Father demands seperate bathroom for lesbians
March 29, 2002 6:12 AM   Subscribe

Father demands seperate bathroom for lesbians The San Diego school system rejects parents demand to create lesbian bathroom because he did not want his daughter sharing the restroom or dressing area with homosexuals
posted by Lanternjmk (35 comments total)
This just in. School Board demands separate bathroom for close-minded morons. If I had children, I certainly wouldn't want them to share a bathroom with people like this guy. They might get some funny ideas.
posted by mrbarrett.com at 6:40 AM on March 29, 2002

Did you answer the poll? I'm shocked that 52% of respondents are in favor of separate facilities. What year is this??
posted by wsfinkel at 6:55 AM on March 29, 2002

wsfinkel. . . .in Oregon, a ballot measure keeps getting on the ballot (in different forms and with different names), and it basically says, "gays and lesbians are bad people, let's keep 'em away from our kids." This measure gets 44-46% of the vote, roughly, every time it gets on the ballot.

There are a lot more bigots out there than you think.
posted by Danf at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2002

It would be futile to try something like this. For every out-and-about lesbian who might choose to use the little lesbian's room, five or ten water-closeted lesbians would still be peeing and seeing alongside his certified heterosexual darling.

[PSA: to remember that it's separate and not seperate, think of pare and paring knife.]
posted by pracowity at 7:00 AM on March 29, 2002

Why not separate facilities for blacks, asians, etc? Would you want your kid to sit on a toilet seat after one of those types had used it?
posted by Postroad at 7:10 AM on March 29, 2002

Remember, the poll only reflects those who chose to participate, and usually, it is someone who feels very strongly against or for it. It really isn't scientific in the least. That said, flood the bastard (no, of course!)
posted by adampsyche at 7:10 AM on March 29, 2002

I've always had trouble with the spelling of that word! :)
posted by Lanternjmk at 7:15 AM on March 29, 2002

Hmmm, to feel awkward the daughter would have to:

1. Know a particular girl is lesbian
2. Be insecure in her sexuality
3. Be in the same bathroom as the lesbian at the same time
4. Be in a bathroom that has a female urinal
5. Be squatting over a female urinal to have any privy parts exposed
6. And the lesbian would need to be aroused at the sight of a girl squatting over a urinal

Bathroom sex is not my fetish, especially chance encounters with people who have come into the room to expel bodily waste.

If the father is concerned about his daughter being in close proximity to a lesbian, then he should also be concerned about segregated seating in classrooms, segregated seating in the cafeteria, segregated seating in the school bus, etc. To be sure, all good little girls would have to undergo psychological analysis to ferret out all these lesbians. And of course he'll sue the psychologist and the school district when he learns his daughter is lesbian.
posted by fleener at 7:18 AM on March 29, 2002

Unisex bathrooms. It's the only way to go.
posted by UnReality at 7:30 AM on March 29, 2002

I wish there were more background in the article. It's difficult to understand whether the father is doing this from simple ignorance or if he's trying to further an agenda and being encouraged by someone else. Obviously his request is completely impractical. Also, I'm guessing that his daughter is getting teased a lot by the other students over this.
posted by anapestic at 7:31 AM on March 29, 2002

This is typically silly. Here's some perspective for you. When I was in France, I stayed at a student residence where the bathrooms and showers were co-ed. Hey, there were stalls on everything, privacy was assured. Still, I was flummoxed when I found out; my respondent merely shrugged and said, "C'est la France." God I love that country.
posted by mcwetboy at 7:34 AM on March 29, 2002

I guess the question that this raises for me, is why have seperate bathrooms at all? Presumably, one of the main reasons that men and women traditionally have seperate bathrooms, locker rooms, showers etc. is because men and women tend to have different sexual orientations. If sexual orientation should not be relevant in these settings, why have seperate bathrooms at all. Is it just social conditioning?

