Unisex Bathrooms In High School

Topic's posts
Posts in total: 43
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?

Do separate bathrooms teach kids that we see boys and girls as not equal?

Are separate bathrooms not a form of segregation? Is segregation ever right?

If you had a 10 year old son, and he asked you why did boys and girls have different bathrooms, what would you say?

What societal I'll is separate bathrooms in high school supposed to stop or inhibit? Is there evidential justification for it?
--> @ethang5
In Australia they're called disabled toilets and anyone can use them.
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?
Money.

Do separate bathrooms teach kids that we see boys and girls as not equal?
No.

Are separate bathrooms not a form of segregation?
Yes.

Is segregation ever right?
I'll say that it's sometimes not bad.


If you had a 10 year old son, and he asked you why did boys and girls have different bathrooms, what would you say?
I do have a 10 year old son. If he asked me, I'd say that because girls don't have a penis and therefore cannot pee standing up; they have to pee sitting down. This means they can't use urinals.

What societal I'll is separate bathrooms in high school supposed to stop or inhibit? Is there evidential justification for it?
Gendered bathrooms arose in response to woman becoming more prominent in public social and working spaces. There was a perception that the outside world was dangerous, women were weak, and therefore they needed protection in the form of their own reading spaces in libraries, their own train cars, their own bathrooms. This justification is quite obviously horseshit of the highest caliber, yet the infrastructure is in place and it would probably cost millions of dollars to "remedy" that error.

As a guy, I am biased toward the status quo, however, in that I don't feel like waiting an hour at large gatherings to use the restroom. I rather enjoy being able to stroll down the quarter-mile long line of women right over to a urinal and be done with it in.
As a guy, I am biased toward the status quo, however, in that I don't feel like waiting an hour at large gatherings to use the restroom. I rather enjoy being able to stroll down the quarter-mile long line of women right over to a urinal and be done with it in.

I'm gonna have to agree with this. It'd be total BS if all bathrooms wewe unisex and guys had to suffer the wait just because women like to write full length novels in restrooms. 😂
--> @drafterman
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?
Money.
How? Unisex require fewer fixtures. Would that not be cheaper?

Is segregation ever right?
I'll say that it's sometimes not bad.
What about when scotus decided that segregation (separate but equal) was unconstitutional?

If he asked me, I'd say that because girls don't have a penis and therefore cannot pee standing up; they have to pee sitting down.
While this is impressively liberal, it doesn't actually explain why boys and girls have different bathrooms.

This justification is quite obviously horseshit of the highest caliber, 
I take it then your answers are, none and no.

 I rather enjoy being able to stroll down the quarter-mile long line of women right over to a urinal and be done with it in.
Lol. You are a hard person to peg.
--> @Smithereens
In Australia they're called disabled toilets and anyone can use them.
I'll assume you mean anyone disabled can use them. Right?

--> @ethang5
How? Unisex require fewer fixtures. Would that not be cheaper?
Doesn't? I don't see how that follows. Regardless, you'd have to replace the existing infrastructure in male-only bathrooms to accommodate female attendants. That costs money.

What about when scotus decided that segregation (separate but equal) was unconstitutional?
In that case of racial segregation, I agree with SCOTUS. Racial segregation is bad.

While this is impressively liberal, it doesn't actually explain why boys and girls have different bathrooms.
You asked what I'd tell him. That's what I'd tell him. The actual origins of the phenomenon is quite obscure and outdated and probably has little reason (other than the lingering momentum of tradition) for why they exist today.

--> @drafterman
Regardless, you'd have to replace the existing infrastructure in male-only bathrooms to accommodate female attendants. That costs money.
Or you could just scrap male bathrooms.

 I agree with SCOTUS. Racial segregation is bad.
But gender segregation is OK? Muslims will be glad you agree with them.

You asked what I'd tell him.
Fair enough. I had no reason to assume you would actually answer him.
--> @ethang5
In Australia they're called disabled toilets and anyone can use them.
I'll assume you mean anyone disabled can use them. Right?
You would think so right? But people use them if it's more convenient that the normal toilets, which is why unisex toilets are rather redundant.  
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?
The answer seems to be, "no reason at all".
--> @ethang5
unisex in that urinals would still be available?  Or perhaps one bathroom with all urinals and one bathroom for the squatters and everyone is free to use which every they choose.

