4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Feb 22, 2022 21:12:07 GMT
And what was there to prevent a man with bad intentions from entering a ladies' toilet before the introduction of gender-neutral toilets? [ Social conditioning that starts as a small child. Which is what the push for mixed-sex toilets and changing rooms is aiming to completely remove. The goal of trans activists is for everyone to use mixed-sex facilities everywhere all the time, and to get used to that. Which is why the old system (trans people who more or less ‘pass’ discretely used the facilities that matched their appearance, and everyone maintains the polite fiction that they are the sex they appear to be even if they’ve clocked them) has been replaced by this. The thing is, removing the social conditioning that says unknown men should not share spaces where women undress, and men who attempt to access those spaces instead of those set aside for male use probably do not have good intentions, is very risky for women. It offers tremendous opportunities and camouflage for those with bad intentions, because they blend in with the crowd instead of sticking out like a sore thumb.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Feb 22, 2022 22:31:09 GMT
And gender neutral toilets are on obstacle for me, as when I need the toilet I need it very quickly and queuing for a cubicle (polite way of saying what kind of toilet I need) is not a real option for me. I suffer from Crohns. For 25 years I managed my condition very well and a toilet wouldn’t be an issue, but 3 years ago I had to have emergency life saving surgery, where more of my bowel was removed and that being a critical part, now my bowel management is poor, despite taking 40 tablets a day to have some sort of control, which basically does little for me. I am a radar key holder as my condition is recognised where I need an (additional needs) toilet, however in many theatre venues these toilets are not fitted with a radar lock, so basically these toilets are used as an overspill toilet (which ordinarily is understandable, as people just see an empty toilet) and assume they just make way if someone comes along with a wheelchair, not taking on board there are none obvious conditions that need these toilets. The Playhouse is one such venue that doesn’t have a radar lock on their toilet. Gender neutral toilets do nothing to help me. While I understand your issue, and know people with similar conditions, your difficulty in accessing a toilet seems to come from the access toilet being used for overspill from the other bathrooms, which is a problem found in many, if not all venues, not just those with gender-neutral toilets. That was a problem that pre-dates the current gender-neutral system. People queueing up to use an accessible toilet in a theatre that they don't necessarily need is a somewhat separate issue that I was having to deal with back when I worked in them years ago.
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Feb 23, 2022 9:26:21 GMT
I've said before on this thread that I really value single sex spaces and feel very anxious about using mixed toilets. I do still go to those venues, but I will avoid drinking anything, research public loos I can use nearby, or just wait (uncomfortably) until I get home if I have to. I don't think theatres should be putting anyone through that, for whatever reason - sex, gender, disability, medical condition, anxiety about lack of privacy or safety. The answer ought to be to look at what customers really need/want and work out how to meet those needs as much and as fairly as possible, which might include better accessible toilets and a mix of single sex and neutral facilities. Unfortunately decisions seem to be imposed on customers based on theatres wanting to virtue signal rather than meet the needs of actual or potential customers, so I'm not sure complaints, boycotts, etc will make any difference in the current climate. sph said earlier, "And given that many of those on twitter threatening to boycott are clearly identifying themselves in their bios as "TERFs" or "gender-critical", I don't see why they'd be attending a performance of something like & Juliet or Cabaret anyway, given each show's content. It's like a vegan boycotting a steakhouse". I don't understand this view or the vegan analogy. I hope people go to the theatre to explore/experience the whole range of human experience. I'm gender critical. It means I think biological sex has an important impact on who we are. It doesn't mean I don't have empathy for people beyond my own experience, or that I don't want to see plays about people who are not like me. What a boring world that would be.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Feb 23, 2022 10:36:02 GMT
I think it's important to note that only a small number of toilets in these venues have been allocated "gender-neutral", and on the whole the ladies and gents are very much separate, and you're very unlikely to come across a person of the opposite gender whilst using the bathroom.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Feb 23, 2022 11:57:28 GMT
That’s not true at the Old Vic?
I haven’t seen Cabaret at the Playhouse yet so can’t comment on the situation there.
The only reason you’d be unlikely to run into someone of the opposite gender in a gender-neutral toilet is if people interpret the new signage to sort themselves into the formerly ‘male’ and ‘female’ facilities. Which is what happens at The Bridge - toilets are officially ‘use what you are comfortable with’ but signage still includes male and female signs, and people sort themselves appropriately.
But as I mentioned above, the explicit goal of the activists is for mixed-sex facilities to be the cultural norm.
My work has kept one set of male and female toilets on one of the floors, and the gender-neutral toilets are used as mixed-sex. But we are giving up one of our floors and I suspect the push will be to remove sex-segregated facilities - though how that will help us hit our other diversity targets from groups who need sex-segregated facilities is a puzzler.
We had a DEI talk this week that included the news that they are revisiting the need for ‘gender-neutral’ changing rooms as well. Given that we don’t own the building and are unlikely to be able to make structural changes to it that can only mean relabelling of the existing shower and changing facilities, which are sex-segregated.
Probably not going to kick up a fuss as most of us now work from home the majority of the time, so not worth the negative attention given the likely low usage of said facilities. But ugh, do not like this trend.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 23, 2022 13:42:00 GMT
We had a DEI talk this week that included the news that they are revisiting the need for ‘gender-neutral’ changing rooms as well. Given that we don’t own the building and are unlikely to be able to make structural changes to it that can only mean relabelling of the existing shower and changing facilities, which are sex-segregated. Probably not going to kick up a fuss as most of us now work from home the majority of the time, so not worth the negative attention given the likely low usage of said facilities. But ugh, do not like this trend. Besides the safety aspect I've already mentioned, does your workplace not have, or ever expect to have, any workers from cultural or religious backgrounds where mixed sex facilities like this are forbidden? I think it's very telling of how culturally un-diverse the arts in the UK and USA are and expect to remain being, that this aspect doesn't even seem to have been factored in by those who make these decisions. At a relative's workplace, this aspect and the way it would affect neurodiverse users including those with SEN were brought up to successfully block the male boss's desire to bring in mixed sex toilets.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Feb 23, 2022 14:11:47 GMT
I think the DEI group are a bit head-in-the-sand about the conflicting rights issues between the different groups they are meant to represent, to be honest.
And honestly it’s hard to raise the issues when the presentation was greeted by drifts of heart emojis and clapping emojis in Teams, and everyone was so pleased to see how well it was received.
Everyone wants to be ‘nice’ and ‘inclusive’ etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Feb 23, 2022 15:26:02 GMT
I think it's important to note that only a small number of toilets in these venues have been allocated "gender-neutral", and on the whole the ladies and gents are very much separate, and you're very unlikely to come across a person of the opposite gender whilst using the bathroom. Don't know about the Playhouse, but some theatres, including the Old Vic, Young Vic and Donmar, seem to be entirely mixed sex, i.e. signage is for "cubicles" and "urinals", unless there are well hidden single sex facilities I haven't seen. I have recently seen men in the queues for the former 'ladies' at OV and YV, and an embarrassed man waiting outside the loo at the Donmar asking if women were in there and was it okay to go in. It would be great if it was only a small number so that everyone has a choice, but I think that is wishful thinking. And I agree with the comments that it's ignoring some groups' cultural needs - seems to be more about enforcing a rigid hierarchy of rights, than about being inclusive.
|
|
|
Post by interval99 on Feb 23, 2022 16:50:18 GMT
Up to now when a sign says urinals that's normally just what there is, no cubicles . Changing the gents to calling it urinals is confusing at the playhouse as the assumption is that if you want a cubicle you have to queue for the toilets and so join all the ladies queueing up the stairs when you could just go to the original gents and save everyone time and concern.
|
|
3,475 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Feb 23, 2022 17:21:39 GMT
Am I the only one who finds those symbols on toilet doors confusing? For instance at Hampstead and the Kiln. These weren't around when I grew up and I think they must have been imported from elsewhere - unless they're literally Greek, in which case elitist. It would be OK if they had the words as well but I don't know which is which and if they mean "male" and "female", I don't see how relabelling toilets with these symbols only supports the gender-neutral cause.
|
|
6,319 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 23, 2022 17:30:32 GMT
If they have space how about the theatre actually thinking how it can serve the Patron's need. There are many examples especially in the west end where toilets could have been made bigger but are squashed to make more bar space. The Gillian Lynne theatre is a prime example where the toilets are behind the bar which could easily have been moved forward. Especially given that they had two other bars plus drink sellers around the floor. If people have been to cabaret then they will have seen that merged toilets have done nothing to reduce queues. The harsh reality is that toilets don't make money for theatre owners and given the industry has had a tough two years. If you have a choice between adding or improving a facility that will generate revenue or a facility that will cost money to maintain then it's an absolute no brainer to go for the former.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 23, 2022 17:44:47 GMT
Bad toilet provision makes return visits less likely if it something that matters to individual patrons.
