Gendered Single-Occupant Bathrooms in MA

Submitted by TheMajesticMoose08 t3_zdakne in massachusetts

At risk of inadvertently flaming a culture war, I'm turning to Reddit for this situation going on in my office building:

The office building I work at has two single-occupant restrooms, one labeled Men and one Women. The bathrooms are exactly the same (no urinals, etc.). My company has 7 employees - all men. We all default to using the men's room but occasionally more than one of us needs to go at the same time so people just use the women's room in that case.

Whenever we do that we get yelled at by the owner of the building because the office upstairs (which for some reason doesn't have their own bathroom) is made up of mostly women and they want that restroom reserved just for women.

My question is: is there any law in MA that says that a single-occupant restroom can be used by any gender? Regardless of anyone's views on transgender people using the restroom of their choice (which I fully support btw) how can anyone argue that a bathroom designed for a single person should be gendered?

Are my coworkers and I in the wrong here?

159

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

RandomRandomPenguin t1_iz0ih89 wrote

That’s weird AF. As a woman, I think all single stall restrooms should be all gender. No reason to create false bottlenecks.

Just ask everyone to keep that shit clean

488

EnoughIdeas t1_iz2a90r wrote

To poorly quote it's always sunny " why doesn't the sign just say toilet?"

63

chadwickipedia t1_iz4g84t wrote

What about that door marked “pirate”? Do you think a pirate lives in there?

3

LadyGreyIcedTea t1_iz2nl26 wrote

Also as a woman I don't hesitate to use the single stall men's room if the single stall women's room is occupied so I don't really see the big deal if men use an empty single stall women's room if someone else is using the men's one. As long as they aren't pissing on the toilet seat and leaving it up, I don't see why it matters.

23

rhythmchef t1_iz53e6w wrote

Well then it matters because just about every guy will either piss on the toilet seat or leave it up lol.

0

7screws t1_iz2c1g9 wrote

Yeah using singles like that are labeled as Family, Handicapped etc.

10

ThreeDogs2022 t1_iz0j3sb wrote

Ok so two issues here.

  1. You've asserted your office is all men, but that's irrelevant, isn't it, because the bathrooms are for the building, not the office. So there is in fact an (evenish?) split of men and women in the building
  2. Single gender single occupants bathrooms are silly.

Presuming you aren't being disgusting in the 'women's' bathroom, (ie. leaving filth and mess and stink), i think you're fine to continue using it, but since you don't own the building you don't have ground to stand on.

Perhaps your XO can speak to the landlord about converting the signage to 'all gender' or 'multi-use' etc.

74

JMe_HiD t1_iz0mf4f wrote

Stink is kind of unavoidable, what would you like them to do about it? Is only #1 allowed if you’re using the “women’s” room?

8

ThreeDogs2022 t1_iz0ncaa wrote

​

i meant it as a continuation of filth and mess. Aka smells are unavoidable but if you fail to flush and leave everything sitting, well, it's gonna be far worse, no?

21

PakkyT t1_iz1qcdy wrote

Which of course has nothing to do with men vs women using the toilet, just thoughtless people in general. I would assume that women are just as likely to leave a toilet unflushed as men.

8

chadwickipedia t1_iz4gifw wrote

we're gonna have three bathrooms, one for each base, no homers. Yes?

1

5teerPike t1_iz100pk wrote

You can't light a match ?

Edit: you asked.

−9

JMe_HiD t1_iz10o3l wrote

Depends on the business, I imagine many workplaces don’t keep matches on hand in the bathroom, and I’m not gonna carry some in my pocket. Some sort of spray or something more likely, but for sure there are ways to reduce or eliminate the smell if provided.

9

5teerPike t1_iz10vtz wrote

Tbh they make incense matches and they are worth carrying around lol

Did you guys really get this mad over a small suggestion? Classic reddit I guess.

−12

JMe_HiD t1_iz11brm wrote

Much easier for people who carry a purse, but for sure an easy solution for OP in this instance to just keep some at their desk or something I suppose.

5

5teerPike t1_iz11m0a wrote

Erm

People carry purses because they don't have pockets, which is a common issue in women's pants.

The matches even fit into the mini pocket in most jeans lol I'm not talking about a whole box here.

−9

beaveristired t1_iz13oo8 wrote

After a while, spray and matches start to kinda smell like shit, though. Like the smells mingle and it all starts to smell the same.

The answer is Poo-pourri, if people are considerate enough to spray the toilet water first.

https://pourri.com/collections/toilet-sprays

11

5teerPike t1_iz13umb wrote

That's why I like incense matches, the smell of sulfur doesn't linger

−1

beaveristired t1_iz18eai wrote

Do they smell like incense? Some people can’t handle the incense smell. I’m fine with incense, but if it’s strong then after a while I’d probably just associate the matches with bathroom smells.

4

5teerPike t1_iz18n04 wrote

They do, but they're not intense because they burn out within a minute. They smell better than sulfur, and the incense smell doesn't linger. They're quite nice IMHO, but I better stop talking about it lest my suggestion to keep matches in your pocket be mistaken for a crusade lol

1

JMe_HiD t1_iz12o7m wrote

Yeah if I was in a situation like OP and it was a regular occurrence daily I can def see that being practical, store then at my desk or in my work bag, pop em in my pocket before taking a dump.

