What's up with Westminster Public Toilets

There has been a lot of chatter in the news about Westminster Council's Public Toilets in recent weeks. As someone who spends a lot of time in the area as a tour guide (especially given that about 3/4 of the Loo Tour takes place in the borough of Westminster)

 

For anyone who wants to get caught up: 

This article by Adriean Zorzut about Westminster Council's spending £800 on entry into the Loo of the Year Awards for their Public Toilets: https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/london-council-slammed-wasting-800-30447960

This article about the multi-million pound refurbishment of 8 of Westminster Council's Public Toilet Blocks: Eight Public Toilet Blocks In Central London To Be Refurbished | Londonist

The recent launch of the London Loo Alliance calling for better provision across the capitol: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-loo-alliance-age-uk-campaign-public-toilets-launch-soho-b1195009.html

What is Westminster's Challenge?

A lot of public toilets in Westminster have closed either perminantly or temporarily in recent decades. I'm going to make a possibly somewhat controversial statement that I don't this this is the main issue when it comes to toilet provision in the borough.

Westminster is a particularly interesting case as there is a vast range of needs to consider in public toilet provision, but these can be divided broadly into four groups:

 1) Locals

People who live and work in the city. Though I don't reside in Westminster I would class myself in this group, for the simple fact that I spend most of my working time in Westminster. Locals are less likely to rely on public facilities because we are often going from and to somehwere with a toilet... be it an office, a cafe or restauraunt, a museum, a train station or a home. Most probably even have their habitiual toilets they visit on a regular basis are part of their routine (I know I do!) so are less likely to be caught short, or when they are will usually know where to go.

The two times this group will rely more on public toilets are when spending time in parks (the largest Parks in Westminster are actually the Royal Parks, who have their own public toilet provision not managed by the local council) and those who are runners or cyclists.

 2) Tourists

People in the area temporarily for pleasure or business. Though they will have access to most of the same facilities as locals they do not have the same routines and knowledge, so are somewhat more likely to make use of paid public facilities, especially when transitioning between activities (as a tour guide "where is the nearest restroom" is one of the most common questions to be asked at the start or finish of a tour.)

 

 3) Nightlife

Though there is almost certainly some overlap with tourists and locals I have classed this separately because availability (and also bladder control?) can be quite different for this group. Your traditional public toilet operates during standard business hours, as do cafes and many shops, so these are no longer an option in the evening. Though not everyone out in the wee hours of the morning is going to be intoxicated, a not insignificant portion are, and the inhibitions this brings, combined with the anonimity of darkness and the probably more urgent need when it arises mean that all the fanciest public toilets in the world would probably not totally combat the problem of night time urination and defication on the streets.

 

 4) The homeless population

This is the most important, but also the most overlooked group when planning public toilet provision. Westminster has the highest number of Rough Sleepers in London (2050 in 2023 as reported by Statistica https://www.statista.com/statistics/381365/london-homelessness-rough-sleepers-by-london-borough/ )

This is where privilidge comes heavily into play: they are more likely to be barred from the makeshift solutions of shops and cafes, but also less likely to be able to afford the luxury of 50p just to use a toilet. During the daytime Charing Cross Train Station (which provides free facilities) gets good use, and there are a few urinals, which though not glamerous provide at least a modicum of privavy and containment (at least for those able to go standing up) but there will be times where there is simply no access. 

The plight these people face is not actually going to be solved by better toilet provision, but in the absence of more comprehensive solutions to shelter and housing their needs must be considered in any conversation about public toilet provision if the streets are to be kept clean.

What are the solutions?

Though as someone who loves a beautiful and interesting toilet experience I am not convinced that the current approach of Westminster council funneling money into refurbishment (or even of the Loo Alience calling for more comprehensive on street provision of traditional purpose-built public toilets... much as I am very glad they exist and hugely admire all their members) will lead to an effective and sustainable solution to the challenges faced in the search for a loo. 

Though not a comprehensive list by any means, here are a few things I think should to be considered to lead to truely effective change:

 

Better sign-posting of existing resources

This I think would be one of the single biggest and easiest fixes. There are some great resources out there, like the Great British Public Toilet Map to direct people towards availible facilities. More investment could be made in keeping these up to date and advertising their existance. Westminster council could also be more pro-active in updating its physical signage, and a lot of it is woefully out of date. 

Public campaigns for behavioural change

Though I can't really see this happening because any local authority that rolled it out would probably (not unjustly) fear being mocked for it... what about advertising around planning to go! Signs on the door of the bar reminding people that "last call" should be a reminder for that last trip to the loo (what in my household we call "a precautionary wee"). A "Go when you can, not when you have to" campaign.

More onus on businesses to actually fulfil their legal obligation to provide customer toielts: 

I'm going to use Pret as my scapegoat here for a moment, because it is a routine problem that their toilets will be "out of order" for months on end. They are not the only chain to have this problem, but the one where I encounter it the most. Like most things even this isn't a simple fix... the lack of toilets can range from genuine plumbing problems, to the issue that the very staff who make your coffee are also expected to clean the loos, and simply don't have time (and are more likely to be penalized for a dirty loo than an out of order one.)  In theory anywhere that offers you the chance to sit and eat should also provide facilities, which is not just about urinating, but also giving you the opportunity to wash hands before eating (which you really should do, though many of us, myself included do regularly forget).  If cafes (especially the big corporate chains) risked losing their hygiene rating for not providing loos I suspect they could solve the plumbing problems more quickly than they currently are.  While I don't think reliance on the private sector is the ultimate solution to toilet availability I do believe that requiring them to do the bare minimum of civic duty as part of the cost of doing business would be a start at least.

Public buildings providing toilets as standard 

One thing that shocks me as a non-native Brit is that most libraries seem to not have toilets availible. What if, rather than building more expensive stand-alone toilets (or in addition to this, if funds are there!) local governments put money into ensuring any publicly funded building (Libraries, Police Stations, Council offices) had facilities that were availible to the general public? 

I should note that all the above solutions are largely for the first three user groups I mentioned. The last is the most complex, and probably needs its own post.

10 things you didn't know about Thomas Crapper

It's Thomas Crapper day! Every 27th of January a small protion of the world (if we are honest about it, mostly bathroom manufacturer's social media managers) celebrate the life of one of the most famous names in toilet history! 

Chances are you have heard the name before. Chances are also that everything you have heard about him is false. So here, to set the record straight, are ten pieces of information you never knew you needed.

 

1) He didn't invent the toilet

Either you already know this, or it will be a big shocker... but people have had bodily functions since the dawn of time and consequently have spent thousands of years developing ways and places to deal with that fact. Even the idea of a mechanised flushing toilet (one where you have to pull a lever to make a flush) first appeared in the 1690's and the first patent for a flush toilet was taken in 1976, 60 years before Thomas Crapper was a twinkle in his father's eye. By the time he began his own busieness in 1861 most households had a flushing toilet.

2) He didn't invent the floating ballcock (despite what you heard on QI!)

This is a common misconception which comes from the fact that he held a patent for a 'valveless waterwaste preventer' (though strictly speaking he didn't even invent this, but purchased it from Albert Giblin, one of his employees.) The misconception is so ingrained in history that it slipped past the QI fact checkers in 2008.

However, despite the innaccuracy, it is still delightful to watch Stephen Fry savouring the word 'Ballcock'

 

Click here to see the video on youtube

 

This is the point where my reader will cry 'he really wasn't all that was he?' But stick with me, because this is where we start getting to the good stuff!

 

3) He did invent the bathroom showroom

Thomas Crapper's real genius was not for engineering but for marketing. Until the 1860's the only way prospective buyers saw what they were going to install was through the drawings in sanitary wares catalogues, or tradesmens samples, which look a bit like dollhouse furniture. Thomas decided that people should be able to see and even test the products before use, so he opened England's first Bathroom Showroom on Marlborough Road in Kensington and Chelsea.

4) He did manufacture royal thrones (so to speak!)

In the 1800's Prince Albert (Later Edward VII... the son of Queen Victoria, not to be confused with her husband Prince Albert, who though he was a great champion of the flushing lavatory had also been dead for two decades) asked Thomas Crapper & Co to supply the plumbing for his newly aquired Sandringham House in Norfolk. This order included 30 lavatories and lead to the first of five royal warrents the company was to receive.

 

5) The 27th of January is actually the anniversary of his death.

We know that Thomas Crapper was born in 1836, but not the actual date of his birth. It was likely in early September as he was baptised on the 28th. 

Thomas Crapper died on the 27th of January 1910 of colon cancer and is burried in Elmers End Cemetary (Now Beckenham Cemetary) in the London Borough of Bromley.

6) His name wouldn't have caused comment in his own lifetime. 

The word Crap actually predates Thomas Crapper, coming form middle english slang. But it fell out of use in the 1700's, so that no one thought twice about it in the 1800's. We owe it's revival largely to American servicemen who arrived in England during the first world war. Language had evolved differently in the states, and some words like Crap had never fallen out of style, and when they saw it printed on the rather fine lavatories they found it hilarious. Hence the word was not only revived, but 'going to the crapper' became a popular phrase.

7) We mostly remember him today thanks to a 1960's biography

Thomas Crapper might have been all but forgotten today if not for Wallace Reybern, a humerouist author who published 'Flushed with Pride: The Story of Thomas Crapper' in 1969. Though based on fact the book is highly embelished, and is responsible for many of the urban legends perpetuated today, but it did help to return the great man to the public consciousness. The fact that Reybern subsequently published Bust-Up: The Upliting Tale of Otto Titsling and the development of the Bra" (a completely fictionalised biography) helped to further confuse the public as to whether Thomas Crapper himself had existed at all.

8) Three of his brothers were also plumbers

Though none of them achieved the noteriety, three of Thomas' seven brothers were also plumbers and toilet manufacturers. His apprenticeship was to none other than his older brother George, who introduced him to London and supported him in establishing his own business.

 

9) He liked to start the day with a bottle of champaign

Having achieved financial success and professional prestige, later in life Thomas Crapper would habitually start his day with a bottle of champaign Finborough Arms Pub in Earls Court. The pub closed in 2021, and last I heard was for sale... we can only hope that the new owners see fit to revive the champaign breakfast!

10) Thomas Crapper & Company still exists today

After being sold and asset stripped in the 1960's and lying dormant for decades, Thomas Crapper & Co was aquired in 1996 re-launched as a preveyor of reproduction Victorian and Edwardian sanitary wares. They don't come cheap... the pull chain alone costs £169, and a full toilet set will set you back upwards of £1,500, but I can say from personal experience that for those lucky enough to afford them they are money well spent! (no, I don't get commission... sadly!)

