Gender Separated Bathrooms

From UBC Wiki

Gender Segregated Bathrooms

Definition

Gender segregated bathrooms are public facilities where there are separate bathrooms for male and female patrons. These bathrooms systematically exclude those who do not conform to traditional socially constructed conceptions of the male/female binary. These facilities are among the last remaining sex-segregated spaces in the American landscape [1]. Academic and activist discussions of these spaces involve historical social constructions, queer politics, and issues of violence and exclusion.[1] [2][3]

Gender Performance

Sex refers to anatomy, hormones and physiology, whereas gender is an achieved status constructed through psychological, cultural, and social means.[4] Gender is displayed through signs and expressions displayed by individuals which are present in social situations and are expected to be conveyed quickly as a mark of identity within these situations.[5] Researchers suggest that this expression takes the form of a performance, as differences perceived as essential and biological are continually recreated as a means of identifying within the masculine/feminine binary[4]. As such, “The functioning of sex differentiated organs is involved, but there is nothing in this functioning that biologically recommends segregation; that arrangement is a totally cultural matter... toilet segregation is presented as a natural consequence of the difference between the sex-classes when in fact it is a means of honoring, if not producing, this difference.”[5] Further discussions of gender performance show that “performativity” is a limited concept insofar as it limits human agency in a damaging way [6]. Gender segregated bathrooms limit individual agency, requiring individual subscription to one of the binary categories of "male" or "female," excluding those who do not identify with either category.

History of Gender Separated Bathrooms

Although many people assume that gender-separated bathrooms were created as a manifestation of anatomical differences between sexes, historical evidence suggests that this separation arose as a result of socially constructed mandates. Early protective labor legislation is thought to be the origin of these mandates, as social movements intended to protect the well-being of workers limited the use of child labor and the cumulative hours spent working by adults[2]. These movements entered the sphere of public washrooms with the institution of toilet laws originating in Massachusetts in 1887[2]. The institution of these laws quickly sparked a debate regarding the intentions of this legislation. On one side of the argument, many view the protective labor legislation as a positive step forward, protecting women from harsh working conditions. Conversely, some arguments suggest that rather than protecting women, this legislation was directed at preventing women from competing with men in the workplace. The Separate Spheres Ideology states that women’s place in society is within the home as a source of emotional stability, whereas the male role was to provide economically[2]. This ideology was supported by Victorian era scientists who concluded that women were biologically different from men in physiology, temperament, and intellect, reinforcing the legally mandated separation of public bathroom facilities on the basis of science[2]. Under this ideology, the gender category “woman” was vulnerable when outside the domestic environment. This process led to the institution of mandated gender segregation based on 4 justifications:

  1. The sex-separated water closet was necessary as a haven to protect the weaker body of the woman worker; 

  2. The sex-separated water closet was necessary as one aspect of a factory's providing its workers with sanitary-"clean and adequate"-toilet accommodations; 

  3. The sex-separated water closet was necessary to protect a worker's interest in privacy; and 

  4. The sex-separated water closet was necessary to protect and vindicate social morality, a morality rooted in the early nineteenth century separate spheres ideology.[2]

Gender segregation was instituted outside of the United States as well, as the institution of public facilities in Dunedin, New Zealand, was tailored towards men as women’s facilities were largely absent, implicitly supporting the separate spheres ideology [7]
. When women’s facilities were finally instituted, they were referred to as “rest rooms”, intended to keep women separate from unruly, even predatory, men [7]

Rather than a gender-neutral policy based on anatomical differences between men and women, the origins of gender segregated bathrooms are rooted in nineteenth century moral ideology concerning the appropriate roles for women in society[2]

