UCD to re-designate more than 170 toilets as gender neutral (Mod warning in op)

Will I Am Not

We used to get a bus up to Carrickmacross to go clubbing in The Oasis. They had unisex toilets. Maybe 20 cubicles and lots of sinks.
The girls with us would always ask a male to accompany them going in if they weren’t going in a group.

I never had any bother with them, there actually used to be a good, fun atmosphere in there to be perfectly honest.
Not everyone feels the same about everything.

ceadaoin.

Will I Am Not wrote: »

We used to get a bus up to Carrickmacross to go clubbing in The Oasis. They had unisex toilets. Maybe 20 cubicles and lots of sinks.
The girls with us would always ask a male to accompany them going in if they weren’t going in a group.

I never had any bother with them, there actually used to be a good, fun atmosphere in there to be perfectly honest.
Not everyone feels the same about everything.

Great fun atmosphere but the girls still asked a male friend to go with them if they weren't going in a group. Could it be that they didn't feel that comfortable going in alone at all? I'm sure many women feel the same way, I don't know why their feelings should be disregarded just because you personally had no issues.

Billy86

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Great fun atmosphere but the girls still asked a male friend to go with them if they weren't going in a group. Could it be that they didn't feel that comfortable going in alone at all? I'm sure many women feel the same way, I don't know why their feelings should be disregarded just because you personally had no issues.

Now if only they adopted that same attitude when there is a 20 person queue for the women's and the men's is half empty...

Will I Am Not

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Great fun atmosphere but the girls still asked a male friend to go with them if they weren't going in a group. Could it be that they didn't feel that comfortable going in alone at all? I'm sure many women feel the same way, I don't know why their feelings should be disregarded just because you personally had no issues.

Eh, yes. That was my point. I didn’t disregard anyone’s feelings.
The last line of my post...

professore

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Did you actually have a genuine point in that question?

You said all toilets in UCD are open to all. I doubt if that's actually true.

professore

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I think peoples issues is with having to shared sinks etc.

This is obvious - I don't get why people are being deliberately obtuse about this.

No one cares about a sign saying all genders. People do care about members of the opposite gender in their bathroom. Particularly women. There are women talking about feeling intimidated in the gym or at a bus stop. Try being alone in a bathroom while a 6'5" male urinates while leering suggestively at you and see how that works.

pilly

professore wrote: »

Can I as a middle aged cis male go into the ladies toilets wearing Speedos without fear of repercussions?

What are you on about?

ohnonotgmail

Bob24 wrote: »

I’d say most people do.

Firstly unisex toilets make urinals a no go as a majority of men and women alike obviously wouldn’t want urinal used in a unisex area.

They seem to manage it quite well on the continent. The urinals are in a screened off area.

Bob24 wrote: »

Secondly because besides urinals there are a few other things which are different in men and women toilets (do most men want to bin full of tampons next to them while they do their thing in a cubicle ... I think not, so this is out as well, and I am sure there are other things).

What is so off-putting about a closed bin?

Grayson

Bob24 wrote: »

I’d say most people do.

Firstly unisex toilets make urinals a no go as a majority of men and women alike obviously wouldn’t want urinal used in a unisex area.

Secondly because besides urinals there are a few other things which are different in men and women toilets (do most men want to bin full of tampons next to them while they do their thing in a cubicle ... I think not, so this is out as well, and I am sure there are other things).

Thirdly it is just a human thing. If a vast majority of cultures and societies on this planet all came up with a concept of separate male/female public toilets there must be a reason. Most human beings just like it better that way.

Now of course this is a bit different for small individual toilets whereby the acceptance for unisex toilets will be higher as not all my previous points apply. But I very much doubt unisex cubicles in large toilets could become a norm as there are just too many reasons people would feel uncomfortable about them.

You don't have to have urinals in every toilet. And you can have them in a unisex toilet, you just put them behind a screen.

Also, if the sight of a tampon vending machine in the toilets, or a special bin is that disturbing to you, or anyone at all, then I would suggest that you bring a new fragility to the word snowflake.

Is this the stage this thread has gotton to? We can't have unisex toilets because men might be squeamish about a tampon machine or a sealed bin?

Grayson

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

They seem to manage it quite well on the continent. The urinals are in a screened off area.



What is so off-putting about a closed bin?

Trigger alert!!

Grayson

I just remembered this from backpacking. In some south american countries, you can't flush toilet paper. So there's a bin next to every toilet where you put the used bog roll.

