UPDATE in 456ish: Older boy in women's locker room WWYD

[J-rap]

Some of you have mentioned how in their particular areas, even women in all-women locker rooms want privacy among each other, and either cover themselves with towels or use a curtained off dressing area within the locker room.

 

In all of my years of being in women's locker rooms, I actually haven't experienced that.  (I grew up in California and then migrated to the Midwest.)  When I'm in women's locker rooms, all the women just undress in front of each other and don't try and cover up.  They seem fine with that.  Showers are just in one big open area as well.  

 

 

 

[MSNative]

There are community centers and Ys here that have women/child only swim times which primarily serve an immigrant population of Muslim women from Africa with their young children. Unfortunately, some people complained and tried to get one of them cancelled because it was sexist towards men. There's not even a big enough eye roll smilie to address my feelings on whoever complained. I mean, come on. Giving people a time and place to swim when they couldn't otherwise is a perfectly valid community center activity.

Would you be ok with the community center having male only times to accommodate families that dont want their boys to see girls in swimsuits?

I work at a gym and it is impossible to accommodate everyone. I can see both sides of the argument. It's wonderful to try to serve one population but when you do at the expense other members there will be issues. Not insurmountable but issues.

One example: our raquetball courts are near one of our fitness studios. During really popular gym times (before and after work) we run into problems. Members get annoyed that people are playing raquetball loudly. Other members want to play at that time and don't think they are doing anything wrong. Both sides are right. Raquetball is loud, yoga is quiet. We are doing things to try to make the best of this situation. Won't bore you with the details. Just sharing to say that if we cancelled or changed the time of that yoga class, we'd have 50+ annoyed members. If we told the raquetball league that they couldn't play then we'd have 50+ annoyed members. When you limit the use of the facility to accommodate one group, another group will complain.

[Ravin]

I would think instead of throwing shade at moms of multiple little girls taking advantage of a family changing room, you'd save your ire for the childless adults who use those spaces. I can't be the only one who's seen that before.

I would stow it even then, because you don't know the person or their situation. Our public pool only has one family locker room, but it's also the only fully accessible one. I use it with or without kids in tow because there aren't individual stalls to change in in the men's except the showers where everything is wet, it would not be safe ot smart for me or comfortable for other men for me to change in the open in the men's, and not comfortable for me or others for me to go into the women's. That is true even if I was by myself.

[Ravin]

Yeah, my 7 year old has no motor skill delays and can't get off his rash guard/swim shirt alone. Yes, wearing a swim shirt is optional but he will.not.agree.to.swim.without.one.

 

When I take the boys swimming with my niece and nephew I send my sons and my nephew into the men's room but my older son is turning 13 this year and can help his brother. My nephew is 10, he can also help. Even still, I have to make sure to count their towels and suits when they come out, lol. Because the last thing I want to do is have to drive back to the pool and check lost and found.

Couldn't you just peel the wet shirt off him before he went in to the men's?

[poppy]

Some of you have mentioned how in their particular areas, even women in all-women locker rooms want privacy among each other, and either cover themselves with towels or use a curtained off dressing area within the locker room.

 

In all of my years of being in women's locker rooms, I actually haven't experienced that.  (I grew up in California and then migrated to the Midwest.)  When I'm in women's locker rooms, all the women just undress in front of each other and don't try and cover up.  They seem fine with that.  Showers are just in one big open area as well.  

 

I see quite a bit of open nudity in locker rooms too.  I'm more modest than some, but I don't mind going from shower to changing area in a towel that doesn't quite cover me up..... I know it is a safe space. Very functional, we're all in there for the same reason, and we're all women.  I like that about locker rooms. 

 

I have only really experienced very open single-gender nudity when I visited a bathhouse in Turkey.  Where you actually have a worker bath you in a stone room full of naked women chatting with one anther.  It's something else. I was a little culturally out to sea at first, but I did enjoy the experience.

 

Neither of those odd little subcultures - lockers or bathhouses - should have to change to avoid waiting times or inconvenience for parents.  Most people in my gym are older women with grown kids. Most of them have been there, done that --- don't mind little boys a bit --- and managed to and put up with a few years of inconvenience...... it's nothing new, it's just more parents today seem to not care about the rules.

Edited January 30, 2016 by poppy

[poppy]

This old video by Rachel Bloom made me laugh... it's about barely-pubescent boys views on women.  It is raunchy in a "11 year old boys don't even know where the parts are " kind of way.  This thread made me think of it.  Just sharing for

.  Only watch if you don't mind dirty words and puberty jokes.

[Bluegoat]

Would you be ok with the community center having male only times to accommodate families that dont want their boys to see girls in swimsuits?

I work at a gym and it is impossible to accommodate everyone. I can see both sides of the argument. It's wonderful to try to serve one population but when you do at the expense other members there will be issues. Not insurmountable but issues.

One example: our raquetball courts are near one of our fitness studios. During really popular gym times (before and after work) we run into problems. Members get annoyed that people are playing raquetball loudly. Other members want to play at that time and don't think they are doing anything wrong. Both sides are right. Raquetball is loud, yoga is quiet. We are doing things to try to make the best of this situation. Won't bore you with the details. Just sharing to say that if we cancelled or changed the time of that yoga class, we'd have 50+ annoyed members. If we told the raquetball league that they couldn't play then we'd have 50+ annoyed members. When you limit the use of the facility to accommodate one group, another group will complain.

