To wee or not to wee: the tricky topic of gender fluidity

Mandy Nolan

As we move towards a more gender inclusive, gender neutral world, what is the efficacy of toilets?

Can we say oui oui to the wee wee of the greater we?

If our language, our passport applications and our medical records allow us the fluidity to identify as whoever and whatever we want, then why are we still insisting on such binary definitions of gender for our public toilets?

These are relics of a time-gone-by where we are asked to identify as a little armless man in trousers, or a paddle pop stick of a lady. According to the graphic, men are defined as wearing pants and girls wear dresses (or a cape, depending on your point of view). If we’re trying to subvert restrictive gender identity that denotes only two genders, shouldn’t we start here?

When you start talking about toileting and safe places to take off your pants, the conversation gets really tricky. A toilet needs to be a safe place. You’re never quite as vulnerable as you are with your pants around your ankles. That’s why I only poo at home.

Our home toilets have always been gender neutral. Sure we’ve complained about seat up or seat down. We’ve complained about wee on the floor. We’ve complained about the toilet paper replacement refusal of some genders. But these are minor issues around toilet hygiene.

I’ve been a toilet cleaner; often women’s toilets were the most disgusting. So if the issue isn’t (perceptions of) gender cleanliness and toilet hygiene, why haven’t we moved to ‘unisex’ toilets in public settings? 

Is it because we’ve had to admit that some men aren’t safe? Is that why there’s such a public outcry about the move towards unisex toilets? A new $80 million school project in Brisbane is building unisex toilets, and there’s a sense of alarm.

In fact it made headlines in the Courier Mail with many fearing that this was going to create huge problems and put some young people at risk. That is quite possibly true. Why? Because we accept that some men will cause harm to others. We accept the existence of this sort of potential violence, or threat to safety, as a given. 

While on the one hand, unisex toilets feel like pragmatic realistic thinking – on the other, it’s crazy to be exposing vulnerable people to a greater potential for harm. On a more philosophical level, it shows how accepted male violence is. No wonder we can’t get our stats down. Violence against women (and children) is a cultural norm. We accept that it will exist.

That some men will cause harm to others (including other men) and we adapt our behaviour accordingly. The whole of society acquiesces to men’s violence. Individual women in DV situations get blamed for not leaving, but on a societal level we’re doing the same. We adapt our behaviour rather than demand that their behaviour changes. 

Male toilets are often perceived as ‘unsafe’ places. For years, as a mother of a small boy, I took him to the ladies toilet. I would never send him into the men’s until I was certain he understood how to speak up for himself. The men’s toilet is for men. The women’s toilet has been for children, men who identify as women, women who identify as men and transgender people… basically the women’s toilet has long been open to anyone who doesn’t identify as strictly (cis) male. That’s because ‘women’s space’ is seen as safe space. 

Of course in a school setting you have vulnerable young girls – they’re vulnerable because a hostile masculine society makes them so. Some will be dealing with the onset of menstruation and the sensitivities around that, and this is when privacy and having a safe space is essential. Young people are at risk of having the door flung open, being spied on, being cornered and being bullied or assaulted in a setting where often ‘no one’ is watching.

Philosophically I say ‘yes’ to unisex toilets, but in reality I say ‘no’, because it puts too many people at risk. How can we ever make the issues around where we release our gender fluid more gender fluid? So, here’s my idea for non-gender-binary loos: one for ‘Violent Men and Sexual Predators’ and another that says ‘Everyone Else’.

Support The Echo

Keeping the community together and the community voice loud and clear is what The Echo is about. More than ever we need your help to keep this voice alive and thriving in the community.

Like all businesses we are struggling to keep food on the table of all our local and hard working journalists, artists, sales, delivery and drudges who keep the news coming out to you both in the newspaper and online. If you can spare a few dollars a week – or maybe more – we would appreciate all the support you are able to give to keep the voice of independent, local journalism alive.

8 responses to “To wee or not to wee: the tricky topic of gender fluidity”

  1. Jimbo Jones says:

    Hmmm.. not your most funny haha contribution Mandy, but a worthy subject nonetheless.

    So a local fact for you in reply…

    The new(ish) Ballina Coast High School has unisex toilets – it is just that they are separate individual toilets for people to use on their own. Like a home with a separate WC – not a row of stalls like we see in traditional ‘public bogs’ around the world.

    How’s that ? The solution and the future right here in the Nthn Rivers, and with no need for loud headlines.
    Kudos to the BCHS architects/designers.

    • roger says:

      @Jimbo – building individual toilets is not really a solution – it is avoiding the issue.
      Frankly, I don’t care who is in the toilet when I go and being a grown man I can acknowledge that is not likely to be the case with all – I have been in toilets in pubs and clubs and events where girls (women perhaps) have come and weed in the urinal because they didn’t want to wait in the female queue – and apart from being amused (and a little curious) I wasn’t the least bit offended.

      And then if you ask me to agree to my 14 year old daughter having to use an “open” type toilet with men around (including men dressed as women) then I will object.

      And if you read my first paragraph you will understand the second – because I have no confidence that some men won’t take that “curiosity” too far. And imagining that somehow a few avid feminists (male or female) are going to change the sexual behaviour of the entire population is delusional and unnecessary.

  2. Mandie Hale says:

    I’m with you on this. A thoughtful perspective as usual.

  3. Len Heggarty says:

    As we transgress the wholesomeness of social etiquette and peer back at the hole we have dug back in the garden at the back of the small house to see what has transpired, there is the question of gender in that as we cross over the line there is the third gender, the transgender as we are perplexed on whether we need to sit or do we stand on the issue?

  4. Adrian Labone says:

    25 years ago in Sydney Unisex toilets were in operation. What’s the problem? Whats the necessity of bringing in LGBTIQ discussion?

  5. Mandy says:

    Nope. No. No way. Some places are sacred. Female toilets are one of the most sacred places. Secret women’s buisness… secret women’s talking, howling, peeing, pooing, farting, adjusting your knickers and outfit, makeup and most important, painful heavy periods… blood everywhere… doubled over.. waiting on another girl/woman to come to the rescue. Women’s toilets are places of emenses female only vulnerability …. sometimes the only place until you’ve stopped crying, straightened yourself up and swing that door open to face ths multi gendered world… big fat NO!!!! Keep woman’s toilets for woman by all means add non gendered, but NOT in the chicks loo’s arghrrr!! ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Echonetdaily is made possible by the support of all of our advertisers.