Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 22 comments on BU Making More Single-Occupancy Bathrooms Gender-Neutral

  1. Relabeling should take two weeks. Reconfiguring needs to happen now. My students still need to leave their place of work, walk outside, and enter an entirely different building just to use the bathroom safely.

    1. Dear Cara, We appreciate your concern and thank you for your feedback. This important initiative involves new signage, but in some cases requires refreshing the bathrooms with new fixtures and lockable doors throughout the campus. We will work as quickly as possible to implement these changes.

  2. So for the very few that have identity issues, you are incurring a massive cost and greatly reducing the number of single-sex bathrooms for the great majority of students. So women will on many occasions have to use bathrooms with men. How about their comfort level of having men in their bathrooms? How about their feeling of safety? Whose donations are going to be used for this project?

    1. They’re single stall, so no one is sharing with anyone. It makes way less sense to gender these single bathrooms in the first place. If someone walks in on you using a single stall bathroom, there’s a bigger problem. Or you just forgot to lock the door.

    2. According to the article, they’re only reassigning single-stall (as in, one person at a time) bathrooms to be gender-neutral, so there’s no need to worry about men and women in the same bathroom. In fact, as the article points out, these changes are increasing the number of bathrooms available to everyone on campus. (For example, women can now use single-stall bathrooms that were previously designated for men in addition to the ones they’d been using before.)

      I’d say that for those who are not cisgender (which according to a recent study suggests could be nearly 3% of teens, the group which now populates the current undergraduate class, and extrapolated would thus be something like nearly 500 students here at BU), this could be a factor in determining if they choose to live or die. As it says above – “Research has also shown that transgender college students are at a significantly higher risk for suicide and attempted suicide when denied access to bathrooms and gender-appropriate housing on campus.”

      On top of all that, I can only imagine that extra single-stall bathroom access only serves to help those with other conditions who might benefit, even if they’re cisgender. (For example, those with uncomfortable chronic gastrointestinal conditions.)

      Keep this change going, BU!

    3. This is largely a matter of relabeling a bathroom that was already single-use–not a massive cost. This is also really helpful for parents with small children, too. Happy to say we have one of these new gender-neutral bathrooms at the College of General Studies!

    4. “Identity Issues”?

      They don’t have issues with their identity Richard, and that’s a telling and harmful way to describe what’s being discussed here.

      There are members of the BU community who are not served under the present system, and this goes a long way to accomodating them.

  3. I definitely believe this is a good thing! In addition to how necessary a change this is for the trans community to really feel comfortable, it just makes sense in efficiency. It’s a toilet, everyone uses it, deal with it. Having everyone use the same multi occupancy bathrooms with slightly more closed off stalls that either contain urinals or toilets is definitely the most efficient way of everything having one closest to them and to make sure some (traditionally women’s rooms) don’t have huge lines while (traditionally men’s rooms) have short or no lines. This helps equilibrate the burden among everyone. Glad to see BU doing more and hoping they really step up their equality for all the the future!

    1. Dear Alexandra, Thank you for your comments and support. The current initiative is focusing on single occupant bathrooms, but will include your suggestion as we develop the broader campus strategy.

    1. Dear Anonymous, Through our study, we have identified opportunities within COM that will provide all gender bathrooms in that building. As we continue this campus-wide initiative, we will create at least one all gender bathroom at COM in the coming weeks and will continue to evaluate opportunities for more thereafter.

    2. Hello Anonymous, Following up on your comment regarding an all gender bathroom within the College of Communication. Working with the College, we identified an existing bathroom on the 3rd floor of 640 Commonwealth Avenue. This space is now an all gender bathroom. The bathroom in on the west side of the building by rooms 336 and 338.

  4. That being said, I’m somewhat disappointed in the bathrooms that have been targeted for relabeling. In the Life Science and Engineering Building, for example, there are two single-occupancy bathrooms in a given hallway. Previously, they were labeled for “men” and “women”, respectively. Now, one is labeled for “men” and the other is labeled for “all genders.” This seems to be a pattern on multiple floors and is not due to the presence of male-specific bathrooms features (i.e., a urinal).