I have always wondered what the locker room experience must be like for gays and lesbians. While, as a straight man I don't have any problem being in a locker room with a gay man, I know I would be extremely uncomfortable using a women's locker room, largely because of my own sexual orientation. (and I'm sure the women wouldn't be too thrilled about it either). Not being gay, I just don't know if gay men have the same hang ups about other men that straight men have about women. Any thoughts?
posted by boltman at 7:40 AM on March 29, 2002

Is this an American thing? When I had to spend time in a University of London dorm while on a research trip, the bathrooms were unisex--which meant finding both men and women wandering around in towels when you got out of the shower. I was startled, but clearly nobody else was even turning a hair. Perhaps this is a case of selectively "turning off" one's response to other bodies (cf. the experience of taking a life-drawing class with nude models).
posted by thomas j wise at 7:58 AM on March 29, 2002

I think part of having separate bathrooms for men and women is certainly social conditioning (I know I'd think it was weird, and probably be drawn to peek if I walked into a bathroom with guys at a urinal- and at the same time, wouldn't want to be peeked at myself,) but it's also practical: women always have to use a stall, we tend to have more challenging clothing configurations than men, and it takes us longer to clean up afterwards, especially if we're menstruating. While all the additional time and hygiene factors wouldn't matter in, say, an office setting, the wait and crowding would be a nightmare in public restrooms. (It's already plenty bad, which is why you get the occasional stories of women sneaking into men's johns at sporting events- no guy has ever needed to sneak over to the women's just to pee before they explode.)
posted by headspace at 8:11 AM on March 29, 2002

From my experience in high school in a small town, young gay boys are usually too scared out of their wits in a locker room full of jock boys to become even remotely aroused. I always stared straight ahead at my locker or down at my feet during the dreaded changing/showering period.

At this point in my life, of course, if I was in a locker room full of bantering, testosterone-filled naked 18 year old jocks, well... watch out!!! But back then it was not arousing at all.

I would be willing to bet there is some group behind this guy and his outrageously stupid demand. People desperate to make a political point always resort to the tried and true 'think of the children' argument.

Sexuality isn't a bleak, binary plane, Mr. Oregon. When will people finally get this?
posted by evanizer at 8:16 AM on March 29, 2002

Maybe Oregon just needs some of these.
posted by adampsyche at 8:18 AM on March 29, 2002

thomas, different colleges in America have different standards. My first college dorm was co-ed (i.e. unisex), including the large bathroom in the middle. (Originally the building had been a single-sex fraternity.) Yes, this meant being in a stall while women cavorted in a shower or vice versa. Everybody was very cool about it, it wasn't that sexy after the first week, and life went on. Later the same college instituted (or re-instituted, if you will, after a years-long absence) single-sex floors and later an entire dorm, by request.

I know other colleges would never have permitted the first case. Especially colleges with highly religious demographics, e.g. in the Bible Belt.
posted by dhartung at 8:23 AM on March 29, 2002

How about separate bathrooms for people that don't wash their nasty feces-ridden paws when they exeunt the shitter? I just imagine every door knob or handle they touch as another contact point. Eeeeek!
posted by ao4047 at 9:06 AM on March 29, 2002

Hey, ao, good idea. Actually, a cheap way to do this would be special doors with two handles labeled for clean and dirty hands. Might actually do some good just as a reminder.

Anyway, this article is stupid. Nothing happened here. The guy got shot down. More or less immediately. So what? It's not much different from a random bigot yelling something at a council meeting.
posted by Wood at 9:24 AM on March 29, 2002

The more I think about this, the more I agree with the guy. And, consequently, UnReality and Boltman. It makes as much sense to segregate lesbians as it does to seperate men and women. It's one of those things we rarely think about, but ultimately, Men's and Women's rooms make very little sense...except, perhaps, for safety reasons?
posted by Doug at 9:32 AM on March 29, 2002

There's a rat in sep-a-rat.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:33 AM on March 29, 2002

I was scared out of my mind in the locker room. I was so concerned with keeping things down (like my lunch, among other things) while at the same time marveling at all the guys. Very frightening experience for a gay teenager. Especially when most teenage guys are so homophobic they would sooner slam you into the pool then think you might be attracted to them.

