Feb. 13, 2011

To the editors:

The editorial is shameful for suggesting that dignity and access to facilities for a basic human need should be allocated based on what body type, clothes, and other gendered qualities the Crimson Editorial Board has subjectively deemed as acceptable to have. Inclusion is about valuing each and any gender and gender expression as fundamentally valid, legitimate aspects of one’s constructed and inherited cultural, social and biological identity.

The move toward creating gender-neutral facilities represents the expansion of the basic rights to safety, access, and comfort to individuals of all genders and gender expressions. The creation of additional bathrooms with the gender-neutral option does not displace current restroom options. The laudable point of gender-neutral bathrooms is that they represent a step in the direction of full gender inclusion. For individuals for whom the regulated gender expressions demanded of sex-segregated bathrooms have caused discrimination, discomfort, and shame, gender-neutral bathrooms provide the safe and accessible facilities that people of other genders already have. It’s about time.

EMMA WANG ’12

Cambridge, Mass.

Feb. 13, 2011

To the editors:

As one of these “very few transgender, intersex, and non-gender identified students at Harvard,” briefly mentioned in the staff editorial “Rethinking Privacy” published on Feb. 11, I have a few thoughts on the conclusions drawn by The Crimson’s editors. I think it would have been preferable if some of these thoughts could have been shared before the article was written, whether by me or by another trans or gender-queer person, but I understand if we were too difficult to find.

First of all, as noted by comments posted online, the existence of gender-neutral bathrooms does not mandate the use of gender-neutral bathrooms. If you’re not comfortable with it, walk into a door with a suit or a dress on it. Maybe I’m misinformed, but unless this city initiative is a lot more radical than it appears, all of those “normal” bathrooms aren’t going to disappear overnight.  And I personally don’t want them to disappear, either. From all the public restroom discomfort I’ve experienced, I certainly wouldn’t want to make that a reality for all the cisgender folks out there who like their designated spaces.

As for why gender neutral bathrooms are important to me, it’s a matter of feeling comfortable when my private excretory practices simply must be taken care of in public spaces. As things are now, I keep close tabs on bathrooms that are low-traffic or single-stall. I will sometimes walk to Canaday from class to use the gender-neutral bathrooms in the basement. There are always the “private en-suite bathrooms” in the dorms, where the Crimson editorial board would clearly prefer for me to take care of my business, but I think we can all agree that sometimes one just can’t hold it all the way home. And I’m not just talking about my comfort here. What about the discomfort of the women who hear “Trust me, I’d pee standing up if I could,” when they inform me that I’ve accidentally walked into the ladies room? Or, what’s more often the case, the discomfort of the women who don’t say anything at all and shuffle out, maybe fearing that they’ve narrowly escaped a case of the public restroom sexual assault that the Crimson article is concerned with?

As a final note, stepping back from the debate at hand, I’d like to express my surprise and appreciation that the issue of gender-neutral bathrooms is even on the table. It’s not an obvious thing, and administrations like the Cambridge City Council and that of Harvard are clearly making a deliberate effort to enact changes that take everyone’s concerns into consideration, not just those of the majority.

ANNA MURPHY ’12

Cambridge, Mass.

Feb. 13, 2011