Only through unfairness can fairness be achieved!

I'm noticing a very peculiar trend in restrooms lately. In government buildings, I am seeing floor after floor in which there are two types of restrooms, labeled thusly:

Women's Restroom

and

Unisex Restroom

While it's not the biggest deal in the world, I find myself having no other choice than to use the unisex restroom, but I wondered why women would have restrooms which no one else is allowed to use. Is this some sort of twisted implementation of "potty parity"?
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held hearings Wednesday on the "Potty Parity Act," a bill that seeks to address the unequal number of restroom facilities for women in federal buildings by requiring at least a 1-to-1 ratio for toilets, including urinals, in women's and men's restrooms.
Obviously the elimination of men's rooms (by simply converting them to "unisex") achieves such parity without much expense, because it allows women to use 100% of the toilets, while forbidding men from using half of them. Unless men object, women are thus over-enabled, and the "problem" is solved.

This seems about as "fair" as removing urinals. (Never mind that the latter save water.)

In the waiting room at New York's Grand Central Station, the new bathrooms are women-only.

Can anyone imagine the outcry if the new bathrooms were for men only?

What I can't understand is why it would be unfair from a potty parity standpoint to simply convert all restrooms to unisex. The problem seems to be that women take longer than men, which has led political demands that there be more toilets for women than men, but has anyone looked at the idea of making all toilets equally available to both sexes? If women take more time, then the resultant longer wait time would be equally distributed among both sexes, and OTOH, if men take less time, then the shorter wait time would also be distributed equally.

But I don't think the objection to all unisex would be grounded in mathematics or fairness. I think the most likely objection would be from women who don't want men in their "private" spaces -- even when the private spaces are not theirs, as I learned firsthand when I "invaded" a men's room which women had taken over. This is irrational, but it is deeply ingrained in our culture. There are also legitimate fears of crime and sexual perverts -- but even if we assume that the vast majority of criminals and perverts are men, by what standard should only men have to tolerate them in their supposedly private spaces?

Regardless of how they sort out the details of this pressing issue of national urgency, I think that having only women's restrooms, but no men's restrooms is a bad idea, as it will lead to callused civil disobedience of the sort described here.

Or this.

unisexdumpster.jpg

I gotta go.

UPDATE (6/05/10): Wow, I was gone all day and only now I'm seeing these great comments.

Thank you, Glenn Reynolds for the link, and a warm welcome to all!

Comments appreciated, agree or disagree.

posted by Eric on 06.03.10 at 11:37 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/9712






Comments

My horrifically sexist theory is that American law, freed of its former obligation to the Constitution, is mutating into a form of primal female self-expression, because that's who votes, and voting is a primal identification with power per se.

So these empirical, logical, and human-decency objections of yours are impertinent. The queenly id is not to be reasoned with! It's to be heard roaring.

"Mine!"

guy on internet   ·  June 3, 2010 01:11 PM

The worst part is soon our restrooms will have those little garbages overflowing with hygene products falling on the floor. Before the worst body fluid we had to worry about was urine on the seats.

At a local lesbian karaoke bar my friends and I go to, our female friends always use the men's room. You don't even want to go in the ladies room, or even stand near it, it is that bad.

plutosdad   ·  June 3, 2010 01:31 PM

My workplace handled it rather well, IMO (yes, yes, I know about all the puns. Most of the time I'm the one making those jokes). All the toilets are one person rooms, one is male only, one is female only, and the other two are unisex.

Yes, women do take more time, especially women who are dressed up - believe me, when you're dealing with pantyhose and skirts and the like it takes a LOT longer than just taking down jeans and underpants. Freud got it right and wrong - I do have penis envy, but it's for the PLUMBING, not anything sexual.

Kate   ·  June 3, 2010 01:47 PM

Plutosdad, why does a lesbian karaoke bar even have a men's room? If the women use it, won't it be just as dirty as the women's room?

Kate, what's the point of having sexed single-person rooms? Why not have all 4 be unisex?

Bob Smith   ·  June 3, 2010 05:04 PM

Remember, it's not sexist if it benefits women.

Trimegistus   ·  June 3, 2010 05:22 PM

As a female I know it takes us a little longer. because of it, the line at events are the longest. Having said that, do we really need a law? This is just silly.

up late   ·  June 3, 2010 08:05 PM

Bob,

Mostly I think because they needed more space for the females since an internal shuffle doubled the number of females working in that area, but budget is tight so they didn't want to change ALL the signs. Changing from 3 male 1 female to 1 of each and two unisex meant only two signs had to change instead of 4. (Yes, the budget really is that tight)

Kate

Kate   ·  June 4, 2010 10:49 AM

I just read the bill. The author is a fool. Even if this had merit in some areas, it is a stupid one size fit all solution. For example, it does not exclude men's prisons or military bases in combat areas.

