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

manual_man

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

I studied at a British university where, in less enlightened times, they still had gender based facilities.

Interestingly, there were holes in the dividers between all the male cubicles in the library.

I guess the university wanted us to have a chat with each other while we were dropping the kids of at the pool.

I made many friends that way.

What glorious times!

And i'd always wondered where the term "shíte talk" came from.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I find the debate gets slippery when the subject turns to communal spaces. Clearly nobody cares about single occupancy toilets. They have nearly always been gender neutral in public and are of course neutral in most people’s houses. The number of geniuses making the point here that their house had a gender neutral toilet was as dumb as is was repitious.

The question is about communal spaces - communal toilets and changing rooms. What happens there?

The debate isn't about gender-neutral changing rooms - if there's undressing and/or nudity, that's a completely different situation.

All toilets are single-occupancy. Bathrooms, point taken - but they aren't deisgnated as safe spaces, either. That would be a different issue again.

ceadaoin.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I'm assuming that all toilets are fully enclose cubicles (not sure why the sink needs to be inside though).

Not really sure these reasons are a sign of a country being 'fecked', but I accept your points. Still, there are plenty of establishments which, due to size or other reason, can only offer unisex toilets. Having to share is a nessecity at that point. As posters have pointed out, most people's homes have unisex toilets: if I don't like sharing the same toilet as my flatmate because of opposing genders, I'd be crazy to expect someone to build me a second gender-specific toilet. (I know we're talking a large institution here, but the principle is the same).

How is the principle the same? You know your flatmate and share a home with them. A public toilet is shared with strangers. I mean, I share a bedroom with my husband so going by your logic I should be ok sharing a hotel room with a stranger too if there was such a necessity?

The_Brood

To the mods: Objective truth and scientific facts does not make one a "dick." Science doesn't care about your feelings.

And btw I self-identify as the administrator of this website, and so I order you to remove the ridiculous mod warning. If you disagree than you are (fill in blank)-phobic and I will be reporting you to the Minister for Children and equality for your lack of tolerance and acceptance.


banned - but you're an admin so you should be able to reverse it easy enough

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

ceadaoin. wrote: »

How is the principle the same? You know your flatmate and share a home with them. A public toilet is shared with strangers. I mean, I share a bedroom with my husband so going by your logic I should be ok sharing a hotel room with a stranger too if there was such a necessity?

You don't share it with anyone at the same time, is my point (well, ok - maybe if you're married, but you know what I mean!)

In any case, all this is getting away from my question: why is it needed? You have a single room with a toilet and a sink - why does there need to be a designation of male or female?

And we're talking toikets here - not bathrooms or dressing rooms.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The_Brood wrote: »

To the mods: Objective truth and scientific facts does not make one a "dick." Science doesn't care about your feelings.

While I'm not sure I agree with the decisions to ban, there was was most certainly no objective truth or scientific facts offered up by the banned parties. One of them pretended to, in the form of loaded questions and bogus claims, but declined to provide scientific evidence on more than one occasion, before he was banned.

ceadaoin.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You don't share it with anyone at the same time, is my point (well, ok - maybe if you're married, but you know what I mean!)

self contained single occupancy bathrooms like how disabled ones normally are - fine. I have no problem with those being unisex. Standard public toilet with several cubicles and shared sinks being unisex- no.

In fairness though maybe I coming at it from the perspective of someone who lives in the US there the toilet stalls offer zero privacy and can easily be seen into

I thought your earlier post was questioning why we need sex segregated public toilets at all, not just the ones that are one toilet and fully private

GritBiscuit

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The question is about communal spaces - communal toilets and changing rooms. What happens there?

My local pool was purpose built with cubicle style changing rooms, each with a little bench in them...some family sized - and a couple of rooms for splitting school kids into genders without losing them in separate cubicles. There are shower cubicles and a row of showers open to the pool for rinsing off with cozzie still on. Works like a charm.