 

I don't really think people here would object to a men only swim any mor than a women only swim.  I think they would probably figure out a way to work out the noise issue as well in the instance you mention - maybe look at times areas are used most, move the yoga, whatever. 

 

I can't take my kids to play in the pool at the adult lane swim or senior's aqua-fit either.

 

That is just all part of living in a community with a variety of people with different needs.

[LucyStoner]

Couldn't you just peel the wet shirt off him before he went in to the men's?

He has a serious hang up, which came from I have no idea where and definitely not me, about anyone seeing him. The shirt was a tool to get him in the water at all, lol. He has a level of anxiety disorder and other clinical issues that, at this time, make sending him into the men's room alone impractical.

 

Unfortunately there aren't many things I can "just" have him do. Believe me, it's for for lack of wanting to or for thinking of and trying ideas like this. At another spot in the thread I describe how I do send him into the men's room at restaurants and how, if he does not find it empty unless he is with his older brother, he screams and runs out. Getting him to be willing to change in the back of the van with very tinted windows and getting him to use the bathroom at the place he takes some classes for homeschoolers have both been what we term victories around here. I still can't get him to pee outside when we are hiking. He's too afraid someone will see him. He seriously would rather hike 3 miles in wet pants than pee behind a tree. It's incremental, but he's moving in the right direction with a lot of coaching. It's slow though.

Edited January 30, 2016 by LucyStoner

[Bluegoat]

I see quite a bit of open nudity in locker rooms too.  I'm more modest than some, but I don't mind going from shower to changing area in a towel that doesn't quite cover me up..... I know it is a safe space. Very functional, we're all in there for the same reason, and we're all women.  I like that about locker rooms. 

 

I have only really experienced very open single-gender nudity when I visited a bathhouse in Turkey.  Where you actually have a worker bath you in a stone room full of naked women chatting with one anther.  It's something else. I was a little culturally out to sea at first, but I did enjoy the experience.

 

Neither of those odd little subcultures - lockers or bathhouses - should have to change to avoid waiting times or inconvenience for parents.  Most people in my gym are older women with grown kids. Most of them have been there, done that --- don't mind little boys a bit --- and managed to and put up with a few years of inconvenience...... it's nothing new, it's just more parents today seem to not care about the rules.

 

I also think it's become more usual for parents to keep kids, even in teh 8-10 range, close to them.

 

I think as a general case that increased level of supervision and decreased sense of ability of kids at different ages is a negative thing.  But, given the changes in other settings, I guess it isn't surprising more parents won't let their kids go into a locker room alone.

[poppy]

I also think it's become more usual for parents to keep kids, even in teh 8-10 range, close to them.

 

I think as a general case that increased level of supervision and decreased sense of ability of kids at different ages is a negative thing. But, given the changes in other settings, I guess it isn't surprising more parents won't let their kids go into a locker room alone.

I don't know. I don't see former generations just not caring at all if they annoy / inconvenience everyone else in the locker room. It's not just 'I keep kids close' , it's also 'my family's needs are more important than your tradition' .

[Bluegoat]

I don't know. I don't see former generations just not caring at all if they annoy / inconvenience everyone else in the locker room. It's not just 'I keep kids close' , it's also 'my family's needs are more important than your tradition' .

 

Sure, that is also true.  But I equally don't see them saying that a ten year old shouldn't go into the mens room alone.  Today, I would not be at all surprised to hear that, including kids that have perfectly normal development.

[LucyStoner]

Would you be ok with the community center having male only times to accommodate families that dont want their boys to see girls in swimsuits?

I work at a gym and it is impossible to accommodate everyone. I can see both sides of the argument. It's wonderful to try to serve one population but when you do at the expense other members there will be issues. Not insurmountable but issues.

One example: our raquetball courts are near one of our fitness studios. During really popular gym times (before and after work) we run into problems. Members get annoyed that people are playing raquetball loudly. Other members want to play at that time and don't think they are doing anything wrong. Both sides are right. Raquetball is loud, yoga is quiet. We are doing things to try to make the best of this situation. Won't bore you with the details. Just sharing to say that if we cancelled or changed the time of that yoga class, we'd have 50+ annoyed members. If we told the raquetball league that they couldn't play then we'd have 50+ annoyed members. When you limit the use of the facility to accommodate one group, another group will complain.

Yeah, I would be fine with that if it were for a reasonably sized population who weren't just demanding it randomly to make a cute point (in a contrived reaction to the the times intended for muslim immigrant women).

 

The community centers here aren't membership clubs. They are open to the public. The public has very diverse needs. There are enough indoor pools in the park and rec system that it is possible to find a few times where a pool can be used by a small group and not really put others out and is at a pool without windows to the lobby etc. The YMCA is a membership organization but with enough of a non-profit focus to be a 501(c )(3) meaning they have a mission which serves the public. Offering times for groups people who can't otherwise swim due to cultural restrictions is within the realm of that.

