作者 ｜
彭渰雯(中山大學公共事務管理研究所)、林書伃(世新大學性別研究所)、畢恆達(台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所)
摘要 ｜
世新大學於 2011 年將兩間既有男廁改建為無分性別的「性別友善」廁所，以回應多元性別平等的趨勢，受到各界注意。但是從使用者角度來看，此一設施所得到的評價為何，則值得深入探究，以進一步思考無性別廁所的定位與功能。本研究同時採問卷調查、觀察與訪談等方法，瞭解世新大學師生與職員對性別友善廁所的認知、態度和使用經驗。其中問卷調查部分一共蒐集到 340 份世新師生、職員的意見，訪談則是特別針對 位跨性別的學生與職員，瞭解其想法。
不論從問卷統計或是訪談結果，都可發現無性別廁所出現「叫好不叫座」的現象，例如有81.6 % 受訪者支持學校設置更多無性別廁所，但是曾使用無性別廁所的人僅有 65. 7%，其中女性更僅有 26.6%。透過觀察記錄也發現無性別廁所仍多被當成男廁使用。許多（特別是女性）受訪者對如廁隱私界線的態度與使用行為，仍延續原有性別角色養成的偏好。即使是 位跨性別特質的受訪者，雖都支持無性別廁所的理念，但也不一定想親身使用。
本文認為「叫好不叫座」是可以預期的反應，也正好讓我們深思廁所空間的性別改革是否只有「去除男女二分」一途。為此，本文呼應學者Jerry Kogan 的主張：未來的公廁在男廁、女廁之外，另外增加一處「其他」（Other）廁所空間，一方面讓不同的性別認同和如廁需要，皆可在公廁空間內得到包容與回應，另一方面也可能鬆動性別二元主義下的空間想像，讓民眾對廁所、身體、隱私的感受與認知，能因為「其他」選擇的存在而有機會改變。至於這個「其他」空間的提案，是性別解放運動的階段性策略，還是值得所有性別化空間改革參考的典範，實與整體社會在多元性別平等議題上的辯證思考息息相關，有待更多時間、實踐與研究來回答。
關鍵字 ｜
無性別廁所、女廁、跨性別者、變性慾者、性別與空間
Title ｜
“Other” than Men’s and Women’s Toilets: Reflection on the Unisex Restroom Experience of Shih Hsin University
Author ｜
Yen-Wen Peng(Institute of Public Affairs Management National Sun Yat-Sen University)、Shu-Yu Lin(Graduate Institute for Gender Studies Shih Hsin University)、Herng-Dar Bih(Graduate Institute of Building and Planning National Taiwan University)
Abstract ｜
Shih Hsin University in Taipei launched a pioneering project to promote a gender-friendly campus by reconstructing two existing men’s restrooms into unisex restrooms in 011, which drew public attention. How do the potential and actual users evaluate this new facility, however, needs more exploration, so as to allow further reflection on the function and role of unisex restrooms. This study applied multiple methods, including surveys, observation, and interviews, to explore the student, faculty and staff’s recognition, attitudes, and experiences on/with the unisex toilets. There were 0 questionnaires collected in the survey, and five transgender students and staff were interviewed.
The surveys result showed that .0% of the respondents knew about the existence of the two unisex toilets in the campus, and 1. % endorsed the idea of installing them. Those who had used the unisex toilets, however, were only . % on average, with only . % of female respondents ever using them. The survey also found significant differences in terms of the psychological burdens and uneasiness regarding using unisex restrooms between male and female respondents. How to react to these worries and habits is a challenge that should be dealt with in promoting unisex restrooms.
The interviews further revealed that the perceptions of unisex restrooms among transgender users are heterogeneous as a result of their different urinary experiences as well as different gender identities. In conclusion, the authors echo Jerry Kogan’s argument for an extra toilet space termed “Other” in addition to the existing “Men” and “Women” spaces. This should be an inclusive and flexible approach to accommodate all users with different gender identities and urinary needs, and at the same time still challenge the traditional, dichotomous approach of segregated restrooms.
Keywords ｜
unisex restroom, women’s restroom, transgender, transsexual, gender and space