Female students in particular struggle with the concept of gender-neutral toilets. “Muslim women wearing headscarves, for example, don’t feel safe in the toilets because they might encounter men there”, Ayinla says.
In the summer of 2023, all-gender toilets were installed in eleven buildings across campus Woudestein. It was a simple transformation: the signs on the doors were replaced with ‘all gender’ stickers with images of urinals and/or toilets. In response to complaints, University Council members Nawin Ramcharan and Joseph Ayinla (both of the Liberi Erasmi party) submitted a twofold proposal.
From 28 to 14 toilets
Of the 159 toilets on campus Woudestein, 28 are all-gender. The University Council proposes reducing this to half that number. “This way, we can repurpose the other half as toilets for women again”, says Ramcharan.
The University Council’s proposal is based in part on a pilot study conducted by Utrecht University. The study found that many women are uncomfortable with all-gender toilets and often prefer toilets without urinals. “These findings are consistent with the complaints we’ve received from fellow students”, says Ramcharan.
Not without a fight
The majority of members decided to adopt the proposal, but this did not happen without a fight, says University Council member Cagla Altin (Erasmus Alliance). She voted against the proposal. “It took months for the proposal to be submitted,” she says. “I don’t think we should reduce the number of all-gender toilets at all. That decision could hurt non-binary and trans students and staff. I believe one has to think carefully about what the proposal does to this community.”
Spread
Besides a reduction, the proposal also argues for the toilets to be spread more widely. “On the third floor of the Mandeville building, for example, there are seven gender-neutral toilets, while there isn’t a single one on other floors”, Ayinla argues. For this building, the University Council recommends having three all-gender toilets: one each on the third, fourth and fifth floors. Altin: “I’m in favour of a better spread of the toilets, but reducing their number doesn’t solve the problem. It denies the need for gender-neutral toilets. This is a matter of great delicacy.”
I am not surprised and saw this coming. Transforming all toilets on only one floor per building into AGTs makes no sense at all. Now those who are on T3 but don’t want to use an AGT have to go to T4 or T5, and vice versa, those who want to use an AGT on those floors have to go to T3. Both IDEA groups from RSM and ESSB, who started the initiative for AGTs in Mandeville, voiced these concerns to the facility office when we learned about their plans, but alas, we weren’t heard. Hope RE&F will learn from this and make AGTs also available on higher floors, so that there is also still room for gendered toilets on the 3rd.
It would be much more inclusive to spread the all-gender toilets (AGTs) much more easily around. This would make AGTs easily accessible and not only to those who are on a specific floor.
Ideally, the number of AGTs should be dependent on the number of floors; every floor should have one AGT. And separate toilets for both men and women. So that everyone can be at ease and feel comfortable. Much more inclusive and promoting equality.
Requesting the halving of the number of AGTs is a strange ‘solution’ to the problem of “many women are uncomfortable with all-gender toilets.”
This is the 21st century! If you don’t like to use them, use a women-only toilet (WOT).
And if men do not want to use an AGT, use a men-only toilet (MOT) .
It should not be any problem to have a good number of WOTs, MOTs and AGTs. The Proposal as it is should be rejected.
Comments are closed.