Bob   ·  June 5, 2010 02:51 PM

The New England Patriots opened their new stadium in 2002 with the same number of men's and women's bathrooms to be 'fair'. After a season of long lines at men's rooms with empty women's restrooms and imported portable toilet stalls in a multimillion dollar stadium, they reassigned toilets to account for the gender imbalance of their fans.

Must be a good sign for feminism when even the mundane, trivial things are 'addressed'.

Mr M   ·  June 5, 2010 03:07 PM

Yes, but, it isn't just the longer time. Women have more stuff to deal with, fergossake.

Please don't ask me to be specific.

Give us our space, and you can have yours.

Sissy Willis   ·  June 5, 2010 03:09 PM

Frankly, I've seen empirical data to support the Woman's and Unisex model. The 1984 "Band Aid" concert comes to mind. The women lined up at the "women's" room and the toilet side of the "men's" (there was a "water fight" going on in the urinal side).

Neo   ·  June 5, 2010 03:35 PM

I guess none of you guys has stood behind an old fart at a urinal. They can take a very, very loong time.

BPH   ·  June 5, 2010 03:53 PM

It is a valid complaint, but the end result of making an issue of this will not be that they add more mens bathrooms. The result will be that they make more of them unisex. So great, everybody can now be unhappy with perv's and peek-ers slinking around the stalls.

Rachel   ·  June 5, 2010 04:16 PM

Women can play in all "Men's" sports... yet they have their own "special" sports as well. This is in spite of the fact few women are interested in sports.

So they get theirs, and half of ours. This seems to be another example...

Funny how that works.

DANEgerus   ·  June 5, 2010 04:19 PM

And women also take more time because dare I suggest they change more diapers?

Sandy P   ·  June 5, 2010 04:23 PM

Woman's restrooms DO have urinals. Only most people think they are sinks. Be practical people! The best urinals are at Wrigley Field, in Chicago. Those are aluminum tanks about 12 feet long. Just stand elbow to elbow with your buddies, and have a good time. No place for "shy bladders" there.

And yes, women think they get half of what men have, and get to keep all of what they have. Don't have a cow over this when the milk is free.

MilwaukeeD   ·  June 5, 2010 04:31 PM

If they convert the mens rooms to unisex rooms I fully intend to leave the seat up as well as leave a trail of urine from the toilet all the way to the door.

KLH   ·  June 5, 2010 04:34 PM

As Bart Simpson said (and your photo illustrates), the world is my toilet. Thanks ladies!

LAG   ·  June 5, 2010 05:00 PM

As a white guy and the father of a white guy, I have experienced discrimination a lot more significant than this that I want addressed first.

Old Guy   ·  June 5, 2010 05:47 PM

Back in the olden days, 1700's and 1800's, they had pissing posts. These worked real good for the guys to make a number 1. Time to bring them back.

chaz   ·  June 5, 2010 06:25 PM

My son, who is 15, surprised me today by stating that the world is rigged against men. I have been careful not to say things like that, I have merely encouraged him to be a boy (hunt, fish, make stuff, etc) so he didn't get it from me, and I'm damn sure he didn't get it from my ex.

If a 15 year old boy has figured out that the world is rigged against males then WHAT THE HELL ARE WE DOING!

Charlie

Charlie   ·  June 5, 2010 09:11 PM

I went to use the bathroom at a school event, recently. There were equal number of men and women in attendance, and two single use bathrooms, one for each. I was behind one woman with three kids, one needing a diaper change. We waited, and waited, and waited. Finally, a woman with two kids came out all at once. Two men came, and left in the time. The woman with three kids took forever, I assume, because all had to go and the baby needed a changing. See if you are smart enough to see why women need more bathroom units. (Hint: the women have the kids -- both sexes). Ever waited while your newly potty trained toddler finished her business? They can sit forever. If you dare to hurry them up, all the other women look at you like you are some kind of child abuser. At several multi unit stalls with lines, I have seen one woman makes herself queen of the bathroom, and refuse to let anyone use the handicapped stall "in case a handicapped person comes in and wants to use it." So the line builds, and 1/3 of the stalls sits vacant, unused.

sportutegirl   ·  June 5, 2010 10:15 PM

KLH: Sorry, but by law, you will have to put the seat back down in unisex bathrooms.

sportutegirl, I'm puzzled. Was your comment truly meant to serve as justification for more women's bathroom units? (Hint: "women look at you", "one woman makes herself queen"...)

Joe   ·  June 6, 2010 01:52 AM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


June 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits