Most public toilets in the US are very low in privacy, the bottom gap in the door is so big (around 15-20% of the door), the side gaps are too big as well. This will make the toilet experience so unpleasant with no privacy at all. You can literally count the people outside and people outside are like "ok, now he is wiping, etc.".

I can't think of a reason behind this. Can someone tell me why?

US Toilets

  • 9
    It probably all boils down to "it's cheaper this way". – Greg Hewgill Apr 30 '14 at 22:17
  • 14
    Well, your standard for privacy is evidently much higher than the norm in the U.S.— which, by European standards, is on the squeamish or even puritanical side when it comes to bodily functions or undress, and thus the last place you would think to be lax in this regard. For instance, it's pretty rare now to find trough urinals in newer construction in the U.S., though they seemed to be the norm, for instance, in Australia. – choster Apr 30 '14 at 22:54
  • 11
    For the convenience of US Senators. – dlanod Apr 30 '14 at 23:02
  • 5
    I have noticed this too. I suspect (though don't know) that it's designed to minimise secretive drug-taking and other undesirable activities. [In contrast the always-secretive Swiss make their cubicles virtually hermetically sealed.] – toandfro Apr 30 '14 at 23:18
  • 14
    The stalls in that photo look sufficiently private to me, for any legitimate use of the stalls. If someone can casually tell that you're wiping in one of those stalls, you're doing it wrong. – Flimzy May 1 '14 at 3:59
up vote 52 down vote accepted

I can't find a definitive link but there are a few reasons, a lot of which were already covered in the comments.

One, the style in your picture makes the whole place easier to clean. You can hose down the floors in one go and there are not so many joins between the walls and the floors for gunk to build up. (EDIT: in your picture you can see that the toilets don't even join the floor -- so for that setup I'm pretty sure it's for ease of cleaning).

Two, it's so that people can see what you're doing in there. It discourages drug taking or people having sex in the cubicles because it's obvious what's going on. Also if someone passes out on the toilet (for whatever reason) it's easier for people to notice -- in a fully obscured stall someone could lie in there for a long time. It may also just discourage people for sitting in there for longer than necessary.

Lastly, it's cheaper and easier. Divisions like that can be deployed in any room regardless of the flatness of the floor, or the height of the room, etc. Building divisions that actually fit floor to ceiling might require custom cutting and fitting, that might happen in a big building with dozens of identical toilets but for the odd public toilet cheap and easy is the way people will go.

To add to choster's comment, it does tend to vary widely across the US. I've seen toilets with even less privacy than that picture -- like a door that's you can see over when you stand up. The concerns about misusing the toilets tend to trump the privacy, particularly in public places. But you're right, in many private places they will be more sealed. And there're many places in the world where you'll be lucky to find a door at all -- or many people that care that there's no door there.

  • 3
    One thing to add on why these factors are a bigger deal for airports than elsewhere: international airports tend to be open with customers coming and going 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. For most other venues, after the building is closed the cubicles will be empty and cleaners can do a deep clean, force open any mysteriously closed cubicles, etc. – user568458 Dec 9 '14 at 12:54
  • This answers only half the question (or, as I've remarked in my comment on the question, one of the two questions), as it does not explain the depicted (IMO unusually, compared to other continents) wide gaps at the sides of the doors. – O. R. Mapper Jul 13 '15 at 6:44
  • @O.R.Mapper I'd imagine large gaps at the sides are also to discourage illicit activities in the stall. Or it could be just cheaper, less material, bad workmanship. – SpaceDog Jul 13 '15 at 7:20
  • 2
    @SpaceDog: I am really not convinced of the former suggestion; the gap between the door and the floor allows to recognize illicit acitivites without reducing privacy to a point where, say, private parts could be visible without considerable additional effort. Through the side gaps, on the other hand, the effort required to recognize illicit activities and to conduct bathroom voyeurism is roughly the same, making this a whole different topic. The other speculation might of course be true, but it warrants an analysis as to whether it really is specific to North America or the U.S. – O. R. Mapper Jul 13 '15 at 7:27
  • @O.R.Mapper, the truth is I don't really know, and short of someone knowledgeable dropping by I'm not sure we'll get a concrete answer. As for it being US specific, as I say in my answer things vary wildly around the world, without proper research it'd be impossible to pin down trends to countries. – SpaceDog Jul 13 '15 at 7:30