It is part of the overall consumer experience. Get it right and you don't win much praise. Get it wrong and you get a lot of flack.
|
|
18,811 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 23, 2022 17:48:49 GMT
I’ve long had a semi-formed idea of how a traditional auditorium could be converted to improve sight lines, increase legroom and provide additional space for bars and bogs all without destroying the interior and with minimal impact on capacity. It’s only semi formed because I’m not an architect and I can’t work out how to describe it other than to say it involves using the vast swathes of unused space. I can’t believe it’s not been done, or at least attempted. Anyway I can’t say more because this is the idea that will one day make my fortune and I can’t have someone nicking it 😌.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 23, 2022 18:17:41 GMT
how a traditional auditorium could be converted to improve sight lines, increase legroom and provide additional space for bars and bogs all without destroying the interior and with minimal impact on capacity While it does impact capacity, the Coronet in Notting Hill is a great conversion that has a fantastic atmosphere in the theatre and gorgeous bar space, and a good rake for sightlines. Given that women spend the interval queuing for loos or avoiding drinks to avoid having to go, better toilet provision would lead to better bar takings, surely?
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 23, 2022 18:29:10 GMT
Besides the safety aspect I've already mentioned, does your workplace not have, or ever expect to have, any workers from cultural or religious backgrounds where mixed sex facilities like this are forbidden? Quite. On the one hand theatres claim to want want a more diverse audience and on the other are they ensuring some people from some religious groups, some Muslims for example, will not want to go. They are making one group more comfortable and another bigger group less comfortable.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 24, 2022 13:52:28 GMT
And gender neutral toilets are on obstacle for me, as when I need the toilet I need it very quickly and queuing for a cubicle (polite way of saying what kind of toilet I need) is not a real option for me. I suffer from Crohns. For 25 years I managed my condition very well and a toilet wouldn’t be an issue, but 3 years ago I had to have emergency life saving surgery, where more of my bowel was removed and that being a critical part, now my bowel management is poor, despite taking 40 tablets a day to have some sort of control, which basically does little for me. I am a radar key holder as my condition is recognised where I need an (additional needs) toilet, however in many theatre venues these toilets are not fitted with a radar lock, so basically these toilets are used as an overspill toilet (which ordinarily is understandable, as people just see an empty toilet) and assume they just make way if someone comes along with a wheelchair, not taking on board there are none obvious conditions that need these toilets. The Playhouse is one such venue that doesn’t have a radar lock on their toilet. Gender neutral toilets do nothing to help me. While I understand your issue, and know people with similar conditions, your difficulty in accessing a toilet seems to come from the access toilet being used for overspill from the other bathrooms, which is a problem found in many, if not all venues, not just those with gender-neutral toilets. That was a problem that pre-dates the current gender-neutral system. People queueing up to use an accessible toilet in a theatre that they don't necessarily need is a somewhat separate issue that I was having to deal with back when I worked in them years ago. Not really I am able to use the able bodied toilet and prefer to use them, as being an able bodied person I have had comments aimed at me using disabled toilet, which makes feel uncomfortable. I just cannot queue for long to use them, this can be exasperated if ladies are queuing in the ‘Gents’ so forced to use the disabled toilet sometimes. Up to now when a sign says urinals that's normally just what there is, no cubicles . Changing the gents to calling it urinals is confusing at the playhouse as the assumption is that if you want a cubicle you have to queue for the toilets and so join all the ladies queueing up the stairs when you could just go to the original gents and save everyone time and concern. Or in the case of the Phoenix Theatre convert the old Gents into an Ambassadors Lounge and an old store room into the new Gents. The Opera House, Manchester I suspect is the same, which are too small for the stalls and one of the worst for queues.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 24, 2022 14:00:36 GMT
I’ve long had a semi-formed idea of how a traditional auditorium could be converted to improve sight lines, increase legroom and provide additional space for bars and bogs all without destroying the interior and with minimal impact on capacity. It’s only semi formed because I’m not an architect and I can’t work out how to describe it other than to say it involves using the vast swathes of unused space. I can’t believe it’s not been done, or at least attempted. Anyway I can’t say more because this is the idea that will one day make my fortune and I can’t have someone nicking it 😌. In an ideal utopian world there would be no Gents/Ladies there would be just one big unisex toilet with no urinals but with loads of cubicles, so many there would be no queues, each with its own handwash basin. Sadly this isn’t possible. Also each theatre would have perfect sight lines, with no clambering over people to get to your seat. Theatre is not perfect.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 24, 2022 14:41:24 GMT
When we have massive tellys, ludicrously expensive public transport, more chance of cancellations or cast absences but no refunds, and the big name actors and more outstanding emerging talent being hoovered up for long-running series by the TV streaming giants, theatre should be doing its utmost to make the theatregoing experience as pleasant and respectful to its customers as possible, and right now it isn't.
