Had I ever expected to go viral, it would not have been because of toilets. Yet here we are. More than one million people have now spent more than 9000 collective hours watching a 60-second video of me explaining the inequity of floor space in public bathrooms. Were they on Instagram, I’m sure my parents would be terribly proud.
My intention had been to explain the difference between equality and equity. To communicate that because human beings have different assets, abilities and access, treating them all the same is rarely a fair thing to do. Such examples exist in just about every sphere of our lives, from workplaces to hospitals to public parks. But I was naive enough to choose toilets.
A familiar scene: women queuing for public toilets. Floor space equal to the men’s toilet does not afford women the same convenience. Credit: Getty
The inequity of public bathroom design is in the equal floor space given to men’s and women’s toilets. This is illogical when people’s usage patterns, privacy needs and accommodation are so different. Male-designated public toilets have urinals as well as cubicles, meaning more people can use the bathroom at the same time. But even when bathrooms have an equal number of stalls and no urinals, their design doesn’t account for women taking, on average, more than twice as long to use the toilet.
People using the female-designated bathrooms are more likely to have babies or children accompanying them. If there’s anything we know about offspring, it’s that they excel at slowing you down. Moreover, women have longer lifespans, which means they are more likely to be elderly or disabled and take a bit longer using the toilet.
I added to these objectively mundane points that most people who menstruate are women and they use bathrooms to change tampons and sanitary pads, not only to use the actual toilet – again, taking longer than the average bloke who walks in, uses the urinal, hopefully washes his hands, and leaves.
Did you pick it? Can you identify the colossal controversy in my not especially original explanation of how bathrooms work? Was it a rampage of women, furious and fed up with wasting years of their lives in queues during theatre intermissions and half-time at the footy? Sadly, no. It’s the phrase “people who menstruate” that caused all the fuss.
People’s concern appears to stem from differing perspectives on gender and how language should be used to accurately describe individuals’ experiences. Using the words “people who menstruate”, where previously we might have said “women”, divides the population into three distinct political camps: those who think it makes sense, those who think it’s an abomination and those who didn’t notice.
Generally, “people who menstruate” is employed for purposes of precision and inclusion. Its use ensures transgender and non-binary people feel safe and welcome in spaces where they might otherwise be trepidatious. It also challenges still-prevalent assumptions that only women menstruate and that all women menstruate.
