Not enough toilets in theatres. For women

[RedToothBrush]

Hands up. Who is remotely surprised by this...?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46735513
Women's toilets an issue for West End theatres

A survey of West End theatres has found there is an average of just one toilet for every 38 female audience members.

The research by The Stage calculated that women would need a 57-minute interval to all visit the bathroom. The average interval is 20 minutes.

The Old Vic had the fewest with one toilet for every 56 women.

Many theatres struggle to increase the number of toilets due to their buildings having listed status and the Old Vic is a Grade II-listed building.

The theatre recently launched a £100,000 public fundraising campaign to improve the toilets and access to the theatre featuring Glenda Jackson and Joanna Lumley.

The works will more than double the number of female loos. They have so far raised £52,482.

This is one reason why single use cubicles are not a solution for the 'problem' of women's toilets not being mixed sex. You cant fit enough in to meet the need.

This is a problem everywhere including the newly renovated and refurbished theatre in our town. It seems to be that because men don't need as much space, it's unreasonable to provide it for people who are not men, even though we make up more than half the population.

What I mean is that whenever it comes up in conversation the response seems to be "well you do need more space than men so of course you'll have fewer facilities within the same size space" when actually the approach should be "women require more space so give them more space".

The Donmar warehouse - recently reurbished in Central London has two. Two cubicles. Who planned that I wonder?

The research by The Stage calculated that women would need a 57-minute interval to all visit the bathroom. The average interval is 20 minutes

But the entire female audience isn't going to need to go to the loo in the interval. I usually go before the performance starts. I can sit at home or at work without needing a loo break after 40 -60 minutes so not sure why sitting on a theatre seat would be any different.

At one occasion at the Old Vic when I was there a member of staff directed women to use the gents. I can't recall if they stopped men going in at all or said they weren't to use the urinals. Tbh I really don't see the need to have separate men's and women's facilities at venues like theatres where there is a very high number and turnover of users in a very short time- span.

Glasgow Theatre Royal has installed unusex lockable cubicles with heavy doors and floor to ceiling walls with mirror and basin.

I'd just like to point out that most Oxbridge colleges are Grade 1 listed, so even tougher legislation on building work. Yet all have (retrofitted) plumbing. It might have to be done more carefully, but listed buildings can be adapted.

MargueritaPink You might be okay with using mixed sex toilets and you might be okay with going the whole performance without needing to go to the toilet but can you appreciate that other women might be uncomfortable (for a variety of reasons) with using mixed sex spaces and other people may need to go to the toilet more frequently than you? I just don't understand the 'well it's alright for me' argument.

I have always needed to wee a lot and now I'm 60 I need to wee even more often. I book theatre tickets on aisles and as soon as I'm aware the interval is approaching (I WILL have been prior to the curtain going up and WILL have eschewed drinks for a couple of hours before) I'm up and legging it to the loo before most people have even started applauding. Some of us do need easy, fast access to toilets- even if others do not.

On newer buildings, toilets should be planned so that everyone has a similar time queuing.

Otherwise it is discrimination based on sex. You wouldn't get away with it if you were serving meals and told all women that they had to wait twice as long for their food.

It isn't an "all right for me argument".

My point was that a statistic that it would need 57 minutes for all women in the audience to go to the loo is a useless sratstic as all women won't be going.

I was at the ballet on Saturday. Less than half the audience left their seats at either interval. So what on earth is the point of quoting a statistic based on the whole female audience going en masse- given that simply does not happen?

As for insisting on separate facilities- I can't see any objection to the set- up which Glasgow Theatre Royal has. Users are in a separate, locked room with full height floor to ceiling walls with a mirror and a basin in the room. People going to the loo at the theatre want to be in and out as quickly as possible and there will be a large number of people around.

Even worse when it's an afternoon performance with kids who all seem to need to go both before and after.

No idea what the solution is but it's a fucking bore for women. She-wees and urinals?

Yes but the British Standard guidelines state there should be two toilets for up to 25 women, plus one for every additional 25 women at theatres.

56 for 1 isn't even close.