I always dressed in the corner of the locker room, where no passerbys would be. But sometimes I couldn't, and you'd have guys walking around naked, and completely freaking me out.

Nope. Not something I'd want to experience again. (At that age... now, oh sure, I'm cool with that. :-)
posted by benjh at 9:45 AM on March 29, 2002

That's odd.. when I was in high school all the bi girls pranced around the locker room, the straight girls stuck to the back of the locker rooms and the lesbians changed in the stalls. Hmmm.. maybe that is just Texas though...
posted by gloege at 9:50 AM on March 29, 2002

Dude, send the lesbians into the guys bathroom.
posted by DragonBoy at 10:31 AM on March 29, 2002

I'm still curious about the logic of this - why is it OK for someone who is gay to be in a dressing room with me and not OK for me to be in a dressing room with women? I'm leaning toward the unisex model like a lot of people here but I still don't know how I would answer the above question were it asked of me.
posted by laz-e-boy at 11:56 AM on March 29, 2002

Because, boy, we trust the gays aren't gonna attack your delicates, whereas we're not so sure you'll leave the girls alone.

Makes perfect sense, no? Well, at least as much sense as the paranoid dad.

I can't say as I could ever find a locker room to be arousing. Generally, they smell too bad. :-P
posted by five fresh fish at 12:15 PM on March 29, 2002

San Diego school system ...

The Grossmont Union School District in El Cajon (geographically near, culturally far) denied the request. Students in San Diego are far more sophisticated.
posted by rschram at 12:23 PM on March 29, 2002

I agree that there should be separate restrooms for lesbians -- to protect the lesbians from people like this.
posted by kindall at 12:28 PM on March 29, 2002

I vote for separate (hey, now I know how to spell, cool) bathrooms for straight males, straight females, gays, lesbians, bi males, bi females, transgender and hermaphrodites. 8 bathrooms should be simple enough.
posted by ookamaka at 12:40 PM on March 29, 2002

Because, boy, we trust the gays aren't gonna attack your delicates, whereas we're not so sure you'll leave the girls alone.

This makes absolutely no sense. Whether gay or straight, all men share the same propensity to lust - unless you have some evidence that proves otherwise?
posted by laz-e-boy at 12:55 PM on March 29, 2002

I hope you all realize that this is just a female conspiracy to get them to build more womens' bathrooms in public buildings.
posted by groundhog at 12:57 PM on March 29, 2002

LBoy: You must have misread the bit where I say that it makes as much sense as the paranoid dad does.

Besides, you can always thump the poofter if he makes a pass at you, whereas those delicate flowers of femininity would be powerless against your male domination.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:24 PM on March 29, 2002

Besides, you can always thump the poofter if he makes a pass at you, whereas those delicate flowers of femininity would be powerless against your male domination.

So, you base the difference on the ability to resist advances? Would that make it OK for there to be a plexiglas wall between the women's and men's locker rooms? What about a man who promises to look and not to touch? Or a woman who happens to be a black belt?

Like I said earlier, the only way out of this mess are unisex bathrooms.
posted by laz-e-boy at 1:35 PM on March 29, 2002

dude, he's joking. see "delicate flowers of femininity."
posted by zerolucid at 4:49 PM on March 29, 2002

I can kind of understand why someone wouldn't want their kid to share a bathroom with someone that could potentially be sexually attracted to them, but there's little doubt in my mind that this claim was almost totally motivated by homophobia.

the daughter's age wasn't given, but I'll figure she is at the most 17. to address fleener's point, who really is comfortable with their sexuality at that age? unisex bathrooms do seem to be the best solution, and would probably help break down a lot of the taboos and preconceptions kids have about each other's bodies at that age.
posted by mcsweetie at 8:00 PM on March 29, 2002

« Older Double Feature: An American History Test & "The...   |   Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments