Bathroom gender controversy

by Joe Lazauskas '10

Tuesday January 22, 2008

Transaction is unhappy with Operations and Facilities.

In February of last year, Transaction brought the issue of Gender Neutral bathrooms to the Committee on Student Life. The group believed that the option of gender neutral bathrooms were necessary for the comfort of all students on campus, since a number of students’ gender identities are not the same as their biological sex.

The group explained that this creates uncomfortable and occasionally hostile environments in sexually designated bathrooms.

Student Life responded by recommending to then President Michelle Myers that gender-neutral bathrooms be designated in the New Dorms, Bates and North. President Myers agreed to the recommendation under the stipulation that the bathrooms in the Campbell’s Sports Center, Science Center, and the Library not be considered until a later date.

Since nearly all of the designated gender-neutral bathrooms were single-sex bathrooms on campus, the only modification needed was a sign indicating the bathroom as gender neutral.

The new gender-neutral bathroom signs were supposed to be installed over the summer, but, Vice President of Operations Michael Rengers admitted in the Nov. 28 Committee on Student Life meeting that facilities “didn’t get to it.”

Through the first week of November this year, the signs had still not materialized. Senator Kit Golan, who was heavily involved in the passing of the gender neutral bathroom reform, voiced his dismay that the signs “did not go up until the week before Thanksgiving.”

Transaction also did not find the signs posted on the Pub single-stall bathrooms adequate. Those signs, which include a male and female symbol, are not considered gender neutral.

Rengers explained that there were complications on how to use the machine to create the signs, and admitted he does not even know how he figured out how to make the first batch of signs.

Transaction Co-chair Jacki Lacey spoke at the Nov. 28 meeting alongside Golan. A dispute between the two and Rengers occurred over whether a MacCracken bathroom with a urinal would be converted. The dispute occurred over ambiguous language in the original proposal.

The discourse then soon turned to the signs. Golan and Lacey argued that the current design—an individual sitting on a toilet and reading a book—was unsatisfactory, since it produced giggles in those who viewed it. They felt that these giggles deterred the desired message of gender-neutral bathrooms from being communicated. Golan and Lacey also interpreted the individual as a “man” sitting on the toilet, although others at the meeting, including Senate Chair Lauren Glowzenski, contended that the individual was ambiguous.

“When we looked on the web we couldn’t find a single toilet,” Rengers explained. “And this is the [gender neutral] symbol being used in Scandinavian countries.”

Rengers then became agitated at Golan’s insinuation that the signs were not approved before their production. “You saw the design [before the signs were produced],” Rengers reminded Golan, who then admitted that he had seen the design.

“I feel a little like Operations is being slapped around a little more than we deserve,” Rengers told the committee.

Rengers ultimately told the committee that facilities would attempt to eliminate the little man from the toilet in the design and make new signs.

Following the meeting, Transaction sent an advanced statement to The Phoenix of what they would like to state the next time they come before Student Life.

In the proposal, the group restated that “Transaction found the signs that have gone up to be neither gender neutral or even clearly indicative that they are restrooms.” In their proposal of the new signs, they requested that “the signs should say, ‘Restroom,’ have a symbol of a toilet, and have the braille component to indicate restroom.”

“Transaction was, and is concerned about the lack of follow-through from Student Life to Michelle Myer’s desk to implementation,” the group wrote. “As a whole, we would like to see Student Life work on making sure that they have measures in place to make sure that the students who come to them to enhance campus life are supported in navigating the red tape.”

Transaction detailed their future plans. “In the near future, Transaction will be presenting a proposal for changing a student’s name on their ID so that trans and genderqueer students’ chosen names are what appears, as opposed to a legal name that might be incongruent with their identity (as is the policy now). The housing policy for trans and genderqueer students on campus is also in extreme need of being updated, and Transaction will present recommendations for changes next semester.”