Seattle mayor proposes all-gender single-occupant public bathrooms
Source: Yahoo! News / Reuters
SEATTLE (Reuters) - Single-occupant public bathrooms in Seattle would be designated for all-gender use, not just for men and women, under legislation proposed by Mayor Ed Murray on Wednesday.
While existing laws protect a person's right to use a restroom matching their gender, bathrooms are usually assigned for male and female use, excluding transgender and gender non-conforming people, Murray said in a statement.
"The transgender community deserves the dignity and respect that most people take for granted," Murray said. The legislation would affect bathrooms in such public places as restaurants, parks, stores, and City Hall, though it would only affect bathrooms that are designed for use by one person at a time.
The move follows similar actions taken in Portland, Oregon's Multnomah County and in Philadelphia, which has passed legislation mandating all-gender restrooms in city or county-controlled buildings, Murray's office said.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/seattle-mayor-proposes-gender-single-occupant-public-bathrooms-005207149.html
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)outrageous. We all have all-gender single-occupant private bathrooms at home.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Just let people use whichever bathroom they identify with and there would be no problem. It's nothing more than a manufactured controversy by bigots who ridiculously think people are actually going to identify with the opposite gender just so they can sneak into restrooms.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)Are we really so childish that we can't even acknowledge bathroom functions occur across all of humanity?
MADem
(135,425 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)No one minded them, they worked just fine.
niyad
(113,585 posts)public library, we have that restroom, and nobody thinks twice about it.
at the park, we have the same.
airplanes have the same.
decades ago, when that idiot phyllis schlafley was working against the ERA, she whined about unisex bathrooms as some sort of evil. I asked her if the males and females in her house used separate ones. she never did answer me.
Township75
(3,535 posts)Then someone will shout misogyny ! Sexism!
And it is all down hill from there.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Some men are really dirty, disgusting people. They pee all over, shit on the seat. etc. I've seen it all.
My advice to women would be to NOT use the bathroom until a women uses it right before you. To men, same advice.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)and having had to clean the bathrooms.
Women are way way way more filthy bathroom makers and AINEC. I've never seen a restroom trashed the way the women's room was daily at Starbucks.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Where do you live? Either you have way filthier women where you live, or the men are filthier where I live.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Born in CT. Moved to NYC. Family moved to CT. I went to college in DC. Moved to (in order) Baltimore, No.VA, Philly, Hartford, Brooklyn, Boston, back to DC, finally to CT. Worked in restaurants in DC, MD, CT.
I'm pretty sure it's the first. I hope it's the first...the second would scare me.
I've only ever seen one bathroom that I had to wash poop smear off the ceiling of and it was the women's room at *bucks. Women pee (and occasionally poop) on the floor more than men too...don't ask me how, I have never figured it out. Men tend to miss the urinal and pee on the wall. Both pee in the sink occasionally but only women tend to leave pubic hair. Blood smears on the wall near the tampon disposal bin...only women. (Oddly in restrooms of establishments that had them...both the men's and women's room had the bins.) Men more than women peed in the trash bin though. Men also tended to leave messy baby-changing tables and women did not.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)I knew it from working at McDonalds when I was 16 years old...but the data is out there...
not to mention plumbers spend more time fixing toilets and drains in the woman's room-
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)Unlike men who have a, shall we say, nozzle that allows them to at least put in an effort to aim.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)the results are messy, to say the least.
Imagine balancing on the back of your calves/knees and back to prevent your butt from touching the seat.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)My wife always hovers - except when she's at home, but even there sometimes she does it without thinking. I wonder how many men "hover" or is it just a woman thing?
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)If its bad enough that I have to go now, sitting on the seat is the least of my concerns.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)haele
(12,681 posts)Especially if we're heading to public "single room" stall bathroom closets with latching doors so that people can be "private" rather than the multiple stall barracks style bathrooms.
While it might be more expensive to set up, and require a larger bathroom "facility" footprint to ensure a comfortable and hygienic experience for users, I think it's a win-win.
And yeah, I've found that while the urinal areas are typically very nasty in men's rooms, the women's stalls and counters tend to be filthier with hair and (to put it politely) "used paper product" waste.
Ahhh, memories...The joys of being in the Navy and experiencing as one of the many "pre-attaining-E-5-concurrent-duty" assignments of cleaning the shipboard common bathroom areas - along with cleaning bilges, on-loading/offloading stores parties, painting, damage control equipment maintenance, mess-line server duties...
Haele
Myrina
(12,296 posts)Makes you wonder what people's homes look like if they're ok leaving a mess like that in a restroom someone ELSE might see.
Oneironaut
(5,525 posts)It's not sparkling clean.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)yellowcanine
(35,701 posts)But the opponents of the ERA warned us about unisex bathrooms and the ERA failed so WHAT HAPPENED??????
Sorry for the all caps. I get carried away.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The key phase is the following:
"only affect bathrooms that are designed for use by one person at a time"
In simple terms, most such restrooms are generally unisex now, Furthermore such restrooms have NOT been the problem, if only one person can fit in the restroom so having to "Share" the restroom with someone who you think is NOT of your sex is NOT an issue (Such restrooms are NOT shared today even with people of the same sex).
Most port-a-johns tend to be unisex (I have seen some for one sex or another but they are rare).
Thus the proposal solves a non-problem. The problem has been in rest rooms where more then one person of the same sex can use. This is the majority of restrooms I have used outside of my home and my office (and my office is a unisex restroom). Such large multi-use restrooms are the norm in schools, shopping malls, airports etc. Those are where people have protested about someone who they think is NOT of their sex using their restroom.
Thus this is another example of someone solving a problem that does not exist.
Reminds me of the time I was in College. I was playing door man at night as part of a work study program and two police officers came in. This was part of their patrol, one was female and she proceeded to go downstairs, while the male officer and I talked. A few minutes late a female law student came up and reported a male was in the female restroom. We guessed what happened and the officer called on his radio to the female officer where she was, and it was in the restroom. The student had seen her combat boots and assumed it was a male. We all giggled including the female law student.
Just bringing up this story for a lot of women worry about being attacked and thus they jump to conclusions not supported by facts. The Law student saw boots and assumed it had to be male. These were police officers walking a beat and they wanted comfortable boots, that kept their feet dry in bad weather and they could walk in 6 to 8 hours a day.
A lot of these stories about transsexuals stem from not rejections of such people, but fear that the transsexual is NOT a transsexual but a male out to attack a female. Single restrooms do NOT create such situations thus my point that this is a non-problem. The problem are the larger restrooms, which are NOT affected by this proposal.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)If I know the bathroom to be single occupancy and the mens is locked, I've gone into the women's restroom. Sure you get an occasional strange look, but who cares.
I guess one issue is Mens restrooms tend to have a urinal, and womens restrooms dont. I can't see them installing a urinal in both (at least in older buildings, so by default, one really should be mens, and one should be womens.