 

The complaints were not coming from people who were losing a swim time or water class they loved due to scheduling a woman (and young child) only swim with outreach to immigrant communities. In some cases they weren't even coming from people who used that location or pool at all (thank you local talk radio!)

Edited January 30, 2016 by LucyStoner

[gardenmom5]

Some of you have mentioned how in their particular areas, even women in all-women locker rooms want privacy among each other, and either cover themselves with towels or use a curtained off dressing area within the locker room.

 

In all of my years of being in women's locker rooms, I actually haven't experienced that.  (I grew up in California and then migrated to the Midwest.)  When I'm in women's locker rooms, all the women just undress in front of each other and don't try and cover up.  They seem fine with that.  Showers are just in one big open area as well.  

 

I'm in a particularly liberal part of the northwest - I *have* seen women who go into the curtained off areas becasue of their desire for privacy.  I've seen moms take their young daughters in there - as it is easier to corral them.   the only locker rooms I've been in where women go around completely naked from area to area (including where they could be seen through the door) - is one that attracts alot of europeans. and as someone else said - I don't sit on the bench . . . .

[8circles]

I think there's quite a leap being made for the situation in the OP regarding the motivations for taking her older kids into the womens's changing room.  We don't even know how old her kids actually are. We don't know her story or her motivation. It doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make her inconsiderate.  To me this is totally going the way of "kids today" as if prior generations were bottomless pits of consideration and respect and NOBODY broke the rules.

[MSNative]

I don't really think people here would object to a men only swim any mor than a women only swim. I think they would probably figure out a way to work out the noise issue as well in the instance you mention - maybe look at times areas are used most, move the yoga, whatever.

 

I can't take my kids to play in the pool at the adult lane swim or senior's aqua-fit either.

 

That is just all part of living in a community with a variety of people with different needs.

That's good. Im glad they would be willing to accommodate. There are always so many issues that you don't even think will come up. In the swimming example, if you restrict the pool for certain groups, what happens to the swim instructors and life guards and janitorial staff? Only men could work during the male only time and only women in the women only time. That can become a staffing issue. Again, not insurmountable at all. I guess I just mention them to say that when someone says why don't they just do x to accommodate y group there are usually a whole host of other issues in the background that can make it harder than it seems to make things happen.

And as I said, we are working to resolve the yoga/racquetball problem. Unfortunately it's not as easy as just moving the yoga to another studio. Wish it were...sigh.

[MSNative]

Yeah, I would be fine with that if it were for a reasonably sized population who weren't just demanding it randomly to make a cute point (in a contrived reaction to the the times intended for muslim immigrant women).

 

The community centers here aren't membership clubs. They are open to the public. The public has very diverse needs. There are enough indoor pools in the park and rec system that it is possible to find a few times where a pool can be used by a small group and not really put others out and is at a pool without windows to the lobby etc. The YMCA is a membership organization but with enough of a non-profit focus to be a 501(c )(3) meaning they have a mission which serves the public. Offering times for groups people who can't otherwise swim due to cultural restrictions is within the realm of that.

 

The complaints were not coming from people who were losing a swim time or water class they loved due to scheduling a woman (and young child) only swim with outreach to immigrant communities. In some cases they weren't even coming from people who used that location or pool at all (thank you local talk radio!)

Ahhhh. Ok. I thought it was other people who were wanting to use the facilities getting bunchy not people trying to boost ratings and stir up trouble.

[J-rap]

 

 

I have only really experienced very open single-gender nudity when I visited a bathhouse in Turkey.  Where you actually have a worker bath you in a stone room full of naked women chatting with one anther.  It's something else. I was a little culturally out to sea at first, but I did enjoy the experience.

 

 

 

I have been to one of those as well, in Istanbul!  I felt just a little silly being the "shyer" one;  I kind of admired how they were so nonchalant about it.  

[EmseB]

I think there's quite a leap being made for the situation in the OP regarding the motivations for taking her older kids into the womens's changing room.  We don't even know how old her kids actually are. We don't know her story or her motivation. It doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make her inconsiderate.  To me this is totally going the way of "kids today" as if prior generations were bottomless pits of consideration and respect and NOBODY broke the rules.

 

But accommodations were available to her and she chose instead to disregard the posted rules.  From the information given in the OP, she specifically stated she didn't want him using the men's room.  Okay, well, then use the provided facilities that don't require using the men's room.

 

It is only her business why she'd want to bring an older child into the women's locker room.  Unfortunately, it's not her prerogative to do so given the rules of the facility.  Certainly not her prerogative to continue to flout the rules once someone expressed discomfort with having an older child in the women's changing area.  It would have been one thing if everyone in there had no problem with it, but that wasn't the case.

 

She was not considerate of any other patrons using the women's locker room, which is designated as a single-gender facility with exceptions for kids under 5.  That is, by definition, inconsiderate of people who use it as such, regardless of her reasons for doing so.  People use that specific area to change and be nude because of the rules in place.  Clearly, she brought her son in there because she was uncomfortable with the idea of the other single-gender changing area designated for him.  But yet, everyone in the area she chose should suddenly rearrange all their attitudes about gender and nudity because she wants her tween son in there?