Having a purse may have originated from not having pockets, but they certainly can store a whole lot more frivolous shit than any men’s pants pockets could. Unless cargo pants are accepted again?

2

5teerPike t1_iz12yay wrote

I'm willing to bet my travel watercolor kit can fit better in your front pocket than mine lol

Believe me, there is a difference and you can carry more frivolous shit than you realize, though it may not be frivolous to you.

−1

JMe_HiD t1_iz13hed wrote

I’m saying that can fit in your purse better than my pockets lol I’m not claiming that women don’t have smaller pockets, that is 100% fact. All I can fit in my pockets without being uncomfortable is phone/wallet/keys and maybe 1 other small item.

1

5teerPike t1_iz13js0 wrote

Like a book of matches.

1

JMe_HiD t1_iz14ey8 wrote

Lol why are we still arguing about this. It was never a question of does it fit, it’s a question of practicality of carrying matches around all the time just in case I have to use a gendered single occupant bathroom. Like I said, in OPs case it makes perfect sense as a solution to their issue as it is a fairly regular occurrence. Nobody is going to carry matches around every day in their pocket just incase this happens. I can count on one hand the amount of times I’ve needed a match in the last couple years, and none of them were just out and about wishing I had them in my pocket. Having a purse allows you to carry all sorts of things like that just in case. Shit maybe I’ll throw a book of matches in my wife’s purse, will that make you happy?

1

5teerPike t1_iz16moe wrote

It's a small item that fits comfortably in your pocket lol what the hell.

0

JMe_HiD t1_iz17wh5 wrote

Lol ok have a nice day day! Keep up the good work in your fight for matches in the pockets of all!

1

notsara t1_iz0ujn5 wrote

Single-occupant bathrooms should never be gendered, IMO. It makes absolutely no sense

56

NoeTellusom t1_iz11ahy wrote

Technically, given they are shared bathrooms for the entire building - yes, you're likely in the room.

That said, as a woman who has often had to use men's rooms in a reversed situation (i.e. 90% women staff, 10% men - who were almost NEVER in the office) - we did this too. We would open the men's room door, yell "Any men in here??? Woman coming in!" and then do so. And even put a post-it "woman occupied" on the door. But we all knew we were doing it.

I've spent some time in Europe where they have all gender bathrooms and honestly, it's pretty awesome. No one cares there. That said, the doors are flush to the frames and go nearly to the floor and such. Unlike our cheap ass crap here.

52

Rattlingjoint t1_iz0lo0l wrote

So I see two arguments being made here;

The first is if MA has a law on gender use bathrooms. The answer is yes and no. MA enacted laws in 2016 to protect gender identities and public bathrooms, making it illegal to discriminate based on a persons gender. So if you were biological male, you identify as female then you are permitted to use female restroom. This is only the case for public restrooms however, private business or commercial lease properties that are closed to the public dont abide by this.

However, MA discrimination laws prevent gender discrimination for bathrooms leading to the 2nd argument;

Can an office owner or business bar someone from using a specific bathroom? Well if that person identifies as a different gender then the one they were born with, then no, its a protected right.

All that said though, in your situation where your a (Im making assumptions based on your post) your a male who identifies as a male, your office manager or owner has the right to bar you from using a female restroom.

41

Rattlingjoint t1_iz0lsp3 wrote

Cant edit for some reason, the 2nd argument is about employment not bathrooms, my mistake

3

EugenioFV t1_iz0me9g wrote

The amount of bathrooms is controlled by the occupant load of the building. Step 1 would be to determine the amount of "fixtures" needed for the building by taking into account all occupants, this is determined by use and square footage, not by people in each office. From there that is divided in half between mens and womens. There are exceptions where you can have unisex bathrooms, which is allowed.

​

My guess here is, the building is seriously under designed, not enough bathrooms. You can always speak with a professional to calculate this, and negotiate with the buildings owner.

31

tippytaps20 t1_iz2n09v wrote

Professional who does this kind of calc for my job - basically you use calculate the occupant load (or a program load where the egress load seems high), then go to 248 CMR: 10.00 Uniform Plumbing Code. Split that occupant load - 1/2 designated female, 1/2 designated male. 248 CMR Section 10.10(18) Table 1 give you the fixture factor based on the type of occupancy. Generally in offices it’s 1 per 20 for females and 1 per 25 for males.

Say in his building, the occupant load is 40 total - 20 female, 20 male. This would translate needing at least one fixture for each gender. Since the building likely small, all the bathrooms are permitted to be located on the first floor as long it’s only a 2 story building and a person upstairs doesn’t have to travel more than 300 ft from the most remote point on the 2nd floor to the bathroom.

248 CMR Section 10.10(18)(j)(1) requires establishments provide designated bathrooms for male and female employees. Over the past few years, the Plumbing Board has been approving variances that allow for gender neutral bathrooms - it’s not explicitly permitted in the current edition of 248 CMR, but the Board has no opposition to it, it’s just a formality. I believe there is another subsection in Section 10.10(18) that allows for a 1-to-1 substitution for required fixtures for males/females with gender-neutral single user bathrooms.