    I want to clarify again – I am fully in support of gender inclusive bathrooms, but I take issue with what appears to be renovations only to bathrooms that were exclusively female. This practice perpetuates workplace inequities that disadvantage women. Women working in traditionally male-dominated fields often fight for equal pay, promotions, and even office space. One commentator noted that a simple way to tell when women have gained footing in a line of work is whether they have their own bathroom. In LSEB, the bathroom situation (“men[‘s]” vs. “all genders”) inherently implies that this workspace is for men and also anyone else who might be hanging around. I’ve observed three women station themselves on three different floors of LSEB to use the restroom. On another occasion, I watched a woman emerge from the men’s room and furtively apologize to a man who was waiting. I can’t help but notice that these small changes to the restrooms produce more glaring feelings of alienation. LSEB is now meant for men, but also everyone.

    I propose a simple solution – change all single-occupancy bathrooms to accommodate all genders.

    1. Very important point, and one we wouldn’t know not being in those spaces. The hopeful part of me wants to think that there’s some reason why those were easier to convert so they just changed the signage right away, and the “men”-designated ones will be soon to follow. But things aren’t usually so simple. If not, someone should be held to account for the imbalance in access and the messages you’ve rightly pointed out that it sends.

    2. “I propose a simple solution – change all single-occupancy bathrooms to accommodate all genders.”
      – Kyle, I thought that was exactly what Facilities was doing, as it is the quickest, easiest and cheapest to get done now.

      In another building, 2 single-person restrooms that were previously labeled Men and Women have been changed to All-Gender. The one and only change made to the former Men’s room was the addition of a sanitary napkin disposal bin.
      Maybe the LSEB situation is “in progress” and possibly waiting on additional signs, and/or sanitary napkin bins???

      1. You make a good point – I misspoke. I encourage facilities to make these changes to all single-occupant bathrooms NOW. When a judgment call is made of which bathrooms to convert, an element of exclusivity is introduced. The unshared bathroom is exclusive to one group, and everyone else can use the other.

        No custom signs are strictly necessary – labeling a bathroom with a sign that says “restroom” is common and, in my opinion, could be considered inclusive. No sanitary napkin disposal bins are necessary – a simple trash can will suffice. Further, the women’s bathrooms were changed weeks (maybe months?) ago in LSEB. In the time since the changes, there have been additional renovations (i.e. repainting the hallways) that have taken precedence over changing the remaining bathrooms. This communicates to me that the timeline on changes for remaining bathrooms is very hazy. However, I seriously hope you’re right in that LSEB (and any other buildings preserving men’s bathrooms) is a work in progress and that we’ll see additional changes soon!

    3. Dear Kylie, Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. The basement, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th floors of LSEB presently have all-gender bathrooms. On those same floors, we tried to alternate the placement of men’s and women’s bathrooms when and until we come back to update all single occupant bathrooms to all-gender ones in the building. This is a work in progress and will be completed in the next two weeks.

  5. This is important, necessary work. But I am concerned that the same attention is not being paid to new builds. WBUR City Space just opened, and the restrooms there are gendered with no single stall options. What needs to be done to encourage admin and architects to stop designing gendered rest rooms? Restaurants across the country have been creatively designing non-gendered restroom areas for years. All new builds and renovations should included non-gendered restroom areas.

  6. Dear Alexandra, Thank you for your comments and support. The current initiative is focusing on single occupant bathrooms, but will include your suggestion as we develop the broader campus strategy.

  7. A note from Brian Stanley and Rachel Bennetts: We would like all readers to know that this article does not fully express our position on this issue, as communicated to the author and editor. When being interviewed for this article, and in past interactions with the author, we did qualify this as a good first step. Since the beginning of our involvement of gender neutral initiaves at BU nearly two years ago, we have held that it is paramount that the University address this issue in a timely manner, which is why when prompted we did accede that adding any gender neutral restrooms is a step in the right direction. However, the majority of the 30 minute interview for this article was spent expressing our reservations and concerns about the University’s approach to this project– including their decision to not listen to the experts they hired to advise them on this project, and their negligible attempts to include the communities most effected by the issue in the planning and implementation of this initiative.

    Our repeated requests for retraction or correction have gone unaddressed and unfulfilled, so we are publishing our objection here. Please reach out to us at cgsa@bu.edu for further comment.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *