Pemalite said:
JWeinCom said:
I think you underestimate the ability of men to be sketchy if you think the doors on stalls are really going to stop them. And whether or not some people will always do sketchy things in bathrooms, the question is if we can minimize those things through segregation.
Lets suppose that studies find that women being harassed is actually a problem in non-segregated bathrooms. What is the benefit to non-segregated bathrooms that would outweigh this issue?
|
There are always going to be sketchy men. - And they are always going to be doing Sketchy things, not all men target women remember.
And I don't underestimate how many dodgy people there are... I am in multiple rescue agencies, I see the worst there is... But also some of the best.
Better toilet layouts and designs to minimize such behaviour is a better approach, don't have open spaces under/above doors for perverts to look under/above is one such measure... Better lighting helps too.
Having toilet blocks in more open, centralized spaces helps a ton as well in keeping shifty characters away.
JWeinCom said:
Generally, in sexual harassment/abuse, the aggressors tend to be men and the victims female. Male/male or female/female sexual harassment doesn't tend to be as big of an issue. So there's not that much need to keep gay/bi people out of men's rooms.
Regardless though, bi people need access to bathrooms. So, even if male/male or female/female harassment was a major concern, we'd have to allow bi people in bathrooms because there's really no alternative. Aside from the fact that I don't know how we'd possibly enforce it, the harm done by not allowing bi people access to any bathroom would outweigh the harm done by some of them potentially using bathrooms to harass people.
|
Sexuality and sex are different things... And I don't think it is logistically possible to create further toilet segregation based on those traits.
If men are assaulting women, they will do it outside of a toilet environment, clearly they lack the self control of a dignified human being, so hows about we catch them before it even gets to that point first?
| JWeinCom said:
On the contrary though, we already have a system in place that can reduce the risk of men harassing or assaulting women, which can be implemented without denying anyone access to restrooms. So, in that case, why not use this system?
|
We have unisex toilets here that generally go without incident. It's not actually that big of a deal, no one is being denied access.
|
Runa brought up sexuality.
Segregated bathrooms potentially reduce abuse (I don't know, I haven't really read studies). Even if they don't, they tend to make women, at least in America, feel safer. And people here at least just tend to prefer it this way. So why exactly would we want to change that? I would be open to changing it, but only if there were some benefit to doing so.
