• Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    13 hours ago

    All of this is solved with just using more single occupancy bathrooms. Just an open hallway with rooms and toilets and changing stations. Sinks in the hallway.

    • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Not allowed. I’ll copy from another post:

      No, there’s already rules in place from the previous government which says that all new builds and buildings euch are changing their use must have separate, sex-segregated toilets, unless the building is physically too small for anything other than a single room with a single toilet and sink. You can have gender-neutral toilets as well but not instead

      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        So make the toilets as outlined above, but on the last two doors in the row mark one male and one female.

        • bthest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Yeah. The minority of loud stupid/paid people who care about this really are the ones who should be inconvenienced. If you want a gendered bathroom then there’s an outbuilding you can use. It’s on one plot so technically we’re still within code.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      This is not a bad consequence, better for all of us, even if the trigger is fear and spite

    • zbyte64@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      As a parent of two, this is best for the kids they claim to worry about. It makes potty training much less stressful