For OP’s situation, the designation of the bathrooms probably goes back to when the space was built/last updated. The designated single user bathrooms probably remains if the building owner didn’t want the headache of applying for a variance, didn’t know it was an option, or it was last updated when the climate wasn’t as friendly to gender-neutral single user bathrooms.

14

[deleted] t1_iz2ud1y wrote

[deleted]

4

you-mistaken t1_iz4sae2 wrote

the code book sounds like it need to update the term gender to sex. like " gender designated tiolet fixture" ones gender doesn't decide what type of tiolet fixture they would need thier sex would.
know what I mean , there are those in the woman gender who could still use a urinal. but I dont think gender exists anyway its a false social delusion that hopefully we get passed one day and everything is genderless.

1

Graywulff t1_iz1yrnl wrote

There should be two bathrooms on each floor at least. Then having to come downstairs isn’t right.

4

poomaster421-1 t1_iz0jnps wrote

If the owner says you're in the wrong bathroom. Tell them to "prove it." shit will hit the fan real quick.

22

Proof-Variation7005 t1_iz0mnb9 wrote

Your choice of idiom and username add an extra layer of credibility to this bathroom discussion

31

zumera t1_iz0rp8o wrote

If the owner of the building is being honest about the complaint from the office upstairs, are the women who need to use that restroom finding it frequently occupied because the men are using both available restrooms?

20

koushunu t1_iz1jww3 wrote

Most likely. Possibly also leaving pee dribbles on and around the seat , toilet seat left up….

6

PakkyT t1_iz1qnzl wrote

As a man, this irks me to no end when men do this. It is selfish and very inconsiderate. Just lift up the toilet seat. "Oh I don't want to touch it", ya, ever notice that big roll of paper next to the toilet? Use a wad of that to lift the seat. And you are going to wash your hands afterwards, right? Don't be a dribble dick!

11

Sayoria t1_iz0tfo1 wrote

Gendered single-stalled bathrooms are absolutely, the stupidest thing ever regarding restrooms. It's not like one sex is cleaner than the other either. It makes life a lot harder for one group if one toilet is broken, or if someone is transgender, or as you said, if there's too many people looking to use the bathroom at the same time.

If there is any place with single room gendered-bathrooms still, they are far behind the times and are only putting the occupants of the building(s) in tough situations.

15

work-n-lurk t1_iz13x5w wrote

>It's not like one sex is cleaner than the other either.<

In my experience as Janitor, the women's room was worse on average.
Your mileage may vary.

7

monopanda t1_iz1gcxj wrote

> the women's room was worse on average.

As an RA back in the day, I have to agree. Those bathrooms were gross

3

beaveristired t1_iz146nd wrote

Yes, thank you. I’m a gender non-confirming cis woman so I face frequent harassment in the women’s room. Non-gendered single restrooms are the best for everyone involved.

3

Sayoria t1_iz1iqek wrote

I myself am trans. In my penumbra phase, it was a nightmare. I was always looking for single stalls and it always bothered the Hell out of me. So I feel you completely and then some.

−1

Own-Wonder-9763 t1_iz0n10u wrote

We have the same situation at my job, gendered single bathrooms, except it’s an elementary school so 90% of the staff is female. We use whichever bathroom is open. It was the same at my old job except they just said “adult bathroom.” Personally, I think there should be gender neutral signage. I don’t know about any specific laws but maybe ask the office manager to buy new signage?

11

Banea-Vaedr t1_iz0j893 wrote

>is there any law in MA that says that a single-occupant restroom can be used by any gender?

Sort of. "Seperate but equal" applies in this case. If there's a women's room, there by law must be a men's room. If the women upstairs demand women-only and recieve it, they must provide a men's only restroom as well.

10

LetMeSleepNoEleven t1_iz1ceoe wrote

I don’t think you’re in the wrong.

I do think that every reply saying you should callously use gender identity to skirt the rules is in the wrong, though.

6

dell828 t1_iz2po0m wrote

I Work in a place where the men outnumber the women. I often find men in the ladies room.

I also find a lot of pee on the seat, and the seat left up. Personally, I would prefer not to have to inspect and clean the toilet every time I go into the bathroom but I do. I have to, or I end up sitting in pee.

I don’t like sitting in pee, but I also don’t think I should have to clean the bathroom every time I use it.

6

ItisNOTatoy t1_iz0tq3s wrote

Just don’t piss on the fucking floor and they’ll never know

3

DatSlammedMX5 t1_iz1433r wrote

how would they know even if you did piss on the floor?

3

bagelche t1_iz1g5jt wrote

umm....there'd be piss on the floor?

That said, I've found the patterns can generally be correlated to the users' bits (hoverers vs unmanaged hoses).

3

marriedinmass1 t1_iz1c8hz wrote

When it’s single occupancy, we don’t even need to say “men” “women” or even the new “all gender”. At what point is it just a fucking bathroom. Bathroom. One. Word. You piss and shit in there. It’s a bathroom.

3

PakkyT t1_iz1s9w7 wrote

In the single occupant bathrooms are the sinks and toilets accessible to persons in wheelchairs? If not, then there needs to be a separate accessible unisex toilet room if the men and women bathrooms are not fully accessible.

3

slaincha3 t1_iz26b5e wrote

If you use the women’s room just make sure you identify as a female first. Then when you are done, go about your normal life.

3

seriousnotshirley t1_iz27cqt wrote

Are these the only bathrooms? I believe the law in MA is that there does need to be separate bathrooms. You can have a gender neutral bathroom if there are existing separate bathrooms but if these are the only two bathrooms then I don't think you have much room here.

3

Just_Drawing8668 t1_iz31vee wrote

If there are single fixture bathrooms they can be designated as gender-neutral provided the gender neutral rooms come from both the original male and female counts.

248 CMR 10.10 (18)(r)

Use of Gender-neutral Toilet Rooms. For purposes of the minimum fixture requirements of 248 CMR, wherever 248 CMR 10.00 requires two or more toilet fixtures designated by gender, those facilities may be replaced with single use Gender-neutral toilet rooms pursuant to one of the following options:

  1. Every gender designated toilet fixture is replaced with an equal number of single use gender-neutral toilet rooms (such that there are no gender designated fixtures); or

  2. Where the code requires four or more toilet fixtures combined for males and females, gender designated fixtures may be replaced by single use Gender-neutral toilet rooms in increments of two such that for every male designated fixture replaced by a Gender-neutral toilet room, a female designated fixture must also be replaced by a Gender-neutral toilet room, and vice-versa (e.g . instead of three men's toilets, four female toilets, there may be installed two men's toilets, three female toilets, and two single use Gender-neutral toilet rooms).

1

albertogonzalex t1_iz2nutn wrote

Make one bathroom the pee bathroom. And the other a poop bathroom.

3

5teerPike t1_iz0zo7w wrote

They should be made gender neutral, like the bathrooms in your homes.

2

youarelookingatthis t1_iz1gbom wrote

Is it possible for your boss/manager to meet with the landlord? It sounds like there are restrooms that the landlord somewhat arbitrarily designated "male" and "female".

2

sneakylyric t1_iz1irrx wrote

I feel like the floor above may be in violation for not having their own bathroom.

But yeah IDC, if you gotta go you gotta go. It's not like you're in there at the same time. Just be considerate and clean up after yourself (not like women aren't nasty too), and put the seat down.

In my opinion all bathrooms should be unisex, but whatever. People just wanna be all nosey and in everyone's business. If you use the bathroom right, nobody else will see your genitals and vice versa.

2

r2d3x9 t1_iz2ac4i wrote

Sounds like you are “gender fluids”, so sometimes you identify as female when the male toilet is in use

2

Oblivious-abe-69 t1_iz2scqv wrote

Idk the answer but my college had an all gender multi stall bathroom for about 150 students on the floor and it was never weird. Honestly I felt bad for the girls cause I’d fucking nuke that thing once in awhile

2

Just_Drawing8668 t1_iz30htc wrote

The sad reality is that Massachusetts plumbing code does require separate facilities for male and female. You might see some nonconformance to this rule because interpretations and enforcement of the plumbing code is left to local plumbing inspectors, and there is surprising divergence on what they allow in their towns.

2

InterestingBit688 t1_iz3kxnw wrote

Single bathrooms should have no signage whatsoever, one toilet and one sink and a dead bolt? Whothefck cares?

2

Maronita2020 t1_iz0yhih wrote

I feel exactly the same way! Now having said that when I worked in group home's we were told that according to MA law the person that needs to use the facilities must use the one they identify with, and that if you don't you are subject to arrest.

I have NEVER seen the law written but that is what we were told! I can't tell you how many times I have had to go into a men's restroom that had multiple stalls even though I am a female because my clients were mail. The company said the law doesn't care if the caretaker is of the opposite gender or not; we must take them to their own gender bathroom.

When I visited a coffee shop which had a single stall men's room and a single stall ladies room we were told me could not enter the men's room unless the women's room was out of order. I suggested to the owner that she take off the gender identity and simply put restroom on the sign seeing they were individual bathrooms, but she wouldn't hear of such a thing. What's funny is it would help women the most seeing that out in public it is usually the women's restroom that has long lines.

1

LetMeSleepNoEleven t1_iz1bq3x wrote

Not sure when you worked in a group home, but that is not MA law now.

1

Maronita2020 t1_iz2oxn1 wrote

Yah, it was in the 90's. I would imagine it is still the case except now it would be with the gender you identify with meaning if you identify as a female (despite birth gender being male) then you must go to the female restroom.

1

LetMeSleepNoEleven t1_iz2phb3 wrote

There’s no law saying what bathroom someone must go to. Only laws saying that people can’t bar you from the bathroom of the gender with which you identify.

1

Maronita2020 t1_iz3pmu4 wrote

All I know is what my employer said when I working in the group homes.

1

Gronkattack t1_iz1xyzt wrote

The only excuse for labelling 1 male and 1 female would be out of fairness if one of them has a urinal. If both have one or don't then they should just be unisex.

