods for 25% of every month. Who designs toilets for women that doesn't consider this???

Bergamotte · 10/06/2021 19:57

@ASpoonfulofDust

What is with the constant erosion of women's need for privacy and dignity.

Women are on their periods for 25% of every month. Who designs toilets for women that doesn't consider this???

Yes- or to put it another way, at any one time, 25% of women* will be on their period!

*(apart from those who are post-menopausal etc, but they are more likely to have the other issues mentioned in the thread like dodgy knees, birth injuries affecting continence etc.)

EyesOpening · 15/06/2021 19:37

I’m wondering if the bit at the front “for your clothes” is actually for you to hook your lowered trousers/shorts and knickers under (dresses and skirts being lifted up) out of the way, to avoid any splashback? It can’t be to put your clothes that you’ve taken off, into as that would make it take longer not quicker. I just can’t figure out how that bit is to be utilised otherwise

Alternista · 15/06/2021 19:48

I used a female urinal at a big festival a few years ago, cos the queues for the normal ladies were ridiculous.

We weren’t exposed to the public walking past- as I recall there were shower curtains between us and then a long trough down the middle, but short of straddling the bloody thing I couldn’t work out how to get the wee in it!

It just didn’t really work. Maxi dresses, crotchless knickers and a quick squat behind a bush much easier and I refuse to feel guilty about that until toilet provision is fit for purpose.

Melroses · 15/06/2021 20:15

Maxi dresses, crotchless knickers and a quick squat behind a bush much easier and I refuse to feel guilty about that until toilet provision is fit for purpose.

I think that is what Victorian Ladies did, only they had the advantage of a built in tent/crinoline.

stillcrazyafterall · 15/06/2021 20:22

They were in an enclosure guarded by tough looking lady security guards, and you got given a cardboard cone on the lines (I think) of the SheWee.
I.could.not.go
Literally could not, my body just went, "are you mad, this is not how we wee" and refused to let the wee out.

I have exactly this issue with my shewee- it's seriously weird!

ScreamingMeMe · 15/06/2021 20:43

@MsFogi

It's six times quicker because 99% of women will walk in and walk out again without actually going to the loo.
Truth.
YellowFish12 · 15/06/2021 21:07

I have exactly this issue with my shewee- it's seriously weird!

You have to practice to get over this!

I have a whizz freedom and it’s ACE for festivals and ski touring.

However you have to have a practice naked in the shower a few times, and you have to get over the feeling that you are pissing yourself (feels warm).

Alternista · 15/06/2021 21:19

@Melroses

Maxi dresses, crotchless knickers and a quick squat behind a bush much easier and I refuse to feel guilty about that until toilet provision is fit for purpose.

I think that is what Victorian Ladies did, only they had the advantage of a built in tent/crinoline.

Am very willing to consider a big hooped skirt! Grin
MirandaMarple · 15/06/2021 21:23

The line for the women's loos will always be longer due to the differences in male and female bladders. The time spent in a cubicle is probably the same as a man takes to use a urinal, I'm quite quick!

somethinginoffensive · 15/06/2021 21:58

The line for the women's loos will always be longer due to the differences in male and female bladders.

The line for women is only longer than that for men because women's needs aren't being met to the same level men's are. For the queues to be similar women need more facilities.

WellRightOKThen · 15/06/2021 22:14

I don't understand.

Quite apart from the privacy and dignity issue (WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?), assuming that I'm wearing trousers or shorts - as I usually am - surely I would need remove all clothing on my bottom half and stick it on the little shelf before straddling this thing to wee?

And in order to get those off, I'll usually need to take my shoes off too.

So I'll be standing in my bare feet or socks while having a very visible wee and then I'll need to take my clothes off the little wee shelf everyone else has just used while they pee and then put it all back on again once I'm finished?

That is going to take me longer and I will emerge grubbier, surely?

...
...

Somebody explain this to me?

Swipe left for the next trending thread