No Urinals on Navy Carrier Creates Problems and is Unnecessary

WASHINGTON - Aug. 2, 2017 - PRLog -- The decision to remove all urinals from a new aircraft carrier, whose crew will be overwhelmingly male, creates real problems and isn't necessary to ensure female sailors equality in restroom access, argues the public interest law professor whom the media has labeled the "Father of Potty Parity."  It also isn't needed to create "gender-neutral" facilities as the Navy, he says.

        Indeed, notes Professor John Banzhaf, a restroom at his own George Washington University Law School, which he helped develop, is gender neutral and also contains several urinals, proving that the two are not mutually exclusive as the Navy apparently believes.

        Even ashore, permitting men to urinate into urinals rather than toilets has been found to be much more sanitary because it's much easier for them to aim - and to remain on target - since urinals are a much closer target, and their sidewalls tend to reduce splash.

        When they urinate into toilets, they are much more likely to splash urine onto the floor; a condition which is not only unsanitary and smelly, but can also cause slips and falls, especially if a ship is rolling in high seas.

        Indeed, when there are high waves, the problem of splash is exacerbated because of the increased difficulty for men to remain on target as the ship rolls under their feet.

        The alternative, trying to retrain men to sit down whenever they urinate, as educational programs in other countries have tried unsuccessfully to do, is no more likely to succeed with U.S. sailors, and some commentators are even labeling it "emasculating."

        Moreover, because it taken more time when men have to drop and then re-button their pants, and to enter and exit a toilet stall, than it is to just unzip a fly and step up to a wall mounted urinal, such a change - even if it were possible - would be a very inefficient waste of time, especially during critical situations where there may be little time to waste.

        The Navy claims that eliminating urinals from "heads" will make it easier to switch them from use by one gender to another as deployments change, but that's certainly not true, and make no sense when women make up only about 18% of all sailors.

        For example, a head designed to be used by males and attached to male sleeping quarters can just as easily be used by women if the quarters and the corresponding head are reassigned to females.

        Urinals mounted on a well take up very little additional space compared with toilets in their separate stalls, and their presence doesn't prevent the female sailors from using the toilets, since women using the head presumably will not be making any use the urinals, except perhaps to grow potted plants.

        Banzhaf notes, jokingly, that requiring women to actually use the urinals would probably create as much of a mess aboard the entire ship (since women will be using only a small percentage of all the ship's heads) as forcing men to use toilets with their much greater tendency than urinals to splash.

        There's no need to feminize an entire aircraft carrier, much less all future Navy ships if that becomes a required standard for ship design, simply to permit males and females to enjoy easily-converted heads, argues Banzhaf, who has fought successfully for female restroom equality for many years.

JOHN F. BANZHAF III, B.S.E.E., J.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
Fellow, World Technology Network,
Founder, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH),
2000 H Street, NW, Wash, DC 20052, USA
(202) 994-7229 // (703) 527-8418
http://banzhaf.net/  jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com  @profbanzhaf