Think we're still a bit away from communal toilets...

Cookie_Monster

Bob24 wrote: »

The DIT ones in their full glory:

when did being in a wheelchair become a gender type?

jaxxx

I don't wanna live in this world anymore... Such an obsession these days with 'labels'. Hetero, homo, trans, white, black, Muslim, Christian, Irish, Chinese, etc etc etc. WTF does any of that crap actually matter, the only thing that matters is that you're a human end of, everything else is just a variable. Doesn't matter a monkey's c*ck what colour you are, what gender you think should be, what religion you have, where you're born. Enough with the god damn labelling!

That being said, I don't think I'm human. Seemingly I'm allergic to all this senseless, illogical trivial crap that's going on in the world. Take me home please, whether it's Mars, Mercury, Venus or some other planet trillions of lightyears away in some far off galaxy...

Arghus

More potential places to pee and poop if caught in a desperate situation - how could you not be in favour of it!

Yer Da sells Avon

The_Brood wrote: »

To the mods: Objective truth and scientific facts does not make one a "dick." Science doesn't care about your feelings.

Not caring about people's feelings, and using "science" as an excuse, makes one a dick.

Just be kind. Life's way simpler that way.

Cookie_Monster

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

when did being in a wheelchair become a gender type?

Probably the same time all of these did;

1. Wheelchair-User
2. Cross-Dresser
3. Drag-King
4. Drag-Queen
5. Femme Queen
6. Female-to-Male
7. FTM
8. Gender Bender
9. Genderqueer
10. Male-To-Female
11. MTF
12. Non-Op
13. Hijra
14. Pangender
15. Transexual/Transsexual
16. Trans Person
17. Woman
18. Man
19. Butch
20. Two-Spirit
21. Trans
22. Agender
23. Third Sex
24. Gender Fluid
25. Non-Binary Transgender
26. Androgyne
27. Gender-Gifted
28. Gender Bender
29. Femme
30. Person of Transgender Experience
31. Androgynous

I'm surprised it took until 2018 but we've finally reached the point where stating scientific facts results in a ban. Fortunately, the WHO's next ICD-11 will recategorise it under “Conditions Related to Sexual Health” instead of “Mental and Behavioural Disorders”, due to the stigma attached with it's current classification.

It will be nice to be allowed reference the World Health Organisation again without receiving a ban when it gets released later this year, and I applaud the mods here for being one step ahead of the WHO, by quite ironically, being antiscience.



As to the toilets, let people piss where they want. We mocked America for having this debate and now we're doing the same.

Annasopra

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

when did being in a wheelchair become a gender type?

How come wheelchair users havent being complaining about their toilets being used by the other gender/sex for decades?

koumi

I just woke up from a weird nightmarish dream, been sitting here drinking a coffee trying to figure it out then I saw this thread and it all made sense. I witnessed some guy kill the Stig in a clothes shop changing room. It was fairly unceremonious, the killer was some randomer who just decided to climb over the changing room cubicle and slay the Stig by lopping off his head (still in helmet) which then rolled out onto the shop floor as he pulled across the curtain to leave said cubicle. He stood proudly over the body and even had a last stamp on the corpse so as not to demonstrate any kind of remorse.

I call him the Stig because ironically, he was dressed a helmet and white suit and completely non identifiable. That's the part that didn't make sense until now. An anonymous victim, in a changing room, killed on the whim of some proud young rager who obviously believed his actions were justifiable.



*sips coffee


Also, my campus has been gender neutral since last year, UCD a bit behind the times.

Sleeper12

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

when did being in a wheelchair become a gender type?

We dont have wheelchair toilets.

We have disabled toilets

Not all disabled people are in wheelchairs

Disabled toilets have been gender neutral/unisex for decades

circadian

I knew what was going to happen, but still. Why did I open this thread?

