[Tagging] Tag proposal for gender-neutral toilets

Cadence Ember cloudrac3r at vivaldi.net
Wed Mar 24 01:11:13 UTC 2021

> Regarding the proposed key name "all_genders=yes": I fear there is
> the danger of falling into the same trap as with "unisex=yes" - it
> could be misunderstood as that a toilet is free to be used by all
> genders and then again, basically very similar to what the
> unisex-key turned into.

> A key that replaces the unisex-key would best be a (well) known
> synonym to "Unisex" and at the same time be free from possible
> misunderstandings from people that do not know the word.

You're right. I now think `gender_neutral` would be a better

> As I understand it, the common situation where there is a separate
> toilet for women, men and a separate room for wheelchair users would
> check the box on "all_genders=yes". But is this the information we
> look to record? After all, this doesn't really solve the problem, as
> people may still comment about that they are entering the wrong room
> (the toilet for wheelchair users).

I think it's still okay to do this? If the toilet for wheelchair users
does not have a gender marker, then it's okay for nonbinary people to
use it, since it's, well, the only toilet they can use. If people
wanted to tag this as a separate case, where the only gender neutral
facility is one dedicated to people with disabilities, maybe there
could be a tag value like `gender_neutral=wheelchair`...

> My primary concern with tagging is "Can I, as a man, legally use
> this toilet?" If you're busting to use the toilet, that's all that
> really matters.

Yeah, this is what I wanted to map - can $gender legally use this
facility? (Any person can still legally use the wheelchair toilet, so
`gender_neutral=yes` would be more applicable and more useful than
`no` for it.)

More information about the Tagging mailing list