Will I Am Not

Latch on to the most irrational reason and run with that.
They don’t want unisex toilets because they’re afraid of bins!!! :rolleyes:

Bob24

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

They seem to manage it quite well on the continent. The urinals are in a screened off area.



What is so off-putting about a closed bin?

I happen to be from continental Europe and to visit regularily, and no if you talk about Europe in general it is absolutely not the norm and I have rarely seen large unisex toilets (what you might have is a sink area at the entrance and then 2 separate toilets areas). Not saying it doesn’t exist but if it does it is a small minority of toilets (again, individual toilets are of course different and will tend to be more unisex for practical reasons).
So I don’t think it is fair to say the continent is any diffferent from Ireland.

On the second point, honestly I don’t think it is necessary to elaborate :-/

Grayson

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Latch on to the most irrational reason and run with that.
They don’t want unisex toilets because they’re afraid of bins!!! :rolleyes:

Yeah because the anthropological argument made more sense :rolleyes:

ohnonotgmail

Bob24 wrote: »

I happen to be from continental Europe and to visit regularily, and no if you talk about Europe in general it is absolutely not the norm and I have rarely seen large unisex toilets (what you might have is a sink area at the entrance and then 2 separate toilets areas). Not saying it doesn’t exist but if it does it is a small minority of toilets (again, individual toilets are of course different and will tend to be more unisex for practical reasons).
So I don’t think it is fair to say the continent is any diffferent from Ireland.

I've seen them in several european cities so they do exist and don't seem to discommode anybody.

Bob24 wrote: »

On the second point, honestly I don’t think it is necessary to elaborate :-/

you poor delicate creature.

Will I Am Not

Grayson wrote: »

Yeah because the anthropological argument made more sense :rolleyes:

Where were you with your hilarious quips and pics when people were saying that some women just wouldn’t feel comfortable with the idea of visiting a toilet where men would be on her own?

Bob24

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you poor delicate creature.

Picking a specific minor point in a post and personally going after the poster based on it doesn’t make valid argument against the whole post. Of course I could live with used tampons next to me when I do my thing it but it is also obvious a majority of men would rather avoid it if possible, this was just another point to add to previous ones and an exemple amongst others of how men and women toilets are different.

Doesn’t change the other major points either:
- urinals *are* impractical in unisex toilets (I guess we’ll just agree to disagree and people can judge based on their own experience, but again large public unisex toilets or unisex toilets with urinals are absolutely not the norm in continental Europe)
- pretty much all cultures around the world came up with the same concept of male and female toilets so there is no arguing that it is something g most human beings feel makes sense

professore

I don't care at all for myself as a man. Have all toilets together for all I care. Really. Don't care at all. Doesn't bother me personally in the slightest. I believe if you are not harming anyone else but yourself with your behaviour, or if the other parties involved consent to be harmed, you should be allowed to do it.

It does bother me that my daughters might be exposed to some perverted behaviour from other straight males when they just want to go to the bathroom. This is nothing to do with trans people - and as I've said ad nauseum here I really don't think trans people want a "special" toilet to stand out from their chosen gender. The problem as I see it is actually "fake" trans men who are actually straight men but perverts.

I hate to use the word "safe space" but a ladies toilet is a safe space for women to go to get away from men. If you attended any disco in the 80s you would know this and I'm sure things haven't changed much since.

I am sure disabled people would be thrilled to be able to use the male or female bathrooms and only use them because they need them. I can't believe trans people would have a different point of view. The one trans person who replied on here thinks like this but does say that others might have a different viewpoint.

I can actually see that a trans woman might be chased out of a ladies bathroom by ignorant or over zealous security officers as in this case : http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36395646 - and I wouldn't want people to unnecessarily discriminate against these trans women - but I do see the point of it. You could say that you could mandate trans women to carry ID but then you are back to discrimination. And separate bathrooms for trans people doesn't solve this either.

What a mess this is ....

WinnyThePoo

professore wrote: »

I don't care at all for myself as a man. Have all toilets together for all I care. Really. Don't care at all. Doesn't bother me personally in the slightest. I believe if you are not harming anyone else but yourself with your behaviour, or if the other parties involved consent to be harmed, you should be allowed to do it.

It does bother me that my daughters might be exposed to some perverted behaviour from other straight males when they just want to go to the bathroom. This is nothing to do with trans people - and as I've said ad nauseum here I really don't think trans people want a "special" toilet to stand out from their chosen gender. The problem as I see it is actually "fake" trans men who are actually straight men but perverts.

