61 pointsby herbertl4 hours ago34 comments
  • mstaoruan hour ago
    This really hits home. As a person with IBS I basically cannot peacefully go outside in EU. I lived for many years in China and Thailand, and toilets are free, clean, and plentiful there, and you can easily ask any place to use their toilet - there's no stigma. I even had to run into a police station in rural China once. They were 100% chill about it, though they had to unlock a gate for me.

    Xi Jinping really will be remembered as the Toilet King, he did issue a few decrees early on, and now in every Tier-88 rural Chinese village road you can find a modern toilet (yes, squat), clean, with water. Paper is hit and miss still though. Cross to Hong Kong and it's the same, but paper is reliable. Hong Kong is definitely richer.

    Then take any shopping mall in Bangkok, that's an absolutely next level experience, clean, smells good, relaxing music. Mmm...

    And EU is a freaking horror show. In many public toilets there's a used syringe compartment as well. Truly a 5-star service.

    • deepsun7 minutes ago
      What's wrong about syringe disposal? A significant portion of population has diabetes. And even if a drug addict uses it, still better than throwing to the trash, similar to how cigarette disposals are mandatory in typical airplanes.
  • strbean3 hours ago
    I was in France recently and used a public restroom. It had an attendant, and a fee of €0.50. Charging for the restroom is unfortunate, but this setup is certainly better than eliminating public restrooms entirely.
    • Cthulhu_3 hours ago
      The 50 cents is dual purpose, the one is obvious in that it pays for the attendant and them keeping it clean, but the other is like using a coin to unlock a trolley, it cuts back misuse by a lot. Once you've been to free vs 50 cent toilets a few times you'll see (and smell) the difference.
      • ssl-33 hours ago
        The trolley analogy doesn't really hold up in this context, does it?

        The incentive to do the right thing that a coin-deposit shopping cart ("trolley") adds is the ultimate return of that coin. It's not much money, but it is nonetheless returned when the cart is put back where it belongs.

        If a cart always costs 50 cents and there is no hope of ever getting that money back, then: The monetary incentive to return the cart doesn't exist.

        • ostacke3 hours ago
          Well, even if you don’t get your 50 cents back you usually have an incentive to leave the restroom when you’re done.
          • ssl-32 hours ago
            Does stretching the analogy help to ameliorate the difference betwixt a payment and a returnable deposit?
        • bluefirebrand2 hours ago
          > If a cart always costs 50 cents and there is no hope of ever getting that money back, then: The monetary incentive to return the cart doesn't exist

          The grandparent post is just talking about incentives.

          I guess what you're saying is that if you pay 50 cents for the bathroom then there's no actual incentive to keep it clean because the 50 cents is gone either way, unlike a cart deposit?

          You're probably right about that, but I also don't think most people actually need an incentive not to make a huge mess. I would put money that most messes in public bathrooms are caused by the people that the 50 cent charge filters out. The rest experience some social pressure from the attendant to keep things clean. If all else fails, the attendant can clean up a mess before the next person uses it

    • indoordin0saur3 hours ago
      Would much prefer this than what we have in NYC, which is go into a bar or cafe, buy something small and then use the restroom. Another thing I'll do sometimes is if I see a busy bar where the bartender isn't paying attention you can walk in, pretend you're looking for friends you're meeting, use the toilet and then sneak out.
    • kazinator3 hours ago
      That practically ensures that some people who have to go really badly, and for whom €0.50 is a big deal, will just drop their business on the sidewalk.
      • seszett3 hours ago
        The only place in France I have seen this happen was Paris and public toilets are free there. I haven't seen paid toilets at all in France for a long time, actually. Maybe in train stations though.
        • kazinator3 hours ago
          Yes; the inverse is not true; making it free won't ensure that it won't happen.
        • strbean3 hours ago
          This was a year ago in Nice for reference.
          • mym19906 minutes ago
            I was in Nice as well and found one place that had a public urinal(my back was literally to people walking around). It was a bit odd...but I really had to go.
          • 3 hours ago
            undefined
          • seszett3 hours ago
            Oh I don't doubt you, I was just reflecting that I think that paid toilets have largely been made free in the last 10 years or so.

