Brexit won because of anti-immigration sentiment. Since then they've allowed half a million immigrants into the UK and that crazy Liz Truss tried to increase that number. Sunak won't be any different. He claims he'll 'bring it down', but they haven't done so in all the time that they've been in office.
Of course, Labour is even worse. Both parties need to be utterly dismantled to the very last unpaid aide.
To balance it out, they’ll reduce the number of accessible toilets. Why have two toilets when you one? Just ignore all the rape as “asians” will be allowed to go into woman dominated bathrooms with full access.
joint report by the inclusion and diversity teams of the Commons and Lords
Back before the pandemic, the place I worked had a neutral bathroom alongside one for men and one for women. It was used 99% by guys to shit after lunch. You would almost never see a woman using it. I'm assuming this is one of the reasons for the "outrage".
Gender neutral bathrooms aren't the future, are hopelessly impractical and are basically just a thinly veiled attack on the convenience of urinals. Aside from being 'sexual assault allegations' factories.
You would need a buddy-team system just to avoid the batshit 'MeToo' accusations from those 'micro-aggression' gender studies clowns.
What's funny is that a large percentage of public restrooms in buildings are literally just a toilet/sink with no gender distinguishing features beyond the sign on the door. Making them gender neutral is a good thing because it speeds up getting to use one, while maintaining the divide gains nothing.
But instead of saying that, which wouldn't offend anyone, they have to be progressive and virtue signal about it.
If that's the case I learned something new about plumbing. Unless you mean urinals as the option, which is not offered in most non-multiple people sized rooms to begin with.
Urinals are generally available in single person bathrooms in North America. About 30%, there is a urinal and a toilet. It reduces clean-up and gets people in and out faster.
But what I actually mean, is that urinals are space efficient, and speed people through the facility quite a bit by allowing a greater load. Even a bathroom with 2 urinals and 1 stall has twice the through flow as a 2 stall bathroom. Additionally, women spend longer in bathrooms on average, thus reducing the capacity of the facility even further.
Stalls are inefficient, women even more so. In fact, Women need to pee more often than men because of urinary tract length and bladder size--and they need to do so in facilities which can handle fewer occupants per square-foot.
To add insult to insult (in the diaper industry, waste-expulsion events are referred to as insults :D) building toilets in this way is bad business--the bathrooms will need to triple in size, costing a lot more to build and maintain. Businesses will have a cost pressure to underprovide toilets, OR charge for their use because the footprint of the facilities for sex-neutral facilities is quite a bit larger (with a slower through-flow) than just having a male facility and an "everything else" facility.
Women are terrible at shitting and pissing in a timely manner, and it's gonna cost us all money.
But what I actually mean, is that urinals are space efficient, and speed people through the facility quite a bit by allowing a greater load
Well yeah, if you have urinal space then its obviously more efficient. That's why I said it the way I did in the first place.
I was talking about places like restaurants and smaller government buildings where right now both genders have a restroom that is a toilet and a sink. There is functionally no difference between the two beyond the sign. Which means the sign is causing traffic buildup because in a lot of places there will be X more of this gender than the other meaning unnecessary wait lines for one while the other is open. BBQ joint women's rooms see far less use, while "staff offices" see far less men usage for an example I see regularly.
"Gender Neutral" toilets should only legally exist as single person unisex bathrooms, also single person bathrooms should be marked as unisex anyway to prevent fights.
I fear for the UK - these laws are being passed under a conservative government.
Their conservative government stands for nothing and according to the polls will be rightfully decimated at the next election.
Brexit won because of anti-immigration sentiment. Since then they've allowed half a million immigrants into the UK and that crazy Liz Truss tried to increase that number. Sunak won't be any different. He claims he'll 'bring it down', but they haven't done so in all the time that they've been in office.
Of course, Labour is even worse. Both parties need to be utterly dismantled to the very last unpaid aide.
The polls for the opposition are far more dire. Either way, the Young WEF leaders will ensure the decimation of "Great Britain".
Waste of money. Waste of water because they'll do away with urinals. Zero benefits whatsoever. Fucking morons.
To balance it out, they’ll reduce the number of accessible toilets. Why have two toilets when you one? Just ignore all the rape as “asians” will be allowed to go into woman dominated bathrooms with full access.
The problem start with the existence of :
Back before the pandemic, the place I worked had a neutral bathroom alongside one for men and one for women. It was used 99% by guys to shit after lunch. You would almost never see a woman using it. I'm assuming this is one of the reasons for the "outrage".
Gender neutral bathrooms aren't the future, are hopelessly impractical and are basically just a thinly veiled attack on the convenience of urinals. Aside from being 'sexual assault allegations' factories.
You would need a buddy-team system just to avoid the batshit 'MeToo' accusations from those 'micro-aggression' gender studies clowns.
Yes, there's definitely not enough toilet rapes in the UK parliament.
What's funny is that a large percentage of public restrooms in buildings are literally just a toilet/sink with no gender distinguishing features beyond the sign on the door. Making them gender neutral is a good thing because it speeds up getting to use one, while maintaining the divide gains nothing.
But instead of saying that, which wouldn't offend anyone, they have to be progressive and virtue signal about it.
It won't speed up access. It'll slow it down. Right now, toilets have two options: Fast (male) and slow (female). Now there is one option: Slow.
If that's the case I learned something new about plumbing. Unless you mean urinals as the option, which is not offered in most non-multiple people sized rooms to begin with.
Urinals are generally available in single person bathrooms in North America. About 30%, there is a urinal and a toilet. It reduces clean-up and gets people in and out faster.
But what I actually mean, is that urinals are space efficient, and speed people through the facility quite a bit by allowing a greater load. Even a bathroom with 2 urinals and 1 stall has twice the through flow as a 2 stall bathroom. Additionally, women spend longer in bathrooms on average, thus reducing the capacity of the facility even further.
Stalls are inefficient, women even more so. In fact, Women need to pee more often than men because of urinary tract length and bladder size--and they need to do so in facilities which can handle fewer occupants per square-foot.
To add insult to insult (in the diaper industry, waste-expulsion events are referred to as insults :D) building toilets in this way is bad business--the bathrooms will need to triple in size, costing a lot more to build and maintain. Businesses will have a cost pressure to underprovide toilets, OR charge for their use because the footprint of the facilities for sex-neutral facilities is quite a bit larger (with a slower through-flow) than just having a male facility and an "everything else" facility.
Women are terrible at shitting and pissing in a timely manner, and it's gonna cost us all money.
Well yeah, if you have urinal space then its obviously more efficient. That's why I said it the way I did in the first place.
I was talking about places like restaurants and smaller government buildings where right now both genders have a restroom that is a toilet and a sink. There is functionally no difference between the two beyond the sign. Which means the sign is causing traffic buildup because in a lot of places there will be X more of this gender than the other meaning unnecessary wait lines for one while the other is open. BBQ joint women's rooms see far less use, while "staff offices" see far less men usage for an example I see regularly.
"Gender Neutral" toilets should only legally exist as single person unisex bathrooms, also single person bathrooms should be marked as unisex anyway to prevent fights.
Most of the politicians there have no balls so this makes sense on a practical level