6 ms·

What's wrong with sharing bathrooms? That's a dorm, or a youth hostel for that matter. It's totally fine. Pretty common all over the world, not just for the poo

What's wrong with sharing bathrooms? That's a dorm, or a youth hostel for that matter. It's totally fine. Pretty common all over the world, not just for the poorest.

sol_invictus 5y ago
Because some people (as in, a vast majority of the global population) live their lives in a low-income bracket and one could consider it a very unpleasant thought to live your entire life sharing bathrooms with strangers.
- cambaceres 5y ago
  The grandfathers point was that shared bathrooms would decrease costs of building new apartments, which is good for poor people with less income. Needing to share a bathroom with someone is no problem compared to not having a place to stay.
  - vidarh 5y ago
    So would sleeping halls. Both models exists, yet in the developed world we tend to see either as a worst case crisis accommodation not as a viable alternative for long term accommodation. So yes, it solves problems in those places where lack of any accommodation is a big housing problem. That is important, but it affects a relatively small proportion even of the homeless (most homeless are not "rough sleepers" who end up sleeping outdoors, but people who bounce between temporary housing exactly or crash with people; e.g. in the UK rough sleepers seem to make up in the region of 5%-10% of homeless people). It may vary by location, but at least in the UK, for most homeless and poor, the problem is not that they have nowhere to sleep, but that they have the kind of substandard accommodation that people in this thread seems to think will solve their problems, and that they lack security - e.g their accommodation is temporary etc. because even this kind of substandard accommodation is not easily accessible to them in ways they can afford.
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      Sharing bathrooms is not the same as "substandard accommodation". That's the point. You can (and do) build perfectly modern, clean, safe high standard living quarters with shared bathrooms. You can also find terrible slum apartments with private bathrooms.
      - vidarh 5y ago
        You can. You wouldn't find buyers or renters without discounts far exceeding the cost savings, because it's seen as substandard, however. If anything, even places where space is extremely costly, one clear way of judging relative luxury level is the ratio of bathrooms to bedrooms.
        Grustaf 5y ago
        "Substandard" is not the complement of "luxury". And nobody is saying that middle class people won't pay the extra cost of private bathrooms, clearly they are doing that. The point under discussion is if it's inhumane to give poor people free housing where they have to live like European middle class students and share bathrooms, and the answer is a very clear "no, it's not inhumane".
        vidarh 5y ago
        No, substandard implies it's below the expected standard, and it is as demonstrated by the fact that the market expectation is to have bathrooms. How many places do you see on the market without a private bathroom exactly? EDIT: In fact, many places you'd struggle to even get approval for places with communal bathrooms without special exemptions, as it's so far below expected standards that these expectations now often violate government set standards as it's come to be seen as entirely unacceptable to impose it on anyone. E.g. in Norway, the standard rules for a permanent dwelling requires a bathroom with few exceptions, and sets minimum requirements for the size of the bathroom.
        Grustaf 5y ago
  - sol_invictus 5y ago
    The question here is - is the cost difference of a shared bathroom versus a private bathroom the (or a) major factor in not building affordable housing and the answer is almost certainly no. If it's not, then this is just elitistic moralizing from the ivory tower. Happy to be proven wrong by the way. (non-sarcastic)
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      Elitistic moralizing? The only ones moralizing here are those that think dorms are inhumane. Anyway, in most countries we do build social housing, it's not a question of not building at all, it's a question of being able to build more if you spend less on each unit, and that is obviously the case. As you probably know, bathrooms and kitchens are by far the most expensive rooms, so you can definitely save a lot of money if you share them.
- Grustaf 5y ago
  Why would you be _more_ averse to sharing a bathroom if you're low income? I think it's more about American germophobia or new members of the middle class feeling that sharing bathrooms is beneath them now that they've made it. In most places being poor doesn't mean you live in squalor, it just means you have less money. You are still doing your best to keep your place clean etc. And obviously your neighbours won't be strangers for long.
  - sol_invictus 5y ago
    Privacy? The original point, although not fully written out, was that the elite schooled grandfather thought it would be more effective to build housing with shared bathrooms, but he neglected the humane aspect(s) of living. Somewhat ironically you are falling into that same model of thinking.
    - alecbz 5y ago
      > Somewhat ironically you are falling into that same model of thinking. This is called 'disagreeing'.
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      Different people have different views on what privacy is. In many cultures it's considered normal to have your parents in law living with you, here it's most people's worst nightmare. Some people think it's important to have your own car, others see no point at all in owning it. There are obviously people who absolutely don't want to share a bathroom with their neighbour, but the "model of thinking" that is the issue is when you're projecting that onto the entire world population. People just have different priorities.
ljm 5y ago
Given the choice, I don't think anyone would spend their lives living in a dorm or youth hostel, or a homeless shelter, or a tenement block with communal facilities that would rapidly fall into disrepair (I mean, look at the state of various housing projects and slumlord setups now and imagine if the same setup with communal bathrooms would actually be better kept than that).
- Grustaf 5y ago
  Is this sarcasm? Obviously there are places in the world where dorms, hostels etc are in exceptionally good condition, like in Japan, or here in Scandinavia.
  - vidarh 5y ago
    Hostels in Scandinavia at least, while they may well be in good condition, make up a vanishingly small proportion of accommodation because what they provide is well below the expected standard for most people even for short term stays.
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      You keep talking about "expected standards" all the time. These are YOUR expected standards. Poor people, students, backpackers and many others have different standards. And please try to understand what is being discussed. In this instance I merely pointed out that "communal facilities that would rapidly fall into disrepair" is not a proper argument, since there are plenty of communal facilities in excellent condition, just as there are lots of privately owned slums. Your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with that.
      - vidarh 5y ago
        These are not just my expected standards, but also market standards a whole lot of places, and the legal standard many places.
  - ljm 5y ago
y7 5y ago
We're presumably speaking about a shared bathroom in your home, not about travel accommodation. It would infringe upon a fundamental need for privacy that people have: having a space that is yours alone, where you are free to do whatever, without being observed by others. I've seen some (studio) apartments that have a private bathroom that outside the front door, but still inside the building. I would very much dislike this: to me, it feels like it would break my private space, forcing me to allow for the possibility to run into others each time I go to the bathroom.
- hashimotonomora 5y ago
  You’d be surprised to know that people in poor places not only share the same bathroom but also the same room and same bed.
- Grustaf 5y ago
  Of course it's not for travel, I understand that. But neither are dorms. And people stay in youth hostels and similar accommodations for longer periods too. > upon a fundamental need for privacy that people have I don't think you should project your personal preferences with objective needs. Besides, you share bathrooms at the office where you spend 8 hours a day, are you also concerned about running into people there?
- alecbz 5y ago
  I lived in a dorm for 2 years in college. Not only did I not have a private bathroom, but I also had a roommate, so really I had no reliably private place at all. It was fine. I mean occasionally privacy would be nice, but I also enjoyed the increased sense of community in the dorms. Maybe you'd hate this, but that doesn't make it a violation of human rights or anything.
  - dendriti 5y ago
    This doesn't make much sense. Sorry.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    Times change. It might not be a human right, but expectations of minimum quality of life improving over the course of decades is a good thing. US college students not having individual rooms and bathrooms is a scam though due to the prices the kids pay the college.
vidarh 5y ago
The fact that most people opt out of doing so as soon as they can afford not to have to share should be a good indication that people value the privacy and comfort of not having to highly.
- mahathu 5y ago
  This is not the case, in Europe, me and almost all of my peers (friends, coworkers) choose to live in flatshares. Renting a studio apartment wouldn't be much more expensive but it's just more fun living with other people :)
  - vidarh 5y ago
    A proportion of young people sometimes do for limited periods, sure, but "almost all of your peers" do not change the fact that most people opt out of it, and even more opt out of sharing with strangers. Even with flat shares, there's a premium on flats with en suite bathrooms, because people tend to opt out of sharing if the price difference allow them to. Of course it's not the only thing people care about - a good enough location or high enough standard can overcome more sharing.
    - Grustaf 5y ago
      The point is not that sharing bathrooms is neutral, the point is that if it's something that huge number of middle class people are happy to do while students or young professionals, it's pretty far from the human rights violation some people seem to think it is.
      - vidarh 5y ago
        First of all, a very tiny proportion of people are middle class while they are students or young professionals. Secondly, nobody here that I have seen are suggesting that it's a "human rights violation", but there is also a huge difference between people making the choice of living in a more central location or a higher standard flat and sharing a bathroom with a few people vs. establishing sharing bathrooms with strangers as an acceptable standard to impose on people who lack a choice.

What's wrong with sharing bathrooms? That's a dorm, or a youth hostel for that matter. It's totally fine. Pretty common all over the world, not just for the poorest.

sol_invictus 5y ago

Because some people (as in, a vast majority of the global population) live their lives in a low-income bracket and one could consider it a very unpleasant thought to live your entire life sharing bathrooms with strangers.

cambaceres 5y ago
The grandfathers point was that shared bathrooms would decrease costs of building new apartments, which is good for poor people with less income. Needing to share a bathroom with someone is no problem compared to not having a place to stay.
- vidarh 5y ago
  So would sleeping halls. Both models exists, yet in the developed world we tend to see either as a worst case crisis accommodation not as a viable alternative for long term accommodation. So yes, it solves problems in those places where lack of any accommodation is a big housing problem. That is important, but it affects a relatively small proportion even of the homeless (most homeless are not "rough sleepers" who end up sleeping outdoors, but people who bounce between temporary housing exactly or crash with people; e.g. in the UK rough sleepers seem to make up in the region of 5%-10% of homeless people). It may vary by location, but at least in the UK, for most homeless and poor, the problem is not that they have nowhere to sleep, but that they have the kind of substandard accommodation that people in this thread seems to think will solve their problems, and that they lack security - e.g their accommodation is temporary etc. because even this kind of substandard accommodation is not easily accessible to them in ways they can afford.
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    Sharing bathrooms is not the same as "substandard accommodation". That's the point. You can (and do) build perfectly modern, clean, safe high standard living quarters with shared bathrooms. You can also find terrible slum apartments with private bathrooms.
    - vidarh 5y ago
      You can. You wouldn't find buyers or renters without discounts far exceeding the cost savings, because it's seen as substandard, however. If anything, even places where space is extremely costly, one clear way of judging relative luxury level is the ratio of bathrooms to bedrooms.
      - Grustaf 5y ago
        "Substandard" is not the complement of "luxury". And nobody is saying that middle class people won't pay the extra cost of private bathrooms, clearly they are doing that. The point under discussion is if it's inhumane to give poor people free housing where they have to live like European middle class students and share bathrooms, and the answer is a very clear "no, it's not inhumane".
        vidarh 5y ago
        No, substandard implies it's below the expected standard, and it is as demonstrated by the fact that the market expectation is to have bathrooms. How many places do you see on the market without a private bathroom exactly? EDIT: In fact, many places you'd struggle to even get approval for places with communal bathrooms without special exemptions, as it's so far below expected standards that these expectations now often violate government set standards as it's come to be seen as entirely unacceptable to impose it on anyone. E.g. in Norway, the standard rules for a permanent dwelling requires a bathroom with few exceptions, and sets minimum requirements for the size of the bathroom.
        Grustaf 5y ago
- sol_invictus 5y ago
  The question here is - is the cost difference of a shared bathroom versus a private bathroom the (or a) major factor in not building affordable housing and the answer is almost certainly no. If it's not, then this is just elitistic moralizing from the ivory tower. Happy to be proven wrong by the way. (non-sarcastic)
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    Elitistic moralizing? The only ones moralizing here are those that think dorms are inhumane. Anyway, in most countries we do build social housing, it's not a question of not building at all, it's a question of being able to build more if you spend less on each unit, and that is obviously the case. As you probably know, bathrooms and kitchens are by far the most expensive rooms, so you can definitely save a lot of money if you share them.
Grustaf 5y ago
Why would you be _more_ averse to sharing a bathroom if you're low income? I think it's more about American germophobia or new members of the middle class feeling that sharing bathrooms is beneath them now that they've made it. In most places being poor doesn't mean you live in squalor, it just means you have less money. You are still doing your best to keep your place clean etc. And obviously your neighbours won't be strangers for long.
- sol_invictus 5y ago
  Privacy? The original point, although not fully written out, was that the elite schooled grandfather thought it would be more effective to build housing with shared bathrooms, but he neglected the humane aspect(s) of living. Somewhat ironically you are falling into that same model of thinking.
  - alecbz 5y ago
    > Somewhat ironically you are falling into that same model of thinking. This is called 'disagreeing'.
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    Different people have different views on what privacy is. In many cultures it's considered normal to have your parents in law living with you, here it's most people's worst nightmare. Some people think it's important to have your own car, others see no point at all in owning it. There are obviously people who absolutely don't want to share a bathroom with their neighbour, but the "model of thinking" that is the issue is when you're projecting that onto the entire world population. People just have different priorities.

ljm 5y ago

Given the choice, I don't think anyone would spend their lives living in a dorm or youth hostel, or a homeless shelter, or a tenement block with communal facilities that would rapidly fall into disrepair (I mean, look at the state of various housing projects and slumlord setups now and imagine if the same setup with communal bathrooms would actually be better kept than that).