1

Ilikereddit15 t1_iz20hz6 wrote

I mean, should agree that you will do your best to abide by the rules but if Bathroom 1 is occupied and someone is dropping heat or on Reddit for 20 minutes and Bathroom 2 is open then why can’t you use it? Also odd that it’s the owners call unless it’s a common area, which I guess it sounds like

1

Nicksucksathiking t1_iz25l4m wrote

Idk what the woman are worried about. I had to clean public restrooms as a teen and the woman’s bathroom was alwayd 100x worse then the mens.

1

Lucybruin t1_iz26sis wrote

If they’re single restrooms, just use whichever one you want

1

Ok_Fox_1770 t1_iz2qelf wrote

I dump in a cold blue box with ice on the seat, no ladies spotted ever sadly. Bathroom culture sounds harrowing. Peaceful world just in someone’s driveway, playin in the dr who box. Trying not to die from shivering.

1

NJGGoodies12 t1_iz2sy9k wrote

You can use any bathroom you want. Next time she yells at you threaten a discrimination lawsuit

1

cementtrampoline t1_iz2zm0n wrote

Imagine this: you work in a building where your bathrooms are on the floor below. They're labeled, one for your company and one for the company downstairs. One day you go down to use the bathroom and it's occupied. Finally a guy from the downstairs company comes out.

You'd probably be annoyed, right? Yeah it's kind of dumb to separate the bathrooms that way and if all had talked about it maybe the women would be happy to share. But in this case you just decided to use their bathroom without asking. Wild that it's the men who decided they're entitled to the women's space while they respected yours!

1

rackfocus t1_iz34wqx wrote

I think it’s inhumane to bar someone from a bathroom based on some archaic gender assignment. We all have to go. Gender is of little consequence when nature calls.

1

chavery17 t1_iz388t4 wrote

It’s Massachusetts lol just change what gender you identify as

1

SabersSoberMom t1_iz3lkwc wrote

A conversation between my kids (10 and 11)

10: hey! This place doesn't have a men's room and a women's room.

11: huh?

10: there's a sign on each door that says, "restroom."

11: and?

10: it's like a gender reveal...door opens a man comes out... that's the men's room....door opens and a woman comes out... that's the women's room.

11: unless they're non-binary...then it's just a restroom, like the sign says. Do your business. Flush the toilet. Wash your hands. Job, done.

1

Black-Diamond729 t1_iz45ehe wrote

I went to a show in Somerville, MA a few years back. They have unisex bathrooms there, even with multiple stalls. I was in there with my husband, while another man and woman were in front of me. It was weird for 2 seconds, and then I got over it. I just needed to pee and get back to my day.

All of that to say that sometimes I think we get used to our own normal and customs that we don’t open our eyes to the possibility of another option. I do agree with you that the bathrooms should be unisex. I actually found a really cute sign that I will try to attach to this comment.

1

Revolutionary-Toe789 t1_izce7ss wrote

When I developed some commercial spaces one town had a building inspector that required a mens sign on one bathroom and a woman’s on another.

Don’t believe it was required by code, but not worth arguing with building inspector.

1

pillbinge t1_iz1gybf wrote

The law only affects what the law affects, and it comes down to gender identity. If the law isn't about that, then yes, they can bar you for that reason. It doesn't make that much sense, but that's what tends to happen when you push the law in certain directions for a while anyway.

0

Eire4ever37 t1_iz1tbpp wrote

I’m old school on this. I want a Women only bathroom and one just for Men. I hate shared bathrooms.

0

gregkel22 t1_iz1ydok wrote

continue using, stop flushing.

0

Past-Adhesiveness150 t1_iz13d87 wrote

Pretty sure you have to use the restroom that you identify with, depending on your pronoun. Thats just the way it is.

Imo. If you have an office full of women in the building, do the courteous thing & use your gender specific bathroom.... unless it's an emergency.

Although, if you feel like being a dick ( no pun intended ).... maybe your identifying as a woman at that particular day... & naturally should use the ladies room.

I should mention that we had a problem with restrooms in our building. It has shops & offices. The bathrooms for the shop areas was part of the problem. The women's room was loaded end to end with motorcycles & parts. & the men's room was disgusting af. Some gross mf in the shops refused to flush the urinal or the toilet, all the time. There was no way I could have a customer, or female employee use the restrooms on the shops side. So we started using the restrooms on the office side...

−1

itallendsintears t1_iz1bh7o wrote

100% agree with you OP provided you guys aren’t dropping heaters in the woman’s bathroom and not spraying/cleaning up. Which, as men, you are most likely doing.

−1

you-mistaken t1_iz1bppw wrote

how does Massachusetts law define what it means to identify as a female? if the law says to identify as a female you simply just say you are a female and that's that, no one is allowed to question if you don't really mean it, than legally you could just say you a female each time you want to use the bathroom.
If anyone gets upset when you go right back to being male you could say you are gender fluid. So that should cover you legally, but than you gotta ask yourself if that's the right thing to do.

−1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz1va9u wrote

It’s not the right thing to do at all.

