weird ("de-gendered toilet" controversy)

edited October 2008 in General Chat
this is at the universiy i am at, but just read this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7643175.stm

i laughed so hard. political correctness needs to die

EDIT: i swear i put this in the general discussion to start with, sorry mods.

Comments

  • edited October 2008
    I'd laugh if it wasn't so disturbing. So now every time anyone makes any sort of crazy claim, we have to accommodate them?
  • edited October 2008
    after hearing some people (mainly women) in my uni talking about this and they feel both disgusted and violated by this, i can see where this comes from. my main problem with this is that it caters to the minority as always, i am sure that there are more women with a problem with this than those that are "gender challenged"
  • edited October 2008
    I dunno

    The result of this is services which are flexible to a variety of diverse individuals, provides people with a choice of facilities, and can provide comfort when one option is currently unappealing.

    I don't really see a reason to stick to the old categorization, myself. What benefits does it provide?

    I don't see why something being a minority is reason to marginalize them, either. "You're too few in number to have a voice that matters against an arbitrary value scale"?

    Do only the majority have any rights? Why not treat every individual evenly?

    As said in the article, an amount of people did voice discomfort at their current predicament so they did something about them.

    I don't see what makes people aside from them "matter more", or they themselves "matter less". They're all individual people.
  • edited October 2008
    It just sounds like a recipe for disaster. I'm sure sooner or later, a lad is going to walk into the "toilets" as a dare or a bet or simply because he doesn't realise that he should be using "toilets with urinals" instead of "toilets" (that's more of a problem with the naming scheme though).
    It's embarassing for everyone involved and I don't see what's wrong with the traditional system.

    I sympathise with people who don't feel comfortable with their gender, but at the end of the day, barring a sex change operation, they are who they are. I'd feel a bit uncomfortable if I had girls budging past me whilst I did my stuff, and I'm pretty sure most girls'd feel the same.

    Probably the best way to deal with it would be to open separate unisex toilets for people, but that means more money, time and space is taken up.
  • edited October 2008
    Badwolf wrote: »
    It just sounds like a recipe for disaster. I'm sure sooner or later, a lad is going to walk into the "toilets" as a dare or a bet or simply because he doesn't realise that he should be using "toilets with urinals" instead of "toilets" (that's more of a problem with the naming scheme though).
    It's embarassing for everyone involved and I don't see what's wrong with the traditional system.

    I read the idea as both rooms being free for use by any person, not simply "renamed".

    Both rooms have toilets, one also has urinals. Hence the naming.

    They're not "mens" and "womens" rooms anymore, they're just bathrooms for anyone.
  • edited October 2008
    So what's the point of having the two rooms then?
  • edited October 2008
    Badwolf wrote: »
    So what's the point of having the two rooms then?

    they're both already there, and one likely offers more toliets

    maybe someone doesnt want to use one with urinals, or maybe someone is looking for one specifically with urinals
  • edited October 2008
    This... is pretty silly. I think it's totally unnecessary to relabel the restrooms as such. If anything, I say pick whichever gender's restroom feels more comfortable for you. If anybody gives you beef over it, explain your perspective to them. If they understand, good. If they don't, well, that person is a jerk.

    We could also just do away with the entire social taboo of men and women using the same room for relief. Where did that come from anyways? Off the top of my head I can't think of any 'evolutionary' advantage for that sort of separation. The only really good reason I can think of is "because that's the way it is." When I was young, I often made the mistake of walking into the wrong restroom, but it didn't bother me until people began to yell at me about it. I figured I may as well listen to them, rather than be yelled at. Still, I can't seem to figure out exactly when or why that social taboo arose, or if its even necessary.

    Grah! This is all so confusing. I pine for the simpler days when I could run through the yard naked and jump through the sprinkler in my birthday suit and people wouldn't call the police if they saw it. Damn adulthood!
  • edited October 2008
    I don't really see a reason to stick to the old categorization, myself. What benefits does it provide?
    Do only the majority have any rights? Why not treat every individual evenly?

    The problem is that the current trend is to always cater to every claimed minority even when their claim is ludicrous. I agree with the suggestion that people simply use whichever restroom they feel comfortable with, and I'd add that if you have any doubts, look down next time you're in the shower :p
  • edited October 2008
    they're both already there, and one likely offers more toliets

    maybe someone doesnt want to use one with urinals, or maybe someone is looking for one specifically with urinals

    Then they might as well knock the wall between them out and make it one room.

    But if people are going to be fussy about going into a room with urinals, even if they don't want to use them, it seems a bit daft. I barely use urinals because I like having the privacy of a cubicle, but I wouldn't go out of my way to use a toilet without urinals if I had the choice.
    Do only the majority have any rights? Why not treat every individual evenly?

    Apparently a lot of individuals don't really want to share toilets with the other gender. Why should they be ignored?
  • edited October 2008
    this has been released
    http://www.umsu.manchester.ac.uk/pdf/pressrelease.pdf

    i think the idea of male female and a gender neutral toilet is a better idea, by far.
  • edited October 2008
    This is retarded. If you're born a male, no matter how many operations and hormones you take you'll always be a male (and vice versa)

    Soon calling someone a man or a woman will be considered an insult.
  • edited October 2008
    xChri5x wrote: »
    This is retarded. If you're born a male, no matter how many operations and hormones you take you'll always be a male (and vice versa)

    Soon calling someone a man or a woman will be considered an insult.
    That's already an insult where I live. Actually, talking to people is considered an insult.
  • edited October 2008
    That's already an insult where I live. Actually, talking to people is considered an insult.