 

2022: Relaunch?!?!?

New Year, new resolutions... 'why not return to blogging?' I thought! It's so long since I have done any significant writing, and there are so many ideas I want to explore. So I opened up the blog and was mildly horrified to see that my last post was just over 3 years ago.

When I began this blog in 2013 I was a freshly graduated Master of Applied Theatre looking for a purpose in life. Loo Tours became that purpose, but I never expected that 9 years later I would still be doing it.  Loo Tours has trundled along. I calculated today that I have now shown at least 3500 people around toilets, which ammounts to more than 1 a day over the last 9 years.

In that time I have moved countries twice (to the US and back to England), got married, had a baby, and survived two years of a global pandemic. On more than once occasion I drifted away from toilets (in a professional capacity... they have been the one true constant in my personal life) but I keep coming back to them. The botomless subject with endless branches to explore.

So, my readers (all 10 or so of you)... what can you expect from here on out? 

• Some combination (tbd) of history, social science, and personal reflection, mostly but not exclusively themed around toilets.
• Updates on what I'm up to  toilet- and other- wise (without wanting to jinx it there are a couple potential exciting things coming up this year.) 
• Occasional but repettative attempts at puns. Mostly bad.
  
• Excellent factoids to throw into your own dinner time discourse... I guarentee they will either stimulate or completely halt the conversation, depending on the company you keep.
  
• The same poor spelling and punctuation you have come to expect from my posts... as the mother of a nearly 2 year old I am incredibly lucky if I get time to write let alone read over what I have written. That said, I love to crowd source my proofreading, so you have my blessing to drop any niggly notes in the comments (plus I think lots of comments boosts my SEO or something. 

My goal is to write a couple times a month as inspiration and the afforesaid toddler allow. Stay tuned next for a Thomas Crapper Day post (unless the muse strikes before then.)

A critical deconstructed response: Public Toilets are Just Not Good Enough (Katy Rice, The Argus, 21 August)

There has been a higher than usual number of public stories in the past weeks, between the Uritrottoirs in Paris, the launch of the Use Our Loos campaign in the UK and the BBC’s big freedom of information request. This has sparked (as it always does) a number of off-shoots which I have followed with interest. In my news round-up the other day I came across this piece by 52 year old Katie Rice entitled "Public Toilets are Just Not Good Enough." The farther I read the more frustrated I became and felt compelled to respond to it… largely because it embodies everything I feel is backwards about current conversations on public toilet provision and because Katie Rice is not alone in these attitudes. Advance warning, this post is a bit of a personal rant.

The link to the original article is here: http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/16588117.public-toilets-for-women-are-just-not-good-enough/

Ms. Rice starts out promisingly enough with the tag line: 

“PUBLIC loos are a feminist issue and if they’re not, well, then they should be.”

She lists the standard toilet closures that we have heard so many times, but the piece quickly descends into a Victorian cis-feminist rant, more a self-indulgent lament than a suggestion for any possible progress.  Below are some of the more mis-guided and offensive statements, and my responses.

“Most of us women do not want to urinate in public. […] Some, tanked up on a night out, do it in the street at one in the morning but the rest of us, quite frankly, are a bit more civilized than that.”

The equation of “being able to hold it” with “being civilized” taps right into the stigma and shame we place on bodily functions, from pee to periods to perspiration. “Civilized” people control their bodies and don’t admit to producing odors or substances.

 “We need privacy and that comes in the form of a cubicle because we can’t and don’t use urinals like men, not being in possession of that handy little gadget that allows men to wee standing up.” 

Has she heard of the She-wee? It's literally a handy little gadget which allows women (or people who are not otherwise naturally anatomically equipped) to pee standing up. But that's a minor point... plus they are better suited to hiking than urban adventures. 

Anyway, she goes on: 

“Women have to go into the cubicle, lock the door, partially undress, put loo paper on the seat (not entirely necessary but many of us don’t want to sit on an unclean seat), wee, wipe, dress…”

Aaaagh! What would otherwise be a sensible commentary on the amount of time it takes gets obscured by the perpetuation of toilet-seat germaphobia... the idea that the toilet seat is the grossest thing in the room. I am all for cleanliness and hand-washing and good hygiene, but the list of things that has more germs than a toilet seat could fill volumes. Among the things on that list: the flush button, the door handle, the taps on the sink, and the hand dryer. So unless the toilet seat is literally covered in poo chances are you're not going to come into contact with anything on there that you would touch else-where in the loo. 

But then she enters the most unforgivable territory yet...

“And in the politically correct rush […]”

Uh oh! Red flag for thinly veiled trans/homo/xenophobia coming up. And sure enough she goes on: 

‘[…] to start desegregating public facilities as gender neutral, women’s privacy and safety have not been taken into account. They may well address the concerns of transgender people who face intimidation and harassment in gender segregated facilities […] but they don’t address the safety concerns of women who make up a far greater proportion of the population.”

Okay. Firstly there is, as far as I am aware (and I have looked), no research stating that gender neutral facilities are less safe. In fact, the limited case studies available tend to point to gender neutral facilities having a lower rate of crime than segregated ones and that in fact because they have higher footfall they tend to be safer.

Secondly the argument that cis-women form a “far greater proportion of the population” is or should be irrelevant when weighing the relative safety concerns. Because there most definitely is plenty of documented evidence of trans people facing bathroom discrimination and violence.

This attitude infuriates me, but it is very prevalent. I have had multiple conversations in the past month with women over 50 who are heavily involved in the world of public toilets who, as one put it "Don't see why the majority of us should be inconvenienced because of a small minority." By which she essentially meant she would rather see an already marginalized group of the population be further excluded from society than give up the personal comfort of the gender segregated loos she has known all her life. Only half a century ago in the US people were making the same arguments for racial segregation in toilets...  and their arguments didn't sound all that different from the ones for gender segregation you hear today.

“On a more trivial level, can we trust men to put the seat down afterwards? Can we trust them not to wee all over the seat we women have to sit down on? Yuk. No, thanks.”

This is straying dangerously into the “boys are gross and have cooties” territory, which is really best left behind in kindergarten (or better yet, never introduced into our consciousness in the first place… side tangent: where does this idea come from?) Women wee all over the seat too... especially when they buy into the previously mentioned germophobia and insist on hovering above it.

She finishes: 

"What it all comes back to is a lack of public facilities particularly for women. Women have long complained about this problem but they are not being listened to. I don’t think women are being consulted when new buildings are being designed or about existing public toilets. And I don’t think we are making enough noise about it."

In and of itself I can't fault any of these statements. Yes, there is a lack of facilities. And toilet design in a field historically dominated by heterosexual cis-gended men, and therefore the facilities are designed with their bodies and comfort in mind. So by all means let's make noise about it! But lets do it in a way that looks forward rather than drags us backwards. 

The more I get involved in this world of toilet campaigners the more it strikes me how many conversations about publicly available toilets look backwards instead of forwards. Campaigners arguing for Victorian ideals of a discreet private room, segregated by a comfortable gender binary.

And I'm unsatisfied with my own response because I don't know what all the answers are. But whatever they are I think they have to do with much wider questions than public toilets. Because these places don't exist in isolation. They are a reflection, perhaps even an amplification of, our cultural beliefs about bodies, gender, class, morality and propriety.

A feminist toilet story

It's International Day of the Girl, which seemed like as good an excuse as any to catch up on some stories and news. I don't generally consider myself to be a militant feminist, but more and more these days as I read stories and look at history of gender disparities in toilet provision I find myself climbing up on a metaphorical soap-box, and crying foul.

Author's note: It should of course be acknowledged that this issue goes far beyond the gender binary. I have used the terms "men" and "women" throughout most of this piece partly because that is how much of the historical literature and current press divides the matter, but there are, of course, women with penises, men with vaginas, and people who defy any of these prescriptive lables. Perhaps a more accurate division would have been to write about people with external and internal plumbing... but even this didn't seem quite right, as public urinals tend to be for the benefit of (and safest for) cis-gender hetero males... hence I have stuck with slightly clunky outdated terms. I welcome comments on how to do better at integrating inclusive language!

So to bodily functions:

A few weeks back some excitement was caused in the toilet world by news from Amsterdam of a young Dutch Woman, Geerte Piening, who found herself unintentionally at the centre of a debate around women's toilets. From what I have been able to piece together from news reports, the story actually begins in 2015 when she availed herself of an alleyway after a night out drinking. She was caught and fined 140 euros for this action, but decided to fight it on the grounds of sexism: Amsterdam has 33 urinals but only three or four toilets open for women at that hour. Two and a half years later when her appeal was finally heard the judge (male) reduced the fine to 90 euros, but maintained that she should have used a urinal ("It wouldn't be pleasant, but it can be done.")

There is now a facebook page and a women's movement urging women to take photos of themselves in urinals and show the impracticality of their use.

The story intrigued me because I have been saying for years that if women want better access to toilets we are going to have to start peeing in public. Admittedly this has always been somewhat in jest (from a public health point of view I recognize that it is a terrible idea) but the fact remains that part of the reason urinals are plonked on every street corner of Soho on a Friday night is that it is generally expected that men will be out and needing relieve themselves, while women are expected to hold it. I haven't done a comprehensive urinal count of the city, but I can tell you that on my tours alone we pass at least 4 more places where men can go than we do for women in a mile-long walk. Here are a couple of them:

City planners and officials will (as the Amsterdam judge did) argue the impracticality and expense of such accommodation. The fact remains that women's anatomy is seen as problematic, and more complicated to deal with. Women's toilets have been described variously as "objectionable on the score of delicacy" "an abomination" and "an unnecessary expense."

This toilet debate puts me in mind of the social and medical models of disability. The medical model says that it is the person who is broken and needs to be fixed- whether because they can't climb stairs or hear or deal with overstimulation. It looks for ways to help them conform to social expectations, and expects them to adapt. The social model meanwhile argues that disability is to a large extent created by these imposed societal norms, and takes the more holistic idea that society can adapt through inclusive design and different approaches.

The field of toilet design has historically been dominated by men. It seeps across our culture in subtle ways. My favorite example: why do jeans (generally considered to be gender neutral clothing) have a zip closure at the front, if not to allow men to urinate with greater ease? Skeptical that this is the case? Look at the fact that cultures which prefer squatting over sitting tend to favor robes for both genders. These things may have been obscured by the world of fashion, but I firmly believe that the origins of our aesthetic preferences are at least to some extent rooted in the basic functionality of allowing us to relieve ourselves in the most practical manner.

