Bobzilla wrote: this whole topic is why I hold #2 until I get home. Not really, I just prefer to poo in my own toilet and not be bothered.
Everyone likes the home field advantage.
Bobzilla wrote: this whole topic is why I hold #2 until I get home. Not really, I just prefer to poo in my own toilet and not be bothered.
Everyone likes the home field advantage.
Apexcarver wrote:When is the last time you saw this in modern construction?
Man that brings back some old memories. We had those urinals when I was in elementary school. It was a common site to see kids standing at one end of the urinal and see who could whiz the furthest. There was this one kid that could piss into the 3rd troth. He was a berkeleying legend.
Now days I do good not to pee on my own feet.
Spoolpigeon wrote:Bobzilla wrote: this whole topic is why I hold #2 until I get home. Not really, I just prefer to poo in my own toilet and not be bothered.Everyone likes the home field advantage.
Who dosen't like getting paid to poop..
In reply to Fueled by Caffeine:
Me. We only have one stall and I work with a bunch of pigs that can't pee in a toilet without peeing all over the place. At least they have the paper ass gaskets there for a small amount of peace of mind.
Our retrofitted self-flushing toilets at work make a little mechanical/hydraulic sound right before they flush. It sounds like a brief cry of pain. I've pointed this out to my co-workers and now they can't not notice it.
SVreX wrote:alfadriver wrote:I am well versed in all applicable handicaps. The issue was specifically wheelchair radius and wheelchair accessible cabinetry and sink.mad_machine wrote: honestly. one big bathroom with locking stalls would solve a lot of issues.. how many times have been at a game and seen one man in the men's room and a line of ladies trying to get into theirs?Other parts of the world are like that. Exposing yourself in the bathroom is not right in any bathroom for any gender. Anyway, at the hockey stadium in Tampa, all of the bathrooms are stalls only- no urinals anywhere. First step to gender neutral bathrooms. Just make the walls higher and lower. Little girls already go into the mens bathroom (with their dad), just like little boys go into the womens (with mom). This whole thing about newly exposing people to predators is nonsense- they are already there, if it's a risk. BTW, Paul- not all people with handicaps use wheelchairs. Some can use the stairs. Not sure why you think that the only handicap that requires the big stall are wheelchairs.
So are you suggesting that there should be a separate accessible standard where there appears that there is no way a wheelchair can use it?
That seems more problematic than just having one building guide.
Bathrooms need accessibility regardless of where they are, so unless you come up with a proposal to separate the needs, one standard works just fine.
SVreX wrote:Woody wrote: I totally get the whole Liberty and Justice for All business, but in the great Venn Diagram of things, we are expending a tremendous percentage of our time and money accommodating subsets of subsets.Well said. Pretty much my point.
So you guys are upset that groups are voluntarily going out of their way to accommodate other people? Last time I checked, there are no laws that force anyone to have bathrooms that cover transgender people. This is people doing it on their own.
The laws are to specifically prevent that. Prevent people from voluntarily accommodating others. That's how we get laws to FORCE that accommodation.
Or are you upset that handicapped people should get equal access to the same things that you have easy access to?
I don't get your beef.
Empathy towards others rocks.
alfadriver wrote: Maybe what we really need to do is go back to Roman/Greek times where there was a bathroom with about 100 holes along the wall of a 20x20 room. And use togas. Sitting only. No walls, and nothing to see. Can have a conversation better that way, too. Maybe even use marble so that it's nice and cold to speed up the process...
NO!
I think the beef is that transgendered folks, unlike the physically handicapped, do not actually need different facilities. All existing bathrooms already cover transgendered people the same way they cover gay people and people with different colored skin. Why do we need to make laws to accommodate them? They're already accommodated.
Keith Tanner wrote: I think the beef is that transgendered folks, unlike the physically handicapped, do not actually need different facilities. All existing bathrooms already cover transgendered people the same way they cover gay people and people with different colored skin. Why do we need to make laws to accommodate them? They're already accommodated.
What laws are there to accommodate them? I see groups doing it all on their own, though. I mean other then letting them just use the bathrooms.
As I see it, the laws are there to not accommodate them.
Since we are bitching about public bathrooms can we get some sort of standard on where to put the toilet paper. As someone who has to rely on finding decent public restrooms to use at work I am amazed at how many ways there are to screw this up. So close to the bowl that you have to sit sidesaddle, low enough to the floor that you can't get the paper out, it's infuriating sometimes.
After reading page 1, I couldn't wait to post the term hovercraft, but then I saw it not once, but twice on page 2.
Karacticus wrote:Apexcarver wrote:For a while my wife had to work in a place where she had to use the public restrooms of a retail store. Apparently some women attempt to hover regardless of #1 or #2, and their skills are so poor that they E36 M3 all over the porcelain and walls.alfadriver wrote: IMHO, the hard part will be to teach men that it's incredibly inconsiderate to pee on the seat. For some reason, that does not stick to all men. As a man, that's totally disgusting, and I see it probably twice a month. Since there are many places that have unisex bathrooms already, I feel sorry for women who have to deal with that. yuk.According to Mrs Apex, there seem to be some gross ladies around our office who need to learn the same lesson. Something about hovercraft?
So much this ^^^^^^
I've had to unfortunately clean up after this once or twice. I dont care how much of a germaphobe you are, if you have the E36 M3s in public, put your ass on the god damn toilet seat.
alfadriver wrote:Keith Tanner wrote: I think the beef is that transgendered folks, unlike the physically handicapped, do not actually need different facilities. All existing bathrooms already cover transgendered people the same way they cover gay people and people with different colored skin. Why do we need to make laws to accommodate them? They're already accommodated.What laws are there to accommodate them? I see groups doing it all on their own, though. I mean other then letting them just use the bathrooms. As I see it, the laws are there to not accommodate them.