−1

you-mistaken t1_iz2pplj wrote

well i dont know, maybe others don't think it's the wrong to temporarily identify as a woman to use a single one person restroom, I dont really see who it hurts

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz2rb3e wrote

The entire trans community who has fought really hard to be able to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity?

2

you-mistaken t1_iz2q0aj wrote

I mean when it comes to people who would get upset that a biological male identifying as a woman is using a single person woman's restroom, I doubt they care much as to why the person is identifying the way they are. I think they be upset either way.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz2rjqj wrote

That’s not my point. My point is that trans people have fought really hard for the rights we do have and shit like this makes it harder for us.

2

you-mistaken t1_iz4kdnp wrote

I'm not trying to be argue, but am genuinely curious, how this would make things harder for trans person. the people that for trans and gender fluid people using the bathroom they choose aren't gonna turn their backs on it because of it,, and the people who are against it are already against it. The one thing that makes me nervous about out right declaring it is wrong and being against this, is it opens the door to trans people needing to pass so subjective sincerity test to be allowed to exercise their rights. I honestly think it be safer and better for the trans community to say ok fine you say your gender fluid or a woman thats that, you know the haters are just waiting for the trans community themselves to open the door to making it ok to question if someone has alternative motivations in making a gender identity claim. I do respect your point of view for sure, and I understand how my point of view may not sit well. but I think it's safest for the trans community to stay with an unwavering position that no one is allowed to question if a person is sincere in their gender identity. I think that's far more dangerous to our rights.

2

bostonchef72296 t1_iz4m0zx wrote

The right wingers argument for not wanting to allow people to use the bathrooms they identify with is that any man could just say they identify as a woman and use the woman’s bathroom and assault someone. So if men start randomly identifying as women when they actually don’t feel that way, they will just be proving the right wingers right that it is dangerous to let trans women in bathrooms. (regardless of the fact that no assault took place)

It is also delegitimizes trans identity when someone “identifies” as a woman just to gain access to a space when they actually don’t feel that way. Trans people have fought really hard to be able to use the right bathroom and we still get harassed and assaulted and sometimes even killed for just existing in spaces like that, so it’s really offensive for a cis man to say “oh, well the wait for the mens is too long I’ll just identify as a woman to use the other bathroom.” Like, just no. Just use the bathroom, as a man. It’s really not a problem. You don’t need to bring an offensive, problematic identity issue with it.

I have no problem with genderfluid people, of course. If that is their genuine expression of their gender. If it only happens around bathroom usage, they can fuck right off. But still, I don’t give a single fuck if a man uses a woman’s bathroom. We are all adults here. Just don’t be a creep and we are all good. It’s a single stall in this situation so it is 0% a problem. There’s just no need to bring gender identity into it at all.

2

bostonchef72296 t1_iz4ma8k wrote

Also, are you trans?

1

you-mistaken t1_iz4ow7v wrote

I dont beileve that gender exists. I believe it's a false mass delusion.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz4v21x wrote

ok well I don’t think you get to tell people what’s “safe” regarding gender identity if you don’t believe in gender. That’s not fair.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5joaz wrote

I'm not telling anyone anything just sharing my feelings is all. There are many others in the community who feel the same as me and beileve gender us a false social construction. just because I don't believe in gender existing doesn't mean I can't have any thoughts or input on it. by ur logic that would mean anyone who didn't beileve in God and religon and its effevt on society should shut up.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5l0dv wrote

No, that’s not the same at all because religion actively causes harm to the world while someone expressing their gender does not. Yes there are problems with the way society is and the patriarchy but the simple act of gender expression does not cause harm so it is not the same thing. Don’t try to compare apples and oranges to make your point. And you are “telling” someone something. You’re speaking/writing to them. What difference does it make if you categorize it as “just an opinion.”

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5mo4z wrote

it is the same. some feel religon brings a lot of good and charity. your also making a strawman arguement as I never said the act of gender expression does cause harm. in fact my point since the beginning is who does it hurt? Sorry but it's an apples to apples comparison, you just don't like it. by your standards the religous people who feel it does cause harm could do what you are doing and say you need to shut up about religon and they are already allowed to speak on gender identity. Sorry us people who don't believe in the traditional views society has on gender must never fall into using religous logic. Which is we decide we are more moral and just and thus can play by different rules.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5nm8b wrote

Dude you sound like you’re like 15 years old I can’t even understand what you’re trying to say it’s completely incomprehensible at this point. It’s like you’re trying to sound smart but you don’t actually know how the words should fit together to make real sentences.