Grustaf 5y ago
Is this sarcasm? Obviously there are places in the world where dorms, hostels etc are in exceptionally good condition, like in Japan, or here in Scandinavia.
- vidarh 5y ago
  Hostels in Scandinavia at least, while they may well be in good condition, make up a vanishingly small proportion of accommodation because what they provide is well below the expected standard for most people even for short term stays.
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    You keep talking about "expected standards" all the time. These are YOUR expected standards. Poor people, students, backpackers and many others have different standards. And please try to understand what is being discussed. In this instance I merely pointed out that "communal facilities that would rapidly fall into disrepair" is not a proper argument, since there are plenty of communal facilities in excellent condition, just as there are lots of privately owned slums. Your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with that.
    - vidarh 5y ago
      These are not just my expected standards, but also market standards a whole lot of places, and the legal standard many places.
- ljm 5y ago

y7 5y ago

We're presumably speaking about a shared bathroom in your home, not about travel accommodation. It would infringe upon a fundamental need for privacy that people have: having a space that is yours alone, where you are free to do whatever, without being observed by others. I've seen some (studio) apartments that have a private bathroom that outside the front door, but still inside the building. I would very much dislike this: to me, it feels like it would break my private space, forcing me to allow for the possibility to run into others each time I go to the bathroom.

hashimotonomora 5y ago
You’d be surprised to know that people in poor places not only share the same bathroom but also the same room and same bed.
Grustaf 5y ago
Of course it's not for travel, I understand that. But neither are dorms. And people stay in youth hostels and similar accommodations for longer periods too. > upon a fundamental need for privacy that people have I don't think you should project your personal preferences with objective needs. Besides, you share bathrooms at the office where you spend 8 hours a day, are you also concerned about running into people there?
alecbz 5y ago
I lived in a dorm for 2 years in college. Not only did I not have a private bathroom, but I also had a roommate, so really I had no reliably private place at all. It was fine. I mean occasionally privacy would be nice, but I also enjoyed the increased sense of community in the dorms. Maybe you'd hate this, but that doesn't make it a violation of human rights or anything.
- dendriti 5y ago
  This doesn't make much sense. Sorry.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  Times change. It might not be a human right, but expectations of minimum quality of life improving over the course of decades is a good thing. US college students not having individual rooms and bathrooms is a scam though due to the prices the kids pay the college.

vidarh 5y ago

The fact that most people opt out of doing so as soon as they can afford not to have to share should be a good indication that people value the privacy and comfort of not having to highly.

mahathu 5y ago
This is not the case, in Europe, me and almost all of my peers (friends, coworkers) choose to live in flatshares. Renting a studio apartment wouldn't be much more expensive but it's just more fun living with other people :)
- vidarh 5y ago
  A proportion of young people sometimes do for limited periods, sure, but "almost all of your peers" do not change the fact that most people opt out of it, and even more opt out of sharing with strangers. Even with flat shares, there's a premium on flats with en suite bathrooms, because people tend to opt out of sharing if the price difference allow them to. Of course it's not the only thing people care about - a good enough location or high enough standard can overcome more sharing.
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    The point is not that sharing bathrooms is neutral, the point is that if it's something that huge number of middle class people are happy to do while students or young professionals, it's pretty far from the human rights violation some people seem to think it is.
    - vidarh 5y ago
      First of all, a very tiny proportion of people are middle class while they are students or young professionals. Secondly, nobody here that I have seen are suggesting that it's a "human rights violation", but there is also a huge difference between people making the choice of living in a more central location or a higher standard flat and sharing a bathroom with a few people vs. establishing sharing bathrooms with strangers as an acceptable standard to impose on people who lack a choice.