AITAH for skipping a line of women to access men's toilet?
AITAH for skipping a line of women to access men's toilet?
edit: I am a man and the only man in this scenario
This happened some time ago. I was driving and stopped on a gas station. probably for coffee and had to go pee. I saw a long queue of around fifteen to twenty exclusively 30-something girls, definitely bit older than me. They probably were a sports team, since there was a hired couch bus waiting outside and they were mostly wearing sweats. There were separate stalls for men and women (one each), so I went for the men's room. It turned out locked, so I stood just outside it. One of the girls in the queue said that the back of the queue is "back there". I replied "sure, but I'm going to the men's room", understandably assuming they were queueing for the ladies room. To which she said "yeah but there's one queue for both". I am familiar with the concept of shared queues, but mostly from supermarkets or post office, where you would queue for several checkouts and just go to the first one that is free. Never encountered shared queues for gender-separated toilets, so I said "but the toilets are separate, I'm going to the men's room and you can queue for the ladies room" and simply went in without any more protest from them when the men's room emptied (and it was another girl in there).
Were I the asshole?
You're viewing a single thread.
Uh.. Yeah.. The door opened and it was another girl in there proving they were in fact all in line for both. You cut in line.
In this case, if he did get in line and when he was in front of the line, would it be acceptable for him to use the women's stall if the men's was occupied? I suspect that would not go without objection, but I could be assuming wrong. That would be pretty unfair if they were using the men's.
but it was marked "men's toilet", they clearly decided to use both in order to save time spent on the gas station
The signage obsession feels crazy to me. There must be a cultural difference where signage supersedes reality. I mean you cut in line to save time at the gas station. I resign myself to not understanding at all, especially with most voices supporting you at the moment.
To me this situation is analogous to priority seats in public transport. You can use them freely as long there's no pregnant women, elderly, or disabled around, then you have to give up the seat to them.
Me peeing before them delayed their departure by one minute. If I had to queue with all of them then my own departure would be delayed by 20 minutes
Edit: don't get me wrong, one should give up their seat to pregnant, disabled or elderly regardless of it being marked priority or not, but they do still get marked that way
My understanding of proper procedure is that men can deal with the intrusion because they are less likely to have complications from holding it, can find a place to pee anywhere, and that an athletic team may have been on the road for hours before having a chance to use any bathroom. A female bus load will take over both bathrooms and a male bus load will have men scattered everywhere finding a safe place to pee in public or a different bathroom.
again, there was one of me
Defo a cultural difference then, because where I am from that would definitely be a yta moment and someone might even ask if you were about to pee yourself.
would you ask a pregnant lady whether she is about to give birth if she wanted to cut the line at a priority queue? because I wouldn't. in fact, I would just let her in on sight and I would even feel ASHAMED if she had to ask.
also, had the roles inverted and it was I who wanted to go to ladies room so as to not queue to the men's room, would you find that okay then? because if I were desperate then perhaps I could consider that, but definitely make sure I wouldn't be inconveniencing any woman beforehand.
I'd offer to call an ambulance because a dirty ass men's room isn't a proper place to give birth
by priority queue I meant queuing for checkout in a supermarket but otherwise fair point
I am not going to be convinced to change my answer, I am sorry. In rural regions of the United States you would be considered very rude. Good news is, according to the reaction to my answer, elsewhere in the world you would not be considered rude.
here's a though experiment. what if suddenly a bus load of men pulled over and a similar number of man to the women already queueing wanted to use the men's room simultaneously: should they queue separately for the men's room or all queue after the women? I'm honestly interested in your take on that
This person doesn't represent all regions of the rural United States.
oh perhaps I should have mentioned originally that this wasn't in a rural area at all, so it's not like I could go on a tree
Don't know where you are from but I would say it's a very misandrist place. Men can also have issues from holding in bathroom needs.
I have no obsession of signage, but my understanding is the signage is there to control the flow of persons.
No the women are using a bathroom not designated for them. Garuntee you if the situation was reversed and 10 men were in line and these girls came up and found a guy using the womens restroom they would flip out.
Except the situation will usually not be reversed. You're acting like men and women are equals on this. They are not.
I understand that. Where I live men are expected to tolerate the intrusion because they don't get uti's or have periods.
So the double standard is only a problem when it doesn't benefit them. Mkay. Also men absolutely get UTIs no idea why you think they can't.
Yikers. The "us vs them" feel to this comment really clears up why people on the internet hate what I have to say about "Gas Station Bathroom Etiquette When a Bus Load of Specifically Women Need to Pee in Rural United States."
There is nothing us vs them here. It's equality, and equal treatment at all times. What you're proposing is a double standard, which is not everyone being treated equal.
Yikes. The emotional manipulation and deflection in lieu of critical thinking, addressing counter points, and arguing in good faith is real with this comment. Super-duper extra yikes.