District Student Council Business Meeting
Friday November 1, 2013
9:00am -12:00pm
Rock Creek Campus, Building 9, Room 201
1.0 Preliminary Business
9:00am-9:15am
1.1
Call to Order
(9:00-9:05)
1.2
Roll Call
1.3
Approval of minutes
David Osterhoudt
1.4
Changes to the Agenda
None
1.5
Welcome from RC President Birgitte Ryslinge
(9:10-9:15)
Good morning, and welcome to the campus. I would like to say it’s been a great week for us all
at PCC and I know many of you were involved with the Investiture and thank you for that. For the
students we are now in week 7, you are busy in your studies as well as your leadership role. We are very
appreciative of all of the things you do for PCC; we couldn’t do it without you.
Questions: What is your 20 year vision for PCC?
Answer: We serve with a combination of looking outward but also inward. The outside is coming in and
having students tell us what they see in the future. The student body is actively becoming diverse and
we are getting interest from students to get them ready for the 21st century. Rock Creek will be a part of
that as well as the rest of the campuses. Go PCC!
2.0 Old Business
None
9:15am-9:15am
3.0 New Business
9:20am-11:30am
3.1
Legislative Task Force
Isha Whittaker (9:20-9:50)
Legislative Internship Proposal: See presentation. Isha is a Senator at Sylvania Campus, selected to be
the Task Force Char. This is a funding proposal with a list of who is participating with the decision
making. The 4 things I will cover today is Why, How, Budget Proposal and Questions.
Timeline:
Students: 10-student cohort, 4 credits, cohort days are Tuesday/Thursday and seminar days are
Tuesday evenings, priority will be for students to be in placement with Legislators.
Promotion: flyers, potty press, sandwich boards, VISIX; word-of-mouth at SAC meetings, class raps,
Newberg contact for SL’s.
Application: website is already linked to the DSC page with an application the student will submit
and have checked electronically. Students will also be asked to submit their resumes.
Selection Process: Students will be contacted by email to set up an interview of 15 minutes on
November 22nd, 2013. Selection committee will have 4 student reps (from each campus) and 1 advisor,
plus possibly Michael and/or Rob. There will be time for deliberation and references will be verified by
Stephen. Class during the term: Jan-Feb Lecture will meet Tuesday evenings for seminar coursework.
Feb-Mar will have Intern work days on Tuesday and Thursday. Setting precedent for the future: Create
“the wheel,” secure more funding for future years, collect promotional tools, present program wrap-up
to DSC & PCC Board. We want to fund 8 students with $4316. Tuition waiver: $2816; stipend: $1200;
Advertising: $200; Food for task force and selection committee: $100.
Questions: What other funding options are you looking into?
Answer: We don’t have any other leads at this time. Based on our timeline we will need to work
harder and sooner in the following years to get different funding.
Question: The amount of your request is the maximum amount, correct? So if a student is already
receiving a grant for tuition, they wouldn’t necessarily need the waiver. So will that come out of the
baseline?
Answer: That is a discussion we need to have. Our plan was to have the waiver in place quickly
and the stipend/tuition waiver is a draw and a motivator for the students.
Question: Great program, not sure about the waivers and stipends. We have been talking with
our legal consultants and I’m not sure how that will work.
Answer: That is a great question. Dean Lane said it’s a non-issue because this is a class.
Discussion: Because this isn’t a class, direction will be provided as to the legality of the waiver
issue.
Question: Did you submit an official funding request form?
Answer: We just heard about this form last night and it is being filled out right now. Because your
form has a maximum of $1500, I will need a follow-up on this.
Question: Could you relate to the students what the upside would be to a less-rushed timeline for
the future?
Answer: Because we don’t have secured funding, this only leaves the students 2 weeks to find out
about it and apply. We really need to give the students as much time to get placed and apply. We would
really like to see this be a fully-open opportunity for students with secured funding.
