From Bangkok to Brooklyn to Bangladesh, bathrooms are known by many names;, head, privy, latrine, powder room lavatory, dunny, john and, of course, the outhouse. China lays claim to the earliest 'sanitary facility', found in the tomb of a king of the Western Han Dynasty dating back to 206 BC., Archaeologists were surprised to discover a top grade stool, a stone seat including a comfortable armrest, and running water. Perhaps the only thing missing was the image of a pant-legged stick figure posted in plain sight at the entrance to the king’s “other” throne.
A place of refuge, a reading room, a dressing room, and occasionally a place of secretive sexual contact, bathrooms have been around since the earliest days of civilized society .As the concept of the sanitary facility evolves though, a problematic bathroom tradition continues to cause consternation, confusion, heated debate, and random acts of violence. The problem is segregation. The solution may be unisex facilities.. .
Little documentation exists regarding the origins of bathroom segregation, but history shines a bright light on who’s who inside the loo. The most outstanding example of bathroom segregation ended with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Prior to that legislation, bathrooms, notably in the southern United States, vigorously enforced racially segregated bathrooms. The Civil Rights Act outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin-in voting, employment, and public services,
Many people benefit from civil rights legislation. Disabled people enjoy access to bathrooms designed to complement their limitations. Peoples of all races are free to use the bathroom of their choice. Unfortunately, while freeing many groups from the burden of locating race-specific bathrooms, the Civil Rights Act failed to define the category of sex. Defintions of men and woman that vary from culture to culture – and the emergence of third and fourth genders in global society – create the need for a new approach to an old problem.
Many practical reasons exist to justify the implementation of ‘unisex’ facilities. Family rooms, open to both fathers and mothers, make baby care possible for either parent. Unisex bathrooms allow opposite-gendered caregivers to stay with their ward. And unisex bathrooms provide a measure of safety for women by eliminating the potential for isolated man-on-women crime. But without a unisex facility at hand, one highly visible group remains at risk of violence for attempting to perform a basic human function.
From a superficial perspective,bathroom segregation simply divide the girls from the boys. In reality though, this division is less about gender than the perception of gender. In transgendered lingo, bathroom safety is proportionate to one’s ability to “pass” as the sex that matches the stick figure posted at the entrance. While this confusion predominantly affects transgendered people, anyone who displays sufficient androgeny is in danger of being assaulted or arrested. From butch lesbians to transitioning transgendered people, the bathroom holds the same potential for violence as it does for safety.
Fortunately for people with special lifestyle considerations, unisex bathrooms seem to be gaining a foothold in contemporary culture. Massachusetts, by legalizing same sex marriage, has mandated a unisexual principle at a statewide level. Universities across country are renewing their efforts to ensure unisex bathrooms for the disabled and transgendered population. A handy site for locating a safe facility, safe2pee.org created by the “bathroom liberation front”, lists the addresses of gender free access facilities in numerous international cities . Another helpful site, thebathroomdiaries.com rates over 12,000 bathrooms across the globe.
To learn more about gender, please read Gender is Destiny