I hate to use the word "safe space" but a ladies toilet is a safe space for women to go to get away from men. If you attended any disco in the 80s you would know this and I'm sure things haven't changed much since.

I am sure disabled people would be thrilled to be able to use the male or female bathrooms and only use them because they need them. I can't believe trans people would have a different point of view. The one trans person who replied on here thinks like this but does say that others might have a different viewpoint.

I can actually see that a trans woman might be chased out of a ladies bathroom by ignorant or over zealous security officers as in this case : http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36395646 - and I wouldn't want people to unnecessarily discriminate against these trans women - but I do see the point of it. You could say that you could mandate trans women to carry ID but then you are back to discrimination. And separate bathrooms for trans people doesn't solve this either.

What a mess this is ....

I don't think I've ever read so much mumbo jumbo.

Knex*

What's this argument about how there'll be, 'strangers in the gender neutral toilet, unlike at home', actually about?

There's still strangers in gender specific toilets too, or am I missing something? It's utterly bizarre.

professore

Knex. wrote: »

What's this argument about how there'll be, 'strangers in the gender neutral toilet, unlike at home', actually about?

There's still strangers in gender specific toilets too, or am I missing something? It's utterly bizarre.

Who is making that argument?

There is a good argument to be had about having male strangers in a gender neutral toilet at the same time as females, which could lead to dangerous situations occurring.

It's weird enough already to stand in a line with other men with your penis out. Bringing women into the mix as well ...

Now, I'm not sure how you go to the toilet in your home, but I tend not to go in there with the rest of my family, unless the kids are out and Mrs Prof wants some hot bathroom action. Maybe your family is a little bit different in this aspect - there's a name for that but who am I to judge.

Likewise I don't tend to follow my female acquaintances into the bathroom and lock the door behind me when they are sitting on the throne.

Bob24

The problem about this discussion is that it is more political than about pragmatically looking at an issue.

If the issue is that a small number of people feel uncomfortable in designated toilets for men or women, the simple pragmatic solution for a large building is to add a few unisex single toilets in the building and label them “WC” or “toilets” while not changing anything else (and especially not relabelling toilets specifically fitted for disabled people!). Problem fixed with something no one will have issues with and not exactly requiring a revolutionary concept as these toilets have always existed.

But sadely this is not was is being done/suggested, hence it becoming political.

professore

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

I don't think I've ever read so much mumbo jumbo.

I am blown away by your rational and reasoned rebuttal of my argument.

professore

Bob24 wrote: »

The problem about this discussion is that it is more political than anything else.

If the issue is that some people feel uncomfortable in designated toilets for men or women, the simple pragmatic solution is to add a few unisex single toilets in the building and label them “WC” or “toilets” while not changing anything else (and especially not relabelling toilets for disabled people!). Problem fixed with something no one will have issues with and be done with it.

But sadely this is not was is being done/suggested, hence it becoming political.

Hole in one Bob24. Actually on the topic of toilets, when my kids were babies I often needed to change them but in many cases the changing facilities were in the ladies toilets. That's something that thankfully has changed, either by putting some in the gents, or the disabled, or having a separate baby changing area. There was uproar a few years back when a man trying to change his baby was thrown out of a ladies bathroom. A less sexy situation couldn't be imagined, yet people were up in arms about that.

Will I Am Not

Bob24 wrote: »

The problem about this discussion is that it is more political than anything else.

Nail on the head. It’s all the usual suspects moaning about people not toeing the liberal line.

F*ck the women that might feel uncomfortable. Trans women’s needs are higher up the brownie point scale than those born female.

koumi

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Nail on the head. It’s all the usual suspects moaning about people not cameltoeing the liberal line.

fixed that for ya

Grayson

Bob24 wrote: »

- pretty much all cultures around the world came up with the same concept of male and female toilets so there is no arguing that it is something g most human beings feel makes sense

That's a strawman argument. Public toilets have only been around for about a hundred years and were built during the victorian/edwardian periods and later. they're a reflection of a time period that is the most prudish in our history.

Simply saying that something was done in a particular way at a particular time is not an argument as to why it's a tautology.

freshpopcorn

Did anybody watch this discussion the Clare Byrne show last night?

Grayson

professore wrote: »

Who is making that argument?

There is a good argument to be had about having male strangers in a gender neutral toilet at the same time as females, which could lead to dangerous situations occurring.

It's weird enough already to stand in a line with other men with your penis out. Bringing women into the mix as well ...