The trouble is that it depends on the audience. For a mixed audience maybe only 50% leave their seats and probably even less use the toilet. For something that attracts an older audience, the need for toilets becomes more urgent. Venues need to cater for all their audiences, not just young and healthy ones.

You can just expect everyone to wear incontinence pads I suppose.....

Yes, matinees with children will be even more of a problem

With respect, the issue isn't about what-you-reckon re how many ballet goers needed the toilet one time you were in a theatre or how happy you are with unisex facilities. It's about lack of sanitation provision specifically for women. We've already established decades ago that single sex provision is appropriate and necessary. We shouldn't have to hash this out again. What the issue is now is that women's public sanitation provision is insufficient.

And actually that provision is insufficient is something that everyone knows - including men. This is not a mystery. Ever since we are little girls, whenever we need to use public sanitation facilities we are accustomed to seeing massive snaking queues, whether that be in theatres or in airports or train stations or wherever. The comments about "the queue for the ladies is always so long" and "you always have to wait for the ladies" are things that we grow up hearing and continue to hear all our lives, as though it were some inevitable inescapable fact, rather than yet another symptom of society not being set up to cater for women's needs - even the basic need of sanitation.

Could you imagine a world where men had to wait twenty minutes to go to the toilet, every time they needed to go in public? Could you even start to imagine the absolute outcry there would be?

The solution isn't to deprive us of our same sex spaces but just to give us proper facilities.

With respect a statistic based on the entirely fictitious assumption that if all women in a theatre audience went to the loo the interval would need to be 56 minutes to accommodate them is completely irrelevant.

The problem with massive queues at venues like theatres where a large mass of people need to use facilities in a short space of time would be solved by unisex fully enclosed cubicles. There is either no queue or a very short one at the Glasgow theatre I mentioned.

There are situations where facilities need to be segregated but I don't see the need in a situation like a theatre.

My objection to wall to floor cubicles is safety. I've climbed into toilets over partitions to unlock doors to rescue passed out women. I've suffered from sudden episodes of hypoglycaemia in the past and I've a cousin that frequently and suddenly has epileptic fits. We'd hope if we needed help women would spot something wrong and get assistance.
Children could get locked in cubicles as well.

Yes to OP this is a "thing" and as report says is much worse in the old theatres where space is v limited and they can't put more in.

Last time I went, it was to one which actually seemed to have quite a bit of provision for women but still it took me & the girls the whole interval to queue and get back to seats while DH was able to pee, have a wander, get drinks etc in teh same time

It's exactly the same when we go to gigs> between the acts massive queue for ladies.

Also totally agree with PP about this "What I mean is that whenever it comes up in conversation the response seems to be "well you do need more space than men so of course you'll have fewer facilities within the same size space" when actually the approach should be "women require more space so give them more space"."

Toilets in general are an issue with other reports saying how the disappearance of public toilets has a disproportionate effect on women.

Why are we talking about unisex toilets? Men's sanitation facilities are more than adequate. Women don't have enough. Therefore women need more. Nothing to do with men.

No idea.

Moving to unisex single cubicles in most already existing venues will just mean less facilities for everyone.

I find it interesting that even on an issue that explicitly and directly affects women only, within the first few posts the thread had already got around to talking about how facilities should include men. Can we really just not request facilities that meet our requirements - sanitation facilities at that, which is basic stuff - without having to justify asking for something for ourselves only?

My point was that a statistic that it would need 57 minutes for all women in the audience to go to the loo is a useless sratstic as all women won't be going

How do you know? I usually hold it in because there aren't enough toilets. i'd love to be able to actually go to the toilet, as and when I want, during an interval and not risk having to come back in late because of the queue. Yet again we have a situation where women have to grin and bear it or stay at home, just because of attitudes like yours. Who the fuck do you think you are? You do not speak for all women.

This really annoys me. I have been to see a show and missed the start of the next half due to long queues at the women's toilets.

There were no queues at all for the gents. There were 2 sets of loos for each sex on different floors. I cant understand why one of the men's loos weren't re-designated for women and men having to have the indignity of queuing for a bit and reducing the women's queue by a bit.

It had notices about how it was listed up but no explanation as to why they were arranged the way they were.

But are there the same number for men - if so is that really an issue?