"History will be kind to us, because we will write it"
Last night I went to investigate the new urinals that have been placed in Civic. Why? For you dear Rioters. I did it for you. As you can see from the above image they have placed them in quiet, private, out of the way areas. Areas such as one of the primary bus stops on Alinga St. Right next to a streetlamp. Because privacy.
Also you see they’ve placed rather large doors to increase the privacy available to the urine-ees.
Climbing into a urinal to examine the facilities I discovered three things.
1. The doors sit well below ‘business’ level, meaning they won’t actually provide privacy to anyone over 5 foot tall.
2. As soon as you step into a urinal you can expect a large group of people to approach you and ask what you are doing, and how you are finding it.
3. Despite points 1 and 2, people must still be using these toilets as they smelt horrible.
[Photos courtesy of Adam Thomas]
Loading ...
Is that really a little man symbol on the side indicating their purpose and intended gender of use?
How tall are you by the way Barcham?
Wait, barcham is a hipster????
You are Barcham up the wrong pee. (Sorry? Never.)
And do you always hold a You Are Here programme while not peeing?
Is that a Hadley I spy with my little eye?
How long before
A) someone does number 2
B) Someone uses it as an excuse for indecent exposure
C) A lady uses it and does A and B.
Is there a tap to wash ones hand it does it just really suit a certain breed of person?
vulpior said :
That pales in comparison to the detailed warnings and diagrams that have appeared in some toilets at ANU.
I must question whether there is any significance to the fashion on display?
Why the hell did they place them in a well lit area?
Question 1. I am not very tall.
Question 2. No, Hadley wasn’t there.
Question 3. I am a dapper man.
Henry82 said :
For security and to assist with aim for those who are inebriated. Same reason fully enclosed toilets are well lit.
Henry82 said :
My guess is splashback
Seriously who designed this abomination and more importantly who gave this the go-ahead and chose the location.Yet another piss poor effort.
Henry82 said :
I’d rather get a bit embarrassed than have some enterprising criminal arsehole catch me with my pants down in the dark, just sayin’.
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :
I thought Barcham was a she?
How long before a female or wheelchair activist group cries discrimination?
gooterz said :
It took years of practice, but I have learnt to not piss on my hands…
Ew. Just ew.
gooterz said :
There seems to be a hand santiser dispenser on the side.
That said, since the stated aim of these was to reduce the incidence of people pissing in alleyways and shop doorways, I think we have already answered the question of what kind of person they’re aimed at.
Such a shame. Mayor Rattenbury or the minister responsible could have, er, “harnessed” this “golden” opportunity and applied some green credentials to the project. The urinals could have been designed to sit around Civic’s trees – or the more standard urinals’ “proceeds” could be collected and applied to citrus trees in an inner-north community garden …
They’re taking the p!ss…
(Someone had to…)
Sandman said :
Unless there are also toilets for sitters of all descriptions, that is exactly what urinals represent. Discrimination moulded in plastic and given pride of place.
And you’re a little late, such comments have already been made.
Pork Hunt said :
Not only do I not piss on my hands but I can also guarantee you that my donger is more hygienic than a public toilets tap that are nearly all still manual and have been touched hundreds of times a hour by the chuds that do piss all over their hands.
poetix said :
Why should we disallow people who are able to utilise these urinals from doing so just because there are people who aren’t able to? It’s the same as saying it’s discriminatory that only cyclists are allowed to use cycle lanes. Hell, it’s the same as saying people shouldn’t be allowed to ride bikes at all because there are people out there who due to unfortunate circumstances are unable to ride one.
There could be a point I’m missing here, and if so, please enlighten me, but I really can’t see any great injustice being done here.
Barcham said :
You bear a damn strong resemblance though! Or maybe I’m just nuts, but I remember you mentioning him not long ago in an article so I don’t think I was too far-reaching in my assumption.
DrKoresh said :
People pee in the dark alleys all the time, i’m sure it’s the least of their worries.
DrKoresh said :
I’m saying that toilets (more of them) should also be provided for women, and for the disabled, as well as urinals for men. We all have bladders. We all need to pee. Why should men be the only ones catered for?
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :
As Jimmy Carr once said “I wash my (blank) in the morning and I’m good for the day.”
DrKoresh said :
I think it may be that women can (and do) hold on for longer …
poetix said :
Where? Post #6 item C references a female but I’m pretty sure that suggestion was more along the lines of an inebriated attention whore doing something that she thinks is funny. I’m talking about the “why was taxpayer money used on a facility only available for able bodied males” aspect of the argument.