            But I'm sure there still exist quite a few, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were especially found in right-wing cities like Nice.

      • ishouldstayaway3 hours ago
        > but this setup is certainly better than eliminating public restrooms entirely.
        • 2 hours ago
          undefined
      • zamadatix3 hours ago
        Somehow that seems ensured regardless.
      • marssaxman3 hours ago
        how is that different from what they'd do if the pay toilet didn't exist?
        • 2 hours ago
          undefined
      • cubefox3 hours ago
        It also makes it more likely that hobos and drug addicts don't soil and destroy the public bathrooms.
    • 3 hours ago
      undefined
  • readingnews4 hours ago
    This seems to be happening in public parks also. I visit two cities literally half way across the country from one another, and have visited them for decades. All of the public restrooms in the public city parks (which are quite popular with locals and tourists) are gone. First they closed them, then they tore down the buildings. Locals thought "oh, must be putting in new ones", but no, they were torn down and never replaced.
  • izzydata4 hours ago
    I am going to start calling the reduction or removal of minor things that helped society "micro regressions".
    • Avicebron3 hours ago
      Is tragedy of the commons overused?
    • mingus883 hours ago
      I’m not sure it’s a regression really

      If you look at a graph of the world population it’s seems clear to me that freely available common resources are just going to continue to get overused and ruined as we continue to add people to the equation

      • mym19903 minutes ago
        It probably isn't as much about population growth as the increasing wealth gap. My hypothesis would be that a society where people don't feel fair distribution of wealth is more prone to this 'abuse' that you call 'overuse'.
      • fwip2 hours ago
        Surely bathrooms are something we can produce faster than the rate at which population increases.
      • micromacrofoot26 minutes ago
        but wouldn't that also follow... more people can create and maintain more common resources?

        tbh I think this falls into a more familiar pattern with a coincidentally fitting name: enshittification

        no one makes money off of public toilets, so they don't exist anymore

    • jihadjihad3 hours ago
      Enpissification?
    • nashashmi3 hours ago
      Micro-regressions will largely be in the realm of charity and hospitality as society has aggressively embodied capitalism's cost and benefit analysis.
      • bluefirebrand3 hours ago
        Don't forget privacy

        Feels like tons of micro regressions around our expectations of privacy these days

  • cube003 hours ago
    Strange "For the Classroom" question.

    Men seeking same-sex encounters transformed the pissoir into something its planners never intended. Who ultimately determines the meaning of a public space: its designers, authorities, or the people who use it?

    The law determines that public space can't be used for any sexual activity.

    I'm not sure what constructive classroom discussion you can have when the example is based on the law being broken.

    • teraflop3 hours ago
      Surely there are all kinds of interesting and constructive classroom discussions to be had about lawbreaking.

      Classrooms teach about reality (among other things) and there are many things in reality that don't involve obedience to the law, as it exists at a particular time and place.

      See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

    • ludwik3 hours ago
      It sounds like, of the three options given, you are squarely in the “authorities” camp (although it seems to me that you interpret the question as asking what you believe should happen, whereas it appears to be asking what happens in practice). Wouldn’t it be interesting to hear the other points of view?
    • xhevahir3 hours ago
      They're probably talking about the sociological functions of the facility, not the set of legally permissible uses of it. (There's a pretty famous book on this particular application, Tearoom Trade: Impersonal Sex In Public Places.)
    • smcg3 hours ago
      That didn't stop... a lot of people.
  • xyzelement2 hours ago
    Lack of bathrooms has been called tragedy of the commons in this thread, but it's not the "commons" that are the problem.

    The worst 10% of society determine what we can and can't have. The "commons" aren't having public sex, shooting up drugs, or destroying the bathrooms with lack of... etiquette. The commons are victimized when these things happen and then there's eventually no choice but to shut them down unless there's willingness to crack down on the explicit problematic behavior.

    • ssl-321 minutes ago
      A reduction of public restrooms didn't stop the worst 10% of society from having public sex, shooting up drugs, or destroying an area with their lack of defacatory etiquette -- did it?

      In places where these things were problems with public restrooms, they remain problems without public restrooms.

      The 10%'ers are still doing their dastardly things. The remaining 90% of society still has the same messes to clean up (or to willfully ignore).

      Nothing has been improved in this process.

      • xyzelement17 minutes ago
        Agreed. However it becomes unstable and a massive liability for society to maintain public restrooms.

        So yes the 10% fuck it up for everyone unless cracked down on.

        • mym19902 minutes ago
          How is maintaining public restrooms a "massive liability"? Surely its an inconvenience but massive liability seems a bit of a hyperbole.
    • arjiean hour ago
      You're right about who is causing the damage etc. but the 'commons' does not refer to the people; it refers to the shared resource. So a public park is the commons. And when it gets polluted with plastic rubbish etc. because externalities are not internalized that's a tragedy of the commons.
      • xyzelement43 minutes ago
        Thanks for both teaching me and not losing the forest for the trees of my point.
    • 8f2ab37a-ed6c2 hours ago
      I tried to find a good term for this trend and the best I could do is "defining deviancy down" defined as "the tendency of societies to respond to destructive behaviors by lowering standards for what is permissible."

      It's like a behavioral Overton window that grows downwards.

  • jeffnash2 hours ago
    > Who ultimately determines the meaning of a public space: its designers, authorities, or the people who use it?

    Restrooms are unique in that they are available to the public but, due to their inherently private nature, are a place where it is difficult to enforce social norms. Because of this, within the confines of the restroom itself, the authorities are all but irrelevant.

    I was scrolling through the addictive and easy to stumble into YouTube reels feature and came upon a livestream of a gentleman having some sort of 'public restroom party' in a stall. By this, I mean he had collected every roll of toilet paper available, shredded them into confetti, and was throwing the confetti up into the air while blasting music at full volume out of his bluetooth speaker. He had a few thousand viewers and people appeared to be donating money for supercomments. I didn't stay to watch the end of the livestream, but I don't imagine he cleaned up.

    By the time the private-but-livestreamed confetti party is over, the damage is done. You can try to anticipate every single unwanted activity in a restroom and try to prevent it beforehand (e.g. tinted lights to prevent IV drug use), but someone, somewhere will find a way to creatively make the owners decide a few frustrated customers who are told "no public restroom" is a small price to pay for the alternative.

  • MrDrMcCoy3 hours ago
    I want to know where the public water fountains went. Those are arguably a safety feature.
    • nikole96962 hours ago
      At least in my area, a lot of folks didn't trust the tap water, and more didn't trust the fountain to not be super germy, so fountains just didn't end up used. I noticed many shuttered during COVID then they never got turned back on, then eventually got removed.

      I have seen indoor fountains gradually being replaced with water bottle filler stations, but I personally wonder how often those filters get replaced.

    • redsocksfan453 hours ago
      [dead]
  • vondur3 hours ago
    Here in the SoCal area the homeless were taking over bathrooms to live in.
  • Simon_O_Rourke3 hours ago
    I think it stopped once public bathrooms became used for things other than taking a whizz
    • foolinaround41 minutes ago
      the public bathroom should be redesigned so that one can do only the thing it is designed for - and maybe it needs to be a single-user design.

      Almost like an airline bathroom size - might be a bit claustrophobic but these are for emergencies and space saving would be big.

      the doors could be wired to sensors that are connected to a central network that shows in real-time the availability and also some alarms if something is out of the ordinary etc.

      • muwtyhg22 minutes ago
        How do you accommodate ADA requirements?
    • expedition323 hours ago
      Yeah you have to actually hire people to clean them and patrol for homeless weirdos. Which is why in my country they cost money.

      I never really understood the economics of public restrooms in America. Who pays for them?

      • selectodude3 hours ago
        We thought it was mean to homeless people to make them pay for bathrooms and made it illegal to charge. Then once bathrooms because a massive cost center, we closed all the public restrooms and made it a sex offense to piss outside. So now instead of making homeless people pay $1 for a toilet, we throw them in jail at a cost of $100k/yr.

        Thank these folks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_to_End_Pay_Toilets_i... - the road to hell is paved with good intentions I suppose.

        • 8f2ab37a-ed6c3 hours ago
          Having lived in SF, LA and NYC, I find it very hard to believe that the homeless or the addicts roaming the streets in big cities are being thrown into jail for much of anything short of overt violent behavior. You can see people drop a deuce in the middle of Mission St any day of the week and nobody bats an eye. As people say, "it's just a normal part of life in a big city".
        • jerlam3 hours ago
          We're not throwing the homeless in jail here, but all the streets smell like urine and you have to watch your step on the sidewalk.
          • rawgabbit2 hours ago
            A few years ago I visited downtown SF for a convention at Moscone center. I remember walking along St Patrick’s thinking this is a beautiful place but , my God, the entire area stinks of urine.
        • phainopepla23 hours ago
          Where are we throwing homeless people in jail for pissing outside?
      • xboxnolifes2 hours ago
        I don't think I've seen a public bathroom in America in my lifetime. They're all privately owned, usually required through regulation.

        But to answer your question, public things are paid for by the public.

        • toast02 hours ago
          Never been to a public park with a bathroom, or a state provided highway rest stop?

          Many transit centers are owned and operated by a municipal transit agency and typically have restrooms, especially large airports and train stations.

        • ssl-3an hour ago
          We've got a ton of actually-public restrooms in my neck of the woods (in Ohio).

          Public rest areas are pretty common along major highways and these include restrooms.

          Publicly-owned parks usually provide a place to poop, too: Sometimes it's an installation with composting toilets, sometimes it's just a seat over a septic pit that needs pumped out periodically. Sometimes, it's fancy with flushing toilets and sinks for handwashing. Other times, it's just a rented portajohn (that may be full of spiders and smell like death, or be very tidy). And sometimes, they're locked at night when the park is closed. But -- usually -- public parks of any substance offer something for facilities.

          Just last week, I worked next to a public park in a very small town (population ~2,000) with some well-maintained basketball and tennis courts. There were a couple of portajohns present. (I did not investigate them further.)

          And when there's a major events that draw crowds, like our very public fireworks displays in downtown areas: Temporary restroom facilities are provided.

          What we don't have very much of here are permanent, literal-public restrooms in the denser parts of cities. That is very problematic, but it is slowly improving[1].

          [1]: https://downtownservices.org/news-article/three-public-restr...

      • cnity3 hours ago
        The public pays for them via taxes.
      • addaon3 hours ago
        > Who pays for them?

        Americans. The same population as most of the beneficiaries.

      • mosura3 hours ago
        The problem with homeless is also what do you do with them when you find them?
        • nitwit0053 hours ago
          Several bathrooms at the openings to hiking trails near me had been smeared with feces. The local newspaper reported someone was caught and taken to a homeless shelter. I remain suspicious that simply resulted in the shelter's bathroom meeting the same fate.
      • alephnerd3 hours ago
        > I never really understood the economics of public restrooms in America. Who pays for them?

        Local sales, income, and/or property taxes.

        Municipalities, counties, state, and the federal government all have the power of taxation in the US.

      • ssl-33 hours ago
        We all pay for it. We do this whether publicly-accessible restrooms exist or do not exist.

        Everybody poops; shit happens. The only real question is: Where does this shit happen?

  • forinti3 hours ago
    I used one these things in Portugal a few years ago.

    They are definitely not thought for women.

    • forinti6 minutes ago
      But I have to say that if you have a very cheap solution for 25% of your use cases you should definitely use it.

      What you can't do is neglect the other 75%.

  • 1970-01-019 minutes ago
    Funny how the answer is yet again more tech: bathroomaccess.com - add one when you find it.
  • lurkerforawhile2 hours ago
    there's a market for a gig-economy app where someone brings a toilet to you.
  • jonshariat4 hours ago
    Something else I've noticed, garbage cans are disappearing.

    I had some trash in my car I needed to get rid of: McDonalds? None outside, Tacobell? none outside, CVS? none outside OR inside, The entire rest of that shopping center? nope.

    Luckily gas stations still have them but its sad to see these community service type things disappear.

    • devin3 hours ago
      This reminds me of a story I heard (read?) a long time ago. At Disney World they had a rule about a garbage can being within a 10 foot distance of basically anywhere in the park. The logic was that when a garbage can is nearby, there is additional social pressure not to litter, and the result was that they were able to save money on park cleanup because people used the cans.

