[OSM-talk] [Diversity-talk] How do you mapping gender neutral toilets? What should the unisex tag mean?

Rory McCann rory at technomancy.org
Wed Apr 25 07:35:40 UTC 2018


My proposal improves the meaning (IMO). A "unisex hairdresser" is like a 
"unisex toilet": all people, regardless of gender, facilitated in the 
same mixed place. Not many unisex hairdressers are gender segregated, 
with males in one room, and women in another! My proposal is that 
"unisex=yes" always means "all genders, and not segregated"

On 25/04/18 04:58, Marc Gemis wrote:
> FYI The unisex tag is also used as a shorthand for female=yes,  male=yes 
> on shop=hairdresser [1] . Giving it another meaning on toilets might 
> cause extra confusion.
> 
> 
> regards
> 
> m
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=hairdresser
> 
> Op di 24 apr. 2018 18:27 schreef Rory McCann <rory at technomancy.org 
> <mailto:rory at technomancy.org>>:
> 
>     Hi all,
> 
>     Let's have a wee talk about how should one map gender neutral (and
>     gender segregated) toilets. There is a unisex=yes for toilets which
>     looks like it might be the number one tag to use. The bog standard
>     meaning of "unisex toilet"[1] is a gender neutral toilet, i.e. not
>     segregated into separate male & female facilities.
> 
>     Many smaller public toilets are single occupancy and hence unisex, many
>     larger public toilets (e.g. in shopping centers) are segregated. Social
>     conservatives are mostly losing the battle on same-sex marriage, so
>     their new target is trans people, and they're proposing "bathroom laws"
>     to limit trans people's access to public life. Some organizations are
>     making their toilets "gender neutral" in response. So there are probably
>     a lot of gender neutral public toilets, and it's very useful for some
>     people to know where they are.
> 
>     But I don't think that's how "unisex=yes" been used in OSM. The wiki
>     page says "unisex=yes" is a shorthand for "male=yes female=yes". The
>     JOSM validator used to suggest that replacement, until I filed a bug[2].
>     iD's preset has 3 mutually exclusive options, Male, Female and Unisex,
>     it won't let you add both male=yes female=yes.
> 
>     If I see "amenity=toilets unisex=yes", I would think this is a gender
>     neutral toilet. If I see "amenity=toilets female=yes male=yes" I would
>     think gender segregated. Big difference.
> 
>     I propose that we start viewing "unisex=yes" on toilets as meaning
>     "gender neutral toilet", which is different from "male=yes female=yes",
>     which is "gender segregated".
> 
>     Thoughts? Feedback? Anything I'm missing? Is unisex-yes tag being used
>     by many projects? What do they interpret it as? It's good not to force
>     things.
> 
>     A year ago Micah Cochran's suggestion[3] would be along these lines, but
>     some changed to toilets:for:unisex=yes (etc.)
> 
>     Rory
> 
>     P.S. I am doing this as part of the "Diversity Quarterly Project"[4],
>     which for the quarter is gendered toilets. Plenty of toilets have no
>     male/female (and/or unisex) tag, and we should add those tags.
> 
>     [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisex_public_toilet
>     [2] https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/15536
>     [3]
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Toilet_Tagging_Improvements
>     [4]
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity_Quarterly_Project/2018_Q2
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Diversity-talk mailing list
>     Code of Conduct:
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct
>     Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
>     <mailto:diversity-talk-owner at openstreetmap.org>
> 



More information about the talk mailing list