    Hello, 16_BIT_MARIO! Oops... I'm sorry! Please forgive me!!
  • edited October 2008
    patters wrote: »
    i think the idea of male female and a gender neutral toilet is a better idea, by far.

    Definitely, yeah. Saves a lot of embarassment for everyone.

    This is retarded. If you're born a male, no matter how many operations and hormones you take you'll always be a male (and vice versa)

    I'll have to disagree with this though. I've seen people who have been miserable with who they are, and after having the gender reassignment op, it's given them a tonne more self-confidence.
    I'm not saying everyone who's feeling a bit down should become a girl or vice versa, but it's helped quite a few people, and to put it the way you are is more than a bit harsh.
  • edited October 2008
    Do only the majority have any rights? Why not treat every individual evenly?

    Because you can't treat everyone equally. As the saying goes, you can't please all the people all the time. Obviously, many people were upset by this decision that was made without consulting them beforehand. How was that fair to them?

    And that's what irritates me the most about this story. That such an action was taken without consulting the people it would affect. If they had put it to a vote, and the majority had said, "Sure, make them unisex," there wouldn't be a problem. But there was no vote, or even an informal survey. Just a group of people deciding they had the moral high ground.
  • edited October 2008
    At this point I am left with nothing to say but, see my signature.
  • edited October 2008
    That green-haired girl is mad!
  • edited October 2008
    It's not a girl! It's a man! Well, man enough to use the men's toilets.
  • edited October 2008
    That green-haired girl is mad!

    i would happily agree
  • edited October 2008
    Look on the broight* side! At least you can't get screamed at for walking into the wrong room!

    *I actually typed it like this. Am I channeling Coach Z?
  • edited October 2008
    I'd totally wander into the "gents".. wait.. toilets with urinals... because hey, no gender? Fair game! Sure a whole lot of guys will be like "HOLY CRAP GIRL!" and pee on their shoes but is that my problem? mwhahahaha.

    This girl is mad with power. I mean, I object to women's officers anyway (our uni now has the "woman's liberation officer" which makes me think of bra burning in the amphitheatre) because honestly.. why do we meek feeble girlies need so much protecting? we're all big girls and we can fight our own sodding battles thank you very much. Hell, I managed to get through uni as a woman AND a mother.. OMG! NO! hah. I did just fine, why? because my gender doesn't make me incapable of standing up for myself. But that's another matter entirely.

    The point is, would a transgender student prefer to use the toilet that matched their gender identity rather than their biological sex? Who would know the difference or CARE if a transgender male to female used the womans loo because GASP, they identify as female!
    If anything it's insulting to make them unisex because it's implying that a transgender person is some other gender than the one they identify with. To a male to female transexual they ARE female, telling them otherwise is ignorant and insensitive frankly.

    This... is pretty silly. I think it's totally unnecessary to relabel the restrooms as such. If anything, I say pick whichever gender's restroom feels more comfortable for you. If anybody gives you beef over it, explain your perspective to them. If they understand, good. If they don't, well, that person is a jerk. - EXACTLY! If you really do identify as a woman then why can't you use the ladies? if you identify as male go use the cubicles in the mens! Who the hell cares? Are you really going to come out of a cubical and go "OMG! there was a man dressed as a lady in the cubicle next door! I feel violated!" no! it makes no sense to be! renaming the toilets however doesn't solve the problem. Gender and sex are different, get over it. Why get uncomfortable about it? If you think you should be a woman then use the woman's toilets. transgender students still identify as a particular gender and both mens and womans loos have cubicles if you want a little privacy. If it's really a problem, use the sodding disabled loo which is always unisex! (I know I know, some people will go "omg but that's like saying i'm disabled because I was born the wrong sex!" but no, it's just a logical solution. I use the disabled loo all the time because you can't get a bloody pushchair into a normal cubicle.

    I do honestly wonder how many transgender students were actually troubled by the whole thing in reality. It just seems rather strange. I mean... doesn't the whole coping with idiots prejudice go with the whole territory anyway? Grow a thicker skin because renaming the toilet isn't going to change people's views. You'll still get dicks who give you crap for being how you are and making toilets gender neutral wont change that. It wont suddenly make prejudice go away, it wont even do it in the long run because in the back of everyone's heads they know that urinal means man, toilet on it's own means lady. Somantics wont change that.
    I agree with her point that a woman who thinks she's a man should be able to use the mens but in the end, is renaming the loo going to actually make that happen? NO!

    hahaha mad is disablist.. that's fantastic. Mad mad mad! Craaaazy!
  • edited October 2008
    OO wait! The student rp nationals are in Manchester next year... if they still have the neutral loos i'll let you guys know the reaction I get when I wander into the gents as a very very obvious female.. mwhahahahahaha.

    What? I like to stir trouble. I'm a brat.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.