Anyway, this rambling is to say, that while we often take for granted the way things are, there are other ways forward. It may sound extreme to say that we live in a world designed by and for men, but there are subtle signs of that all around us. We've got to start somewhere, so why not with toilets (which, after all, provide access to greater participation in society.) The challenges this disparity creates range from the relatively frivolous (longer queueing times) to the very serious (girls leaving school when they start menstruating because they have no where to go.)

The solution may not yet be obvious, and there is unlikely to be a gender-wide consensus on the best way to approach the issue. Some women will merrily use a she-wee, or a women's urinal, while others see them as degrading or just uncomfortable (which in turn, it could be argued, is a product of our social conventions and ideas of propriety.) There will never be a one-size-fits-all solution.

Right now I think the best we can hope for is to start the conversations. We may not have the answers, but by airing the issues in public we can get more people thinking about what the alternatives might be. Many people (men and women) haven't thought about it simply because our approach is so ingrained that it hadn't occurred to them there was anything to think about.

Do you have a story on the subject, a favorite solution, or an idea that hasn't even been mentioned yet? Do share in the comments!

Thames Barrier Test Day

Today was the annual closure of the Thames Barrier. One of the largest flood barriers in the world, it has protected London from Storm surges and unusually high tides since 1984. It is raised once a month for testing, but a scheduled full closure only happens once a year and is a rather special occasion.

We arrived on the South Bank near Greenwich around 9 in the morning when it was quiet, save for lots of Environment Agency staff bustling about and setting up. We set up a picnic on the grass and waited. By the time things got started an hour later the road was lined with people who had come out to watch.

There are ten gates, four of which lower down and six which lie in the river bed and rise up. They moved one at a time, each one taking about ten minutes to raise or lower. By 11:30 the whole thing was in place. It would stay there until after high tide, and then raise a few meters to allow underspill and level out the water before opening the gates again (we didn't end up staying until the end, so will have to catch the underspill another time. It's apparently a great time to see lots of birds who come to feast on the fish it churns up.)

The barriers have closed 176 times for flood defense (an average of about 5 or 6 times a year) in addition to their routine closures. But it is not intended to last forever... eventually due to climate change and sea level rise the gates will no longer offer complete protection.

The Thames Estuary 2100 Plan developed by the Environment Agency sets out a plan the next 100 years, which of course is largely guess work beyond the short term. As they put it:

"The plan is based on contemporary understanding of predicted climate change, but is designed to be adaptable to changes in predictions (including for sea level rise) throughout the century."

It was interesting to reflect that I have never lived in a place where I was very aware of environmental threats or imagined the Thames as anything other than a beautiful river (with an interesting history of sewage). Until today, as far as I knew Thames Barrier was "that thing that looks a bit like the Sydney Opera House, that you can take a boat to." It's amazing to think about the infrastructure that is in place, and the careful research, thought and engineering that goes into it, without the average person being aware... and that one day changes, no matter how prepared and planned for, will probably take us by surprise anyway. I'm grateful there are people who devote their careers to the subject in so many ways from protecting the environment from harmful chemicals and plastics to tackling the engineering challenges to ensure that when changes do come we are prepared. There were loads of great organizations out recruiting today, and I now have a whole stack of bedtime reading for tonight!

More information on TE2100 is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/thames-estuary-2100-te2100/thames-estuary-2100-te2100
More information and reports on the Barrier are here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-thames-barrier

World Toilet Day: What is it? And how to celebrate!

November 19th!

Every year World Toilet Day sneaks up on us. While we're already hanging out Christmas decorations in September many people forget there are some very important observances that come first, and this is one of them.

It's understandable... World Toilet Day is a fairly young holiday, started in 2001 at the first meeting of the World Toilet Association and only recognized by the UN in 2013. So most people don't know about it until it's happening or has passed, and then they only get the hallmark version of it: The humour without the substance.

Here are the ways a few people describe World Toilet Day:

The aim of World Toilet Day is to raise awareness about the people in the world who don’t have access to a toilet, despite the fact that it is a human right to have clean water and sanitation.“ (United Nations) 

World Toilet Day is THE day for action. It is the day to raise awareness about all the people who do not have access to a toilet, and the urgent need to end the sanitation crisis. And it is the day to stand up (or sit down or squat if you prefer) to do something about it. (World Toilet Organization) 

A campaign to motivate and mobilize millions around the world on issues of sanitation. (Wikipedia)

You don't have to dig far to learn that sanitation, and by extension toilets, is one of the major humanitarian crisis of our time, even if it doesn't always make the front pages. For the 2.4 billion people who lack access to good sanitation there is an increase of risk of malnutrition and disease. This problem exists not only in developing countries but refugee camps and many large cities (San Francisco for example is infamous for its 'poop problem' due to the high homeless population and the lack of access to basic facilities.') 

But I promised you I'd talk about celebrating and all of this is rather grim. Many consider the humour aspect of toilets to be an important part of the day because it gets people's attention in a way that facts and statistics don't. So here are some ideas for ways to make the most of the day at whatever level you wish to plunge to:

1. Wish people a Happy World Toilet Day! When they ask why be prepared to tell them a little about the day and its history. It's a baby step, but you never know where simply getting a person thinking about a topic will lead!
   
2. Throw a World Day Party! Whether you use it as an opportunity to raise money for a cause or just to reflect on the topic and talk to people about it it's a fun way to acknowledge the day. Topical (but not overly gross) foods include these super adorable Poo Emoji Meringues and lemonade... or rainbow ice cream in honor of the Squatty Potty unicorn. Create a toilet themed Quiz or play.
   
