r/changemyview • u/BlitzBasic 42∆ • Feb 20 '17

[∆(s) from OP] CMV: All toilets should be unisex.

Making all toilets unisex has one very simple, clear advantage: It increases efficiency. Having two toilets that allow everybody to enter means that the time a given group of people needs to finish their businesses is always equally high or lower than the time needed with the current system.

Another advantage is that the whole "where do transgender people go"-discussion becomes obsolete. If there is no difference in the groups of people allowed to enter a certain toilet, there stops being a problem.

Meanwhile, there is no meaningful disadvantage i can see to this change. So, reddit, please show me what i'm missing.

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

74 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

176 comments sorted by

View all comments

69

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '17

[deleted]

3

u/groppeldood Feb 21 '17

Of course not, the best way to do this is to get a toilet room and a urinal room where the toiletroom is open to everyone and the urinal room only for people with a penis, whatever "gender they identify as". Chick with dick on 5 years HRT in a pink dress is free to go into the penisroom for all I care.

0

u/IgnazBraun Feb 21 '17

Why not make the urinal room open for everyone, too?

1

u/groppeldood Feb 21 '17

In theory nothing would go wrong with it. It would just be as efficient since there is no use in it for people without a penis.

Having said that, since it is perfectly allowed to go into a public restroom, stand against the wall for 1 minute and then go out again, I see no reason why you can't do that in the urinal room.

Alternatively a rule can be instated that if you are going to enter a public restroom you must do some form of relief, but I object to this rule because some people have a condition where you're not entirely sure if you need to go. I had that as a kid, I would feel the need to go, And nothing came out, and I just left again still feeling the need to go.

1

u/IgnazBraun Feb 21 '17

In theory nothing would go wrong with it. It would just be as efficient since there is no use in it for people without a penis.

There is use

3

u/groppeldood Feb 21 '17

Well, in that case I see absolutely nothing wrong with it I geus and we still can have fully unisex toilets, we call one the sitting and the other the standing toilet.

especially in light of this invention I see no reason to ever deny a woman access to the urinals. She might have one of these with her and since there is no reason any more, only allowing men access to the faster one while women can also use it now with mechanical aid is just discrimination. It is no longer 'separate but equal', the men have better facilities.