Transcriber: Chaemin Lee Reviewer: David DeRuwe
One in six cell phones contain fecal matter
(Audience) Eww!
because the majority of us use our cell phones on the toilet,
and most of us don't clean our phones.
In public restrooms, we fix our hair, our makeup, we watch Netflix,
and we wash our hands, hopefully.
We take narcotics, both legal and illegal,
and the majority of us use the stall that is furthest from the bathroom door
because we believe it is the cleanest.
Our restroom experiences are private, and they're common.
So if we use the restroom for the same experiential and utilitarian purposes,
why is the label on the door such a concern?
Public restrooms have a short yet complex history.
Public restrooms are less than 150 years old.
And back then,
public restrooms were male only.
And today, for the most part,
policy changed, and they're male and female.
But the original restroom, the original public restroom,
was male, female, gender-neutral,
deer, and dinosaur.
(Laughter)
And when did trees become the victim of human elimination?
My first encounter with public restrooms,
or my first memorable encounter with restroom signage,
occurred on a United States military base overseas.
On this base, there were public restroom trailers all throughout the base.
And although there were many,
I'm human and subject to patterns and complacency -
I used the same trailer every day.
I used the same trailer so often
that I began to ignore the signs on the door.
Then one morning, I go to use the shower.
I was the only person in the trailer,
so I step outside the shower curtain to dry off.
And four females walked in.
They stared at me, and I stared back at them.
We stared at each other as if we owed one another money.
"Hey! You're in the wrong bathroom!"
"No! No, I'm not!"
"Yes, this became a female latrine two days ago.
There's been a sign on the door for two weeks."
"Oh."
As restrooms changed, so did the law.
And we often say that the law is too slow to maintain pace with technology.
And to some people, indoor plumbing is modern technology.
I still call my father for help with indoor plumbing.
I'll share another story, and I promise for less of a visualization.
When I first learned about North Carolina's House Bill 2,
also known as "the bathroom bill,"
I wasn't very knowledgeable about bathroom policy.
So when I first learned about the bathroom bill
that restricted people to use the restroom
associated with their gender identified at birth,
my initial reaction -
Isn't that already illegal?
Then I encountered a restroom
that discriminated one gender and not another.
And I was so baffled and confused by the design of this restroom
that I had to figure out why it was done like that,
and more importantly, how people felt about it.
So I seized all the research and dove headfirst into this phenomenon.
There are some organizations
that label one restroom as gender specific and the other as gender-neutral.
I'll give you an example.
You walk into the restroom, and you approach two doors.
The door on the left is female.
The door on the right is male and gender-neutral.
And the situation is often reversed.
Male, and female and gender-neutral.
In concept, this sounds like it solves the utilitarian problem.
But humans aren't utilitarian thinkers.
So
I'll share a story from a college professor.
I recently showed a college professor a gender-neutral restroom placard,
and she said she'd use the restroom.
Then I showed the same college professor the female and gender-neutral placard,
and she declined.
The two restrooms share the same meaning, same definition of the placard,
but yet, two different responses.
The utilitarian response would have been to use the restroom,
but the response is about the perceived experience.
And then we took that same scenario,
and we replicated it with 6,000 participants.
When we showed 6,000 females
the female and gender-neutral, and gender-neutral placards,
89% were more than comfortable with using the female and gender-neutral version.
Again,
two different restroom signs, two different responses.
Well, how would males feel in the situation?
When we showed males the same placards but the male versions,
males typically did not care what the signs on the door said.
Males are very utilitarian.
They'll walk in the restroom,
use the restroom,
and exit the restroom.
But males did have one concern, and it wasn't their restroom.
The concern that most males had was the female restroom.
Males did not want females sharing the female restroom.
During the tense bathroom debate of 2015,
when most people were confused about what was going on in the bathroom,
I was more concerned about what was going on outside the bathroom door.
When is a bathroom no longer a bathroom?
When is it a can, a john, a lavatory, a latrine, or a loo?
When is it a powder room, a potty, or a privy?
And when is it a restroom, a throne, or a water closet?
With so many names,
why are we so hung up on gendered pronouns?
More so,
why are we so hung up on using gender-neutral
as a default option for shared restrooms.
Behavioral science tells us
that gender-neutral is not the preferred option by most people.
