Gender-neutral bathrooms would end the marginalisation transgender bodies face, writes Ella Kotze
On Monday, Wits University’s campus newspaper, Vuvuzela, announced that the institution’s project to create gender-neutral bathrooms was in its “final stages”.
The article quotes project co-ordinator Thulani Nkomo, as saying: “We feel gender-neutral toilets are a must in the university because of the oppression, marginalisation and discrimination that transgender bodies face.”
The proposal for the development of gender-neutral bathrooms has been submitted to the powers-that-be and now awaits approval – the culmination of several years’ activism and lobbying.
The move for gender-neutral bathrooms comes at a time when trans actors and celebrities such as Laverne Cox and Chaz Bono have made great strides towards moving trans lives out of the realm of fetishism and into the sociopolitical arena.
Caitlyn Jenner is perhaps the most famous – or infamous, depending on who you ask – example of trans stardom.
While her public transition has brought greater enlightenment to the masses on issues relating to living while trans, Jenner has also raised the ire of many activists for seemingly reproducing the very circumstances that make life difficult for most other trans folks.
Among other issues noted, very few people have access to the amount of resources Jenner has at her disposal in negotiating the new boundaries of her existence. Jenner’s image is another point of contention as it fosters further ingraining of the need to “pass” – or be read as – either male or female by trans folks, thereby further marginalising those individuals who identify their gender as somewhere in between the two.
It is precisely this ability to “read” gender that lawmakers in North and South Carolina, US, relied on when they forbade trans folks from using bathrooms that match their gender identity, forcing them instead to make use of bathrooms in line with their sex assigned at birth. North Carolina has passed the bill for regulation of public bathrooms, while South Carolina is hoping to follow suit.
Musicians like Bruce Springsteen have subsequently cancelled performances in these states, urging lawmakers to rethink their stance on the matter.
One of the recurring angles used in social media campaigns against this issue make use of a very simple visual tactic.
The picture of a very stereotypically feminine person is juxtaposed with the picture of a very stereotypically masculine person. Both can be said to be sexually appealing, judging by the standards of our time.
Most of the images are of white, supposedly middle class folks.
The viewer is then invited to imagine bumping into either of these persons in the bathroom they least expect to see them – the masculine person in the women’s bathroom, and the feminine person in the men’s bathroom – with the punchline: that is what will happen if Carolina lawmakers get their way.
However, the reality is that these folks will likely not be the ones who are arrested because of this law, but those who present as somewhere in between masculine and feminine – the genderqueer and genderfluid folks, who subscribe to a non-binary gender identity.
This was demonstrated when a cisgender woman – whose sex assigned at birth aligned with her gender identity – was arrested in Charlotte, North Carolina, last week for using the women’s bathroom.
She was read as masculine because she had short hair and was wearing pants, and not much in the form of cosmetics.
In the Vuvuzela article, Alaine Marsden from the Wits gender activist group CtrAltGender calls for the proposed gender-neutral bathrooms to be inclusive of everyone, as trans-only spaces “run the risk of being discriminatory”.
This evokes the mental image of a transphobic person gleefully waiting at the door of the gender-neutral bathroom waiting for their next trans victim to emerge. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel, wouldn’t it?
In fact, this has been the focus of some of the critique levelled against queer spaces in general – nothing easier for a homophobe or a transphobe to get their daily violence fix than walking into a gay club or trans space.
Research has given some credibility to such fears, noting that violence against marginalised groups increase with increased visibility.
Ask any young lesbian in Ekhurhuleni and she will tell you that being known as a lesbian makes life a scary endeavour.
But there is a deeper issue than increased visibility at play here, and it is the common thread between the perceived need for a gender neutral bathroom and the deployment of ultra-masculine and -feminine identities for the validation of trans bathroom use.
Both of these play into the gender binaries that have necessitated their existence in the first place.
Neither challenge the status quo to such an extent that discrimination is actually done away with. Both accept the inevitability of discrimination based on gender identity.
I think gender activists can learn a thing or two from our colleagues in the disability field who have been calling for universal design or universal access for years.
They have thoroughly critiqued the ways in which buildings and institutions are constructed for the sole benefit of those who can see, hear, walk and talk without any assistance.
They have also critiqued the ways in which accommodation for any disability almost always come as an afterthought – ramps for wheelchair access are often rickety last-minute constructions; visually impaired workers are often rendered unproductive because of a lack of technological support; hearing impaired colleagues are often left out of the loop when it comes to office communication. And we degendered disabled folks years ago when we placed most of the accessible bathrooms in or near women’s bathrooms.
Universal design says: let’s make all sites equally accessible to all people; let’s not have a wheelchair ramp next to a staircase, but let’s rather design a new idea that will incorporate both aspects simultaneously.
This principle seems to be in line with our Constitution, which enshrines equal rights for everyone, and I call for the same principle when it comes to peeing.
Why do we need men’s and women’s bathrooms in the first place?
Most men I know hate using urinals, so let’s not use that as a non-negotiable design element.
As for people fearing sexual assault in unisex bathrooms (a concern that is seemingly very widespread), would increased traffic in a communal bathroom not perhaps reduce the chances of being trapped alone with a sexual predator?
Our problem as a society is that we are always trying to catch up. When we realise something is off, we try to remedy the situation by attaching a band-aid solution.
What would happen if we started from scratch and design a way of thinking and doing that eliminates the problem in the first place?
* Kotze is a community and counselling psychologist