I found myself today in the hairdressing beauty building of a further education college. And this was the sign on the toilet doors.
 
As almost all of us know, it takes women longer than men to have a pee. So in all buildings where the toilet provision is ‘equal’ rather that ‘just’ (sane, sensible, considered, thought-through, pick your adjective) women have to wait for a loo while (some) men have to wait for their female companion. Madness. I first commandeered men’s toilets well over half my life ago and I’ve been doing it when necessary ever since. But too often, when offered the opportunity to cut their queuing time, women just giggle and stay where they are. We are deeply, deeply socialised into injustice.
 
A sensible solution would be to provide more loos for women than for men in all buildings, but it seems that this would break rule one of building design. So, what a conundrum, when there’s a building that’s used far, far more by women than by men! Clearly installing the same number of male and female loos takes no account of the building’s use. But providing more for women than for men would be ‘unequal’ and might mean men had to walk further.
 
So someone’s come up with a solution that doesn’t collapse the architectural profession: to eliminate the tiny risk that men might be disadvantaged, let’s share. Then everyone has the same queuing time regardless of sex. Genius.
 
I’ll say that again: let’s share. Then everyone has the same queuing time regardless of sex.

Architects, before you design your next building, repeat after me…