Would you favor a law that required public restrooms to have more space (more stalls) allocated to women than to men in order to compensate for the waiting lines which tend to appear in front of women's bathrooms but not men's bathrooms.

Just what we need, more laws.

They should do a statistical survey for that type of venue (theatre, stadium, concert hall, whatever), and base the stall construction on the proportional number of each gender who use the bathroom, and how long each takes. Of course, that doesn't make up for the fact that particularly hurried and unabashed men are capable of using stalls, urinals, and sinks (ugh!!!), but it does help. I'm not sure it should be a law, but it should be a guideline taught in every architectural/civil engineering curriculum there is.

Ron: I'll send you some asbestos longjohns.

A law? No. I think it should be common sense for builders to do this voluntarily. I would like people to enforce the rule that women can't enter men's restroom because of the lines. I worked for event security at the Centrum in Worcester and we actually had to post people outside the men's rooms to keep women out. There definitely is a need for more restrooms for women, but I think legislation should be left to matters of real importance (like pollutants from factories). (They don't need more restrooms, just thiner stalls.)

I think there should be bathrooms that both share!! There could be a separate spot for urinals, but booths could be in large areas. Say 40 of them, and everyone waits equally for them. There's always empty ones in the guys' room - why does that make sense? In other countries (other than the US) people deal with it. Read the book "everybody poops" :)

I'm against new laws, but I'm for the idea. Thing is, I don't know squat about building codes, and for all I know there already are laws dictating how much square footage of bathroom must go into new buildings based on estimates of usage. Seems to me if there are such codes they could be weighted a bit differently, but I don't have any strong opinions. If any laws are enacted or changed, they should only apply to new construction, and only to buildings above a certain size, and they should allow for petition and/or waiver. Allright, I'm getting far too technical here. I think LisaShea's on to something here.

IMHO, this is the kind of law that has turned our legal system into a labyrinthine monstrosity. Can't we figure out some way to deal with these kinds of trivial problems without making laws? Personally, I favor unisex bathrooms, though I realize there are a whole truckload of other problems that go along with them.

Yes, though I'd *prefer* it if we'd cut the crap and have unisex bathrooms. ***after reading others' comments: wow! I'm struck by how overwhelmingly people consider the "it's a law" part more important than the thing being regulated. I can get behind that, though like seven, I don't know what laws currently exist and whether this proposed law would be "new" or not.

What exactly is a "public restroom"? Is this any restroom in a public place (such as a restaurant)? In any case, definitely not. Let the restaurant owner do what they will with their restrooms and let the public chose whether or not they want to give the restaurant their patronage.
(Random unsourced factoid: IIRC, assuming an even gender split in the users of restrooms, it takes approximately three times as many toilets for women than men in order to ensure similar wait times.)
**dpolicar: There is a cost associated with creating (and enforcing) any law. Speaking only for myself, anytime someone proposes a law as a solution to a problem, I immediately weigh the benefits, if any, against the likely cost. Had bill asked "Should architects take this into account?" then my answer would have been very different.

A law would be stupid. Common sense should accommodate for this and that should be encouraged. We have enough laws that are not needed. *** ron2112: How many urinals are there in a mens room and how many stalls are there in a mens room? I bet that in any given mens rooms there are the same number of stalls as in a ladies room. If we take out the urinals I bet that the mens rooms will be a lot more crowded with men waiting for a stall. The urinals are there for the convenience of the man so why not more stalls for the convenience of the woman? The hold up is not that it takes that much longer for a woman to go to the bathroom but that there are less places for her to use in a womans room than for a man in a mens room.

I don't favor regulation, so I would tend not to. If there is currently a law that requires equal space, I'd favor changing it.

You bet...but even better...lets eliminate the entire need for single sex bathrooms and spread out the wait between both sets of stalls .. I have never really understood why bathrooms could not be co-ed.

while this might be a good idea, its not something that should be demanded by law.

I said no, but I'd be much less against a town law then a federal law.

If a facility is equally used by both sexes, the women do need more stalls, but if this is primarily a male facility, leave them as they are.

Maybe they could keep things as they are except for the addition of a "generic" bathroom. I have never hesitated to use the men's room if I really couldn't wait in the line at the women's room. If someone chose not to (or "couldn't")wait they would have the option. They could have a male and female attendant to assure privacy.

A law??? Absurd. Not every minor inconvenience in life should be answered with legislation. Wheelchair ramps are one thing; that's a reasonable use of legislative power to regulate business. But bathroom lines?!?!? Listen ladies, get in there, do your business and get the hell out. I understand you have to sit down and all that, but come on already. Sh*t or get off the pot; your sisters await. And if anyone gives me "yeah but we have to fix our makeup" I'm going to get real non-PC...