      When I see lone overflowing garbage cans in big cities I think about this.

    • etc-hosts3 hours ago
      I haul my garbage home in my backpack like a good little global citizen but the lack of trash cans in San Francisco is crazy

      https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SAN-FRANCISCO-Trash-c...

    • hlynurd3 hours ago
      You would think it's in the interest of whoever is responsible for keeping those areas clean to offer garbage cans.
      • xahrepap3 hours ago
        I live by a park. These places don't care for the same reason the park doesn't care: the wind blows it all in my yard, not their problem anymore.
      • ssl-33 hours ago
        It would be, if the responsible parties were making rational decisions.
        • jerlam2 hours ago
          It is unlikely the low-ranked employees responsible for cleaning up garbage are making decisions on whether to construct or retain garbage cans.
          • ssl-3an hour ago
            Agreed. It was never my intent to suggest that they would be doing so.

            So move up the management ladder, if you will, until a party that is responsible for making this kind of decision is reached. That's the class of party of which I was speaking, and where I suggested that irrational decisions are being made.

            Someone -- at some point -- did make a decision to eliminate outdoor trash cans at these establishments. They used to be present and no longer are, and they didn't disappear on their own.

            • jerlam43 minutes ago
              I'm not sure that anyone in the management ladder is affected. People don't generally choose a fast food restaurant or convenience store based on the cleanliness of their parking lots, so sales isn't going to be affected. Nor is staff, already cut to minimal levels, going to be given additional hours to keep the parking lots clean.

              There even might be a disincentive to have garbage cans if they can't be maintained. People who don't litter will either take the extra step of going indoors, or they might leave it in their own car to throw out later. Whereas people who do litter will do so regardless of when there are trash cans. By removing outdoor trash cans, you've "saved" the staff the time to monitor and clear out those trash cans.

              • ssl-311 minutes ago
                If that's really your take on this then I have no option but to accept it.

                Let's move forward.

                What incentivized them to provide the trash cans to begin with, might you suppose? They aren't cheap to buy, or to maintain, or to keep emptied daily (or as they fill up, or whatever). But yet: They were things that existed, and their existence was definitely deliberate.

                What motivates companies that still provide outdoor trash cans to continue to do so?

    • curtisblaine3 hours ago
      In city centers it's usually counter-terrorism: it's easy to throw a timed bomb in a metal garbage can and flee the scene, so they got rid of them (London did because of IRA, and of course now they have Islamic terrorism). Outside of city centers it's about (lack of) recycling: it's easier to check if you're recycling correctly in your home bin than public bins.
      • lesuoracan hour ago
        Why would you throw a bomb into a garbage can? Who loiters next to one?

        100% just drop it behind you as you exit the tram. Way better metal container for blasting.

        "Counter-terrorism" just means nobody thought about it more than 2 seconds or else they'd have a more specific reason.

    • tamimio3 hours ago
      Blame the raccoons!
  • kazinator3 hours ago
    A pissoir is of little comfort when you badly need a shittoir.
  • curtisblaine3 hours ago
    Fun that this article concentrates on gay sex restrictions and pressure by temperance advocates - two "enemies" that conveniently serve a certain social agenda - while public toilets, at least in Europe, died because of heroin users in the 70s and 80s (they used bathrooms to inject, often leaving their syringes behind, and that became a real problem and society-wide panic during the AIDS boom) and because of the increasing number of homeless people later - who used to clean themselves in public toilets with a sink and more often than not left them in terrible conditions.
  • beardyw3 hours ago
    Yes, where are you going to take a bath, in public.

    It's interesting that this subject is awash with euphemisms. At least pissoir is properly descriptive.

  • polski-g4 hours ago
    • tomjakubowski3 hours ago
      Fascinating stuff. And what a logo.

      > Starting a national crusade to cast away coin-operated commodes, Gessel told newsmen, "You can have a fifty-dollar bill, but if you don't have a dime, that metal box is between you and relief."

