home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!lll-winken!bu.edu!buast7.bu.edu!kane
- From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
- Newsgroups: ba.politics
- Subject: Why Do We Have Separate Restrooms? (WAS Re: Gays, the military...)
- Message-ID: <105715@bu.edu>
- Date: 28 Dec 92 15:46:15 GMT
- References: <1992Dec23.063048.15348@netcom.com> <44026@zygot.ati.com> <1992Dec28.114046.1520@netcom.com>
- Sender: news@bu.edu
- Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <1992Dec28.114046.1520@netcom.com>
- phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
-
- >In article <44026@zygot.ati.com> john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes:
-
- >>Men and women are built differently. They look different,
- >>even with clothes on. I had always assumed that this was the
- >>rationalization for separate toilet and dressing facilities,
- >>not some worry about mental processes concerning attraction
- >>or lust. Nor had it occurred to me that the reason for
- >>separate facilities was to keep men and women from
- >>uncontrollably screwing each other.
-
- >1. Women would complain immediately if restrooms in this country would
- > be made into unisex rooms overnight.
-
- Why women, and not men also? Because men would initiate the hanky panky?
-
- Naw....only GAY men do that. Not the angelic straights...
-
- >We have SEPERATE facilities for men and women because both sexes prefer
- >to have control over their sexual contexts. Women don't want men in their
- >locker rooms, and mostly, men don't want women in theirs (football teams
- >and women reporters).
-
- Again, why the subtle difference in how you word your arguments about men
- and women? Why the implication of ALL women, but only "mostly" for men?
-
- Come on, admit it---the reason we have separate bathrooms is so that men
- don't sexually harass women.
-