I can see the arguments about it being easier to clean, and perhaps spying is good for safety, but what's the deal with urinals? Often times they are squeezed uncomfortably close together, and most don't have a guard wall between them. In these situations, it takes some intense concentration to not accidentally get an eye full of full frontal. What possible reason could there be for such an obvious lack of privacy? Some might argue it's economics, but I see this in expensive and cheap places alike.

The best I can figure is that these designs stem from a time where people didn't care as much about bathroom privacy (the era when high schools had to shower together as a group) and they've simply been grandfathered in.

Here's some good answers on another forum: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/4184

  • 2
    Takes intense concentration to not turn your head ninety degrees and look down? Please! – WGroleau Dec 6 '16 at 23:17
  • @WGroleau: Some of us have better peripheral vision than others. Frankly, I like the guards more for preventing the situation where the other person's lack of concern for backwash means your legs get damp. – Sean Duggan May 25 at 14:26

As an European I was always uncomfortable to use any public facility in USA, for the same reason and I asked myself, over and over, the same question "Why????" .

The official answer is here where you'll find this stunning ABSURD reason:

STALL DOORS

To prevent unnecessary queuing, anyone entering the restroom should be able to easily determine the state of occupancy of stalls. This can be done with doors that do not fully close when not in use or by other devices that signal occupancy. The doors of stalls often loose alignment over time. Doors should have sufficient clearance and locks latch length to function as the stall frame becomes misaligned. "

Of course, I do not believe this is the real reason. I think is more behind that official nonsense explanation, and I incline to believe that it about another way to invade our privacy. Plain and Simple!

  • 5
    Well that can't be "official". No one in the US, save from expats from the UK, uses the word "queuing". Also, I don't know if it is a UK/US English thing or just a typo but it should be "lose" not "loose". That being said as an American, I remember being annoyed in the UK having to push on stall doors to see which was available rather than being able to lean slightly down to see which is available. – Dean MacGregor Jul 13 '16 at 17:20
  • @Dean: Next time in the UK, try not peeking under the toilet cubicle doors and look instead at the occupancy indicator that is part of the door lock. Everybody will be much happier! :-) – RedGrittyBrick Feb 28 at 17:27

The bottom "gaps" are for ADA. Minimum 12" so feet and foot rests clear...I believe. The cracks between doors are just poor construction tolerances that nobody in the States seems to care about.

  • 5
    ADA? Can you expand the TLA? – Mark Mayo Feb 4 '16 at 23:54
  • 2
    @MarkMayo -- probably Americans with Disabilities Act – UnrecognizedFallingObject Feb 5 '16 at 0:52
  • 2
    @MarkMayo Americans with Disabilities Act ? – blackbird Feb 5 '16 at 0:53
  • 1
    How does a huge gap under the door help people with restricted movement? – David Richerby Dec 6 '16 at 19:39
  • 1
    The bottom gap is called "toe clearance". A huge gap is not absolutely necessary, but if there is no big gap, the toilet stall has to be wider. Take a wheelcheer and roll into a restroom. To turn around, your footrest has to be able to move. With a gap, your toes can pass under the gap. You can find this in any ADA restroom guide, e.g. here steppingthruaccessibility.com/… – Max May 27 '17 at 18:34

As suggested on Seinfeld, the gap can be used to see if someone is inside before trying the door. Obviously there are usually locks for that purpose, but these tend to breakdown and the gap could work as a 'backup system'.

This phenomenon back home in the States varies. The lower the class of the clientele, public, or local user base, the less privacy there will be. There is no practical or benevolent utility to the wide spaces except to deny privacy in the bathroom. The ADA has no standards for clearance under a door to a toilet, although the space under a door is generally just enough to see feet in non-security-theater countries.

Doors with wide hinges and that "hang away" from the frame are actually more expensive and difficult to maintain, and are sold featuring their viewable apertures on each side (hinge- and latch-side pillaster clearances). These are often sold internationally as 'US style'. Americans (especially the more conservative or deprived segments of the herd) are a fearful, often oppressive lot, as most well know. Nothing illustrates this more than the small touches added to everything that bespeak their fears of 'someone might get away with something I disapprove of'.

As an architect, I can tell you that the only purposes in these gaps is to discourage comfort, satisfy resentment at the requirement to provide minimum facilities on the part of public accomodation locale business operators and conservative lawmakers, enable dehumanization and humiliate the lower classes. It is the same reason that US transit stops are often not weather-safe and have discomfort in mind (under the aegis of preventing homeless 'camping', and thereby non-participation in rent regimes). It is the same reasoning underlying the use of inordinate amounts of privacy invasion for basic interaction with any institution at the middle class level or below: frivolous and pointless oppressiveness and an ever-present precarity to keep people in line.

If one goes to or frequents reservation-limited municipal golf courses; country clubs; higher-tier restaurants, hotels, their associated cocktail lounges; and facilities in more homogeneous areas, these little touches disappear. A public park in the same city will have no doors on the stalls in the 'poor' part of town, not to mention likely prison-style fixtures for toilet paper (if any is on offer) and will generally lack sanitary supplies. However, in the richer part of town, a similar park (in addition to newer, better children's play equipment and sports facilities, as well as maintained landscaping), will have full privacy in well-lit, meticulously maintained restrooms with modern equipment and special touches (clean baby changing stations with filled wipe dispensers, heated water as well as the standard cold, and paper towels and toilet paper, present and of good quality).

Any other offers of explanation, really, are delusions. Americans blend classism with bitter, petty security-theater antics to keep the labor class on their knees.

  • 4
    This is nothing more than a baseless rant with nothing to back it up. – Andy Dec 4 '16 at 22:10
  • I am an architect and a civil engineer who is also a multi-decade member of SEAOSC and the CEAC. I have worked for several counties and cities over the last 3 decades and have no reason to sugar-coat or skew my assertions. They are the facts and a quick visit to any facilities as described above will confirm them. I am sorry if your breadth of experience has not exposed you to this truth as of yet, and hope that your safe spaces have smaller gaps around their doorways than the average public bathroom in areas outside your comfort zone. – Internationalite Dec 5 '16 at 11:41
  • 3
    Please cite something that backs up what you're saying then. I really don't give a damn what your occupation is, unless there's something official that actually states the reasoning is to make people uncomfortable. If there's not, you're just stating your rather silly opinion to try and provide what you think is the rational. – Andy Dec 6 '16 at 23:17
  • @Internationalite can you somehow back up your claims of being a civil engineer? Anyone on the Internet could claim that. – JonathanReez Dec 7 '16 at 10:09
  • While I certainly don't share the average American's conviction that we're the best, this other extreme is absurd.. – WGroleau May 25 at 15:47

I think it is the nanny state thing. There are rules for everything in the USA (second most universalist nation behind Switzerland) and you might just be doing something naughty in the bathroom... like emptying your bladder. I used to think that the builders couldn't measure properly but it's definitely about keeping a watch on you.

  • 1
    What do you mean by "nanny state"? Paternalism? – Vince Jul 12 '15 at 21:23

I believe that the gaps in the doors were made for many reasons, but the one i came up with was, that in case theres an emergency, lets say somebody had a heart attack, or passes out, it would be easily visible to others, but thats just what i believe one of the reasons would be

  • Welcome to the site! Thanks for contributing but this looks like it's mostly guesswork. For example, there's rarely more than a 6-9" gap under stall doors in the UK but I'm sure a person sprawled on the floor would be easily visible. – David Richerby Dec 6 '16 at 19:42
  • This answer does not add to what is already in the other answers. – Willeke Dec 6 '16 at 21:21

protected by JonathanReez Dec 7 '16 at 10:09

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.