      I'm sympathetic to this argument. Carrying around loose change with US-style billfold wallets has never been convenient, and back in the day you'd often find yourself without change for a bus fare or a pay phone and so on in a critical moment.

      Today, though, almost everyone carries either a contactless credit card or a phone with an NFC wallet. I would pay $0.25 for access to a clean public toilet if I could swipe one of those instead of having to carry change.

      LA Metro has these restroom facilities at their rail stations, which are free for a 10 minute visit but require an access code on your phone or a standalone entry pass. I've never used one, but heard great things. https://thronelabs.co/

    • baggy_trough3 hours ago
      Another example of completely counterproductive interference in the free market, this time eliminating public toilets more or less entirely because you can't make money from them and the state is too incompetent to provide them.
  • Daviey4 hours ago
    They all look like lovely "cottages".
    • zabzonk3 hours ago
      Hence one of the activities they are best known for - "cottaging".
  • ButlerianJihad8 minutes ago
    One of the first lessons I learned as a homeless person is that restroom access is one of the most vital things for survival and staying out of jail.

    I am not sure of the real-world risk, but to hear Internet commenters, if you are a man and you urinate in public, you may be on a fast path to being a registered sex-offender for no other reason. That is an obviously sad consequence that no homeless guy wants to be burdened with.

    The first time I needed to go and I was out on the streets, I veered into the nearest resort hotel downtown, figuring I'd just be lost in the crowd of tourists there. It was night but not particularly late. As soon as I got inside the men's room and in front of a urinal, a security guard was on my case. He said restrooms were for hotel guests only. I was very apologetic, but at least he let me finish and let me get away peacefully.

    For all y'all complaining how the public libraries and other facilities are infested with smelly homeless, those are the ones who try to live honestly and stay near sanitation facilities. The libraries saved my bacon when I was on the streets. They were a quiet refuge during the day. I didn't make trouble; I just needed to stay in the A/C and stay clean and have a bathroom nearby.

    People complain about poo in the streets of major cities, but the reality is, if a person cannot afford a restaurant, a coffeehouse, a motel, or whatever else, they will not have access to restroom facilities, and we all poop sometime. So the lack of those public restroom facilities in urban centers is just one more inhumane, hostile environment that tells us to pay up or GTFO of polite society.

  • testing223213 hours ago
    Friends were just in Australia and were immensely impressed by not only the ubiquitous public bathrooms, but also how well maintained and clean they are.

    Tons of free to use BBQs too.

  • ModernMech4 hours ago
    This is why anyone from Eastern PA knows Wawa is considered essential public infrastructure.
    • gib4443 hours ago
      In the UK, it's a big pub chain called Wetherspoons. City centres often have multiple of them too. I don't think any of the toilets need an access code, unlike a lot of other places.

      You can get a £2 pint of cider or ~£1.80 half-decent coffee while you're there too

  • bradgranath2 hours ago
    Jim Crow
  • MengerSponge3 hours ago
    https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1248664709

    Well-meaning activists lobbied to make toilets free, but they didn't build a base to support the continued use and maintenance of those now-free toilets.

  • bethekidyouwant3 hours ago
    Just switch to porta-potties.
  • micromacrofoot3 hours ago
    > Notably, they were only intended for use by men.

    this complicates public bathrooms quite a bit, and ADA requirements do too... once you've got a place to sit and doors on rooms you've got the vagrancy and drug use problem

    though China does ok with the model of a big room with holes in the ground and almost no dividers or affordances at all (everyone brings their own toilet paper, old people bring their own chairs)... they have public workers to hose them out

    • mosura3 hours ago
      Sounds like the Romans had it better than your description of the Chinese, though I am sure in the modern world someone would be stealing the sponges for unfathomable reasons.
  • jmclnx3 hours ago
    Same place free trash pickup went, gov do not want the expense of public bathrooms.

    Here in the US, where I am all public restrooms were gone by the late 80s.

  • baggy_trough3 hours ago
    They were lost due to the tender ministrations of the bottom quintile.
  • wmchen3 hours ago
    [dead]
  • dayyan3 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • ath3nd8 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • farceSpherule3 hours ago
    [dead]
  • mring336214 hours ago
    "Closed due to COVID-19"