Now, I'm not sure how you go to the toilet in your home, but I tend not to go in there with the rest of my family, unless the kids are out and Mrs Prof wants some hot bathroom action. Maybe your family is a little bit different in this aspect - there's a name for that but who am I to judge.

Likewise I don't tend to follow my female acquaintances into the bathroom and lock the door behind me when they are sitting on the throne.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have rooms where a man may be alone with a woman because it's dangerous? Are you Mike Pence?

Ans no-one is suggesting that men and women should share a cubicle.

Grayson

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Did anybody watch this discussion the Clare Byrne show last night?

Nope. have you got a linky?

freshpopcorn

Grayson wrote: »

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have rooms where a man may be alone with a woman because it's dangerous? Are you Mike Pence?

Ans no-one is suggesting that men and women should share a cubicle.

This issue I've heard is mainly a woman doesn't want to be applying her make up at the mirror to be surrounded by a large group of men.

ohnonotgmail

freshpopcorn wrote: »

This issue I've heard is mainly a woman doesn't want to be applying her make up at the mirror to be surrounded by a large group of men.

Any time i'm in a public toilet i want to be in and out as fast as possible. Do they envisage large groups of men standing aroung?

freshpopcorn

Grayson wrote: »

Nope. have you got a linky?

It wasn't a great debate to be honest.
They did an opinion poll 58% against 31% for and 11% undecided.
https://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/claire-byrne-live-extras-30003215/10844493/

freshpopcorn

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Any time i'm in a public toilet i want to be in and out as fast as possible. Do they envisage large groups of men standing aroung?

Most men I know go to the toilet do their business, wash their hands and leave.
Woman have a tendency to spend longer either in the cubical or at the sink.
So there is more hanging around. Either waiting to use a toilet because they won't be urinals or waiting to use the sink.

ohnonotgmail

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Most men I know go to the toilet do their business, wash their hands and leave.
Woman have a tendency to spend longer either in the cubical or at the sink.
So there is more hanging around. Either waiting to use a toilet because they won't be urinals or waiting to use the sink.

If the guys are going to be in and out i dont see the issues for the women using the toilet. And i dont see why unisex bathrooms cant have urinals. they just need to put them in a screened off area.

freshpopcorn

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If the guys are going to be in and out i dont see the issues for the women using the toilet. And i dont see why unisex bathrooms cant have urinals. they just need to put them in a screened off area.

The reason why guys would be hanging around is women spend longer in cubicals or at sinks/mirrors based on my experience just look at the queues going into the ladies and men's. There often is a que for the ladies compared to the men. As a man your whole process would be slowed down.

The Legend Of Kira

Claire Byrne show did a poll on this last night & it turns out a silent majority of the audience are not in favour of so called gender neutral bathrooms/toilets.

ceadaoin.

Grayson wrote: »

That's a strawman argument. Public toilets have only been around for about a hundred years and were built during the victorian/edwardian periods and later. they're a reflection of a time period that is the most prudish in our history.

Simply saying that something was done in a particular way at a particular time is not an argument as to why it's a tautology.

Oh here we go. Prude. The worst thing you can be nowadays

Ignore the fact that plenty , if not most, women have at some point felt harrassed or threatened by a male and that many simply would not feel comfortable sharing intimate spaces with strangers of the opposite sex. It's not just public toilets, it's changing rooms, locker rooms, hospitals, domestic abuse shelters, or it will be at some point in the future.

Why was the fact that the university of Toronto had to reduce unisex facilities because of women being filmed ignored? Target had an increase in these incidents also after their changing rooms went unisex. Also ignored. Yet someone talking about a sanitary bin was focussed on. Yes we now that perverts will commit crimes anyway. But why make it easier for people who otherwise would not have taken the risk?

Also I must be the biggest prude ever because I wouldn't want to use a tampon vending machine with some random guy standing there !

Women fought for their own facilities btw, at first it was male only, and in some countries are still fighting for access. Why is it that they want their own and not just access to the men's?

Bob24

Grayson wrote: »

Bob24 wrote: »

- pretty much all cultures around the world came up with the same concept of male and female toilets so there is no arguing that it is something g most human beings feel makes sense

That's a strawman argument. Public toilets have only been around for about a hundred years and were built during the victorian/edwardian periods and later. they're a reflection of a time period that is the most prudish in our history.

Simply saying that something was done in a particular way at a particular time is not an argument as to why it's a tautology.

Let’s be serious, not one culture was forced to adopt and retain the idea over such a long period. They did it because it suited their people - even though those cultures can be vastly different in many aspects.