Sleeper12

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm surprised it took until 2018 but we've finally reached the point where stating scientific facts results in a ban. Fortunately, the WHO's next ICD-11 will recategorise it under “Conditions Related to Sexual Health” instead of “Mental and Behavioural Disorders”, due to the stigma attached with it's current classification.

It will be nice to be allowed reference the World Health Organisation again without receiving a ban when it gets released later this year, and I applaud the mods here for being one step ahead of the WHO, by quite ironically, being antiscience.



As to the toilets, let people piss where they want. We mocked America for having this debate and now we're doing the same.

I mocked America for having this debate because the southern states loved the idea of separate toilets & everything else for Blacks. They actually marched & rioted to try protect this practice. Then a few decades later they don't want gender neutral toilets.

Struck me as a bit hypocritical & ignorant to me. Maybe thats just me

koumi

I knew what was going to happen, but still. Why did I open this thread?

me either but I hope they start making arrests soon

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

As to the toilets, let people piss where they want. We mocked America for having this debate and now we're doing the same.

Oddly enough, some of us didn't mock America about this debate. Not that we were concerned or afraid, but rather that we were/are interested how it might develop and affect their society. It's still very much early days, and yet, it seems we're all in a rush to accept the changes before the effects are known.

I don't have an issue with anyone who is trans. I don't really care about what they do to themselves. I only care about how it impacts on my life and those of my family. Now, a large part of this is about familiarity. I've known one trans person so far. I haven't met many previously, we all tend to be a bit uncomfortable with the unfamiliar, and I'm sure that we will become more comfortable as they become a more common experience.

Still, I should be allowed to be concerned as to where this will all go. Unisex toilets are fine. I really don't mind the cubicles aspect, but that will just be the first step. They will demand more access to other areas (communal areas, dressing rooms, shower areas in gyms) as part of their rights, and we should be prepared for that.

Debating this topic allows us to determine where the line should be drawn. I get that trans (or whatever identification they have) people have their rights, but we have are own rights too. My rights don't disappear just because someone chose to change their gender. That's not transphobic although some will consider it such, just to shut down debate or other peoples opinions. While I would support them having the same access to cubicles as the rest of us, I would be against them being in a shower area that I was in. Just as most women would object to men sharing the same shower area.

Debate of this subject is healthy. And IMO necessary. Our societies seem to be "in the mood" to rush into implementing social change without considering how it affects other people, and what further changes will come afterward.

Grayson

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It’s had them for centuries. Must have been a reason.

Strangely we didn't. Toilets for women were considered unsightly. Ladies didn't pee. Of course that was the 1800's. Before that people just sh1t or pissed on the street.

Grayson

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I find the debate gets slippery when the subject turns to communal spaces. Clearly nobody cares about single occupancy toilets. They have nearly always been gender neutral in public and are of course neutral in most people’s houses. The number of geniuses making the point here that their house had a gender neutral toilet was as dumb as is was repitious.

The question is about communal spaces - communal toilets and changing rooms. What happens there?

I'm not sue if they'e still there but the pool in maynooth had communal changing rooms. The changing facilities consisted of a load of separate shower booths were you could also change. Those wee nearly a hundred years old.

Where I work has something similar. A load of little changing rooms for people who cycle to work and shower when they get there.

dalyboy

Deleted User wrote: »

Oddly enough, some of us didn't mock America about this debate. Not that we were concerned or afraid, but rather that we were/are interested how it might develop and affect their society. It's still very much early days, and yet, it seems we're all in a rush to accept the changes before the effects are known.

I don't have an issue with anyone who is trans. I don't really care about what they do to themselves. I only care about how it impacts on my life and those of my family. Now, a large part of this is about familiarity. I've known one trans person so far. I haven't met many previously, we all tend to be a bit uncomfortable with the unfamiliar, and I'm sure that we will become more comfortable as they become a more common experience.

Still, I should be allowed to be concerned as to where this will all go. Unisex toilets are fine. I really don't mind the cubicles aspect, but that will just be the first step. They will demand more access to other areas (communal areas, dressing rooms, shower areas in gyms) as part of their rights, and we should be prepared for that.

Debating this topic allows us to determine where the line should be drawn. I get that trans (or whatever identification they have) people have their rights, but we have are own rights too. My rights don't disappear just because someone chose to change their gender. That's not transphobic although some will consider it such, just to shut down debate or other peoples opinions. While I would support them having the same access to cubicles as the rest of us, I would be against them being in a shower area that I was in. Just as most women would object to men sharing the same shower area.

Debate of this subject is healthy. And IMO necessary. Our societies seem to be "in the mood" to rush into implementing social change without considering how it affects other people, and what further changes will come afterward.

Too right , No offense is being targeted at trans people but with knee jerk and poorly planned solutions we are going to draw out aggressive responses to trans people. Most important thing you said is WE NEED TO DRAW A LINE. If this progresses to the idea that anyone and everyone can freely walk into the opposite genders OPEN PLAN changing and shower facilities in gyms/pools etc then I for one will not stand for it. Our female population (young and old) will be exposed to dangers that are unacceptable. Its not like all of a sudden perverts and paedophiles will just disappear if these facilities are made "gender neutral"

koumi

dalyboy wrote: »

Too right , No offense is being targeted at trans people but with knee jerk and poorly planned solutions we are going to draw out aggressive responses to trans people. Most important thing you said is WE NEED TO DRAW A LINE. If this progresses to the idea that anyone and everyone can freely walk into the opposite genders OPEN PLAN changing and shower facilities in gyms/pools etc then I for one will not stand for it. Our female population (young and old) will be exposed to dangers that are unacceptable. Its not like all of a sudden perverts and paedophiles will just disappear if these facilities are made "gender neutral"

I'd say it might be difficult to have an open discussion as I very much doubt any trans people here would be willing to enter into one given the direction of the thread. They've already been diagnosed as mentally ill and have to respond to comments on issues such as how they can make sure that women and children won't be exposed to unacceptable dangers they may pose given they are possible rapists, pedophiles, perverts and deviants.

As an aside, I was passing through a medical center last week and while waiting for an appointment there was a poster on the wall in the waiting room which caught my eye, seemingly the health center offered counselling for transgender youth. I had to look twice because I thought I was seeing things but that's definitely what it said. I thought it was unusual to see those services being offered as I didn't think Ireland was that open to it but I was pleasantly surprised and it made me think of the issues some of our kids may be dealing with.

Annasopra

dalyboy wrote: »

Too right , No offense is being targeted at trans people but with knee jerk and poorly planned solutions we are going to draw out aggressive responses to trans people. Most important thing you said is WE NEED TO DRAW A LINE. If this progresses to the idea that anyone and everyone can freely walk into the opposite genders OPEN PLAN changing and shower facilities in gyms/pools etc then I for one will not stand for it. Our female population (young and old) will be exposed to dangers that are unacceptable. Its not like all of a sudden perverts and paedophiles will just disappear if these facilities are made "gender neutral"

Our women shouldnt be attacked? I didnt know that men own women and that all men are sex attackers!

Will I Am Not

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Our women shouldnt be attacked? I didnt that men own women

Suppose you can twist anything to make it look worse. I didn’t get that at all from what was said.

tretorn

Are any of these transgender people actually happier after they trans or do they still have the same "issues" to deal with as well as a whole lot more new "issues".

Is it all a first world thing, I cant imagine in countries where it takes a lot to survive that people sit around gazing into their belly buttons wondering about transitioning.

pilly

tretorn wrote:

Are any of these transgender people actually happier after they trans or do they still have the same "issues" to deal with as well as a whole lot more new "issues".

What's that got to do with this thread?

Annasopra

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Suppose you can twist anything to make it look worse. I didn’t get that at all from what was said.

Language can be subtle