Why are women still waiting?

Apparently this is becoming a regular topic in columns that I write. I ranted about line-ups at women’s washrooms in 2015, revisited the issue in 2019 because nothing seemed to have changed, and in 2024 I turned my attention to poor washroom design. And now, here we are again.

Recently I had a five-hour wait at Toronto Pearson Airport’s Terminal 1. During those hours I visited several different women’s washrooms throughout the terminal. Every single one had only three stalls. Every single one had a line-up. Every time I walked past the men’s washrooms there was no line.

Beside each set of men’s and women’s washrooms there was also a single-user all-gender washroom. I was pleased to see that option available. Unfortunately, it always had a lineup too.

Back in May I visited the Manitoba Museum in Winnipeg that had a completely different approach. Instead of separate men’s and women’s washrooms plus one all-gender room, there were gender-neutral and barrierfree universal washrooms. The individual stalls had floor-to-ceiling walls and doors for complete privacy while everyone shared the sink area. I’ll admit it felt a little different at first, simply because it wasn’t what I was used to, but it worked well. More importantly, everyone had access to every stall.

When I got home I did some reading and it turns out the Ontario Building Code has recognized this problem for years.

Historically, building codes focused on equality rather than equity. Men’s and women’s washrooms were often given roughly the same amount of floor space. But because urinals occupy much less room than enclosed stalls, men’s washrooms could accommodate more users in the same space. Add to that the reality that women generally require more time because of clothing and the fact that they are more likely to accompany children, older adults, or people with disabilities into the washroom, and the result is predictable: women wait while men often don’t.

The Ontario Building Code has evolved to recognize those realities. For large assembly buildings such as arenas, theatres and stadiums, it now requires more toilets for women than men in order to reduce wait times. It also permits and encourages universal all-gender washrooms, because allowing everyone to use every stall makes much more efficient use of the available space.

The catch is that building code changes are generally not retroactive. Many older buildings continue to operate under the standards that existed when they were built unless they undergo major renovations.

Yet I keep coming back to Pearson Airport. Terminal 1 opened in 2004. It is one of Canada’s busiest airports and serves millions of passengers every year. If women are consistently standing in line while the men’s washroom is empty, then something still isn’t working.

Perhaps the calculations satisfy the building code. Perhaps the design meets the minimum requirements. But meeting a minimum standard and meeting people’s needs are not always the same thing.

I’ve now been writing about this issue for more than a decade. I’d love to say I’ve noticed dramatic improvements. Unfortunately, my lived experience suggests otherwise.

As the mother of two daughters and the grandmother of two granddaughters, I’m still hoping that somewhere, someone will decide that women shouldn’t have to budget extra time simply because they need to use a public washroom. Surely that’s not too much to ask.

Debbie MacDonald Moynes is Executive Director of The Prince Edward County Community Care for Seniors Association.

info@communitycareforseniors.org