[KungFuPanda]

I have a disabled son who always needs help in the locker rooms.  He was more able-bodied at 5, but entirely too young to send into the men's room alone. I would ignore the signs until he was 7, because 4 is just ridiculous.  Then, I would wait for a family room to come available.  If the kid was starving, or starting to get too cold after a reasonable wait time, I would put a towel over his head, lead him through the locker room, and use a stall if it was in the dead of winter and too cold to just go home and change.  

[zoobie]

I think there's quite a leap being made for the situation in the OP regarding the motivations for taking her older kids into the womens's changing room. We don't even know how old her kids actually are. We don't know her story or her motivation. It doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make her inconsiderate. To me this is totally going the way of "kids today" as if prior generations were bottomless pits of consideration and respect and NOBODY broke the rules.

We do know that she has a child over 4*, knew the rules, broke them, and lied about it. That's inconsiderate.

[8circles]

But accommodations were available to her and she chose instead to disregard the posted rules.  From the information given in the OP, she specifically stated she didn't want him using the men's room.  Okay, well, then use the provided facilities that don't require using the men's room.

 

It is only her business why she'd want to bring an older child into the women's locker room.  Unfortunately, it's not her prerogative to do so given the rules of the facility.  Certainly not her prerogative to continue to flout the rules once someone expressed discomfort with having an older child in the women's changing area.  It would have been one thing if everyone in there had no problem with it, but that wasn't the case.

 

She was not considerate of any other patrons using the women's locker room, which is designated as a single-gender facility with exceptions for kids under 5.  That is, by definition, inconsiderate of people who use it as such, regardless of her reasons for doing so.  People use that specific area to change and be nude because of the rules in place.  Clearly, she brought her son in there because she was uncomfortable with the idea of the other single-gender changing area designated for him.  But yet, everyone in the area she chose should suddenly rearrange all their attitudes about gender and nudity because she wants her tween son in there?

 

You can speculate all you want but the reality is that you don't know.  To make the leap to "nowadays people are so inconsiderate, much moreso than they were in prior generations" is unfounded.

[EmseB]

You can speculate all you want but the reality is that you don't know.  To make the leap to "nowadays people are so inconsiderate, much moreso than they were in prior generations" is unfounded.

 

I didn't make that leap.  But it is not a leap to say she was being inconsiderate.  I bolded the part of your post that I disagree with.  What she actually did, as reported by the OP (not speculation), is the very definition of inconsiderate, even if she had her own good reasons.  Me having a good reason to cut in line at the grocery store, for example, doesn't mean I'm not being inconsiderate of other patrons by breaking established rules.

Edited January 30, 2016 by JodiSue

[MamaBearTeacher]

I have not been in an all female locker room in a while. I hate dressing in front of others and feel like I have to hide myself under a towel while quickly getting everything on while also being careful not to step on, touch or put my belongings on anything gunky. If a ten-year old boy walked in I would ignore him. I assume he would ignore me completely too. I think he would be thinking about whether his mom would let him get potato chips from the snack bar later or not. I would worry more about other women judging me than a little boy. Honestly, I often feel uncomfortable at the indoor pool because I worry about other women thinking some bad thought about me in a soggy swimsuit. I am in good shape and I don't live in a conservative area and have hardly met anyone conservative outside this forum. I think this stems from bad experiences in adolescence and even just hearing adult women judge each others bodies and clothing. Anyways I like the numerous clean family change rooms at the new pool near us.

[8circles]

We do know that she has a child over 4*, knew the rules, broke them, and lied about it. That's inconsiderate.

 

& I disagree.  There are people who have posted that their swim facilities don't allow children of opposite gender over the age of 2 or 3.  I would have happily, and without guilt, broken those rules without a second thought.  I would even bring my 5 yo into the women's room with me if his older brothers weren't there.  I don't think that's incosiderate but you are welcome to.  I think we have a difference of opinion about what is a reasonable age cutoff and I don't think it automatically makes people inconsiderate to think the age should be higher and do what they need to do.  

 

We don't know how old the children were in the OP, we only know how old the OP thought they looked. We know nothing else about the situation except that she didn't use the family changing rooms.  But we don't know why. 

 

I don't think that breaking or following rules is such a black&white situation.  I think life is filled with more grey than that.  But clearly lots of people disagree & that's OK with me.  I'll keep saying my opinion, even though it may be the minority.

 

People are different.  People change.  Cultures change.  This is all part of the process.

[8circles]

I didn't make that leap.  But it is not a leap to say she was being inconsiderate.  I bolded the part of your post that I disagree with.  What she actually did, as reported by the OP (not speculation), is the very definition of inconsiderate, even if she had her own good reasons.  Me having a good reason to cut in line at the grocery store, for example, doesn't mean I'm not being inconsiderate of other patrons by breaking established rules.

 

My post that you quoted was about making the leap.  I don't think it was automatically inconsiderate, unless we are defining inconsiderate as anything that doesn't consider that person.  In that case, the rules not allowing 3 year-old boys into the women's locker room are inconsiderate themselves.  

 

I've explained why I don't think it's inconsiderate & I'm happy to agree to disagree.

