Express and Star article - head of British Toilet Association pushing for mixed loos

[Fenlandmountainrescue]

Apparently, in order to get us all back shopping again, it is essential that we should all share toilets. Because that is cleaner?

It would come to something if feminists ended up unwitting accomplainces to religion in perpuating the ongoing suppression of women

Except that that is not what is happening.

All male, men and one transwoman

There's a fucking surprise.

It would come to something if feminists ended up unwitting accomplainces to religion in perpuating the ongoing suppression of women.

You mean like the kind of oppression you’re pushing onto ALL women, regardless of their wishes.

Whilst I think unisex can just about work in certain situations (eg at work where there are 4 or 5 loos, each one is entirely separate, it’s a smallish office of no more than 50 and there’s the social pressure of not leaving a mess), anything else is a recipe for disaster for cleanliness and safety.

Based on the data in Invisible Women however I think it’ll be a massive own goal if this goes ahead. The second men have to start waiting for the lengths of time women do, the majority of men will be shouting from the rooftops how rediculous it is that they start to miss trains, spend entire intervals at shows waiting to go to the bathroom, or just having to spend ten times as long doing something very basic. And as it’ll be men complaining, they will obviously be listened too. I can see it now - woman with child in tow waiting for the loo, man in suit comes in and says “would you mind me going ahead, I’ll only be a second” and social conditioning will mean we let them.

I've been reading some of the work done by Wateraid round women's toilets

washmatters.wateraid.org/publications/female-friendly-public-and-community-toilets-a-guide-for-planners-and-decision-makers.

There's a rather good YouTube video halfway down explaining, it's amazing that it has be, why safe and accessible toilets are important for women.

Funny really, separate facilities for women are considered important and liberating in the so-called developed world, in the West they are called bigoted, transphobic and irrelevant

But try telling that to the families of little girls in developing countries who have been kidnapped and raped/murdered when they have to go a relieve themselves outside because they have no toilets. They won’t fight for these loos - just ‘gender neutral’ ones here (as if that’s a matter of life and death).

All male, men and one transwoman

Every single time I go to the toilet, my body reminds me of what a man has done to me. I don’t give a fig for pseudo-progressiveness. I cannot and will not go to the toilet in the same room as a man. I don’t care that no one can see me go to the loo. My demons from past abuse are hard enough to bear.

I say no.

I can't walk through the men's and respect their privacy without not being able to see what im doing. Which is not so good if you have a child prone to falling and tripping

Unisex removes the dilemma

Aside from the many many complaints about men peeing in the stalls and leaving the door open, if it comes about that we have unisex loos, nothing will actually change. What was mens will still have urinals, so you will still see men. What was womens will over time also get urinals and as a consequence fewer stalls and you will still see men.

And for a very very long time until it becomes standard if ever, most people will use the originally sexed toilet for their sex. Apart from the ones that women want to keep out by staying single sex.

If you think urinals will never happen, think again, men will not stand for joining a queue.

I dont view religion, which historically has been one of the biggest surpresssers of women as a good argument. Not in a predominantly atheist country.

Agree. If you want to live in a country where public toilets are run in a way that satisfies the requirements of your (fictional) religion, this isn’t it.

Agree. If you want to live in a country where public toilets are run in a way that satisfies the requirements of your (fictional) religion, this isn’t it.

Is that a subtle way of saying “go back where you came from”?

I think so, yes.

I dont think even men want this. I've noticed at work, when the men want a bit more privacy i.e. to do something a bit stinky, they will go in the disabled loo (judging by the smell as you go past!).

So I honestly do not believe they would want to share with female colleagues. I cannot imagine how awkward it would be. Whoever comes up with this stuff, cannot be asking the general public what they want.

That wateraid leaflet is fascinating.

Wateraid is a fantastic charity that does some fantastic work in developing countries.

But those are countries where womens rights are decades if not a century behind us. Where oppressive often religious regimes are the norm.

The case studies within that leaflet are india Mozambique etc. They are talking about areas if those countries where women's toilets dont necessarily even exist. Some places the water supply didnt even exist pre wateraid

I didn't see one mention of a developed or European countries in it.

There is no way the "repression of women" in this country even has the same vocabulary as the repression and degradation of women in some of those countries.

