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

Dakota Dan

patsman07 wrote: »

My local Catholic church has had a gender neutral bathroom since the 1940s.

So they share the same bath?

BattleCorp

Dakota Dan wrote: »

So they share the same bath?

No, that's only the priests and alter boys. Nothing to do with women.

pumpkin4life

BattleCorp wrote: »

Women don't have to wear dresses so I can't see how a lad would have to wear a dress to use the women's toilets.

Not just the toilets man. Changing facilities it says in that link.

UCD is to re-designate more than 170 toilets across the entire campus as “gender neutral” and introduce transgender changing facilities at its sport centre.
The move is part of a new university policy to provide a welcoming campus for transgender and gender-fluid students and employees.
In addition, UCD is to allow transgender students to change their names on official university award documents and other material without the need for gender recognition certificates.
Minister for Children and equality campaigner Katherine Zappone, who is due to launch the new policy on Thursday, has welcomed the move as another step towards “full equality for all”.
“Our universities are drivers of change, promoters of equality and champions of justice,” she said.

Bob24

BattleCorp wrote: »

Bob24 wrote: »

I am not sure about that. They could keep male and female toilets while adding a third category which is “gender neutral” (ie unisex). For exemple see the picture on the IT article. It would be fairly stupid alright, but it would allow them to make their political point while not breaking what is working.

But I wouldn't be compelled to use the gender neutral toilet as I could self determine as a woman.............therefore in the eyes of UCD I am a woman..........and therefore I could use the women's toilets.

I think I'm being logical here.

By the way, I'm male, not transgender, and have no intention of doing any of the above. I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Yes what you are saying is logical. BUT let’s not forget this is just an ideological battle and most likely just a handful of people if anyone on the UCD campus actually has personal issues with current toilet arrangements (even those who are asking for those new toilets themselves are probably in manjority not identifying as the “wrong gender” for their toilets and currently very fine).

So they main goal here is to score political points more than to fix an acrual issue. Adding a third category of toilets would be winning a first battle for those who are fighting the ideological war but at the same time would let the university keep the arrangement which works best for a vast majority of people, so this is why I don’t see it as an unlikely compromise.

blue note

I haven't read the seven pages but don't understand how there are seven pages written about this. What's the big deal? The only slight negative I could see is that they might get rid of urinals and that might result in queues? If they're to do it right keep the urinals for anyone who wants to use them and make the bathrooms unisex otherwise.

Actually, the other problem could be if you destroy one of the toilets and get caught by a girl you fancy coming out. That would be embarrassing. And if it happened the other way around probably worse.

pumpkin4life

Anyway, I was reading the article there. The changing facilities, fùck that, that's peanuts. Take a look at this quote.

Ms Zappone is also expected to announce her support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender history to be included on the school curriculum.

No words.

WinnyThePoo

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Anyway, I was reading the article there. The changing facilities, fùck that, that's peanuts. Take a look at this quote.






No words.

It's funny how Zappone seems to scare the **** out of Conservatives and turn them into little snowflakes.

eviltwin

Don't see the problem with unisex bathrooms at all. I remember a well known club I went to in the mid 90's had them. Every place I've worked has had them. Some people panic at the idea of it. Why?

Caliden

Just pee with the cubical door open.

Walls and doors are a human construct. Everyone should be comfortable around each other.

topper75

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I grew up with gender neutral toilets in MY OWN HOME. :mad:

How many stalls? Used you hear the ould lad groaning out a hefty when you were taking a whizz?

topper75

Caliden wrote: »

Just pee with the cubical door open.

Walls and doors are a human construct. Everyone should be comfortable around each other.

I'll see your human construct, and raise you 'gender neutral'. :pac:

ThinkProgress

eviltwin wrote: »

Don't see the problem with unisex bathrooms at all. I remember a well known club I went to in the mid 90's had them. Every place I've worked has had them. Some people panic at the idea of it. Why?

I've seen the state that many women can leave a bathroom in... so I'm not too keen on sharing that particular public space with them tbh!!

pumpkin4life

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

It's funny how Zappone seems to scare the **** out of Conservatives and turn them into little snowflakes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

WinnyThePoo

pumpkin4life wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Oh your the one with the problem here.

The J Stands for Jay

Bob24 wrote: »

If it is in an individual room with both a regular toilet and a urinal which can be used by only one person at a time, it defeats the purpose of the urinal (which would be to take up less space than a full toilet and increase speed/capacity).
If it is urinal(s) in a public area of the toilets ... clearly not gonna work. Bar some exibitionists, lads don’t want the ladies to look at them while they are doing their thing, and most ladies wouldn’t enjoy the sight very much either.

So toilets with urinals are a male only toilets or are pointless.

It was just a regular gents with loads of urinals and loads of cubicles. They just changed the sign on the door from 'Gents' to 'Unisex'. There was no other toilets in that area, so this must have been the solution to having no female toilets nearby.

Franz Von Peppercorn

eviltwin wrote: »

Don't see the problem with unisex bathrooms at all. I remember a well known club I went to in the mid 90's had them. Every place I've worked has had them. Some people panic at the idea of it. Why?