I don't see why we need laws to accommodate them. Just not to discriminate, like we figured out with that different colored skin thing a few years ago. They don't need special facilities, they just need to use what's already there. Let them.
I believe SVReX's concern is that he's going to have to start building something different. I'm with him on that concern. A law that says "don't discriminate and keep your junk in your pants regardless of how you're put together" seems fairly reasonable and all inclusive and is pretty much already in place.
This is not a fuss I've followed too closely. I understand some states are trying to put laws in place to make things difficult for transgendered folks because...well, because different is bad and because of stories like the traumatized 15-year-old when she came across someone acting inappropriately. That's not a good idea. It's also not a good idea to legislate specific rules about bathrooms, just say you can't discriminate. Voila.
In reply to Keith Tanner:
I get that people don't want new laws. But there are NO laws right now that force anyone to build anything. You don't need to worry about something that does not exist.
Paul has done a classic job of putting two issues together, pretending that they equate- the ADA making bathrooms accessible to people with disabilities and the current issue of transgender issues. There are no laws for the transgender groups. Well, laws to accommodate- there are laws to prevent that.
If someone is asking Paul to make something accommodating, it's their option and choice to do that, not a law. And if he doesn't want to do that, it's his choice to not accept that job. Like his buddy who decided that he does not want to partake in people choosing to give people choices and accommodation. You are welcome to do that, but you will get no sympathy from me.
You guys are making an issue where there isn't one. Why?
Now if we go about forcing people to not be accommodating, I can easily see that turning into laws forcing some action. If you go down that path, you are forcing an issue that does not need to even worked with.
Spoolpigeon wrote: In reply to Fueled by Caffeine: Me. We only have one stall and I work with a bunch of pigs that can't pee in a toilet without peeing all over the place. At least they have the paper ass gaskets there for a small amount of peace of mind.
This. Ass gaskets are a must.
A previous employer used to keep cans of spray Lysol stocked in every stall. Which was great because we worked with some serious swamp creatures
Apexcarver wrote:
They used to have these built into the bar at places in Scranton so miners didn't even need to go to the bathroom to take a piss. Just drop trough and go. One stop shopping. Shot, beer back and. ... ahhhhhh. All they needed was a glory hole down there too to go from unusually convenient to EPIC convenience.
FWIW, They became a polished brass novelty around the time they had to let women in.
I totally get the OP's point about absurdity in this particular case. I don't at all question the need for ADA provisions (for buildings, crosswalks, subways, parking, etc) in general.
Tomorrow I will have to read my building and plumbing code books. I'm curious whether every toilet room actually needs to be accessible. Seems like an auto dealership would have accessible restroom facilities in the public area. If an elevator isn't required.. it's surprising that a limited use upstairs restroom needs handicap accommodations. I wonder if they've wasted money in this case.
Regarding special accommodation for trans and gender undecided folks, I like the way the TV show Aly McBeal solved it. One restroom.
And finally.. People who piss on toilet seats and don't clean it up are shiny happy people, whose parents failed them.
Gonna blow your mind:
No gaps.
alfadriver wrote: IMHO, the hard part will be to teach men that it's incredibly inconsiderate to pee on the seat. For some reason, that does not stick to all men. As a man, that's totally disgusting, and I see it probably twice a month. Since there are many places that have unisex bathrooms already, I feel sorry for women who have to deal with that. yuk.
also people need to learn that it's unacceptable to leave your deuce in the toilet and walk away without flushing.
Furious_E wrote: That being said, I do see how the policy of "use whatever bathroom you identify with" can create problems. As someone else mentions, what do you do about a registered (or just a perv who hasn't been caught yet) sex offender who chooses to identify as the gender opposite that of their biological identity? Could this individual potentially pose a threat? Certainly. Does this threat already exist in our current system? Yes, BUT we're now creating a protected class under which these people can, by their own choice, identify. I see problems occurring somewhere down the line, albeit not enough of one to justify tailoring policy around it.
The "Perv" argument has two major flaws:
It assumes all pervs are male.
It assumes that pervs only prey on the opposite sex.
Japanese seem to be fixated on all things toilet, wonder how they do this?
In reply to Cooper_Tired:
Ass gaskets are too thin to do any good. Its been proven scientifically. It's a feel good scam and really only useful for emergency TP.
You'd be better off hovering or bringing Lysol with you.
alfadriver wrote: So are you suggesting that there should be a separate accessible standard where there appears that there is no way a wheelchair can use it? That seems more problematic than just having one building guide. Bathrooms need accessibility regardless of where they are, so unless you come up with a proposal to separate the needs, one standard works just fine.
So, you think it's OK to have a law that requires building a wheelchair accessible bathroom in a place that is not accessible by a wheelchair, and permitted to be so by law? That's completely ridiculous. Even the building inspector and the architect agreed.
It sure is easy to spend money when it belongs to someone else, isn't it?
It's not a matter of having a different standard. It's a matter of having a standard that makes sense.
If you were told all the cars you build had to be outfitted with braille labelled controls, you'd think it was pretty stupid, since blind people can't drive.
In reply to alfadriver:
I have never built a trans gender bathroom, and am not complaining about it. If someone wants one, I'll be happy to accommodate. You are redirecting the issue by saying things I did not say.
My point is the laws we are currently dealing with are ridiculous, and I fully expect them to get worse. The political impetus exists, and I've seen these kind of changes before.
The cost is very, very real. Forcing businesses to spend money to make accommodations for imaginary people with problems that do not exist (like wheelchairs that can fly up a staircase) means less money available for real world problems, like raising employment rates, or investing in technological benefits or environmental improvements.
You'll need to log in to post.