|
|
6,319 posts
|
Post by Jon on Feb 24, 2022 14:53:15 GMT
When we have massive tellys, ludicrously expensive public transport, more chance of cancellations or cast absences but no refunds, and the big name actors and more outstanding emerging talent being hoovered up for long-running series by the TV streaming giants, theatre should be doing its utmost to make the theatregoing experience as pleasant and respectful to its customers as possible, and right now it isn't. You do realise that short of demolishing theatres which nobody wants or will ever happen, it's hard to create more toilets without hitting capacity or affecting the Grade listed status.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 24, 2022 16:09:26 GMT
When we have massive tellys, ludicrously expensive public transport, more chance of cancellations or cast absences but no refunds, and the big name actors and more outstanding emerging talent being hoovered up for long-running series by the TV streaming giants, theatre should be doing its utmost to make the theatregoing experience as pleasant and respectful to its customers as possible, and right now it isn't. You do realise that short of demolishing theatres which nobody wants or will ever happen, it's hard to create more toilets without hitting capacity or affecting the Grade listed status. I love listed buildings - I even successfully campaigned to get one listed (not that it made much difference - in my home town, money takes precedence over history). However, I think many historic theatres just aren't fit for purpose any more. They are uncomfortable, some inaccessible to those with disabilities, the sightlines are poor, they are probably dangerous in an emergency, bits of the ceilings drop off, the toilet, bar and foyer situations are generally bad... I think a conversion like the Coronet's could be the way forward : there, the old stalls are now enclosed making a large bar and toilet area and the circle is now the stalls, on a level with the stage, and the seats have an excellent rake. Yes, it reduces capacity but the experience is so much better and the atmosphere of the place is wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 24, 2022 16:33:03 GMT
The RSC had the time, money and space to really sort out decent toilet provision when they did the work on the old RST and linked up with the Swan. But again they, like many others, didn't get it right.
There is still not enough capacity to guarantee audiences can use the bathrooms comfortably during the interval.
Even with staggered start times and intervals planned so they don't overlap between the two theatre spaces, it still doesn't work.
There seems to be a basic lack of understanding of the issues highlighted in this thread.
It reminds me of when the OFS here in Oxford was being redeveloped. The architect thought it was fine for the cast to have to use the same toilets as the audience. They also wanted the cast to carry key cards at all times so they could go down to the dressing rooms. It took several meetings to get them to understand how impractical that was.
I don't think anyone should be allowed to design theatre spaces without having a full understanding of ALL the needs the building needs to meet.
|
|
5,588 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 24, 2022 19:58:24 GMT
When we have massive tellys, ludicrously expensive public transport, more chance of cancellations or cast absences but no refunds, and the big name actors and more outstanding emerging talent being hoovered up for long-running series by the TV streaming giants, theatre should be doing its utmost to make the theatregoing experience as pleasant and respectful to its customers as possible, and right now it isn't. You do realise that short of demolishing theatres which nobody wants or will ever happen, it's hard to create more toilets without hitting capacity or affecting the Grade listed status. O no it isn’t ( as we might say in panto) It is very possible to reconfigure entrances so that women are not queuing in the lobbies (NT) and queuing on the steps ( Donmar tho this may have been improved, don't know) and so on… There are some old theatres with small spaces but tbh they have done a lot to improve these over the last few years. The Bridge shows how it should be done, loads of loos, cubicles with nobody really worrying who is going in and out of them because there is loads of space. Of course it was purpose built. The RSC needs more toilets on the ground floor, yes even more people. There is always a queue at both the main house and the Swan end. This may improve with the Swan refurb but I’m not holding my breath. The NT is appalling with bottlenecks before, during and after a show in all the loos. ( nice image that) I agree with what someone further up has said. You have to make going to the theatre a comfortable and jolly event to get us back.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 4, 2022 11:33:06 GMT
An actual Met Police officer has just been arrested for filming women undressing, sticking his mobile phone under the partition gaps to record them in a mixed sex changing room.