Were they communal stalls?

Your single occupancy toilet tends to be gender neutral. For obvious reasons this isn’t comparable to communal toilets or showers.

Red_Wake

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Anyway, I was reading the article there. The changing facilities, fùck that, that's peanuts. Take a look at this quote.






No words.

It's funny how Zappone seems to scare the **** out of Conservatives and turn them into little snowflakes.

Altering the educational curriculum to support a person political agenda is very dangerous. Especially subjects such as history.

Why not include the pogroms against Protestants in the immediate post independence period? Why does LGBT historical marginalisation get in ahead of other cases? How much time will be spent on this? Where would the time come out of - would parts of the curriculum detailing the famine, the troubles, etc be reduced to satisfy Zappone's political agenda.

It also sets a dangerous precedent for future ministers to interfere with other subjects - could a future ministers to interfere with the Science subjects to promote a personal belief in Intelligent Design vs Evolution by forcing them to be given parity within the course? We laugh at the Americans when they do this, but Zappone could be engaging in the exact same behaviour, just on a different topic.

I'll admit I dislike Zappone, she's escaped the Maurice McCabe unscathed, despite being in charge of TUSLA during the period in which they went rogue.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Red_Wake wrote: »

Altering the educational curriculum to support a person political agenda is very dangerous. Especially subjects such as history.

Why not include the pogroms against Protestants in the immediate post independence period? Why does LGBT historical marginalisation get in ahead of other cases? How much time will be spent on this? Where would the time come out of - would parts of the curriculum detailing the famine, the troubles, etc be reduced to satisfy Zappone's political agenda.

It also sets a dangerous precedent for future ministers to interfere with other subjects - could a future ministers to interfere with the Science subjects to promote a personal belief in Intelligent Design vs Evolution by forcing them to be given parity within the course? We laugh at the Americans when they do this, but Zappone could be engaging in the exact same behaviour, just on a different topic.

I'll admit I dislike Zappone, she's escaped the Maurice McCabe unscathed, despite being in charge of TUSLA during the period in which they went rogue.

Protestants? I doubt if the previous history of British rule will ever be discussed.

It will be “you’re all white heteronormative cis privileged **** and have always been white heteronormative cis privileged ****”.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Oh your the one with the problem here.

OP would beg to disagree.

yourdeadwright

So what the crack I your at a urinal with your flute out and some girl walks in ?
Court case waiting to happen there " he flashed me "

Franz Von Peppercorn

yourdeadwright wrote: »

So what the crack I your at a urinal with your flute out and some girl walks in ?
Court case waiting to happen there " he flashed me "

She flashed me with her penis.

Please. We’ve moved on.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Or maybe Ze flashed me. Can’t keep up.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

yourdeadwright wrote: »

So what the crack I your at a urinal with your flute out and some girl walks in ?
Court case waiting to happen there " he flashed me "

Can you clarify: if you've "got your flute out" or are peeing discretely....?

Pepefrogok

Will there also be hangers? You know for the attack helicopters?

yourdeadwright

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

So what the crack I your at a urinal with your flute out and some girl walks in ?
Court case waiting to happen there " he flashed me "

Can you clarify: if you've "got your flute out" or are peeing discretely....?

Well unless your peeing on yourself and on your trousers it would have to be out ?
Maybe you haven't mastered it yet sorry ,

tretorn

We arent just talking about toilets here, anyone using the sports centre can choose to use either men or womens changing rooms, that means sex offenders and paedophiles can claim they are transgender and get access to where women and children undress.

Of course the usual reply will be, we had rape before we accommodated transwomen in female changing rooms,!!!!!

Hande hoche!

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Will there also be hangers? You know for the attack helicopters?

The osprey feels like a transgender aircraft.

yourdeadwright

tretorn wrote: »

We arent just talking about toilets here, anyone using the sports centre can choose to use either men or womens changing rooms, that means sex offenders and paedophiles can claim they are transgender and get access to where women and children undress.

Of course the usual reply will be, we had rape before we accommodated transwomen in female changing rooms,!!!!!

Does it include the shower area's  or are they singular showers ?
Jesus seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen .

DickSwiveller

This is a political statement more than anything. It's all about furthering the cultural marxist goal of eliminating gender and pretending that men and women are indistinguishable. This is just their latest cause.

The Legend Of Kira

Pc gone mad once again-strongly disagree with this move, one of the purposes of separate bathrooms for both genders is privacy for the two genders,, example if a woman or girl is in the bathroom looking in the mirror fixing her makeup she don,t need a fellow walking into the same bathroom shes in as it may likely make her feel uncomfortable or vice versa if a guy is using a urinal he don,t need a woman or girl walking in him taking a p***,,  + Id have to question could such a scenario be classed as indecent exposure or something along those lines ?

This story from Australia is worth reading,, one guy was all in favour of gender neutral bathrooms until he found himself uncomfortable one night after using one.

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/headlines/i-was-fully-pro-gender-neutral-bathrooms-until-i-had-to-take-a-****-in-a-nightclub/