So we have so many names for the restroom,
let's start using more fun names.
Although, non-traditional restroom signs
could create a more enjoyable restroom experience,
there isn't a universal answer.
We can probably all relate
to a time we've been to a restaurant that had a foreign theme,
and we didn't know which bathroom door to use.
Are we blokes? Or are we Sheilas?
Traditional restroom signs can be found nearly anywhere.
And organizations are constantly seeking new ways
and more appropriate ways
of conforming to the non-binary gendered population.
What would happen if we took the traditional restroom sign
and reframe the message?
But let's not reframe the message to match the transgender population,
let's match everyone,
and we just might nudge a new normal or a neat default
through behavior change.
We took the traditional restroom placard
with the traditional male silhouette and the word "gender" below it,
and we showed it to males.
And males were very comfortable with the design.
Then we took the opposite version,
took the female silhouette and put "gender" below it.
And females, again, were very comfortable with this design.
But then we thought, "Would it be possible
to increase acceptance and willingness to use
if we remove the silhouette completely from the restroom placard?"
So, we created two more designs:
a gendered M and a gendered F.
And we showed these to males and females alike -
again, 6,000 participants each.
And again,
males and females alike were extremely comfortable
and extremely likely to use this restroom design.
Then the moment of truth.
How would this placard fare for everyone if we had a shared version?
So we showed the shared version to people
who identified as male, female, non-binary, and transgender,
and a significant majority
were extremely comfortable with this restroom design.
But as we got closer to what we felt like
was an appropriate answer for a restroom design
that would work for everyone,
we realize, you know, we don't live in a perfect world.
How would these restroom designs fare if children were involved?
I want you to imagine you're at a concert,
and your favorite artist is to perform.
You wait in line for the restroom,
and the line is long, and it's moving slowly.
You're anxious to get back to your seat.
Then you notice the restroom for the opposite gender
doesn't have a line.
How likely are you to use the opposite gender's restroom?
Here's what we know:
We know males are too scared to go into the female restroom,
and we know that females are likely to invade the male restroom
but are less comfortable doing so.
Same scenario -
now you're waiting in line for the restroom with a small child.
How likely are you to send that small child into that restroom alone?
Less than 1% of people
would allow that child to enter that restroom by themselves.
So then we tested the ALL placard again.
And instead of 1%, we got 20%.
Not the highest results, but greater than the previous 1%.
Then we had one more nudge up our sleeve
to nudge behavior change and get people to accept shared restrooms
when children were involved -
the EVERYONE placard.
The EVERYONE placard has consistently given us
the highest results of acceptance, comfort, and willingness to use
across all gender identities and all situations and scenarios,
especially with parents of young children.
Our perceptions of restrooms are likely to change
from private restrooms to public restrooms.
For example,
we use the stall that is furthest from the bathroom door
because we believe it is the cleanest.
So if we're all using the same stall, is it really the cleanest?
85% of Americans believe they have an exceptionally clean toothbrush.
Toothbrushes are recommended to be stored seven feet from the toilet,
but in America,
the average toothbrush and toilet distance is a mere three-and-a-half feet.
We all believe we're pretty quick on the toilet,
but one in four Americans
will spend at least 60 minutes on the toilet each day.
So not all restroom concerns are about transgender individuals.
When we take an extended period of time on the toilet,
we indirectly create a potty parity concern.
So we try to be equal.
But what does equal mean?
We can probably agree
that an equal statement or action contains a one-to-one ratio.
New York City's potty parity law
states that female restrooms must have two stalls
for every one male bathroom stall in the adjacent male bathroom.
Then there's Denver.
Denver's convention center created a unique restroom
that has partitioned walls.
So when the Denver Convention Center
hosts events that cater more to one gender than another,
the restroom size changes to reflect the audience demographics.
I often advocate
that the restroom experience begins outside the restroom door.
And I'm not sure I've ever come across a person
who was raised in a home with a gendered bathroom.
Maybe, the Denver Convention Center
is a metaphor for potty parity and shared restrooms,
but is it possible that the solution to shared restrooms and potty parity
is not forced policy change
but, rather, creative solutions that are fun and engaging?
I'm Michael Barbera,
I'm a researcher
and I love asking tough questions.
Thank you.