Transterrestrial Musings  


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
Journoblogs
The Ombudsgod
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
Joanne Jacobs


Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« President Clinton In '08? | Main | Still Stuck On Science »

Nanny State?

KLo is upset by this apparent meddling by the New York City Council in the number of male/female restrooms required in public facilities.

I fail to see the cause for umbrage. Given that there are going to be ordinances specifying that there be restrooms at all (and there are much more serious depredations on liberty than such ordinances to be concerned with), why not respond to clear demand, and establish a sufficient number of each type? It's blindingly obvious that (mostly male) architects seem clueless as to the disparity between male/female toiletry issues. When there are consistently long lines for something, it's an indication of a shortage of supply, and one to which the market seems impervious, given the captive-audience nature of the situation in, say, a sports stadium. I remember when the Getty first opened, it had a serious shortage of bathrooms for both sexes, and as an engineer was appalled at Meier's apparent lack of common sense, focusing instead on pure aesthetics. It would be nice if the designers would get a clue, but given that they continue not to, I've got a lot bigger things to worry about than this.

Posted by Rand Simberg at May 27, 2005 07:52 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/3829

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments

I have always been puzzled by the lack of common sense in dealing with this problem. If you look at virtually any architectural plan you will see that the layout has equal numbers of plumbing fixtures in both men’s and women’s bathrooms with some of those used for urinals in the men’s rooms While this makes for a neat clean plumbing stack, but it ignores basic physiology. I’m not sure how other men feel but I see a toilet in a men’s room as an emergency only receptacle while women see them as a necessity for obvious reasons. Changing the plan to an “L” shaped configuration with the men’s room sacrificing a couple (or more) of the stalls would go a long way in relieving the situation.

Posted by JJS at May 27, 2005 10:33 AM


> I fail to see the cause for umbrage. Given that there are going to
> be ordinances specifying that there be restrooms at all

Circa 1980, public health laws in New York State required all restaurants to have restrooms *except* in New York City -- and many restaurants in New York City did not have restrooms. That may have changed, but knowing NYC, I wouldn't count on it.

Posted by Edward Wright at May 27, 2005 12:56 PM

I went to a firefighter's exposition in the Charlotte coliseum some years ago. We were there all weekend. There were very few female firefighters, volunteer or paid, back then. (There's still a large gap, but that's another discussion.)

Since there were so few of us, we each had our own stall with some to spare. And we pretty much all went to the head at the same time, usually just after a seminar let out.

On the other hand, the line was out the door and then some for the men's room. We women laughed our asses off (and some of the men at least admitted they could now better sympathize with women on the subject).

I can guarandamntee you that if the usual situation were reversed and men's restrooms had lines out the door while women's restrooms had plenty of stalls, restroom facilities in public venues would be totally redesigned. Yesterday.

As Rand said, you'd think they'd be willing to address an obvious supply shortage in order to please customers.

(Another thing male architects don't think about is that women more often than not take young children to the bathroom. You can take a young boy into a ladies' room, but nobody in their right mind would take a young girl into a men's room. So if a couple is out with their daughter, guess who she goes with? Even it the child is a boy, he and Dad take less time because using a urinal takes less time.)

Posted by Barbara Skolaut at May 27, 2005 11:11 PM

You can take a young boy into a ladies' room, but nobody in their right mind would take a young girl into a men's room.

Where did you get that idea? I had seen it plenty of times.

Posted by Ilya at May 28, 2005 06:42 PM

This is a bit off the main topic, but not by much.

Some years ago I heard a story about an architectural blunder made in the design of new monastery. The architect simply forget to put in toilet facilities. The head of the monastery wrote on the design "Suntne angeli?" ("Are they angels?" for the Latin challenged.) The problem was corrected.

I live in the Maryland suburbs. The oh so lovely DC Metro was designed without public toilets intentionally as a cost saving measure. It's possible to spend up to two hours traveling from one place (say home) to another (say work) via this system. It is possible to beg the station master permission to use employee facilities if the need is great enough. The fact that these crackpots can get away with such nonsense is appalling.

In general the American attitude to such a basic human function needs fixing. Are we dominated by nuts?

Posted by Chuck Divine at May 30, 2005 08:35 AM

Wow, so the DC Metro doesn't have public toilets at all? I only use the Metro once in a blue moon and never had the need during a commute. I always assumed that there were facilities for the passengers tucked away in a corner somewhere.

I recall that the NY subway's bathrooms were notoriously bad for a while. They had serious problems with vandalism, lack of regualar cleaning, and bad people taking up near permanent residence in them to provide various "goods and services" of an illicit nature. Maybe the DC designers feared the same problems and opted to take the easy way out.

Posted by Bryan C at June 1, 2005 01:51 PM


Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments: