[ql06] PUBLIC: Potty Discrimination in Manhattan
- From: "Kenneth Campbell [QL06]" <2kc16@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ql06@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 12:41:30 -0500
HEY!!
I know what EVERYONE wants right now, more public law discussions!!
So, I'm posting the story below, to slake that thirst, Public Policy
Warriors.
I think this is a stunning case on so many levels, but, mostly, for the
s.15(1) Law Test...
Way down there, at the bottom of this email, is a story from
NYC-Manhattan.
Potty Wars are being waged. City council has introduced legislation
creating more toilets, per capita, for women than for men.
Needing a break from criminal law studies and the cheerful subject of
when exactly to give someone 25 years for a disgusting, brutal murder
and when to give someone 10-15 years for a disgusting, brutal murder.
I think it would be fun to take a 30 min. break here and analyze the
social ramifications of this pressing discriminatory issue of
male-to-female toilet rights in government institutions -- and whether
more potties for girls is unconstitutional, goddamn it.
I think I will use this caffeine buzz to rattle off my rendition of the
Law Test for discriminatory toilet allocation. Watch for an exciting
follow-up analysis.
Ken.
--
Behind every great fortune, there is a crime.
-- Honore de Balzac
----------------------------------------------------------------------
N.Y. Council Weighs 'Potty Parity' Bill
By DONNA DE LA CRUZ
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP Dec. 4, 2003) - Potty parity. Squatters rights. Go ahead,
make fun of the fact that several City Council members introduced a bill
Wednesday to have more restrooms set aside for women than men in most
buildings.
To women - and one male law professor dubbed "the father of potty
parity" - it's a matter of gender equity.
"Women need more restroom facilities simply because women take longer,"
said John F. Banzhaf III, a public interest law professor at George
Washington University Law School during a telephone interview Wednesday.
Banzhaf, who was dubbed the "father of potty parity" for filing several
court complaints - including the first one on the federal level - wrote
recently that these legal cases show that women are standing up for
their rights "even if they can't stand up while exercising those
rights."
"We would never tolerate a system where women would routinely have to
wait five times longer than men to have their blood tested, even if
men's and women's blood were tested for different things," Banzhaf
argues. "And we shouldn't tolerate a system where women routinely are
forced to wait five or more times longer than men to perform a basic and
necessary personal function."
So why might women take longer in the bathroom? Because they often have
small children to tend to, they wear more clothes, and, as Councilwoman
Yvette Clarke put it, there's that anatomical difference.
"We don't have the same type of equipment that men have," said Clarke,
one of the main sponsors of the "Restroom Equity Bill."
And women don't use urinals, said Banzhaf, another reason why men can
zip in and zip out of restrooms.
Still laughing? You should stop now, Banzhaf said.
"I think the courts are recognizing that restroom facilities are an
essential important service," he said.
According to Clarke, similar bills have been adopted in at least 12
states and cities like Pittsburgh and St. Paul, Minn. The uniform
plumbing code and the international plumbing code require that more
"elimination facilities" be provided for women than men, Banzhaf added.
In most of the states and cities with potty parity laws in place, the
ratio is two women's restrooms to one men's room. The bill before the
City Council follows that ratio.
Women, of course, are staunch supporters of the bill. Cara Upton of
Manhattan said she often would avoid drinking anything when she went to
a concert or sporting event just to avoid the long bathroom line.
"I've even resorted going to the men's room when I couldn't wait any
longer," said Upton, a "violation" Clarke said she had committed
herself.
But most men were not taking potty parity as seriously as Banzhaf.
"The reason women take so long in there is because they're primping,"
said Jerry McWhorter of Manhattan. "And won't it cost a lot of money to
put more bathrooms in?"
Cost is not a defense, said Banzhaf. In most facilities, all that has to
be done is change the sign on the restroom door, taking away some men's
bathrooms and assigning them to women, he said.
That is currently underway at City Hall, the landmark building where
Clarke works.
The bill would apply to arenas, auditoriums, drinking places, meeting
halls, theaters, public dance halls and stadiums. New facilities and
buildings undergoing substantial renovations would have to comply to the
2:1 ratio. And other buildings would be required to adhere to the ratio
as best possible.
Clarke said the bill is a win-win situation for men and women.
"Men won't have to stand there and hold all our packages while we are
waiting in line for the bathroom," she said.
Other related posts: