Uncomfortable about unisex toilets at work

[Onlyinanemergency]

My workplace is moving to new premises and all the toilets are to be unisex. Apparently the bathrooms consist of several floor-to-ceiling cubicals opening out onto shared sinks. There is then a large window onto a public corridor so that the sink area can be seen from outside the bathroom. There are 3 of these bathrooms, one on each floor of the building, as well as 3 single disabled toilets. The architects have obviously put a lot of thought into creating toilets which are unisex but also fairly safe and private, yet I still feel really uncomfortable about the idea. Particularly about not being given a choice. Am I wrong?

@ratrolypoly

Sometimes something is so spectacularly moronic, it's worth the extra effort.

However for stuff like school and workplaces I think it is less suitable.

Schools definitely, I'm not convinced about the workplace thing.

Works OK in ours, sinks & Sanitary Bins in the cubicles, full length doors. I'm not massively bothered if I bump into someone I recognise going in or out (and I will because there are only about 100 people on our floor).

I couldn't work in a place where I was surrounded by sexual predators waiting to pounce like so many of you are, so I must be lucky that I work with normal people.

Should we have single sex kitchen areas too? They're small, confined, out of the way - those predators could be waiting for you to bend over by the fridge.....

Why should women have to make do with little baskets of sanpro? When the glaringly obvious solution is just to keep the women’s loos.

Exactly, especially when the employer is legally required to keep the women's loos unless they are designing them so that each loo is in a separate room (not cubicle). I've said it before but it's worth repeating.

Sometimes something is so spectacularly moronic, it's worth the extra effort.

Much effort was it, to put an @ in front of my name?

Well in that case, well done you.

Should we have single sex kitchen areas too? They're small, confined, out of the way - those predators could be waiting for you to bend over by the fridge.....

The two situations are not analogous.

The issue is vulnerability. In a toilet, you’re removing clothing and engaging in a bodily function. That makes you vulnerable. It makes even animals feel vulnerable - watch defection/urination behaviour in many animals. A toilet cubicle is something you could be pushed into. It could have electronic peeping tom equipment placed in it.

A work kitchen is often an area open to the main office. Even if it’s not, Making a brew or perusing the contents of the fridge does not require removal of clothing. It does not make you feel vulnerable. It does not signal to anyone else in the office you’re menstruating, vomiting through morning sickness or having a miscarriage. Peeping tom style electronic devices would reveal no intimate bodily areas.

So no, the two are not the same in any way at all, and it is disingenuous to suggest they are.

I couldn't work in a place where I was surrounded by sexual predators waiting to pounce like so many of you are, so I must be lucky that I work with normal people.

If you have been sexually or physically assaulted in the past your reaction to men you meet whilst in vulnerable situations may well be completely out of your control. It is not not necessarily based on whether or not you think the particular man in front of you is a threat.

Should we have single sex kitchen areas too? They're small, confined, out of the way - those predators could be waiting for you to bend over by the fridge.....

yeah. sometimes i really think we should. i guess you have no idea how sexual assault can affect every fucking decision you make and interaction you have in your life thereafter do you? you seem completely devoid of empathy. i hope you are employed somewhere this is an asset not a danger.

@changeypants: i guess you have no idea how sexual assault can affect every fucking decision you make and interaction you have in your life thereafter do you?

@Illustrouslyillogical, to give a real-world example, I chose my secondary school solely on the basis of avoiding a repeat of the sexual assault I suffered at primary school. By insisting on an all-girl school, with threats of running away from home if I didn't get my way, I ensured that my secondary school life was free of the threat of male violence. You may be lucky enough to never have been so violated, but don't assume that the rest of us have no reason to fear men.

Rat and logical: why is it not enough to know that when women have sex specific toilets, the number of sex assaults comes down. The UN and Amnesty agree. Why would you want to remove the sex specific spaces, knowing this?

Oh, and a word on normal people. Look at the figures for sexual assault. It's fair to guess that a lot of assailants are "normal" - that's certainly been my experience.

NAMALT can have its own paragraph.

Sexual violence perpetrated by men is a society wide problem. It's in our culture.

@illustrouslyillogical: I couldn't work in a place where I was surrounded by sexual predators waiting to pounce like so many of you are

6% of men rape, according to the oft-cited 2002 study by Lizak and Miller. They don't wear t-shirts announcing that fact, so how can you know that you don't work alongside any predators? For all you know, you do, and the only reason he hasn't struck yet is because the workplace environment doesn't provide a suitable opportunity.

Bd: but for it to matter you have to be 'surrounded' by sexual predators who are permanently 'waiting to pounce'. The odd opportunistic rape or secret filming ? PSHAW do better doesn't count.

@changeypants Oh, and a word on normal people. Look at the figures for sexual assault. It's fair to guess that a lot of assailants are "normal" - that's certainly been my experience.

