Stool Test Kits are not Gender Neutral
There are a variety of stool test kits. All of them instruct us not to urinate while having a bowel movement because urine will contaminate the stool sample. They must have been designed by men. Most women who were toilet-trained within the last 100 years have not developed the neural connections necessary to control urination and defecation separately. Both happen over the same bowl at the same time and are controlled by the same pelvic floor muscles. I assume that, historically, women had the neural connections to relax at one outlet while holding the other tightly closed but now most women have no reason to develop these abilities separately.
I make this assumption because, historically, women did pee and poo separately. European men have worn underwear since the middle ages but women resisted wearing underwear until the 1920’s because this garment restricted their freedom. In their long full skirts, without underwear, women could pee where they were standing, and they did. The full-length skirts of upper class women allowed them to pee discretely on the lawn without anyone knowing – at a garden party, in conversation with a man – he did not know. To have to find the privacy necessary to pull down underwear and squat to pee would have been a significant restriction on a woman’s freedom. Like men, women used an outhouse or chamber pot primarily for privacy during bowel movements.
What happened 100 years ago? In the 1920’s, toilets with plumbing were installed in many convenient locations – near public squares and market places, and in ballrooms and restaurants. Toilets had been installed in many upper class homes for several decades. It was the convenience of public toilets that enabled urban women to suddenly adopt short straight dresses. It is easier to pull down underwear, to sit on a toilet, if there is less skirt to lift and hold up.
Modern stool test kits need to be designed in a way that accommodates the fact that most women cannot separately control urination and defecation. The only test kit that allows this is a separate plastic cup that can be held under the anus. It is awkward because its round shape does not allow it to be used while seated on a toilet; so that the woman must find another container for the urine. The stool container needs to be shaped to fit at the back of the toilet so as to catch the stool droppings but not the urine. An alternative would be a double container with a divider that can be placed between the two outlets, though there might be a risk of contents slopping over the divider when the container is removed from between the legs.
I make this assumption because, historically, women did pee and poo separately. European men have worn underwear since the middle ages but women resisted wearing underwear until the 1920’s because this garment restricted their freedom. In their long full skirts, without underwear, women could pee where they were standing, and they did. The full-length skirts of upper class women allowed them to pee discretely on the lawn without anyone knowing – at a garden party, in conversation with a man – he did not know. To have to find the privacy necessary to pull down underwear and squat to pee would have been a significant restriction on a woman’s freedom. Like men, women used an outhouse or chamber pot primarily for privacy during bowel movements.
What happened 100 years ago? In the 1920’s, toilets with plumbing were installed in many convenient locations – near public squares and market places, and in ballrooms and restaurants. Toilets had been installed in many upper class homes for several decades. It was the convenience of public toilets that enabled urban women to suddenly adopt short straight dresses. It is easier to pull down underwear, to sit on a toilet, if there is less skirt to lift and hold up.
Modern stool test kits need to be designed in a way that accommodates the fact that most women cannot separately control urination and defecation. The only test kit that allows this is a separate plastic cup that can be held under the anus. It is awkward because its round shape does not allow it to be used while seated on a toilet; so that the woman must find another container for the urine. The stool container needs to be shaped to fit at the back of the toilet so as to catch the stool droppings but not the urine. An alternative would be a double container with a divider that can be placed between the two outlets, though there might be a risk of contents slopping over the divider when the container is removed from between the legs.