[EmseB]

& I disagree.  There are people who have posted that their swim facilities don't allow children of opposite gender over the age of 2 or 3.  I would have happily, and without guilt, broken those rules without a second thought.  I would even bring my 5 yo into the women's room with me if his older brothers weren't there.  I don't think that's incosiderate but you are welcome to.  I think we have a difference of opinion about what is a reasonable age cutoff and I don't think it automatically makes people inconsiderate to think the age should be higher and do what they need to do.  

 

Having good reasons or good feelings about breaking the rules doesn't mean you're not being inconsiderate.  It means you're fine with being inconsiderate of the rules.  In this particular case, it means you're fine with being inconsiderate of the staff of the facility that made the rules, and the other patrons who use that particular area with an understanding of the established rules.  Feeling justified about breaking the rules doesn't change the meaning of the word inconsiderate.

[8circles]

Having good reasons or good feelings about breaking the rules doesn't mean you're not being inconsiderate.  It means you're fine with being inconsiderate of the rules.  In this particular case, it means you're fine with being inconsiderate of the staff of the facility that made the rules, and the other patrons who use that particular area with an understanding of the established rules.  Feeling justified about breaking the rules doesn't change the meaning of the word inconsiderate.

 

LOL.  OK.  I guess I'm inconsiderate then.  I also believe sometimes the rules are inconsiderate of me.  Every rule is inconsiderate of someone.  How relevant is it?  Is that always the most important thing?  These are subjective opinions & not black & white.

Edited January 30, 2016 by 8circles

[EmseB]

LOL.  OK.  I guess I'm inconsiderate then.  I also believe sometimes the rules are inconsiderate of me.  Every rule is inconsiderate of someone.  How relevant is it?  Is that always the most important thing?  These are subjective opinions & not black & white.

 

Right, and I'm not saying I've never broken a rule before.  However, in the case where it involves a community facility with rules that apply to everyone, I'd either use the provided accommodations, try to change the rules with the administration, use a different facility, or change at home.  There's no reason my disagreement with the rules should involve making everyone else in the women's locker room uncomfortable.

 

The problem with what this particular lady did is that it was pretty hypocritical of her to be uncomfortable with him being alone in a locker room with a bunch of naked men and instead she turns around and requires a bunch of naked women to be comfortable with her son being in the ladies room.

Edited January 30, 2016 by JodiSue

[8circles]

Right, and I'm not saying I've never broken a rule before.  However, in the case where it involves a community facility with rules that apply to everyone, I'd either use the provided accommodations, try to change the rules with the administration, use a different facility, or change at home.  There's no reason my disagreement with the rules should involve making everyone else in the women's locker room uncomfortable.

 

The problem with what this particular lady did is that it was pretty hypocritical of her to be uncomfortable with him being alone in a locker room with a bunch of naked men and instead she turns around and requires a bunch of naked women to be comfortable with her son being in the ladies room.

 

And this is my point.  This is purely speculation.  You have no idea why she is bringing her boys into the women's locker room.  If you want to assume that she is an inconsiderate bitch, you're welcome to.  You clearly aren't alone.  

 

I just disagree.

[poppy]

I think there's quite a leap being made for the situation in the OP regarding the motivations for taking her older kids into the womens's changing room.  We don't even know how old her kids actually are. We don't know her story or her motivation. It doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make her inconsiderate.  To me this is totally going the way of "kids today" as if prior generations were bottomless pits of consideration and respect and NOBODY broke the rules.

 

OK, leaving aside the fact that there is always a reason when people  are jerks..... if it was a case of a woman with an 8-9 year old who didn't want to use the family room because the wait was too long, would you agree she was in the wrong?    Not that there is agreement on this thread about that.  

 

People back when I was a kid were awful in a lot of ways. There was smoking in the pool and gymnastics studio during my lessons, for goodness sake.  I'm not setting up a "past good, now bad" dichotomy. 

 

I'll also add, I (like so many of us here) have a kid with special needs, and I've been in situations where I've had to make choices that I know made me look bad to other parents.   I do have sympathy.  But when there is an accommodation available-- I take it.  I do not routinely behave in a way to make others uncomfortable, without apology. We don't do swim lessons.  We use the family restroom, or wait.  We don't get to go to restaurants like a "normal" family, except when it's necessary. When I have a choice, I do take consideration of others into account. 

Edited January 30, 2016 by poppy

[73349]

Right, and I'm not saying I've never broken a rule before.  However, in the case where it involves a community facility with rules that apply to everyone, I'd either use the provided accommodations, try to change the rules with the administration, use a different facility, or change at home.  There's no reason my disagreement with the rules should involve making everyone else in the women's locker room uncomfortable.

 

The problem with what this particular lady did is that it was pretty hypocritical of her to be uncomfortable with him being alone in a locker room with a bunch of naked men and instead she turns around and requires a bunch of naked women to be comfortable with her son being in the ladies room.

 

I agree with your first paragraph. But the second ascribes to the mother a motivation that may not be the correct one.

 

Having just posted a picture of my DS at 4 elsewhere and having people think it was from when he was 7, I really would like to hear the child's age from his mother or himself before we decide why he was in the WR at all.