Grayson

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Oh here we go. Prude. The worst thing you can be nowadays

I mentioned prudishness because public toilets have only been around since Victorian/Edwardian times and they had some very strange ideas about this stuff. Now rather than go on some weird rant about prudishness, why don't you actually show that separate public toilets were based on some sort of practicality rather than a prudishness.

Before that time people crapped in buckets or on the street. The idea of sharing a facility would have seemed like a stupid dilemma since there were no facilities.

So if you want to demonstrate that there is an anthropological reason why toilet facilities have to be separate, you'll have to do better than a rant about prudishness.

Mtx

Why do this? Trans people represent a tiny minority. Seems like a great way to waste money.

Grayson

Mtx wrote: »

Why do this? Trans people represent a tiny minority. Seems like a great way to waste money.

Surely combining facilities would save money in the long term. Especially when constructing new buildings. And in existing buildings it may result is less facilities being needed.
Also, why do people keep focussing on trans people. I just think of them as combined facilities that men or women can use.

koumi

I think most people here have used a unisex toilet or bathroom facility at some stage in their lives but wouldn't really regard it in that way. If you've ever stayed in a public hospital, you'll know that every ward contains a toilet which facilitates both men and women and disabled people, it's just a singular cubicle with toilet and shower which accommodates anyone physically able to use it. The all gender toilets in college campus are this, most were designated as disabled spaces originally but now function as a multi gender space.

In the same breath, if you happen to be in a hospital waiting room you will find gender specific toilets, which is probably sensible given the volumes of people who may be needing to use the facilities so I don't think abandoning separate spaces is what is being suggested. The singular units are additional to gender specific areas and I don't believe that anyone has proposed doing away with regular multi user gender designated spaces at all.

Billy86

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

Claire Byrne show did a poll on this last night & it turns out a silent majority of the audience are not in favour of so called gender neutral bathrooms/toilets.

It's worth noting in a general sense, but I'm not sure that Claire Byrne's audience overlaps that much with the average UCD student. It would be interesting to run a poll on it past them.

jmayo

Dr Brown wrote: »

It's PC gone mad.


Mod-Ok folks, A few people have been banned, From here on anyone linking transgender to mental illness will get the same treatment. Discuss the topic. You can think an idea is a good idea or a bad idea without being a dick about it.

Sorry but isn't the whole argument about who has and hasn't a dick

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Oh here we go. Prude. The worst thing you can be nowadays

Ignore the fact that plenty , if not most, women have at some point felt harrassed or threatened by a male and that many simply would not feel comfortable sharing intimate spaces with strangers of the opposite sex. It's not just public toilets, it's changing rooms, locker rooms, hospitals, domestic abuse shelters, or it will be at some point in the future.

Why was the fact that the university of Toronto had to reduce unisex facilities because of women being filmed ignored? Target had an increase in these incidents also after their changing rooms went unisex. Also ignored. Yet someone talking about a sanitary bin was focussed on. Yes we now that perverts will commit crimes anyway. But why make it easier for people who otherwise would not have taken the risk?

Actually funny thing is AFAIK the poster you replied to no so long ago lived in Toronto, Canada anyway, so may be able to shed some light on that case and what effects it had opinions.

Red_Wake

Is there an inherent contradiction in banning posters for linking transgenderism to mental illness, while at the same time commending UCD for extending the use of toilets which were previously only for the disabled?

ceadaoin.

Grayson wrote: »

I mentioned prudishness because public toilets have only been around since Victorian/Edwardian times and they had some very strange ideas about this stuff. Now rather than go on some weird rant about prudishness, why don't you actually show that separate public toilets were based on some sort of practicality rather than a prudishness.

Before that time people crapped in buckets or on the street. The idea of sharing a facility would have seemed like a stupid dilemma since there were no facilities.

So if you want to demonstrate that there is an anthropological reason why toilet facilities have to be separate, you'll have to do better than a rant about prudishness.

Ok so just ignore the rest of my post which wasn't really a rant about prudishness at all.

ohnonotgmail

Red_Wake wrote: »

Is there an inherent contradiction in banning posters for linking transgenderism to mental illness, while at the same time commending UCD for extending the use of toilets which were previously only for the disabled?

No.

professore

So basically they are putting signage on the disabled bathrooms? Is that what's happening?

University authorities will shortly begin the process of re-designating single-stall toilets and changing rooms as gender neutral.

It's not 100% clear from the article. Meh I don't care. Do what you want.

DelaneyO

Feminists wanted equality. Now they have it. Suck it up.