3. Volunteer!  What sanitation initiatives are going on locally for you? In San Francisco I am a huge fan of Lava Mae which provides mobile shower units to the homeless population. Find out if your city has similar local programs!)
   
4. Donate to a cause! There are many options both local in international, so find out what speaks to your interests. It might be one of the big global charities like WaterAid or something local to you. Get a group of friends together to Twin a Toilet!
   
5. Do something fun and toilet related! I'm personally biased towards the London Loo Tour, but wherever you are there is likely to be something happening: visit the Paris Sewers or the Manchester Museum of Science (which has a great sewer exhibition).
   
6. Share your celebrations! For the tweeters among you, previous years hashtags have included #wecantwait #worldtoiletday and #giveashit ... keep an eye out for others relating to your activities of choice!

A Sewer Love Story

Last year I looked forward with great anticipation to the Brighton Sewer tour, which had been on my bucket-list almost since I started out on my journey of toilet obsession. But alas, a month before the tour was to take place I got an e-mail saying all tours for the year had been canceled due to flooding. Determined to have a sewage adventure of some sort I searched and found the Paris Sewer Museum. I put out an open call to my facebook friends, and found a partner in crime, undeterred by the thought of a weekend of sewage, toilet hunting and eating snails. Despite my having a horrible hacking cough the whole time (arguably the authentic bohemian experience?) that trip turned out to be one of the best things that has ever happened to me.  I am now engaged to my patient, long suffering travel companion... and he even proposed with a sewer rat puppet.

Six months after getting engaged my fiancé and I finally managed to go down those Brighton Sewers, which are at least partially to thank for bringing us together. So with nearly three years of anticipation riding on them those sewers had a lot to live up to! They did not disappoint.

Our tour began at 9:30 and we waited on the wall outside the entrance with a group of other sewer enthusiasts. Mostly couples, a few families and a few lone travelers. We had a full group of 25, which is the maximum they take.

As we entered were issued with hard hats and rubber gloves and taken into a small room for an introduction. Four guides, all of whom have worked the sewers for many years took it in turns to give us health and safety and a bit of history.

The story parallels that of most large cities in the UK: Brighton's sewers were built in the 1860's in response to population growth and exciting diseases like cholera. Improvements have been made since then, but much of it is still the Victorian system.

Until fairly recently parts of the sewers were tidal... that is when there was not enough water from the household waste to keep things moving gates could be opened twice a day to let in the high tide and flush out the chambers. You can still see barnacles on the walls.

When they are flowing they flow fast! One tunnel we were taken to see moved at about 30 miles per hour... fast enough to knock you over if you stand in it (not recommended.) If you  are standing in sewage and feel yourself going down the first thing you should do is close your mouth. As our guide put it, "You've established you're going for a swim... you don't need to drink it as well."

Sewer men generally work between 2am and 6am as the safest time to go down is while everybody else is asleep (it used to be midnight and 4am, but night clubs have shifted that.) They clean out grit and grease that block up the sewers. Most of them remember when cleaning grit had an added bonus in the form of coins, rings, gold teeth, pocket watches and other treasures that made their way into the sewers. But these days instead of shoveling grit by hand they pump it into a truck.

We walked through the large overflow tunnel and climbed a ladder to emerge in a park a few blocks away from where we began. I wonder if people thought it was strange to see an army of people emerging from the sewers, or if by now the locals are used to it.

We hiked back to the start of the tour to wash our hands, collect our backs and receive goodies and pamphlets. Most of the gifts and indeed much had to do with keeping drains clean. As one guide explained it, the drains coming out of your home are usually only 4 inches thick... so if you let grease start piling up it doesn't take long to obstruct them. Actually most of the point of the tour seemed to be not to indulge curious lovebirds with a sanitation fixation, but to spread the gospel of clean drains. A worthy cause indeed!

I suppose the only appropriate way to end this post is to say that I hope that my marriage will be as enduring and the sewers. That we will treat our relationship with care and respect and not dump grease, wet wipes, ear cleaners or dead goldfish on it (metaphorically or literally.)  That though there may be grit to clean from time to time, we may find the gold and false teeth to make it worthwhile.

wedding vows: check!

Happy Family

One of our tour guides with Ratty

No offense intended: slippery bathroom territory

I don't often manage to offend people, so it was interesting to re-post something I thought was reasonably innocent on Facebook and receive some fairly strong reactions to it.

Like many Americans I have been following recent Bathroom legislation in various states (North Carolina of course being the noisiest at the moment) and like most of my circle of friends I have been suitably embarrassed by my country. Toilets and gender have interested me for a long time, originally from a perspective of potty parity (which is very much a part of my life as a woman), and more recently from the trans perspective (which is something I cannot claim personal experience with, but I know affects a number of my friends.) This image caught my partly because it conflates the two issues:

Perhaps these things are inappropriately combined in some people's eyes. I would have to agree that my annoyance at having to wait in ladies' queues pales in comparison to the risk that a trans person takes using a public rest room. It's not unlike the way my frustration at having to pay for (or worse, not being able to find) public toilets seems negligible compared to the plight of the billions worldwide who have no access at all. But that doesn't mean we don't or shouldn't talk about all the issues... and much of my toilet-ing work has been built on the idea that a) sometimes looking at multiple things at once leads to stronger and more creative solutions and b) finding the humour in a potentially uncomfortable situation can make it easier to talk about.