 

I think this problem is interesting--the fact that it's usually mothers taking kids swimming and locker rooms are sex-segregated (except for those rare few family rooms) puts boys in a situation--like many elementary schools--where their tendency to mature later than girls but often to look older for their age is going to be held against them in the interest of treating everybody the same. (My DSIL could dress herself, including tights, at 2, and sometimes did so pre-emptively to make sure mom didn't make her wear pants that day. DS could not unbutton a button at that age, perhaps not at twice that age.) To compound the difference, in the women's room, if a girl is having trouble or seems to be off-task, someone is likely to help or correct her--even a girl her own age. In the men's, who knows?

 

I'd encourage everyone who has concerns about the situation--moms of immature boys, patrons unhappy to be seen by boys, etc.--to address facility management, probably via letter. It should be management's problem to make sure there is space for everybody.

Edited January 30, 2016 by whitehawk

[poppy]

I agree with your first paragraph. But the second ascribes to the mother a motivation that may not be the correct one.

 

Having just posted a picture of my DS at 4 elsewhere and having people think it was from when he was 7, I really would like to hear the child's age from his mother or himself before we decide why he was in the WR at all.

 

I think this problem is interesting--the fact that it's usually mothers taking kids swimming and locker rooms are sex-segregated (except for those rare few family rooms) puts boys in a situation--like many elementary schools--where their tendency to mature later than girls but often to look older for their age is going to be held against them in the interest of treating everybody the same. (My DSIL could dress herself, including tights, at 2, and sometimes did so pre-emptively to make sure mom didn't make her wear pants that day. DS could not unbutton a button at that age, perhaps not at twice that age.) To compound the difference, in the women's room, if a girl is having trouble or seems to be off-task, someone is likely to help or correct her--even a girl her own age. In the men's, who knows?

 

I'd encourage everyone who has concerns about the situation--moms of immature boys, patrons unhappy to be seen by boys, etc.--to address facility management, probably via letter. It should be management's problem to make sure there is space for everybody.

 

But what happens when there are family changing rooms, and they get ignored? I mean, sometimes the answer is "build more".... but really, I don't know how much money public pools (or even private ones) if the only issue is an occasional wait time.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I agree with your first paragraph. But the second ascribes to the mother a motivation that may not be the correct one.

 

Having just posted a picture of my DS at 4 elsewhere and having people think it was from when he was 7, I really would like to hear the child's age from his mother or himself before we decide why he was in the WR at all.

 

Outside of the fact that I trust AndyJoy's perception that the child was, even with consideration for him possibIy looking older than he was, not 4, or 5, or 6, I think the mom's response to the challenger is what answers this question. She didn't reply and say, "Actually, he's only four, he just looks older." She replied that she just wasn't going to send him to the men's room. And then she apparently lied about not being able to get a key for the family room. I'm not inclined to give too much benefit of the doubt. I've spent too much time with "Your stupid rules don't apply to me" people over the past five years to have much benefit of the doubt left in me!

 

I do agree that making concerns and issues known to management is the proper avenue for stuff like this though. That's how change gets made, ultimately.

Edited January 30, 2016 by ILiveInFlipFlops

[8circles]

But what happens when there are family changing rooms, and they get ignored? I mean, sometimes the answer is "build more".... but really, I don't know how much money public pools (or even private ones) if the only issue is an occasional wait time.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that some people are just rude & truly don't care about anyone else.  Yes - that happens.  But sometimes that isn't the case & I think there are times for EVERYONE (just many people don't want to admit) that they do, in fact, place their own needs & those of their children above pretty much everyone else.  We can focus on that & call them inconsiderate rule-breakers or we can try to give benefit of the doubt.  I admit that I sometimes put my needs above others.  Sometimes I also put my needs below them - but I don't make this distinction based on whether or not people followed the arbitrary rules.  Because sometimes the answer is cultures change, people change, people get more tolerant.  Sometimes a combination.

[73349]

But what happens when there are family changing rooms, and they get ignored? I mean, sometimes the answer is "build more".... but really, I don't know how much money public pools (or even private ones) if the only issue is an occasional wait time.

 

Also the management's responsibility.

 

They can:

• Post clearer signage in the main locker room door (not "No Boys Over 5 in women's locker room"; but "Boys over 5 MUST use family changing room across from main desk or men's room.").
• Ask ages of all children passing the desk and automatically give the key or directions to the family room to a parent with an opposite-sex child age 5-8 or several young children.
• Track how often there is a line for the family room and how long the wait is, and make it a top budget priority to change the set-up if needed--for instance, if it turns out that on weekdays after swim lessons, the wait for a family changing room is as long as the lesson was, definitely provoking people to break the rules.
• Survey patrons about their need for more privacy, perhaps providing more curtained changing stalls, as some are uncomfortable even in a single-sex setting.
• Station a male staff member in the men's room after swim lessons to help deter dawdling and horseplay.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I must say, this whole thread has made me really grateful for the locker rooms at our public pool. There's plenty of privacy provided, and in years of swimming there, I've never seen one person completely in the buff other than maybe some toddlers/preschoolers and someone with a faulty shower curtain. I'm kind of thinking about writing a letter thanking them for their consideration!

[EmseB]

And this is my point. This is purely speculation. You have no idea why she is bringing her boys into the women's locker room. If you want to assume that she is an inconsiderate bitch, you're welcome to. You clearly aren't alone.

