Why does the fight for social justice so often focus on bathrooms?

Author, feminist and advocate for the Transgender community Ugla Stefanía Kristjönudóttir Jónsdóttir published a powerful piece in the Metro this month about the discrimination she has faced since childhood because of her gender identity.

The piece opens with an awful account from a 13-year-old student who has never used the toilets at school due to fears of harassment. Ulga goes on to share the pain and abuse she has experienced before and after coming out, moving swiftly from being a person threatened with prejudice to becoming “the threat”.

While the various scenarios and contexts differ over time and location, this account got me thinking about the ways in which spatial resources, design, particularly bathrooms, have become part of the battleground for conversations on civil rights, power and privilege.

Discriminatory processes seem to be repeated over time to make the exclusion against marginalised groups tangible. Time and time again, stereotyping, fear mongering, misinformation and a lack of understanding have fueled exclusionary practices across society which can then be made real in the design of the built environment.

Disabled people in the UK had to wait until the late 90s and the publication of Building Regulations (Part M 1999, part 3) for assurance that provision was made for accessible bathrooms and to be “no less available than for “able-bodied people”. Last year, in 2021 Changing Places, bathrooms for new buildings and supporting severely disabled people became law.

“Campaigner Zack Kerr said the Changing Places announcement was "nothing short of life changing". It seems odd now to think how recently public places did not have to consider the significance and impact of the lack of provision for disabled people.

Research by the Museum of London notes that the lack of access to public bathrooms for women in Victorian times supported the tying of women “to their homes, putting them on a leash as long as their bladder capacity”. 

“In a survey (You Gov 2018), 59% of women say they regularly stand in line for the loo, compared with 11% of men – the result of gender bias in architecture and design, plus a dose of prejudice and taboo.”

There are other examples too of how leveraging the control of fundamental amenities,  such as bathrooms, in terms of accessibility, location and provision were enabled, to support racist ideologies. The Black Code/Jim Crow laws (USA 1856 - 1968) and Apartheid (South Africa 1948 to 1994. ) are just two examples of how race/ethnic prejudice facilitated segregation of human rights such as voting, resources, opportunities and of course amenities which included segregated bathrooms.

Now in the 21st Century, fear and prejudice are again being used to deny and limit the rights of transgender people, particularly and mainly those who identify on the male to female spectrum. Access to amenities and resource provisions for this marginalised group is being questioned, discussed and challenged. Often the conversation is framed as a reduction in rights and provision for women rather than as an opportunity to review how amenity and design can provide greater inclusion.

Recent statements from the Equality and Human Rights Commission EHRC have been unhelpful and divisive in the latest skirmish of bathrooms vs social justice. Legal experts have been quick to point out that discrimination based on Sex and Gender remains illegal.

It is important that built environment professionals including designers and asset managers are aware of the legal and social implications of spatial discrimination, and that they use that understanding to push back on, or advocate for, greater inclusion if faced with client/user objections.

Transgender people should not have to deal with a lack of provision, and/or the bullying and harassment, from using current mainly binary amenities. I believe that with a better understanding of the people we serve, we can reach a place where 13-year old children will not spend their days avoiding bathrooms or coming to physical and emotional harm because their needs were not considered. We as a society and designers of buildings, places and spaces, must learn the lessons from the past.