Responses I got to the post included:

"It's really too soon to make jokes about things like this."  

"People are getting killed by the right wing-extremists. Stop it with the jokes." 

My first reaction was defensive: that I didn't see it as a joke. So I had to interrogate: If it's not a joke, what is it? A tongue in cheek statement of fact. Okay- so maybe it is a joke, but one that pokes fun at my own reality rather than being intended to demean anyone else's struggle. On closer reflection though it strikes me that offending language is probably the potential implication that people identify as something else are still 'actually' their biological gender (which, horror of horrors makes it not much better than Mike Huckabee joking "I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have 'felt like a woman' when it came time to take showers in PE.") I see it now, unintentional though it might have been.

In the end I took the post down, not because I don't still think it's interesting nor because I don't find a grain of amusing truth in it, but because if a picture is worth a thousand words this one is not very clear about what those words are and too open to misinterpretation without context. I think there is a more productive discussion to be had around the issue, and I'm grateful for a circle of acquaintances who can call it out when communication is not effective.

So here are some thoughts and questions off the back of that.

It has been written time and time again that toilets are, if not the last, then at least one of the most visible sites of gender segregation. A binary system that not only favours men over women in terms of provision, but forces a person to publicly declare "I am 'this' or 'that'"and then opens them up to the judgement of society if they do not fit neatly into the prescribed order.

I am generally for de-gendering toilets all together, though I know this in itself is a tricky issue, easier said than done. But it seems to me that in addition to the practicalities of equitable queuing and fluid gender roles (like tradition of providing baby change tables only in the ladies) it provides a more fluid view of gender identity, taking away the need to make a political statement through a simple bodily function. There will always be contexts where, for whatever reason, separate facilities are necessary, but what if these were to become the exception rather than the rule?


It occurs to me is probably safer for me as a cis-gendered woman to use the men's toilet in many places than it is for a transgender man. I have used men's toilets when the ladies was being cleaned, when the line was long, and when I just wanted to see what the inside was like as part of my research. I have occasionally been told off, but never have I felt endangered. It's not an experience I can easily imagine, nor one I would wish on anyone.

I'd be interested to hear feedback from my friends (of all orientations.) What can be done to make restrooms a safe and stress-free experience? What needs to be done (and is already happening) in terms of larger social change? And what can friends and allies do on a practical day to day level? And, if you are willing to share, what particularly good or bad experiences have you had?

Cholera to Clean Water: a brief reflection on narrative and history

Often times when you get close to a subject you get to a point where you can predict (if not recite along to) most documentaries, talks and lectures. You still go because a) there will inevitably be a new tidbit or two, b) it’s good to test your memory and 3) you’ll meet likeminded people with whom you can enthuse about said subject. It’s a bit like dusting off and re-reading A Christmas Carol every year.

But sometimes you get something that completely surprises you.

Howard Benge’s presentation “From Cholera to Clean Water” at the Guildhall Library was refreshingly new, obscure and in-depth. With a title like that I had expected the usual much loved story: John Snow discovers source of cholera at pump in Soho, Bazalgette builds the sewers and Britain reigns supreme in its superior systems of sanitation. But Bazelgette (often referred to as ‘unsung hero’) had only a cameo role in a much broader history of London’s quest for clean water and made way for other even lesser known men.

Sir Francis Burdette, MP, 1770-1844, who was campaigning for better water quality as early as 1827, when water piped from the Thames into people’s homes was full of all London’s refuse.

James Simpson, Engineer, 1799-1869, who researched water filtration around the country and developed systems for Lambeth Water Company which were widely copied.

John Snow… but not the old story we already know. The pump in soho was mentioned in passing, but only as prefface to the crowning achievement: his Grand Experiment of 1855. Snow compared the supplies of the two main water companies in South London: Lambeth Water Company, which drew its water from a relatively clean area upstream, and Southwark & Vauxhall Water Company which drew its water from downstream near Battersea. Comparing Cholera Deaths in the households, Snow estimated an average of 315 deaths/10,000 in Southwark, and a mere 37/10,000 amongst those supplied by Lambeth.

Why don’t we normally hear all these details? Why do some stories get chosen and not others? I suppose it all comes down to luck and narrative. The Pump in Soho is a nice detective story… one man on a mission. A small location. Colourful native characters. Evidence neatly pointing to the obvious conclusion, and a resolution (the handle is taken of the pump.) Elementary my dear Watson. Meanwhile, the Grand Experiment, though historically significant is more clinical and less personal.

Similarly with Bazalgette: we have a sudden and dramatic problem (The Great Stink) with a sudden dramatic solution (a sewer that is a marvel of modern engineering). There is, for some reason more romance in sewage than in water filtration. It's easier to be a hero by fixing a problem than by pre-empting it.

Near the beginning of the talk Benge made the observation that 19th century London was still operating on Medieval systems. In another 200 years when progress we can't envision has been made perhaps some researcher standing in a similar room will say "21st Century London was still operating on its Victorian Systems." I wonder which of our stories and heros they will remember.

Dismaland

A ticket to Dismaland: £5
Train to get there from London: £57.60
Art that inspired both glee and fear: Priceless.

I’ve never been to Disnyland and I don’t know very much about Banksy, but Dismaland intrigued me. The pictures of burnt out castles and distorted mermaids appealed to my love of contradictions and the slightly morbid. So off I went not really knowing what to expect.