Actually if you look at the requirements, unisex toilets in Sweden (Which is generally considered ahead in terms of gender equality) for example would meet their requirements

Agree. If you want to live in a country where public toilets are run in a way that satisfies the requirements of your (fictional) religion, this isn’t it

Is that a subtle way of saying “go back where you came from”?

Is it? I saw it more as commenting on the weirdness of co-opting oppressive religious views which insist on compulsory and unnecessary sex segregation to support your (general your) case for sex segregation.

If keeping spaces single sex is a good thing the argument shouldn't need to be propped up by special religious pleading.

Is that a subtle way of saying “go back where you came from”?

No it's a not so subtle way of saying that in this country we have seperation of religion and state. State shouldn't be supporting religions that advocation regression of women's rights.

If keeping spaces single sex is a good thing the argument shouldn't need to be propped up by special religious pleading.
Yes this.

I can understand its difficult when you have a child or person of the oppersite sex with you who needs help toileting.

But realistically, pre teens they would go in the ladies with you. After teenn disabled loo and if not avaliable, you need to make a judgment call. Personally I would take a disabled male into the mens. If I needed to go myself I would take him into the disabled loo with me. I can hold it so no issue of queuing.

It's not ideal but you can't expect all women to put aside their comfort and dignity just incase there is a que for the disabled toilets.

Supporting patriarchal religions and recognising that certain women need to be able to leave the house and participate in public life are really quite different things.

Supporting patriarchal religions and recognising that certain women need to be able to leave the house and participate in public life are really quite different things

All women need to be able to leave the house etc. etc. If sex segregated spaces are a good thing then they should be a good thing for all women. There is no need to cite religious beliefs to support the case.

Hmmm - I don't think you can hand wave away women's religious/cultural requirements like that.

I'm an atheist, living in a Muslim country. I think privacy, dignity & safety plus I don't bloody want to share toilets with men are quite sufficient reasons for single sex provision.

But I wouldn't dismiss the fact that for practically every other woman in the country her reasons would be 'all of the above AND it is not acceptable in my religion or my culture'.

I'm quite appreciative of the fact that unisex toilets would be absolutely unthinkable here (& colleagues & students who have encountered them on visits to Europe are unanimous in condemning them as disgusting, weird & upsetting to use).

There are all sorts of other problems in cultures that segregate the sexes of course - it's not usually 'just the single sex loos & changing rooms & sport & prisons, everything else is an egalitarian utopia where we all muck in together' - but I do find the attitude to female spaces to be a definite positive, in pragmatic terms. 🧐.

Women don't need to use religion or assaults or anything else as a reason. Simply not wanting to share an intimate space with an unknown penis haver is enough.

We all have a right to drop our draws away from males. Religion or personal circumstances can support that argument but just not wanting to alone is enough.

I'm an atheist, living in a Muslim country. I think privacy, dignity & safety plus I don't bloody want to share toilets with men are quite sufficient reasons for single sex provision.

But I wouldn't dismiss the fact that for practically every other woman in the country her reasons would be 'all of the above AND it is not acceptable in my religion or my culture'.

This.

There is no need to cite religious beliefs to support the case

I give you the one woman who said NO.

She is the only one who matters in this. Her reasons are hers and not up for debate or attempting to guilt her or change her mind.

It's not me by the way, I generally do not care in 99% of the times I'm in the loo.
But she matters.
I'm listening to her, I can see why she might say no men in my loo. And she has the absolute right to say it.

This all sounds like a preformed solution searching for an opportunity, carefully presented to media as a response to an entirely unrelated problem by a rather opaque group whos interest in the matter are not clearly outlined

Very interesting

I actually find the religious argument irrelevant as well as quite offensive. As an atheist or just a plain ole female I want sex segregated spaces when I'm semi-naked for my safety and my dignity.

What a particular bunch of males sky fairy's arbitrary rules for women are is irrelevant.

Either all women need the protection because they are women or none of them do. Nobody is extra special on top of that.

If anybody wants to argue that somehow women from a particular religion will get extra told off, shunned or harmed by others of that religion if they use mixed sex facilities, that is the precise opposite of an argument in favour of helping women obey those religious rules.