From One Extreme to Another: Macalester’s Newest Gender Inclusive Bathroom Policy
April 28, 2023
On the morning of March 31, I woke up to a lively Resident Assistants (RAs) chat. One RA wrote: “I am confused, are there only single gender bathrooms in Bigelow next year?” To this question, a Doty hall RA responded that only Bigelow and Doty will have single gender bathrooms according to what she “has been hearing from many people.”
I was about to go back to sleep after my morning prayer but these rumors were too impactful, if true, to be ignored. I had just accepted my RA offer for 30 Mac and no one thought it necessary to let me know of this major change. As a Muslim woman who wears the hijab, an all-gender bathroom was in no way suitable. So I had to verify this new information. I reached out to various students to check if they had been informed of this important structural change. To my surprise they were also confused. I then emailed members of Residential Life who should be able to provide me with a sound response. I locked my phone and went back to sleep.
Later in the day, Residential Life confirmed the rumors that were spreading across the campus. Starting Fall 2023, Macalester would move to a “gender inclusive housing model” with only Doty and Bigelow as single gender spaces. I asked why this information was not sent as a student-wide email given that this change significantly modified the housing model. To this question, Residential Life responded that they had already notified students. This notification was located at the bottom of the room draw email, in the FAQ section on 1600grand when students start planning for housing.
When Jordanella asked a senior leadership team member the same question, they responded: “why would we?”, she was surprised that this answer was very different from the approach Macalester usually takes when making big decisions that will impact our community. This response seemed so far from transparency and inclusivity.
We as students all know that when Macalester wants to inform the student body of something or receive feedback, they will do everything in their power to make it happen, whether it is sending class emails for registration, reminders of course surveys every time you log into Moodle or the reminder to clear any holds on your account. So why was that not the case in this situation?
Overall, the approach to notify students of this change was neither efficient, or enough. So many students kept wondering whether this change was true, especially younger students. Even RAs like me, who work for Residential Life and are going to live in areas the change impacted, did not receive the information officially. It’s unfortunate that there was no mass communication about this change, as it spread through campus without any clarification about what is actually true. What did it cost the institution to inform everyone who’d be impacted, if not all students? Were I to just come back to my RA job next year and be surprised with a bathroom that did not fit in with my needs? We can be inclusive without excluding others.
This change includes many of our students but failed to consider a good number of others. Beyond spiritual needs, some students are simply not comfortable with sharing a bathroom with any other genders. Some students have had traumatic experiences including assault that make them feel more comfortable in single gender spaces. There are students who are already experiencing significant stress and anxiety, just thinking of sharing a bathroom with a person from a different gender and this policy limits their choices to feel safe and comfortable.
What about the students of 30 Mac who need accommodation? Do they now have to sacrifice their privacy to meet one of their needs (allergies, other disabilities, and just preferences)? Some students have mentioned to their RAs the context of first-year students who came to Macalester before the decision and are now forced to live on campus under these circumstances during their second year without early notice. Or even the class of 2027, many of whom committed to Macalester before this information was released.
It stays true that we cannot fulfill all our students’ needs but we can strive to accommodate as many as possible. While we believe everyone at Macalester can agree that we need more gender-inclusive bathrooms, as illustrated in the petition during Fall 2022, we did not need to change the housing model in all buildings but one (Dupre, Wallace, 30 Mac). What was the process that led to only adding Bigelow to single gender spaces, granted that Doty had always been one? How did the decision makers account for the number of students who would not be comfortable with using all-gender bathrooms since no survey was sent out to all students? How does the institution plan to modify the physical aspects of the bathrooms to ensure the continuous respect of students’ privacy?
The reality stands that our bathrooms were not built to be gender-inclusive. For instance, one can peek underneath a shower and see everything happening inside. So will Macalester make sure they rebuild the bathrooms to accompany this change? If not, is our institution considering the possible drawbacks of this move? Once more, we can be inclusive without excluding others. Why could we not move to a model where some floors are gender inclusive and others aren’t? Where each building will have both single gender and gender-inclusive spaces? So many questions that we have did not get satisfying responses after reaching out to many people in our leadership.