Weston Supermare is a sort of typical English seaside town. It’s got a pier and lots of shops selling colourful beach toys and ice cream. I had been hoping for gloomy weather to fit the mood of my adventure, but the day was beautifully sunny with barely a cloud in sight. I was probably the only person disappointed by this.

Dismaland begins with the universal theme park experience: queuing. All of those of us who had been lucky enough to get advance tickets waited across the street from the park for our timed entry at 2 o’clock. Once we made it to the front and had our bags checked by the real (not too dismal) security guard we were taken across the street in groups by the (also not too dismal) lollypop man.


Entering Dismaland we had to go through ‘security’ with lots of grumpy guards hanging about giving us grief. I got pulled aside and scanned by one of them because I looked too happy. She told me that my rainbow socks were an “interesting wardrobe choice” and finally let me in, wishing me “a dismal day.”

Inside the park the spires of the burnt out castle rose ahead just as promised. Despite the earlier queues it wasn’t too crowded… busy but not suffocating.

I started by going through a series of galleries. Directly inside the entrance were signs with flashing messages that would have been perfect for slightly subversive fortune cookies:

It is better to be naïve than jaded.  

 You are clueless in your dreams.  

 Abuse of power comes as no surprise.   

Push yourself to the limit. 

Don’t place too much trust in experts. 

Confusing yourself is a way to stay honest.

As I wandered round the corner I came across a sign by some seemingly out of use bumper cars: Dance of Death: On the hour and every 15 minutes thereafter. My timing was apparently impeccable, because just then the lights popped on and a hooded figure with a scythe rode out on one of the cars. After cruising slowly around crashing into things disco lights popped on and he (I don’t know why I assume it was a he) zoomed around laughing hysterically while “Stayin alive” blared in the background. Then it all shut down and we were back to the dark room.

The rest of the gallery contained some potted plants made from ready meal boxes  and a fetus covered in corporate logos in a vending machine.


The next gallery was mostly paintings and photographs, most with a very blatant global warming message. A few favorites:

There was also a car with cross-stitch embroidery on the bonnet.

The third room had a vast model village with blinking lights (mostly from police cars) throughout ... The sort of thing you might find at a post-apocalyptic model railway show: "Jimmy Cauty’s hand crafted miniature world will delight and amaze (and potentially cause seizures in persons sensitive to strobe lighting)."

Emerging from the gallery it took a few moments to re-adjust to the sunlight. I came out right next to the pond with the refugee boats. For a pound you can take a turn to steer them towards the white cliffs of Dover, though they don't always do what you expect them to. There were a few bodies floating in the murky water as well. This was the most dissonant thing for me. How far removed (by time or geography) do you have to be from an experience to make it feel comfortable to parody? What role does intention play in that?

In an interview about the park Banksy said:

"I feel like my generation was the first to deal with the mass media beaming the world’s problems to us in real time... Mostly we’ve chosen to deal with this by cocooning ourselves, that we can live with the guilt. But why should children be immune from the idea that to maintain our standard of living other children have to die trapped in the hulls of boats in the bottom of the Mediterranean? The grown-ups might have convinced themselves small incremental change and buying organic tomatoes is enough, but passing that mindset onto the next generation doesn’t feel like good parenting."

I couldn’t go to the park without trying a ride, so I hopped on the carousel. It was mostly pretty normal, except for one horse that had been strung up. Next to him was the figure of a butcher sitting on a box that said “lasagna.” The carousel went slightly faster than most I have been on… or perhaps that was my imagination.

Around the other side of the park were a lot of booths and tents handing out pamphlets. I wasn’t entirely clear whether they were for actual causes and organizations or if they were parodies. Where does art end and real life begin? Can you have one without the other?

I went through the Pocket Money Loans shop put together by Darren Cullen of spellingmistakescostlives.com. The room offered adverts for children from aging cream (to get rid of the symptoms of youth) to my personal favorite: rent-to-own gobstoppers: “everlasting payment plans! Dissolve your finances today!”

Finally I went through the enchanted castle. 

"Step inside a fairytale and see how it feels to be a real princess. Souvenir photos available" 

It was the only thing in the park that I had to queue to get into, but it moved pretty quickly. Inside we went through a dark hallway and then came through to a room of flashing lights. 

Being a princess isn't all bluebirds and balls. Cinderella’s carriage was overturned in the middle, and she was hanging limp out the window. The only light was provided by the strobe-like flashing of the paparazzi’s cameras. A grim tribute to Princess Diana.


On the way out I played knock the anvil off the pedestal. The silent attendant handed me three pingpong balls and loomed over me, rolling his eyes as I threw them. Even though I failed to hit the anvil, let alone knock it down he gave me a pin that said “strive for excellence”

Dismaland is to be experienced rather than written about. Banksey says art can be loud and obvious, and critics tend not to like this because it leaves nothing for them to do.

"Fundamentally I disagree with the charge that art is bad if it’s too easy to understand [...] I think there’s space for art to be loud, crass and obvious. If it looks like the rantings of an angry adolescent what’s wrong with that? [...] As far as I’m concerned there are too many things we need to discuss in the actual world before I start making abstract art." 

Maybe it was the influence of Dismaland that lead to the lively debates with a stranger on the train home about immigration and the role of the economy. There are so many things so obviously wrong with society. The sacred place of the economy and our fear of breaking it.