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Apr 9, 2022 17:01:13 GMT
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Apr 9, 2022 17:46:16 GMT
The public toilets across the road from me were converted into a bungalow. I don't know what it's like inside, but it must be rather quirky because it has two front doors at opposite ends of the street-facing side and the one which serves as the main front door has changed over time.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Apr 9, 2022 22:37:50 GMT
I do think that as a society we do public toilets very badly! They are few and far between, and when you do find one they're usually disgusting. Funny how one of the most basic human needs is often so very poorly provided for.
But that theatre does look interesting. I find tiny performance spaces like that fascinating, especially if they try more ambitious productions which mean a lot of creative staging.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 10, 2022 10:51:03 GMT
I agree with that.
There should be more proper public toilets especially in Central London where they are all but none existent, apart from those god awful portable loos for men, which completely exclude ladies’ needs and besides there is no hand wash facilities, so that wouldn’t be for me. Westminster Council has one of the lowest council tax rates in the country, as they raise so much from businesses. So with all that money raised from the entertainment economy, they could build several public toilets.
|
|
5,588 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 10, 2022 21:28:24 GMT
I’m ancient enough to remember public toilets. And there was usually someone in attendance. Can you imagine?
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 11, 2022 13:07:05 GMT
What frustrates me is when newer venues have inadequate toilet facilities.
There's no easy answer in older buildings to ensuring everyone gets the toilets they want, when they want, and the biggest mistake is to think it's easy.
The story from the OFS sums it up. Architects, who may be young, able-bodied men with bladders of steel, that rarely go to the theatre, and definitely haven't worked in one, can't imagine that anyone else's toilet needs are different to their own, or that their brilliant innovation is fatally flawed.
I support the provision of gender neutral toilets, but it has to be done right. The concern that predatory men (cis men) will take advantage might seem irrational to those who haven't experienced it, but is it any less rational than men getting a shy bladder because there's another man at the next urinal? I know older men who might be shakier on their feet or with prostate issues find that it's not so much a shy bladder, but one that takes its time to get going, and sitting down in a cubical is preferable. But it's not as if the theatre going public is somehow immune from its share of perverts, so please let's not argue that perverts wouldn't bother going to the effort of buying a ticket to do their perving. It's possible to design facilities so it's harder to peer over/under a cubicle door or wall, and the danger of a physical assault from a stranger drops dramatically when it's busy.
I actually think more women are embarrassed at the thought of a strange man hearing them wee, or rustling their period products, than they are worried about assault. In an ideal world we'd not have these hang-ups, but you won't undo a life-time of social conditioning by telling someone they are being irrational.
A separate, but not to be sniffed at, issue is that if you are in a controlling hetero relationship then the trip to the toilet may be the only time you are assured peace and can be a useful place for public information messaging on how to get away from an abusive partner.
Keeping some separate ladies/gents will provide reassurance for those with more serious concerns, and all toilet options should be well sign-posted. I'd suggest smaller toilets should have a sign outside to let customers know of the much larger one nearby.
For most people, queues are the biggest issue. At best it's a tedious waste of time, but good access is a medical necessity for others. Even if they can't make room for more toilets, installing units that are less likely to block or break, and don't take ages between flushes is important. And hooks to hang jackets and bags too please.
Better provision of accessible toilets should be the priority if extra space can be found. There rarely are enough, and not all disabilities are visible. Too many people simply stay at home unless they are confident the facilities are available.
Well advertised, adequate interval times too please. People dash to the loo because they want to be able to relax for the remainder of the interval and there's more pressure to do so when the length of the interval is uncertain.
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 11, 2022 13:56:53 GMT
What’s the OFS?
|
|