@Illustrouslyillogical My dad was a manager in the public sector and he had a highly-skilled male subordinate who was hard to replace. I would have been about 11 when I came home from school and my dad told me that he'd had to sack a cleaner. I asked why. The skilled subordinate had sexually harassed the female cleaner and the cleaner had complained, and it was easier to replace the cleaner than it was to replace the skilled subordinate. I asked my mum about it years later, thinking it was maybe a bad dream I'd remembered, and she confirmed that dad had fired the cleaner and that this had happened repeatedly. She also said that "you wouldn't think he [the skilled subordinate] was capable of it, he was as meek as milk". Well, of course he wasn't going to try it with the boss's wife, so mum never saw that side of him. This guy came across as totally normal, except to the women who, by virtue of being "expendable" in dad's eyes, were available as victims.

And yes, I gave my dad a piece of mý mind at the time. And yes, I had already been sexually assaulted, so this actually really jarred me hard. In fact, I'd say that this incident was why I became a feminist (no woman should be treated like that, no man has the right) and a socialist (she lost her job and her income for standing up for her rights, she needs a safety net).

@changeypants @Illustrouslyillogical

@bd67th: This guy came across as totally normal, except to the women who, by virtue of being "expendable" in dad's eyes, were available as victims.

Post script: that my dad who had daughters would sign off on this crap, which he did by not firing the perp, made me have zero tolerance for "not my Nigel" and NAMALT arguments. Yes all men are like that, they will all throw women under the bus for their own convenience if their gain is high enough and the woman isn't someone they care about.

Tagging on:

I doubt the architects are aware of moon cups

This.

Even in 2018, women (me included) are still embarrassed and ashamed to raise the necessary issues and clear need for particular facilities because of menstruation.

We should speak out! Caroline Criadi-Perez is currently tweeting about this.

@ratrolypoly So OP, I've been thinking; if this goes ahead and these end up being your loos - and they don't have basins in the cubicles - you could perhaps lobby HR to provide little baskets full of sanpro in each cubicle and a packet of baby wipes for bloodied hand cleaning.

Heaven forbid that someone might have sensitive skin or be allergic to the baby wipes. Hell, I'm allergic to something in disposable sanitary pads that gives my vulva a rash, hence why I use cups. Your half-baked plan doesn't cover cup users btw...

Okay, well I can't imagine the OP has the deciding vote on whether or not these proposed toilets go ahead at her work place, so assuming they do indeed come in I guess she's all out of options to improve her comfort in using them then. Especially as I'm sure she won't want the lovely feminist women in HR laughing at her for daring to approach them with a potential partial solution to her discomfort.

Okay, well I can't imagine the OP has the deciding vote on whether or not these proposed toilets go ahead at her work place, so assuming they do indeed come in I guess she's all out of options to improve her comfort in using them then.

But she can ask for the law to be enforced and contact the HSE if the employer isn't complying with the law, so there's really no need for her to be looking for workarounds.

We women need to make sure that the legal protections that we have (limited though they may be) are actually enforced.

We women need to make sure that the legal protections that we have (limited though they may be) are actually enforced.

Oh yeah, I completely agree. I read your link to the law on the second (I think?) page and it does refer to rooms; if the architect or whoever comes back to her though and says what she calls a cubicle is in fact a room, what then?

Oh my goodness Rat: do I hear gloating? How very unbecoming.

I can't say that I was gloating Pratchet but I'm mortified that you'd think so; it's just so unfeminine! (Joke, in case that needs saying.)

How hilarious are you

People who want to get rid of women's spaces do not entertain me

if the architect or whoever comes back to her though and says what she calls a cubicle is in fact a room, what then?

I think it must mean proper rooms with solid walls, not cubicles. This HSE guidance (www.hse.gov.uk/pUbns/priced/l24.pdf) for example says that disabled people can either have a cubicle within a single sex bathroom or a separate room. So the obvious conclusion is that a cubicle does not count as a separate room. But I'm sure the HSE would be able to clarify if the employer/architect dispute this though.

I'm assuming that the OP's description of the bathrooms as containing cubicles is accurate. As I say though, if it's tiny rooms just containing a toilet opening out into shared sinks, then nothing can be done.

As I say though, if it's tiny rooms just containing a toilet opening out into shared sinks, then nothing can be done.

I'm trying to dredge up any memory I might have from my broad surveying training (my job is a branch-off from QS'ing, so unfortunately nothing to do with buildings any more), but I suspect the floor to ceiling doors might make the distinction very difficult. There's very little to define a "room" (in construction terms, at least) from what I remember, and if there's little more clarity in law than I suspect the OP might be on a hiding to nothing.

Worth a try though of course.

How ridiculous. Trying to define 'room' when you can't define 'man'. Or woman. Or gender. Or male, or female. Can you define anything at all?

Pratchet in case you hadn't noticed this isn't actually a trans thread, although one or two posters have certainly posted as if it were.

I'm not one of them.

To me, this is a question of a woman and her office bathrooms. I have posted solely on the subject of this woman and her office bathrooms. If you want to talk about something entirely more philosophical then be my guest, but you may be risking be accused of a derail, and I'm not sure I'd want to join in.