This piece is not seeking to create an us vs. them narrative. There is no doubt that we needed more gender-inclusive bathrooms at Macalester and we need to accommodate for it. Everyone on this campus’ bathroom needs should be met, but the approach we took to address the concerns raised translated into moving from one bad extreme to another bad extreme. Instead of improving the situation, this decision seems to make the living conditions better for one group of students and worse for another.
So many younger students have reached out to us asking what they should do. While I (Anna) am lucky to be able to advocate for myself, and was able to have Residential life move me to a place that suits my needs, too many students are complaining about the change behind doors, around meals, and through chats. This piece seeks to raise questions many are asking to hopefully start a conversation that can make Macalester reassess this policy and move towards the right direction. We all want what is best for Macalester and its students, but sometimes our approaches do not always reflect that. Thus, we should always be flexible and adaptable when situations like these occur. It is through transparency, open dialogue and understanding that we can make positive changes for our community. So let’s talk and communicate with each other, instead of allowing secrecy, rumors, uncertainty and confusion drive the conversation.
Student! • May 1, 2023 at 2:27 pm
These comments are exactly why I believe the students at this school need to take a real hard look at the way we converse with one another. Students are afraid to utter a single word on this campus because of the chance they will be labeled as hateful, xxxx-phobic when that wasn’t their intent. While I think we should call out people for the wrongs they do (even when it was not intended), I do not think we need to jump to assumptions and conclusions about every word someone writes. What happened to reading to understand? Reading with empathy?
Why is it us vs them? Can people not see that the authors clearly want to work with all students to make sure every student feels safe, comfortable, and accommodated on this campus? Both “sides” have valid points and needs. And both deserve to be addressed and resolved.
And with all of this back and forth, who loses? Us. Mac students.
Watch someone come after this well-intentioned comment too. Sigh.
Anonymous • May 1, 2023 at 12:20 am
While I do agree with most of the points brought up here, I am concerned about how the fallout is going to affect the trans students here at mac, especially considering that we are already being harassed about a single bathroom in Turck being changed to being all gender.
I’d also just like to recommend that those not wanting to use a non gendered bathroom for reasons outside of religious concerns investigate why that really is. As a survivor of SA, I do still think it is important for everyone to critically think about why you may feel safer around certain (perceived) genders, and how that idea relates to bioessentialism. This work is oftentimes uncomfortable, but is needed.
anonymous • Apr 30, 2023 at 7:01 pm
I think what makes this issue especially tough is that there really needs to be expansion. There needs to be a mixture of spaces so that people can choose what they’re most comfortable. Creating male, female, and gender neutral spaces would easily be a solution that would have the most successful results. it’s unfair for the university to do something so drastic that affects the whole student body without having a vote, direct communication, or support from the student body.
I truly hope as time goes on, we find ways to promote the inclusivity of all students. Being aware of everyone’s needs is important. Creating new spaces is the solution and hopefully, Macalester will take that more into consideration for the future.
Additionally, if this becomes a long term change, Macalester needs to provide more single sex floor options for people who are struggling with these changes. One floor on 30 Mac is enough. Additionally, Macalester should have more gender neutral/ gender affirming housing as well. Truly hoping the college listens to the feedback and there’s productive change.
Student • Apr 30, 2023 at 2:45 pm
This article is a real shame. Certainly, the college acted without transparency and should have notified the student body of this change. However, this article goes much further than denouncing this lack of clarity. It would have been fine to denounce this. However. This article delves into ugly and fairly despicable rhetoric surrounding bathrooms.
The paragraph starting with “the reality stands . . . ” is transphobic nonsense, echoing hateful rhetoric claiming that trans people will enter bathrooms in order to commit sexual assault. Let me be clear, this paragraph is pure fearmongering, especially without providing any evidence that such an incident ever occured. If someone peeks into a shower in any bathroom, all-gender or not, it’s sexual assault, and the gender of the assailant has no bearing. Implying in this way that all-gender bathrooms somehow lead to this type of sexual assault is ludicrous, and it’s disingenous at best. I find it unfortunate that a former MCSG president and RA, two stations that call upon one to represent the Macalester student body in all its diversity, have put their heads together to create such an article that discounts the experiences of transgender students and simply ignores their experiences and trauma surrounding bathrooms.
Let me be clear, the model for next year has both all-gender and single gender spaces, in both first-year and all-school dorms. This article, by referring to this as a “bad extreme,” implies that the solution is a return to a more puritanical and patriarchal model, with more single gender spaces that exclude trans students. It’s honestly shocking that these writers seem to have not considered, even for a single second, the indignity that non-binary students face when they are only given the options of a men’s room or a women’s room, when a significant amount of the students of this institution do not fit into those two narrow boxes.
Last semester The Mac Weekly put out a piece about the college failing to properly house trans and non-binary students in spaces that fit their gender. It made the front page. It’s fairly disappointing that this publication has seemingly swung the other way. It’s disappointing to anybody close to any non-binary individual that the paper representing the students has promulgated an embarrassing opinion claiming, through false reasonings and exclusionary patriarchal logics, that expanding spaces which include the entire student body is a negative.
It’s frankly hilarious that these writers include the sentence “This piece is not seeking to create an us vs. them narrative,” then later say “this decision seems to make the living conditions better for one group of students and worse for another,” a harshly essentializing statement which, yes, implies an us vs. them dynamic wherein trans students who benefit from this change are suddenly being unjustly prioritized.
Do better. This piece reverts to the most basic fearmongering, implying that trans student rights are at odds with other students’ privacy in bathrooms. It’s a simple falsehood, characteristic of an ignominious article.
Anonymous • Apr 29, 2023 at 6:22 pm
Leave it to Macalester to make a huge change and not tell anyone. I definitely appreciate this reply and I agree that many of the bathrooms are not in an acceptable state to begin with. I think this is generally a good change but they really need to tell people and gather input so they can make it work for everyone. Like the article says, Macalester will go to great lengths to alert everyone of something, for example, involving the strategic plan, but then never even tries to communicate changes that actually impact current students. Anyway, as a trans and nonbinary person, I’m really happy to hear that all gender bathrooms are becoming the norm and it will give more people places where they can comfortably live, I think that it’s also important to keep a reasonable amount of gender-segregated ones for those who feel more comfortable with it (so long as they do not exclude trans people from using one that they’re most comfortable with). These are all valid concerns and Macalester needs to address them, but at the same time I definitely think this is a move in the right direction.
Anon • Apr 30, 2023 at 7:33 am
I really agree with this comment. It is a move to the right direction but the approach and the way they did it is not. How can you make a decision this big without taking into account the students it will impact? Without discussing how to rebuild and improve the necessary infrastructure etc. It’s like they are trying too hard to do what’s is right without sincerely wanting to do it. I mean if they could make such a big decision like this in hiding, what else could they do?
Jack E, trans student (using alias) • Apr 29, 2023 at 6:19 pm
I understand your point of view, and do believe that spirituality is a large factor that administration has ignored in this situation, along with transparency. I agree that this new solution is moving from one negative extreme to another. However, I don’t see why you, the authors, had to start spewing harmful, transphobic, and bio-essentialist rhetoric while trying to point this out.
Firstly, in your writing, you espouse common, harmful stereotypes about the nature of sexual assault. Your article assumes that its readers believe that every victim of assault has been assaulted by someone of the opposite gender or sex. This erases the narratives of numerous victims and further creates harmful stereotypes about certain vulnerable populations – especially queer survivors.
Secondly, “The reality stands that our bathrooms were not built to be gender-inclusive” was a sentence that I had particular issue with. It seems as if this college was not built to be gender-inclusive either, if people like you continue to espouse rhetoric that could very possibly harm a minority group on campus that is already in a dangerous position. Did you know that after RL tried to create an all-gender bathroom on Turck 3, people living on that floor made it their business to take down the “all gender” sign and single out out people who were using the bathroom as such? And you say that the campus will have a “gender inclusive housing model” after RL’s plans are implemented! What a laugh!
Yes, RL’s solution helps neither party, but the more important thing is that it’s creating further tension between the cisgender and transgender students at this school in order to take the heat off of RL’s back, as evidenced by the word choice you have used in your writing. We, the Transgender students at this college, did not come up with this solution despite advocating for more all gender bathrooms, and we would like that noted before more students decide to jump on your bandwagon and use this decision as a way to continue espousing talking points that harm transgender students.
There is a right way to bring awareness to this issue, and by writing this article the way you have, it seems as if you have failed at doing that.
Student @ Mac • Apr 30, 2023 at 7:57 am
How exactly are they spewing harmful, transphobic, and bio-essentialist rhetoric? By raising awareness and expressing their point of views in a rather respectful and considerate manner tbh? I’ve seen hatred at Mac towards others student, and I don’t believe that’s what’s happening here. I had no idea about this change, and I am very grateful that they took the time to write and share about it. Imagine if it were the other way around, and we had all-gender-inclusive bathrooms, but then one day, we found out that it had been completely changed to gender-segregated bathrooms without involving the people it will impact the most.
Transgender students are not at fault for this decision at all, and I don’t think that is what the authors are saying. I believe they are raising the point that the administration did not handle the valid demands for gender-inclusive bathrooms well, which led to a rushed and poorly thought-out decision. I support transgender students as well as those who require gender-segregated bathrooms for personal reasons.
Our school infrastructure reflects systemic racism and discrimination, which is a reality for most schools in the U.S. that have existed for this long. It is a reality that our school was not built to be gender-inclusive. For us to become inclusive will take more than Macalester just changing a policy in secret and keep it going? It has to be more genuine and intentional, including the voices of different students and improving bathroom infrastructure.
Student • Apr 30, 2023 at 11:47 am
I believe it is unfair of you to accuse them of “spewing harmful, transphobic, and bio-essentialist rhetoric” without providing specific examples for others to learn from. I am honestly having a difficult time seeing where they have said anything like that in this article.
Furthermore, they provided an example of sexual assault as a form of trauma that a student may have experienced. This example is not limited to ALL traumas/sexual assault cases, as we all should know. However, according to SupportingSurvivors, statistics indicate that approximately 91% of rape and sexual assault victims identify as female, and nearly 99% of perpetrators identify as male. These are just facts, Jack E.
If you feel that their approach was inappropriate, what alternative approach would you suggest? From what I understand, they reached out to the relevant parties, including senior leadership and RL, in order to start a productive conversation and inform the student body. I believe they have accomplished that. When giving feedback, we should always try to be as constructive and helpful as possible, I hope my comment reflects that and I hope you can do the same in the future.
Student (same as comment from 4/30 at 2:45) • Apr 30, 2023 at 2:58 pm
It’s unfortunate you are being brigaded by multiple people, or at least multiple screen names with very similar argumentative and writing styles. Although they seek to skew your words, you are correct my friend. This piece, oversteps the bounds of valid criticism and ends up using bioessentialist, transphobic arguments.
There are multiple anonymous comments, and far more likes and comments than any other Mac Weekly opinion piece in recent weeks, all for an article that appeared only online, not in the physical newspaper. I cannot help but believe that just one person is driving this engagement which unwaveringly lauds this extremely dubious article, either through sham sock puppet accounts or through mobilizing their friends to lavish praise on this sham article.
Rebecca Gentry • Apr 28, 2023 at 12:56 pm
Thank you so much for writing this piece! I didn’t know about this change until reading your article. I don’t understand how a major change to something as intimate as BATHROOMS could fly under the radar like this. Did they even consider the issue of showers? Dupre, for example, does not even have private changing areas for showers. Even though I’m a graduating senior, I’ll never forget the anxiety around SHOWERING, a part of one’s daily routine, during my time in Dupre. It was already unacceptable that there was no thought given to privacy. But the idea of sharing that kind of space with men? I don’t even know what I’d do if I were to live in Dupre next year. I 100% agree with the need to expand our gender inclusive bathroom options. But this cannot be the answer. I’m extremely disappointed in Macalester for making such a change without adequate student input or even adequate notice.