Question: Have you looked into fundraising?
Answer: Secured funding is an issue and needs to be worked out, but if we did fundraising people
would raise the question: “why isn’t the college/PCC funding this?” I think it’s an option we need to look
at, but I think it could have some bad PR on PCC.
Discussion: People will think this only touches 8 students, but this program has taught us how to
navigate the legislative system and doing my job for PCC is directly related to the internship. We would
like to have 4-first year students and get institutional funding.
Question: We are on a tight budget right now, so is there anything non-essential for the program
to be successful?
Answer: We can cut out food for the students, as well as the campus advertising costs that each
campus said they would be willing to cover. The stipend: there will be 10 students driving on an average
of 1000 miles for the term. With the price of gas it is about $127 per person in one car for gas. Food: $7
a day 10 times is $70 per student. We have already taken some off of the request and we feel like taking
more and more off will put the students at a disadvantage if they can’t find the necessary resources.
This number is flexible, but we are invested in providing \opportunities for students who don’t have
resources. The waivers really aren’t flexible, because it is the cost of the whole class.
Question: Maybe have 6 or 4 students instead of 8? I recommend keeping the waivers, but
lowering the amount of students going.
Answer: If we did 6 students instead of 8, it would be $3300. Obviously if you cut students, you
cut the impact of students in the offices.
Discussion: I agree that if we cut out students we will cut out the impact, but it wouldn’t be taking
away the program.
Question: What was the cost of the program last year for the full amount?
Answer: It would have been double this. Winter had 7 students and spring had 8 students, plus 1
un-funded. There are many offices, reps, and senators and the more you have that have a personal
connection with the students is what’s important.
Discussion: I don’t think you can put a dollar amount on the value of this program. The more the
merrier!
Question: Could we get a budget check?
Answer: Our budget at a low is $16,835 for the rest of the year. That is taking out the Bridge and
soccer funding. We may have a high of $19,100 because the soccer funds have been returned to us.
They may be requested in December and The Bridge is coming to ask for more funding in the next DSC,
last year we gave them $6,000. We need to move on, so I would like to open this up for approval,
suggestions, or denial. Does anyone approve?
Approval from two. Since we work on consensus, there seems to be some hesitation. Can
someone speak on why?
Discussion: I would like to see some fundraising by the students.
Question: For the future or now?
Answer: For the future.
Discussion: Since they are working on a tight timeline and budget, would anyone have a
suggestion for a different budget?
Suggestion: I don’t think we should fund the food or advertising and fund $4016.
Discussion: We still have one concern. Please tell us why.
Answer: I would like to see the number of students lowered. It would be compromise, it is a good
program and I don’t think we should not allow it, but I think the number of students could be lowered to
6.
Question: Do you have the number for 6 students?
Answer: It would be about $3000.
Discussion: You would not mathematically have 2 people from each campus. Maybe one, but
certainly not more than 2. There would be a rippling effect with representation from each campus.
There would be a possibility to take out Centers. Sylvania obviously has more students and if no
one applies from a campus, we obviously can’t offer them a position. If we funded 6 students it would
be$3,012.
We need to approve or not approve. Options: $4,016 or $3,012. Can I get a motion to approve
the first option? And the second option? We do not have consensus.
Another option is to have 6 funded and up to 4 unfunded.
Question: Is this a program that the students would do without being funded?
Answer: The one unfunded student last year had private resources. So for the student like that
who already has their needs met. But at a national level, we have been discussing funding and it does
not promote equal opportunity for our students.
Discussion: I’m curious as an observer as to what you mean by “no consensus?” you could have
people offer to step aside. I haven’t seen any asking for blocks.
Question: Is there anyone that wants to block or step aside?
Answer: Two people will step aside. This will go forward and fund at $4,016.
3.2
Portland Healthcare Action Group
Jan McWilliams & Judith Wickman (9:50-10:20)
They are here to discuss information and no one, for the record, has agreed to anything. We
started last spring with a proposal to the Cascade campus, (has Shannon Olive sent the proposal? Yes.)
And we are part of a coalition to provide healthcare to all of Oregon. For house bill 1122 to pass we
need 1 million dedicated voters in Oregon and that is what our mission is. What we propose to do is
having a forum and showing a healthcare movie to students. Shannon suggested we expand and table at
each campus for 4 days to promote who we are and the opportunities, while hoping to get student
volunteers. Shannon also suggested a meeting time and place for students on each campus to share
their own health related stories. We have materials that use and can provide with a second showing of
the movie. If any of the other campuses would like to join in this effort, we have a plan and a schedule
that wouldn’t need to be developed. We would like to get Dembrow to come and speak at the forum;
otherwise we will have other contacts who may be interested. There is a lot that people don’t know
about what a single payer universal healthcare means. We would like to provide students with the
opportunity to learn about this option and what it can provide students, as well as the opportunity for
students to ask questions. We are not looking for an answer today, per say, but I will provide my email
for your questions or thoughts: janmacwill@gmail.com, 503-307-1564 is my phone number.
Questions from Jan: Do you think we should offer the movie showing at other times than the
ones we’ve proposed? Do you think this should just be offered at Cascade, or the other campuses, as
well?
3.4
M.E.C.H.A Funding Request
Yesi Herrera (10:20-10:30)
See attached request
We are here to present to you today about the MEChA regional conference. Because MEChA is a
national movement and we have several regions, we have put together a proposal for a conference with
students from high schools, colleges, and universities. PCC has never held the conference before and we
have been elected to do so. The theme is Community Engagements and the goals are to reconnect
MEChA with the community while maximizing resources and increasing visibility. This is a three day
conference held on January 31st, Feb. 1st, and 2nd, with 300 potential participants on Cascade campus.
First two days are open to the public and the third day is just for chapter members. The requested
budget is $8,750 with $1,000 already acquired. We will be seeking money from elsewhere, but we would
like to acquire the money now and give the money back if it isn’t used. The food is the biggest expense
so far at $6,000.
Question: Is there a registration fee for the participants?
Answer: there is and we are hoping to offer a scholarship where these fees will be going back to the
students. This fee isn’t going to offset the cost of the conference.
Question: Have you received any food donations?
Answer: I think we have received a donation of $300, but I need to clarify that.
Question: How much is each chapter contributing?
Answer: We would like to see the money from our service learning projects to go into the conference.
Question: How many meals are you providing per day?
Answer: 2 per day, breakfast and lunch.
Question: Where are you getting your attendance number?
Answer: We are adding a day for high school students, which normally aren’t there, so we think that will
raise our numbers this year. There have been conferences in the past that have had over 300 attendees.
Question: Where will this be held?
Answer: Cascade campus
Question: Is this open to non-MEChA students?
Answer: Yes it is.
Question: How did you get chosen to host?
Answer: We applied to vote, which took us out of the voting process.
Quesiton: Where was the conference hosted last year?
Answer: It was hosted at U of O in connection with Lane CC. The year before that was at a high school
with easily over 300 attendees.
Campus caucus for 5 minutes.
Southeast: There is a lot of positivity around the conference and I have been approached by a student to
extend MEChA to Southeast. On that note, we are concerned about the food budget and that it is a lot
of money. We were also wondering about the registration and if you are leveraging funding from
MEChA headquarters. Is there a venue fee to have it held at Cascade?
Rock Creek: We also think this is a great opportunity, but we do have a problem with the budget. We
propose to give you $1500 from DSC and suggest that you charge a registration fee on a sliding scale to
motivate people to come.
Cascade: We are very excited to host the conference and for the conference in general. We would like to
see a preregistration fee being collected and we would support $1,000. Cascade has already donated
$1,000 and we would support $1,000 from DSC.
Sylvania: We haven’t come up with a specific proposal and our sense is that we would be able to support
it at a higher cost than $1500. If we gave you that amount, would you continue seeking money to give
back to DSC?
Answers: We are doing a can drive with the most raised getting a free registration; otherwise it’s a $25
registration fee. The scholarship will be used by proceeds coming from what we hoped would be the
registration fees. If that’s not possible, we will use the registration fees to go toward the cost of the
conference. And we will be fundraising.
Southeast: $1,000 should be the most for the venue fee and $6,000 is too much for food. We will give
our $300 to get started and with regards to the food, we suggest having a pot luck with people bringing
a celebrated dish. $300 for supplies; as for performers, we don’t really see a need, but maybe you could
find local artists who would volunteer; $300 for t-shirts; total amount is $1600.
Sylvania: Our final amount is $2700 at least to get started and it’s important for us to support MEChA.
This would cover everything outside of the food.
No one supports fully funding this request.
Discussion: We have only one chance to intern for Leg., but with MEChA, they have many opportunities
to connect with students and have many lifelines. Rock Creek is willing to go no higher than $1500.
Southeast agrees to $1500, as well. Cascade will vote $1500. Sylvania is willing to agree to $1900.
Southeast says $1900 would be the maximum. They would be willing to drop down to
$1500, but realize this event is every important and would like to keep it at $1900. Rock Creek will stay
at $1500, as they have a tight budget. Yoli will approach her Programming team to see if they will
contribute. Cascade is staying at $1500 and Sylvania will concede to $1500 with the friendly amendment
that they may be able to return to request more funding if they are unable to acquire the required
funding. Consensus has been reached and the approval is for $1500.
Gender Neutral Bathroom Task Force
Nash Jones (10:30-10:50)
Nash has been brought back to PCC for 5 hours a week to focus on the Task Force. We are kind of at an
interesting place right now. 3 campuses went through my Bridge 13 training on Wednesday and we
discussed the Gender Binary System. In particular we are discussing the “burns” that occur with genderspecific restrooms. The Task Force has a broad mission of increasing the number of gender-neutral
restrooms on each campus. Cascade has the only accurate audit of their restrooms and we are trying to
get those done for the other campuses. Currently we are at a stage where I left over the summer with
students in charge and I am back to amp up the momentum and involvement and solidify our mission.
We are trying to open up our mission to include buildings not touched by the bond. Dr. Pulliams left, but
before he did he left Linda Degman in charge of that process with the help of Heather Lange. I would like
to let you know we still exist and the gender-neutral bathroom mission is still in effect. We are working
through getting an email and website that feels accessible on a district level. Last year the DSC approved
the formation of the Task Force and I want to make sure we have the support of this year’s Task Force.
Question: Have you organized your meeting schedule yet?
Answer: We are meeting next Friday at 1:00 at SE, round robin style to make it accessible to students.
We are not set on our meeting time, which is simply what has worked for those that have attended so
far. We are open to change.
Question: The web page is still standing?
Answer: Yes, http://www.pcc.edu/resources/aspcc/rock-creek/qrc/, with Gender Neutral Bathrooms
link on the right. I am tasking myself with revamping that website and we have had a new email address
made, genderinclusivespaces@pcc.edu. We will start a poster campaign once we get the website
established to make sure folks know we exist.
Discussion: One of the ideas from your presentation Wednesday is that our campuses could fund more
Bridge 13 trainings which would be open to Classroom Enhancement Grants and maybe have PS Officers
attend, as well. Because Bridge 13 is so affordable, we were thinking of inviting Nash and their
counterparts from SMYRC to give Bridge 13 training on other campuses.
3.5
OCCSA Report
Mona Hutchinson (10:50-10:55)
Lizzy would like OCCSA to be a permanent agenda item to promote transparency. This will be added
permanently.
*5 MINUTE STRETCH BREAK* (10:50-10:55am)
4.0 Discussion Items
10:55am-11:35am
4.1 Student Activity Fee Exploratory Task Force
(10:50-11:05)
Southeast Center is going to gain a MC/WRC and Cascade will gain a MC. Campus-specific ASCC’s
fund these centers and this Task Force will explore what will happen if SAF’s were increased so that each
campus could have their own budget for these Centers. What do they need budget wise and how will
they obtain that? This is purely exploratory and will take 2 years. Cascade supports starting a Task Force.
How does everyone feel about this? We will put it on our next agenda and go into what it will look like.
Kendi has agreed to be an advisor, as well as Narce.
Question: Have the existing Centers been included in this conversation?
Answer: This is merely an approval from DSC to create a Task Force and will welcome people from
the existing centers.
Everyone is in support of the Task Force. Please send in nominations to Rachel from around the District
before the next DSC.
Question: Is there a document available to explain the committee?
Answer: No, but I will put one together for you to discuss at your next GCM/Executive Meetings.
Questions: Are club members welcome?
Answer: Personal opinion is to just take nominations and put a Task Force in place.
Please ask your ASPCC Leaders, WRC's, QRC's, and MC's for nominations. Official Nomination dates
begin today (Nov.4, 2013) and will close Nov.29th, 2013 at 5pm.
This will allow time for me to compile the nominations list for the December DSC meeting (Dec.6th). We
will discuss nominations and hopefully be able to create a well-rounded taskforce.
Nomination details needed:
-Name, Current Job Title, Major, G#, Phone number and e-mail.
-Also as short response to the question, "Why do you want to be on the SAF Task Force?"
TALKING POINTS: The SAF Task Force
-This task force would explore the current funding structure of the Multicultural Centers and WRCs at all
the campuses.
The taskforce would decide if raising the fee to provide funding for those programs makes sense. They
would create guidelines for use of the funds.
-The task force would develop a funding fee distribution that would be equitable for each campus.
-The fee increase, if raised, would go directly to those programs similar to the TGIF increase of a few
years back.
-Student Activity Fees are currently providing funding for student programming and leadership
programs at SYL RC and CA. The amounts differ, the reasoning behind the amounts differ.
4.2 Affordable Care Act Brainstorming
(11:05-11:35)
Eli gave us a presentation about what the Care Act means and in winter term having a plan of
action and how we want to go about that. Do people want to be involved with this on a district level?
Caucus called to see how everyone feels about it. Cover Oregon has certified agents that can register
people and has prepackaged plans to help out with that. Everyone is in support of bringing in Cover
Oregon.
See Eli’s presentation statement:
My Prezi was focused on the reasons why each department is offering up help to get students enrolled
in the ACA. Here is a brief summary of various interest groups:
Financial Aid: We need to lower the student loan default rate for PCC students. The number one reason
for default is not completing their degree or certificate. The number one reason for not completing is
healthcare and mental care.
Business Office: They are refocusing their staff to tackle financial literacy. Fin Lit has become a major
part of new PCC initiatives and the business office has the staff to teach the program.
Faculty: The allied health faculty members want to see healthy students. Virginia Chambers (whom I
think you met) is a great resource and can provide the health incentives portion of the program
Cover Oregon: The State Agency has tons of resources and information to share with your team as we
begin enrolling students.
In summary here is why everyone cares:
Financial Aid = completion
Business Office = financial literacy
Faculty = health
Cover Oregon = access and resources.
Here is the link to the full
Prezi: http://prezi.com/axk_vexdl5bo/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy
5.0 Public Comment
11:35am-11:35am
th
Campus conversation with Dr. Brown Wednesday November 5 at Sylvania and Friday November 8th at
Cascade. There are two days in November at the Capital to meet legislators and representatives.
February 8th
6.0 Reports:
11:35am-12:00pm
6.1 Chair’s Report:
Rachel Black Elk
6.2 Cascade Campus Report
Shannon Olive
The PCC investiture event went well. The Cascade ASPCC team came early to help welcome the New
District President by holding banners while sporting colorful PCC t-shirts. Our campus has also agreed to
support the formation of the SAF Exploratory Task Force to bring to the DSC.
Our legislative team will be bringing the Young Invincibles Organization to our campus Monday
Nov.4th from 11am-1pm.
Our programmer’s team has set up an impressive array of events for our campus during the Native
American heritage Month. We are also collecting money for the Thanksgiving Baskets and will be giving
out gift cards to family this year instead of the baskets full of food given out in previous years. The
thought behind this was to allow families to buy their own food in case they needed special diet foods or
other supplies during the Thanksgiving season.
6.3 Rock Creek Campus
Mari Cruz Gonzalez Vasquez
Director of Campus Affairs
ACUI
Campus President Search
Committees
Director of Programming
- Harvest Festival
- Bingo Nights
- District Programming Team: Fright Town
- Halloween Costume Contest
- Helping out with International Week
- Blood Drive
- Thanksgiving Baskets
Director of Legislature
ACUI
1395 total amount of surveys
6.4 Southeast Campus
Patrick Stupfel
Completed Events:
OCCSA Student Survey:
Distributed the Oregon Community College Student Association student issue surveys via class raps and
canvassing. We have successfully received input from over 200 students.
Take a Crack at Cancer:
In respect to breast cancer awareness month, our wonderful women’s resource advocate hosted a fun
and informative event that focused on promoting awareness and education about breast cancer.
Shanghai Tunnels Tour
Veg much? Students enjoyed an event that promoted healthy food alternatives and highlighted the
benefits of being a vegetarian.
Boo-tiful Autumn Extravaganza: A Halloween themed event where students enjoyed arts, crafts,
mummy racing, food and beverages, pumpkin painting and all sorts of Halloween themed games for all
ages.
Current Events:
Asian New Year celebration planning: We are forming subcommittees while focusing on logistics,
advertising, community engagement, budget...etc.
International Photo Competition
Take Back The Tap: An event that promotes using sustainable water bottles and drinking tap water
instead of buying plastic products.
Upcoming Events:
International Week/International Night
Asian New Year Celebration
Math Events: At Southeast we are striving to change the perception of mathematics and help
revolutionize the way we learn about math by putting on events that show the benefits of mathematical
education.
6.5 Sylvania Campus
Victory LaFara
Sylvania Campus Report 11/1/2013
-Halloween: Costume contest, cupcakes, photo booth, face painting, and pumpkin carving. Around 300
people participated.
-Breast cancer awareness info tabling and fundraiser. Sold all lollipops and received extra donations.
-Club fair, Resource Fair, etc.
-Simone Sedillo event went very well. Around 300 in attendance.
-Day at the Capitol being planned for Nov 20th and 21st.
-Students’ Rights & Responsibilities brochure.
-Met with Michael Morrow (of union, voting member) and he supports acquiring a student spot on AFT
union committee and they send us a union liaison to DSC. Will be proposed at next union.
-Committees have been assigned and Senate made a committee report form for meetings
-Senate reached 1,400 surveys
-Sylvania ASPCC is struggling to be visible this year. There is a wall blocking off our primary access point,
making it a challenge for students to find us. In addition, we were included in the new construction
maps. Our area is under a big red block that says “under construction.”
-Communications has been improving our online presence and advertising ASPCC. Published a How to
Get to ASPCC video. Working on a photo booth and social media contest for ASPCC Loves You Day. Our
FB page will publish the booth photos and people who get the most of their friends to “like” the photo
will win a prize.
-Finance is working with the IRS and nonprofits to help low income and international students to file
taxes for free.
-It was noted that BPAC only had Sylvania represented. Mona would like to offer assistance to folks who
desire to attend this committee.
-Sharing Thanksgiving program is lacking applicants, but folks are working on solutions to increase
visibility
-Kicking off a toy drive for low income student parents.
7.0 For the good of the order/Announcements:
None
12:00pm
8.0 Meeting adjourned.
12:00pm
Gender Neutral Bathroom Resource Guide
Queer Resource Center, Portland Community College
Rock Creek Campus, Building 3 room 128
Coordinator: Addie Jones, addie.jones@pcc.edu
Online resources to learn more about the topic or to educate others:
●
The Transgender Law Center (based out of San Francisco) “Peeing in Peace” resource
guide:
http://transgenderlawcenter.org/issues/public-accomodations/peeing-in-peace
●
“Safe 2 pee” online directory of gender neutral bathrooms in Portland (PCC Cascade is
listed!):
http://safe2pee.org/new/map/us/or/portland
●
Lambda Legal’s Transgender Rights Toolkit, “Equal Access to Public Restrooms”
(includes FAQs and Tips for dealing with harassment):
http://data.lambdalegal.org/publications/downloads/trt_equal-access-to-publicrestrooms.pdf
●
Public Hygiene Lets Us Stay Human (PHLUSH) Short Bulleted guide that lays out the
issue succinctly (mentions PDX and Multnomah County non-discrimination law)
(references Peeing in Peace and Toilet Training):
http://www.phlush.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/legal-non-discrimination.pdf
Debunking common arguments against gender neutral bathrooms:
1.
argument: gender neutral bathrooms are unsafe for women and children
rebuttal:
● this argument assumes that the safety of cisgender women and children is more
important that the safety of trans* and gender nonconforming people
●
allowing people to use the bathroom that works best for their gender identity does not
compromise the safety of women or children. Trans* and gender nonconforming people
should not be assumed to be predators or dangerous. Also, a sign on a gender
segregated bathroom does not keep actual violent or dangerous people (of any gender)
out of the restroom.
●
while gender segregated bathrooms do not actually insure safety for cis women or
children, they do actually compromise the safety of trans* and gender nonconforming
people
2.
argument: gender neutral bathrooms are a special privilege for transgender or gender
nonconforming people. Spaces should not be required to go out of their way or spend money on
creating a space for such a small population
rebuttal:
● going to the bathroom is not a privilege, but a right. Many trans* and gender
nonconforming people will avoid using the bathroom if not given a safe or anxiety-free
option. Not using the bathroom when one needs to can cause severe health problems
such as dehydration, malnutrition, or a UTI depending on how one deals with not having
a bathroom option.
●
bathrooms have historically been used as exclusionary spaces for marginalized
communities. The argument of giving minority groups “privilege” has played a role in
creating this exclusivity. Controlling who uses which restroom or whether someone may
use one at all has played a factor in several fights for human rights in the United States.
For instance, people of color, women in traditionally male workplaces, and people with
disabilities have all had to fight for equal rights to restroom use.
(IMPORTANT NOTE: the struggles for equal bathroom access has been specific and
unique to each group mentioned. discrimination in any form against people of color,
women, people with disabilities, and gender minorities is distinctly different and should
not be equated. Equating these struggles as the same erases important differences in
history and experience and appropriates the work done by another.)
●
gender neutral bathrooms do not only increase bathroom accessibility and safety for
trans* and gender nonconforming individuals. Gender neutral bathrooms increase
access for guardians who accompany a child of another gender to the bathroom, thus
increasing the safety of that child. Gender neutral bathrooms increase access for
attendants who assist people of another gender in the restroom, thus increasing the
safety of the person who necessitates assistance in the bathroom.
3.
argument: If only gender segregated bathroom options exist, which bathroom should we let
transgender people use? What if they do not present in a gender normative way?
rebuttal:
●
trans* folks should not be told which restroom they should use. Trans* folks should be
allowed to use the restroom that they believe is most fitting, comfortable or useful for
them. For binary trans* folks, this would most likely be the bathroom that corresponds
with their gender identity. For genderqueer or gender nonconforming folks, this decision
may depend on several personal factors.
●
There are no rules about how feminine or masculine one needs to be to access the
restroom. This is called “gender policing” the rules of the gender binary. Almost no one
(trans, queer, or cis) conforms perfectly to gender norms all of the time, thus the gender
binary is restrictive for all. Policing gender in or outside of the bathroom can lead to
discrimination and violence.
4.
argument: men are messier and stinkier than women, so women shouldn’t be forced to share a
bathroom with them
rebuttal:
● men are not inherently or naturally messier than women. Often women’s restrooms can
get messy. If this is an observed comparison between bathrooms in a given place,
maybe making the bathrooms gender neutral will encourage a culture of cleanliness.
●
most people use gender neutral bathrooms at home or in others’ homes without
questions of messiness. The ease at which restrooms are shared with all genders in the
home indicates that people could do so successfully in public.
5.
argument: gender neutral bathrooms will make cisgender people (often communicated as
“real,” “natural,” “regular,” or “normal” women/men) uncomfortable. Also, sharing the bathroom
with the “opposite” sex will be embarrassing.
rebuttal:
● Comfort should not take precedence over safety.
●
Folks may feel uncomfortable with a change in a rule that did not negatively effect them
personally, but most likely only at first.
●
avoiding embarrassment should not be more important than creating safety.
●
the preferences of the majority should not be prioritized over the needs of a minority
6.
argument: I understand that gender neutral bathrooms increase safety and health of trans* and
gender nonconforming people, but we just don’t have the money or space to build new
bathrooms. I also don’t have the power to change the bathrooms we have into gender neutral
options.
rebuttal:
● If you cannot build new bathrooms or change the existing bathrooms to gender neutral,
you can institute a broad nondiscrimination policy and post it in the bathroom that
encourages a culture of respect where people do not police gender in the restroom. The
policy should state the right for anyone who uses the restroom to do so and do so safely.
●
find out who is in power of the building or the bathrooms and start a campaign to raise
awareness about the importance of gender neutral bathroom and begin the process of
getting some instituted. (see Chapter 3 of Peeing in Peace for some great advice of
changing bathroom options through action campaigns)
●
Multi-stall gender neutral bathrooms actually take up less or the same amount of space
as gender segregated restrooms. They are simply a single room instead of two separate
rooms assigned to women and men. They are also more cost efficient because you
need fewer of them, you can convert pre-existing bathrooms with only slight changes,
and if you choose to take the urinals out, you will have less maintenance cost as urinals
are known to clog and break down at a faster rate than toilets.
Why does this matter at PCC?
●
PCC currently does not include gender identity or expression explicitly in its
nondiscrimination policy. This kind of discrimination often occurs in or around
bathrooms, thus the institution of gender neutral bathrooms could improve the safety of
an unprotected class of people on campus.
●
PCC does, however, state in its Student Rights that, “the college shall promote equal
opportunity and treatment through a positive and continuing affirmative action plan.”
Instituting gender neutral bathrooms should be understood as a way in which PCC can
continue its affirmative action plan. Gender neutral bathrooms are a great way to show
trans* and gender nonconforming people that PCC is a safe and affirming campus, that
their needs are important, and that their presence within the community is valued.
●
PCC should mandate a minimum number of gender neutral restrooms as part of the
build-out for the bond. One goal of the bond is to “make health and safety upgrades” at
PCC, and gender neutral bathrooms are just that. To achieve this, more people involved
in decision making need to be educated about the importance of gender neutral
bathrooms in improving PCC’s campus climate and support of a diverse student body. If
you feel that you are in a position to educate others about this topic, please hold
discussions and refer people to the resources at the top of this page. If you do not know
how to answer a question about the topic, please refer them to Addie Jones at the QRC.