Contemporary Exclusion and Violence

Within the modern context, gender segregated bathrooms are problematic as they discriminate along lines of gender, sexuality, disability, and age. Gender segregated bathrooms may pose challenges for parents tending to opposite-sex children who need to use public facilities. They are problematic for wheelchair users or elderly people who need the assistance of opposite-sex caregivers in order to use public restroom facilities[2][8] Another issue within the sphere of public restroom accessibility is parity[1]. In many cases, there are disproportionately fewer women’s restrooms, inadequate restrooms, missing restrooms, or no restrooms at all. “The fact is, biology has given men less to do in the restroom and made it much easier for them to do it. If men are less reluctant to urinate outdoors, it is in significant part because they only unzip and take aim”[1]. Women take about twice as long to use restroom facilities compared to men, taking almost 3 minutes on average compared to a mere 84 seconds for men [9]. Because of this disparity, even when there are equal numbers of bathrooms or toilets women are often disadvantaged. Women must attend to feminine hygiene needs and often tend to children, but are more likely to be forced to wait in line[1]. These long waits create risks of health problems, as women are particularly prone to urinary tract infections (UTIs) and renal damage[10]. These risks are particularly dire for pregnant women, as UTIs are associated with low birth weight babies at risk for medical complications. Gender segregated bathrooms have even been linked to physical violence. Transgender women, lesbian women, or simply women who do not fulfill the stereotypes of physical appearance within the category of "women," are prone to physical violence and assault in misguided attempts to protect other women[3]. The entrenched stereotypes of men as predatory and women as vulnerable and needing protection create hazardous environments for individuals who do not fit the restrictive normative expectations of gender appearance.

Activism and Recent Changes

As the discriminatory environment created by gender segregated bathrooms has become increasingly evident in the public consciousness, steps have been taken to mediate this issue. As of 2006, twenty-one US states have instituted statutes addressing the issue of parity in public bathrooms [1]. The World Toilet Organization was recently formed attempting to address issues surrounding bathrooms internationally[11]. Gender-free or gender neutral bathrooms are gaining popularity, and have been instituted at various Universities throughout the United States and Canada[1] [12] Many institutions, buildings, and organizations have also implemented family bathrooms and care areas, providing parents with safe and comfortable spaces to take care of their children, regardless of their gender or sexual identities.

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Anthony, K., and Dufresne, M., (2007). Potty parity in perspective: Gender and family issues in planning and designing public restrooms. Journal of Planning Literature. 21, 267-294
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Kogan, T.S. (2007) Sex-Separation in public restrooms: Law, architecture and gender. Michigan Journal of Gender & Law. 14(1):1-57
  3. 3.0 3.1 Browne, K. (2004) Genderism and the bathroom problem: (Re) Materializing seed sites, (re) creating sexed bodies. Gender Place and Culture. 11(3): 331-346)
  4. 4.0 4.1 West, C. &Zimmerman, D.H. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender and Society. 1(2): 125-151
  5. 5.0 5.1 Goffman, E. (1977). The Arrangement between the sexes. Theory and Society. 4:301-331
  6. Nelson, L. (1999). Bodies (and spaces) do matter: The limits of performativity. Gender Place and Culture. 6(4): 331-353
  7. 7.0 7.1 Cooper, Annabel; Law, Robin; Malthus, Jane & Wood, Pamela (2000) Rooms of their own: public toilets and gendered citizens in a New Zealand city, 1860±1940, Gender, Place and Culture, 7, pp. 417±433.
  8. Kitchin, R.,&Law, R. (2000).The Socio-spatial construction of (in)accessible public toilets. Urban Studies. 38(2):287-298.
  9. Rawls, S. 1988. Restroom usage in selected public buildings and facilities: A comparison of females and males. Department of Housing, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
  10. Banzhaf, J. (2002) Is potty parity a legal right? http://banzhaf.net/docs/pparticle.html (accessed February 13, 2015)
  11. World Toilet Organization. 2015. World Toilet Organization. Worldtoilet.org (Accessed February 13, 2015).
  12. CTV Vancouver Island, (2012). Everybody's Welcome: UVic Students Adjust to Gender-Neutral Washrooms. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QRty4wv7Xg (Accessed February 13, 2015)