1

[deleted] t1_iz5oc7u wrote

[removed]

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5owg3 wrote

The world is not black and white. One concept should not be applied to all circumstances. You’re putting words in my mouth and I won’t stand for that. You make absolutely no sense.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5qit5 wrote

you are the one making black and white statement not I. you are the one declaring religion does zero good and is all evil. while it does evil it does good. you then are implying that the view gender does exist is a good and righteous view with no evil. thus one who doesn't beileve in religon can still speak on it, while the opposite isn't true.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5radi wrote

Omg your reading comprehension dude. Where did I say ZERO GOOD and all evil? All I said was actively causes harm. I didn’t say ONLY causes harm. I’m done with this convo you clearly cannot understand nuance or anything In a grey area and just wanna argue. I don’t mean this as an insult at all but you sound like you have autism

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5pfrn wrote

I find it incredibly offensive that you’re comparing my ideals to that of religious people on the grounds that I think you shouldn’t spread around the idea that gender is a construct when transgender people are currently fighting to not get shot on a regular basis.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5q7sq wrote

that's not what I'm comparing. what I'm comparing. I'm simply saying that the logic that one can not speak on something they don't beileve in is very faulty logic.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5r9zv wrote

you are not following me, I agree its a construct, we agree there. I believe it's a false construct. also it's terrible people are shot for their beliefs, but religious people are also killed everyday for their beliefs. My belief that gender isn't even real does nothing to put transgenders in any danger. Now had I sad gender is a very real thing and not just in the minds of society, I believe that would be more harmful to transgenders.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5oqcs wrote

I'm sorry if I'm not expressing myself well enough, is there something specific you are confused about as to what I'm saying? maybe if we just tackle 1 point at a time we can better understand eachother.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5povn wrote

I don’t feel like continuing this conversation with someone that clearly just wants to attack my points of view

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5pzj7 wrote

I'm sorry, but I haven't attacked at all. you are the only one who has, and even after you attacked I didn't even attack back.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5n13r wrote

I mean what you said actually sounds like a religous person,, " I'm allowed to do X cause I deem myself more righteous than y" very dangerous religous like thinking there. don't start playing by their rules. it will turn into a cycle that goes nowhere.

1

bostonchef72296 t1_iz5oce1 wrote

Lmao I am the farthest from religious anyone could possibly be dude. And don’t put words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say I was better than someone else and if that’s the message you’re getting you need to continue on with your high-school education and make sure you study for those finals coming up in a few weeks.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5piwg wrote

I'm sorry you feel the need to insult me, I think it's a misunderstanding so will just turn the other cheek. what I was saying there was when I express the view that I dont beileve in gender, that it's a false social delusion it's religous people who try to shut me up.
You are saying I shouldn't be allowed to express that view as well. That's all I'm pointing out.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz5pvjk wrote

Also you imply you are better and above others when you say ur view of good and bad is the correct view of what's good and bad. that is ur entire work around for being able to speak about religion and God even if you don't beileve in it, when you say I shouldn't be allowed to speak about gender, because I don't beileve gender exists at all.

1

you-mistaken t1_iz4pzjy wrote

like if gender did actually exist reasonable people would overwhelmingly agree on what defines a gender. know what I mean? Like for the most part reasonable and logical people would all have to agree the defintion of a male is.......... and defintion of female is.......... Since reasonable people don't have a anything close to a shared defintion, I think that's just more evidence gender is a false delusion. So since i dont beileve gender exists I obviously don't believe a person can transfer from one thing that doesn't exist to another thing that doesn't exist. we are all just humans. It's tough you know what I mean, cause in a way of I were to consider myself transgender, I feel I would be reinforcing the gender delusion and to a degree the gender binary delusion.

1

bobgoblin888 t1_iz1cqyu wrote

My guess is that the men are leaving piss on the floor, which stinks, and the women are tired of it.

−1

PakkyT t1_iz1swm4 wrote

According to the original poster, it doesn't sound like the woman upstairs are complaining but instead he landlord catching men coming out of the "women's" bathroom and making a big deal out of it.

And women are equally able to make a mess on and around a toilet and sink.

3

duckbigtrain t1_iz1zyar wrote

the poster is also not being entirely honest with their representation of the situation (possibly unintentionally), as evidenced by not including the women at the top where it would make the most sense. So there’s a decent chance that there are issues regarding the toilet seat being left up or dribbles on the seat etc.

2

garvierloon t1_iz2fqfw wrote

What happens if I identify as a red panda?

−1

queenofhaunting t1_iz0ulvh wrote

you may be making it severely uncomfortable for whichever woman may notice you using it. ask around first.

−2

beaveristired t1_iz14pqo wrote

It’s a single occupant restroom, though.

1

queenofhaunting t1_iz17rxl wrote

doesn’t mean women can’t feel uncomfortable about it.

−3

beaveristired t1_iz1995o wrote

Right, I’m just wondering what would make someone uncomfortable with a single occupant non-gendered restroom. Nobody else would be in there. I’m not uncomfortable with man using a bathroom in a restaurant, or event space, or a porta-potty, and to me this is the same thing.

1

queenofhaunting t1_iz20z1e wrote

trauma/sexism/woman’s discomfort is often dismissed as “irrational”. i think womens comfort should be absolutely prioritized over a couple mens convenience. there’s literally zero harm in asking around first.

−1

beaveristired t1_iz2geh9 wrote

Yes, as a woman I’m aware that our concerns are downplayed. As a gender non-conforming cis woman, I can say that my concerns of getting harassed in the bathroom are certainly valid, but having gendered single occupant bathrooms make me extremely uncomfortable and put me in awkward, sometimes dangerous, situations. Imagine the first day of work, being called out because “a man” is in the women’s room. Ever experience dehydration because you avoid drinking water because you’re afraid to use the bathroom that is assigned to your gender? This is what I deal with on a daily basis, and I don’t think my concerns should be dismissed as irrational either. There is literally zero harm in making single-occupant restrooms gender free.

