Quote:
Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp
It's not so much the doing of your own private requirements behind your own locked cubicle door that's the problem.
It's the young hormone driven teenagers of both sexes being in a place where they can lock themselves into a cubicle together which screams out NO! NO! NO!
The perfect location for sexual harrassment too. The shyer more retiring girls would not want to have to 'go' when there may be a crowd of lads loitering outside the cubicle door.
Disabled toilets are different. They tend to be one cubicle only with outside access and one user at a time.
|
Thats assuming teenagers are sex mad and anti-social. If teenagers wanted to have sex in toilets, do you think a sing on a door stops that? There is the same risk of being caught having sex in a cubicle with or without a little person on the door.
Sexual harassment doesn't class as lads standing outside a cubicle door either.
I don't know how old you are but you clearly have a big gap with the younger generation as you seem to think they're too antisocial to go to a unisex toilet responsibly. Gives me the impression its the older ones who'd kick up a fuss about unisex toilets, sounds like the younger ones would just get on with it, which is more likely as the younger generations are brought up in a faster developing society than the older generations who are afraid of change without thinking of every negative aspect imaginable to going as far as assuming young people just want to lock themselves in with eachother in the toilets.
At primary schools both sexes experiment in the cloakrooms, at high school they go to the cinema, believe or not once they leave they do it in the privacy of their own homes. Very few are going to be running to the toilets for a quicky. Theres nothing actually giving them less oppurtunity now before the unisex toilets are in place.
Perhaps in the older generations people DID have to sneak for a quicky where ever they could? Is that what it is?