I can tell you this though, women like having their own bathrooms w/o pee on the seat.  Generally women are cleaner and like it that way.
--> @TheDredPriateRoberts
I would guess that unisex would have both.
--> @ethang5
well I mean you don't have to have both, men can still pee standing up in a toilet.  So a urinal isn't a necessity.
--> @TheDredPriateRoberts
Exactly. So the reason why we don't have unisex bathrooms cannot be "extra costs". Dirty and messy bathrooms exist already.
--> @ethang5
yeah I don't think cost would be a reason
--> @ethang5
Or you could just scrap male bathrooms.
That still costs money.

But gender segregation is OK?
Universally? No.

Fair enough. I had no reason to assume you would actually answer him.
I would. Your disagreement with my answer is immaterial to the question.
--> @drafterman
That still costs money.
Not if you consider the savings in cleaning staff and materials, and space and water usage, and security. No one meant it would be free, but would cost less.

Universally? No.
But sometimes yes? Glad to you you confident enough make such decisions for others.

I had no reason to assume you would actually answer him.

I would.
OK. But then it makes it even more curious that you didn't.

Your disagreement with my answer is immaterial to the question.
You son asked why. You did not tell him why. That is fine, but you cannot pretend it answered his question. So you are right, regardless of any "disagreement" of mine, you did not answer the question. You responded to it, but did not answer it.

Your son will grow and answer the question for himself.
--> @ethang5
Not if you consider the savings in cleaning staff and materials, and space and water usage, and security. No one meant it would be free, but would cost less.
It doesn't eliminate the initial cost of conversion. And when you have schools that can barely make ends meet as it is, unable to provide basic amenities such as working AC, I don't see them spending money over something that is a non-issue. Nor do I see how converting them saves money in the long run.

But sometimes yes? Glad to you you confident enough make such decisions for others.
I don't recall making any decision for anyone but myself.

You son asked why. You did not tell him why. That is fine, but you cannot pretend it answered his question. So you are right, regardless of any "disagreement" of mine, you did not answer the question. You responded to it, but did not answer it.
Your like or dislike of my answer does not alter its status as an answer.

--> @drafterman
It doesn't eliminate the initial cost of conversion.
There would be no conversion, just a scrapping of male bathrooms.

I don't see them spending money over something that is a non-issue.
Neither do we. Did you think we were advocating it?

I don't recall making any decision for anyone but myself.
So my like or dislike of your answer does alter its status as an answer.

Your like or dislike of my answer does not alter its status as an answer.
We agreed on that if I recall.
--> @ethang5
There would be no conversion, just a scrapping of male bathrooms.
That costs money too.

--> @ethang5
Why can't we have unisex bathrooms in high school?
Because insanely hormonal teenage boys will take advantage of the fact that there won't be security or cameras to catch them doing whatever they do in there when girls are in there as well.

Unless of course, you're talking about handicapped washrooms, which are available to all genders and has a lock on the door for privacy and safety, which is good enough.

Also, the cost to implement additional washrooms into buildings that are already built with two washrooms would be way too much for any building owner to want to pay. Implementing an additional unisex washroom to buildings being built could make more sense, but then it would just be filled with rapists and Tumblr Feminists, two demographics nobody wasnts to be around. LOL
--> @drafterman
That costs money too.
We know. No one meant it would be free, but rather it would cost less.


--> @ethang5
Right, and I'm saying that even the initial cost is a barrier to implementation. That's why we "can't" have it.
--> @Mister_Man
Because insanely hormonal teenage boys will take advantage of the fact that there won't be security or cameras to catch them doing whatever they do in there when girls are in there as well.
Thank you for your truthful and realistic answer. Can you imagine, in a convo about why not unisex bathrooms in highschool, no one mentions the reality of why there aren't? 

Political correctness restricts us all, even those of us who don't subscribe to it.

Thank you Mister_Man. That was refreshing.
--> @drafterman
Right, and I'm saying that even the initial cost is a barrier to implementation. That's why we "can't" have it.
Doesn't track D-man. If new schools can be built with separate bathrooms for boys and girls, new ones can be built unisex as that would cost less.

The cost is not the issue. Human nature is.