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

Rory McCann rory at technomancy.org
Wed Apr 25 07:43:17 UTC 2018


(a) This is OSM, if it exists, we map it. 😁😁 Gender neutral vs. gender
segregated toilets exist. So how do we map that?

(b) Many people benefit from gender neutral toilets: Gender
non-conforming people, some trans people, people with carers of a
different gender. Mapping these facilities allows them to be found.
Wikipedia has more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisex_public_toilet

On 24/04/18 20:02, Tobias Zwick wrote:
> Why do you think it necessary to map at all if any particular toilet is
> segregated or not beyond whether I can go there as a man/woman? What is
> the application?
> 
> On 24/04/2018 18:27, Rory McCann wrote:
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 




More information about the talk mailing list