0

queenofhaunting t1_iz2l9o8 wrote

you can simply explain you are not a man. guess what, i’m also gender non conforming. i’m in a field dominated by men. i would still rather it stay segregated because i trust fellow women more than i trust men.

−1

beaveristired t1_iz2ou8l wrote

Maybe you shouldn’t have assumed I was a man?

And you haven’t explained why all this matters if it’s single occupancy? Probably because there is no good reason not to make it genderless.

Also, doesn’t my experience as a woman matter as much as you?

I think it’s interesting how you’re minimizing my experience as a woman why complaining about others doing the same thing. I’m dizzy just trying to follow your logic.

2

queenofhaunting t1_iz2qyjr wrote

because we’re not talking about you. we’re talking about the women that work with OP. all i said was “ask around first” and i still don’t see a single problem with that.

we also don’t live in a vacuum. there’s a reason hidden cameras/spy cams have their own dedicated porn sites. men also regularly: steal womens underwear, follow women into bathrooms, make a fuss when they see period products in the trash, steal womens period products, track womens menstrual cycles, and most importantly, already have their own designated bathroom.

3

beaveristired t1_iz2s4h5 wrote

Do you think hanging a sign that says “women’s room” prevents those things from happening?

You really haven’t given any good arguments for your position.

2

queenofhaunting t1_iz2zjj3 wrote

no, but neither does prison stop all criminals. but it stops a good amount.

i don’t have a “position”. again, he should simply ask around and see if anyone objects. what are you so worried about if he does? that someone will object? the worst that can happen is he isn’t violating anyones sense of peace.

1

beaveristired t1_iz3kt65 wrote

No, I can assure you it does nothing, but you aren’t able to admit when you don’t have an argument.

Take a look at my profile, see just how gender non-conforming I am, and tell me again I have no reason to think that non-gendered single sex restrooms don’t have a place in workplace.

You’re arguing that having a sign on the door somehow protects woman, while I, a woman, have been straight up harassed at my job due to my gender presentation. Nice.

2

queenofhaunting t1_iz544w7 wrote

it protects women by societal convention. a woman cannot legally say anything if the man is allowed to be in there, no matter what kind of threats he’s been making outside of it. if he comments on her being on her period or purposely tries to walk in on her. i don’t know how to tell you these things happen very often.

i actually don’t need to look at you because we’re not talking about you. and i don’t think my “argument” insufficient because you have yet to explain why it’s a bad idea to first ask around in case anyone objects.

0

beaveristired t1_iz60zh5 wrote

This isn’t a realistic argument. Sorry, but this is going in circles, and you’re really grasping at straws. Your fake scenario isn’t an issue with single occupant non-gendered bathroom. Meanwhile I’m talking about a REAL LIFE SITUATION that has happened to me , a woman, and has caused much harm. You’re frankly being very dismissive and disrespectful at this point. I suggest you learn how to listen and respect the experiences of other woman. Maybe learn how to take a L, too. I don’t waste time with ignorance and disrespect. Take care.

1

queenofhaunting t1_iz678gd wrote

you literally never answered my one, singular question.

0

beaveristired t1_iz67p3m wrote

You literally have no argument or point here to discuss.

You literally never admitted that maybe my real life situation deserves the same consideration as your unrealistic fake one.

Go haunt someone else, Queen.

1

golemsheppard2 t1_iz0og32 wrote

The reason that buildings do this is archaic laws which require that they have to have X number of mens restrooms and women's restrooms per Y number of occupancy capacity. Unspecified single use bathrooms don't count towards these requirements.

Yes, the bathrooms are exactly the same. They both have a toilet, paper towel holder, sink, foam soap, trash, and nothing really else.

But until states start repealing outdated building requirements, this is the stupidity we have to deal with.

Like does my wife's OBs office really need two mens restrooms when there's only one male OB and all the receptionists, clinic manager, sonographers, medical assistants, nurses, PAs, midwives, and remainder of OBs are all women?

−3

queenofhaunting t1_iz0uuxl wrote

historically, there were no public bathrooms for women and they could not leave the house for long hours. this law was created for equality purposes.

7

bubalusarnee t1_iz1d9wn wrote

If you are trying to find out what the LAW says because your landlord said NO and NO is for other people.... then you are in the wrong here.

Another way to look at it is like this. I like to pee in bushes. You have bushes on your private property. You can tell me not to pee in them. If I do anyhow, am I wrong, on YOUR private property? Most importantly, did you need to check the lawbooks to determine that when the roles were reversed?

−3

PakkyT t1_iz1rulb wrote

You analogy is completely wrong since you are not renting out your bushes to people for their occupancy. Your bushes do not need to comply with MA 521 CMR 30.00: PUBLIC TOILET ROOMS.

2

noodle-face t1_iz0o86o wrote

Just say you identify as female today and the owner can't say shit. Sorry that's a bad take. Realistically someone needs to convince him to make them unisex

−7

stevenc88 t1_iz2igej wrote

If you do this, they can't contradict your assertion by their own rules.

1