***lizzie (or anyone): Okay, so what's the holdup then? While I have no first-hand experience with the particular plumbing in question, it seems to me that it should take longer but not that much longer. It's not like y'all are wearing hoop skirts and corsets anymore. You go in, drop trou, sit, tinkle or whatever, jiggle if that's what you do, wipe, stand, dress, and you're out. I'm assuming there's not the same kind of line at the sink so that's not an issue. What am I missing? I suppose under certain monthly circumstances other steps would have to be taken, but that accounts for what, maybe 1/24th of the women in a given bathroom on average? I just don't see how we get to the "3 times as many toilets" figure. Is there some sort of "chick secret" that can't be divulged?

***re: unisex bathrooms, here's a hypothetical...you're a woman, you're in a skeevy bowling alley full of drunk guys around closing time. Do you really want to wander alone into the unisex bathroom with the fear that you may not be alone in there for long? I know a man could just as easily follow you into the ladies' room, but believe me, the stigma of simply approaching the door to the ladies' room, much less going in, will prevent most drunk guys from bothering. I guess the idea of unisex bathrooms seems a little utopian for my tastes...

***anyone who answered my confusion: Wow, I guess I know now. I had no idea that ladies' rooms were typically just men's rooms with the urinals removed. That is pretty dumb; I feel for ya! I would think the ratio should be ladies' stalls = men's stalls x 3. I think we just need more women in the construction field. Ooo...I think I just got a survey idea...

GAWD yes!!! Please yes!!!

How about a law banning gender-segregated restrooms!

*** LisaShea: Not a bad idea, I think! Great book for those with potty-training children, too!

The few times I have been in a women's room, they have had more stalls than the men's room in the same place. Not sure if it has been as high as # men's stalls + # men's urinals = # women's stalls, though. Also, men will often have kids with them, too (my kids prefer to have me take them to the restroom, so it is more often that I have them with me than that their mom does).
The bottom line is, there should be adequate facilities for the people who need to use them. If there is some requirement that restrooms be segregated, then there need to be enough stalls in each to handle the load. I don't believe it should be legislated, though.
I've worked places where the men's room was just a bathroom, but the women's room had a couch, and a television, and ... This does not seem at all fair to me (not to mention completely unnecessary), but maybe I'm missing something.

I'd rather see more unisex bathrooms - that would also simplify things for my trans friends.

No. Why do we need a law for this? Anyone smart already knows this, and would accomodate for it. **ron2112: women don't wait in line to put on their makeup, just to go pee. **I think I'd be against unisex bathrooms because guys sprinkle on the seats!! Gross. Yes, women do too, and it's just as gross.

no no no ... how many places would just go out of business? who would want to be on the "Potty Police" ???

I wouldn't favor a law, because I dont see this as the government's issue. I do agree with the idea though, but I think there must be some other way to deal with the problem.

1. Women are about 52% of the population (therefore, there are more people for so few stalls).
2. Each woman must go into a stall (no urinals).
3. In most cases, women must urinate more often than men. (I've always peed about twice as often as any boyfriend.)
4. Women are more likely to have bladder infections. (I have at least 2 per year.)
5. Must search for toilet paper (hardly ever any in the stall).
6. Some women have little kids using the restroom as well (girls & boys).
Believe me, we're going as fast as we can.

I am against a law mandating it, but it would make sense to do it.

Women just need to learn how to pee faster!

abstain: i don't favour any laws.

I really don't favor legislating such trivial things.

**okay, now I feel the need to put in my two cents... I don't think that legislation should be done for every trivial thing. it makes people too dependant ont he government. the government isn't there to babysit, they aren't our parents. the problem is that far too many people are willing to let them be our parents, running each little aspect of our lives. You can't legislate intelligence or sense no matter how hard you try.. so stop trying. This issue is trivial. Biologically, men generally have bigger bladders, so they have to go less, but when they go it is for longer (a larger volume is being released). this doesn't balance things out. I don't know enough to say how much extra time is taken because women have to go more often. it is something that should be taken into account by architects or building designers. to my knowledge, the bathrooms are usually the same size, the difference (I am guessing) is that women's bathrooms have more stalls, but men's rooms have urinals. In a roomy bathroom, I am guessing that 1.5 urinals would be about the same space as a stall. in a cramped bathroom, you can have a row of urinals opposite the stalls, so you can have the same number of stalls in both men's and women's rooms, but the men's room has more places to go. the answer is simple, make men's rooms a little smaller and use the extra space in the women's room. no government involvement needed.

The less laws the better.

There is always a line to the women's bathroom no matter where you go and never one in the mens bathroom, but I don't think that there should be a law for it because it would be stupid to penalize someone for not having more womens' restrooms.

I think all of you "no more laws" folks are missing the point that these things are already covered in the building codes and licensing regulations pretty much everywhere. It's not a question of whether or not this should be regulated...it is regulated. Should the regulations be changed to minimize everyone's wait times? I think so. I'm with the "unisex bathrooms are fine" crowd, but I'd rather see more facilities for women than listen to a man complain about waiting for me.