Add a Comment
Email This
Statistics
RE: further review
I still don't think people will use the restrooms as much as our current "plan" for public restrooms dictate.
Just curious - why do you think people wouldn't use them? Women too embarrassed to fart around men? Men that don't want to listen to gossip? Common annoyance at the disgusting results of the "hovering" of women combined with the "missing" of men?
RE: further review
Again, not the "be-all-end-all" here, but maybe our streets would look more like Iraq in that instance.
I doubt that. Assuming you're implying that people who'd avoid the unisex restroom would end up using the streets instead. (I don't think that's really true of Iraq, either.)
People are already uncomfortable using public restrooms, mostly due to unfounded fears of contamination. When the "urge" overcomes the fear, they end up vandalizing the bathroom - either they cover the toilet seat in paper, or they attempt some kind of acrobatics. Worse - they rarely clean the mess they make (again, I assume, from unreasonable fear).
People don't use the streets because a) it's illegal, and b) if they're uncomfortable in a public restroom, they're even more uncomfortable in public. Unisex restrooms aren't likely to change that much.
I think there should be a fourth option: status quo
The status quo is "outlawed". Most, if not all, states have laws requiring that public venues have separate restrooms.
The three choices offered are mutually exclusive and exhaustive.
RSS
further review
I have a couple different personal thoughts, but I'd rather look at the options in depth from a financial perspective:
If Unisex restrooms were mandatory, would they even be cost effective? The answer lies in who would actually use the restroom? If its mandatory, I still don't think people will use the restrooms as much as our current "plan" for public restrooms dictate. Consequently this could pose economical and health issues that would then need to be addressed. Should we put our tax money into the legality of such a mandate? Would people only use the mandatory unisex restroom if they can't "hold it any longer" and its the only option? Again, not the "be-all-end-all" here, but maybe our streets would look more like Iraq in that instance.
As for the optional option, I'd pose the same question....would it be cost effective? Probably not. If posed with a choice, most folks would probably choose to use the non-unisex restroom,...and in this case, you just created more work for your custodial workers,..more work equals more time, more time equals more money, and you see where I'm going here.
Lastly, if they were outlawed, would someone be willing to challenge this outlaw constitutionally? Again,...economics, taxes, etc come into play here.
I think there should be a fourth option: status quo => there should be no need to make a law regarding the use of public restrooms via sex. And in this case, it would allow for the optional choice should someone choose to make an "Optional Unisex Restroom". I hope that person would be willing to live with the non-sensical financial burden.
View Full Discussion