 

I just disagree.

It wasn't speculation, it was based on what the OP said that the mom said when confronted. She didn't want him in the men's room.

 

Also, being inconsiderate is one thing, but please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't call her that, and I wouldn't use that word to refer to another woman in any case.

[zoobie]

& I disagree. There are people who have posted that their swim facilities don't allow children of opposite gender over the age of 2 or 3. I would have happily, and without guilt, broken those rules without a second thought. I would even bring my 5 yo into the women's room with me if his older brothers weren't there. I don't think that's incosiderate but you are welcome to. I think we have a difference of opinion about what is a reasonable age cutoff and I don't think it automatically makes people inconsiderate to think the age should be higher and do what they need to do.

 

We don't know how old the children were in the OP, we only know how old the OP thought they looked. We know nothing else about the situation except that she didn't use the family changing rooms. But we don't know why.

 

I don't think that breaking or following rules is such a black&white situation. I think life is filled with more grey than that. But clearly lots of people disagree & that's OK with me. I'll keep saying my opinion, even though it may be the minority.

 

People are different. People change. Cultures change. This is all part of the process.

We aren't talking about other people with other children in other facilities. This one has a posted rule with accommodations for families. The woman knowingly broke the rules *and* made people uncomfortable by doing so. That's doubly inconsiderate.

 

If you knowingly flaunt the rules at your facility, that's inconsiderate too.

[8circles]

It wasn't speculation, it was based on what the OP said that the mom said when confronted. She didn't want him in the men's room.

 

Also, being inconsiderate is one thing, but please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't call her that, and I wouldn't use that word to refer to another woman in any case.

Except we already know she was lying because a key was available and she said it wasn't. You are speculating.

 

No, you didn't say bitch, I did. The way you describe her makes her sound like a bitch.

[Gil]

Removed.

ETA:

I wanted to get something off my chest and I did. I don't care to hear arguments for why I shouldn't feel saddened/exhausted by  something that someone else said.

 

I know that statistically the other poster was not being unreasonable or exaggeratory.

 

Edited January 30, 2016 by Gil

[EmseB]

Except we already know she was lying because a key was available and she said it wasn't. You are speculating.

 

No, you didn't say bitch, I did. The way you describe her makes her sound like a bitch.

I am so confused by your posts. She was lying about there being an available family room, she refused to take him out of the women's room when asked about it, she said she wouldn't let him in the men's room by himself. That's all per the OP.

 

And yet...I'm speculating about what happened? And you call her a name because you say I'm describing her in such a way...yet I've only gone on the facts in the OP. But you insist she's not inconsiderate.

 

I think I need more coffee to follow this.

[73349]

I get that, Gil, and I'm sorry to have made you unhappy.

 

It is hard for everybody when we have these facts:

The vast majority of men are kind, helpful, law-abiding citizens;

the greatest danger statistically is in the home with family members and acquaintances;

and yet the vast majority of violent criminals, and even more of those whose victims are strangers, are men.

 

Perhaps if you are on Twitter, you noted the #notallmen vs. #yesallwomen hashtags. Many men wanted to point out that they personally take great care not to harm others, even were willing to defend a woman against an attacker--yet women know that it takes very few dangerous men hidden among the many good-hearted ones to wreak havoc with our ability to trust a stranger. Not all men are a risk, but yes, all women have to be vigilant about safety, for ourselves and our children.

 

Many of us prefer to be very careful about who has access to our children away from their parents' sight, then, just as we feel we have to lock our doors and stay in groups at night.

 

I wish it weren't this way.

Edited January 30, 2016 by whitehawk

[8circles]

I am so confused by your posts. She was lying about there being an available family room, she refused to take him out of the women's room when asked about it, she said she wouldn't let him in the men's room by himself. That's all per the OP.

 

And yet...I'm speculating about what happened? And you call her a name because you say I'm describing her in such a way...yet I've only gone on the facts in the OP. But you insist she's not inconsiderate.

 

I think I need more coffee to follow this.

:). Ok then. Enjoy your coffee.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

For a plethora of reasons that I can't even fully articulate, this bothers me. It really and truly does, I kept thinking about since yesterday and it was on my mind this morning.

 

I'm not attacking you directly, or asking you to "prove to me" that men are less safe, I just figure I should get it off my chest that this social attitude that I have observed many times over, that by my being a male, that I'm a inherently a greater "risk" to other peoples safety is just...tiring.

 

Is this not true, statistically? That's probably a whole other thread, and I'm definitely not trying to start an argument. I'd love to understand better. I also don't have sons, but I can see why men and parents of boys are heartbroken by this mindset. And yet...I do personally know people who have been sexually assaulted as both children and adults, and in all cases the perpetrators were men (sometimes multiple men/boys). There was a sexual assault at our pool last year, and the perpetrator was a male. We live in a university town, and the sexual assaults and other violent crimes that have been reported over the last few years have, without exception, been by men. 

 

I don't think men's locker rooms are inherently dangerous to the degree we think they are, and I think the vast, vast majority of men are good, safe human beings, but I can see why the perception exists. Believe me, I wish fervently that it did not :(

 

Hopefully this doesn't start a fight. I'm truly interested in hearing/reading information to the contrary. I know there has been an uptick in reporting of/coverage of/belief of victims of sexual assaults and other violent crimes by women and girls. I'd love to understand how the data all fits together.

 

I really probably ought to start another thread...

[Ravin]

There was a recent Free Range Kids blog post, in which a home school mom complained about not being allowed to send her school age boys she decided were capable into the men's, because they were past age to be allowed in the women's. They were told they HAD to use the family facilities, which were always busy, often in use by individuals.

 

It just goes to show that some people will find it unacceptable no matter what you do.

http://www.freerangekids.com/why-is-my-son-not-allowed-to-change-in-the-mens-locker-room-at-the-y/

 

I would love to see the gender neutral/family set-up become the default or main option in family/kid oriented facilities.

[LucyStoner]

It wasn't speculation, it was based on what the OP said that the mom said when confronted. She didn't want him in the men's room.

 

Also, being inconsiderate is one thing, but please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't call her that, and I wouldn't use that word to refer to another woman in any case.

The OP related her own speculations as to his age and his ability to change. People are layering their own speculations on top of that. I think what 8circles is saying that it's generally a good idea to give people the benefit of the doubt rather than ascribe nefarious intent or poor moral character. I would not act as the OP describes this woman as acting but I have access to a pool where I have the privilege of weighing options (van, many family dressing rooms, a largely empty women's room where it's possible to duck to privacy while giving other people theirs). That does not make me a morally superior human being. Maybe the gal just made a mistake. Perhaps like a lot of people, she resorts to becoming defensive when challenged and had simply assumed there were not any keys because she's run into that before. Maybe now that she knows it bothers someone, she will change her behavior.

 

To listen to this thread (not your posts- just the general tenor of the posts), apparently WTM is full of people who are above reproach and never make a single mistake. I'm not buying that...

Edited January 30, 2016 by LucyStoner

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

There was a recent Free Range Kids blog post, in which a home school mom complained about not being allowed to send her school age boys she decided were capable into the men's, because they were past age to be allowed in the women's. They were told they HAD to use the family facilities, which were always busy, often in use by individuals.

 

It just goes to show that some people will find it unacceptable no matter what you do.

http://www.freerangekids.com/why-is-my-son-not-allowed-to-change-in-the-mens-locker-room-at-the-y/

 

I'm not a free range parent, but this is frankly ridiculous. I'm sure it's all about liability. I think the posters who mentioned the fact that some locker rooms have cutoffs that don't even mesh with their local laws about leaving children unattended are on to something. 

[zoobie]

I'm not a free range parent, but this is frankly ridiculous. I'm sure it's all about liability. I think the posters who mentioned the fact that some locker rooms have cutoffs that don't even mesh with their local laws about leaving children unattended are on to something.

Unattended minors are a risk for the facility. Having a live attendant is expensive. They can't do video security in a locker room. Kids could get hurt, damage the property, or annoy the other members. But if they're going to allow minors in the facility, they need to provide appropriate changing areas where the child's parent can supervise him/her.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

Unattended minors are a risk for the facility. Having a live attendant is expensive. They can't do video security in a locker room. Kids could get hurt, damage the property, or annoy the other members. But if they're going to allow minors in the facility, they need to provide appropriate changing areas where the child's parent can supervise him/her.

 

I completely agree with you. 

[LucyStoner]

For a plethora of reasons that I can't even fully articulate, this bothers me. It really and truly does, I kept thinking about since yesterday and it was on my mind this morning.

 

I'm not attacking you directly, or asking you to "prove to me" that men are less safe, I just figure I should get it off my chest that this social attitude that I have observed many times over, that by my being a male, that I'm a inherently a greater "risk" to other peoples safety is just...tiring.

Well, ~18-19 out of 20 sex crimes are committed by male perps. While the risk of a stranger attack is very small, we can't pretend that men and women are equally likely to sexually abuse children.

 

Several of the Ys in my area have had sexual abuse come to light, usually by staff. And in all of those cases, the perpetrator was male.

 

Is it tiring as a man to feel regarded with extra suspicion? I am sure. Most men are not at all a risk to women and children. I really do get that. As a mom of boys, I am saddened that this is part of the culture and factor in the reality in which we live. People should not be assumed to be unsafe or less safe based on their biological sex.

 

That said, I am personally someone who is not only a survivor of childhood sexual assualt, I also observed and experienced first hand a lot of inappropriate harrassment and uncomfortable situations as a child and teen. Many different men, often wholly unknown to me. I have male and female friends who were sexually abused or accosted as children by men they did not know. So like it or not, I have to evaluate the safety of a situation with gender as a factor. I don't regard the risk of my children being sexually abused by someone they don't know as being very high. But I also can't pretend that men and women I don't know raise the exact equal amount of concern.

 

This isn't really an issue for me in deciding where to have my boys change because I regard the risk as being fairly small but we can't pretend it doesn't factor in on some level in some situations for just about all parents.

 

If men don't like this, the answer is to proactively work against misogyny, sexism and sexual violence. Not to complain that they don't understand why there's a different perception of danger and risk when the stats are so tilted in one direction.