a further example of creeping political correctness?
or a genuine attempt by a public body to be inclusive to all - as well as recognising the situation seen regularly on the continent, particularly at motorway services....
I would not be comfortable with them...but I guess that is my age. Though I see from the article that this is also for use of transgenders-which makes sense.
As for what the toilets are called-Gender Neutral seems a bit political in its tone.
They have a great system at a market I go to.
Each cubicle has a toilet and sink so it is totally private. The walls go right to the top and bottom so no peeking.
The doors open in to public space - a long, busy corridor so there is no chance of being jumped on by a lurker. Safe for everyone, gender neutral.
I suppose the only problem could be if the door suddenly opened when you are sat on the throne but the locks are sturdy and easy to use.
What's 'politically correct' about it? Unfortunately it is not to be universal; in restaurants, clubs, and the like; so we men will never have the answer to the perennial questions : "Why do they go in en masse, not singly?" and "What the heck do they do in there ?" Bodily functions could never explain the time taken.
Like ummm said. The loo in our house is shared by males and females, so it's no skin off my nose.
Rather than using the term 'gender neutral', which is bound to bate some people, perhaps we should refer to them as 'unisex', an already accepted term?
I always thought mixed loos wouldn't bother me until I went to France, walked in to the toilets and a man was having a pee in the urinal, have to say I didn't like it at all. I would much prefer they were all cubicles like hc describes.
Would nobody else feel inhibited using them? Letting rip with a foul smelling stinker wouldn't be the same if you thought there were people about who'd be offended.