Turnbull National Wildlife Reservation.

[eyesup]

I think the status of the roadside restroom and/or pit toilet in the wild has exactly to do with what this discussion is about. If the body functions are taboo, everyone is on edge to find a facility when needed so they can take care of business out of sight. If things were less so it would be ok to take off behind a bush and relieve the pressure at any time. It is more accepted for guys than for women.

Bob, the urge to hide the activity sure could explain your observations.

Duane

[eyesup]

JohnP, your pictures of the "throne" in a wood reminded me of a pit toilet I saw out in the desert. It was near a trail head and a powerline service road. I don't know who built it, but it was old and well into the process of self disassembly. Could have been a power company install.

I didn't get a picture, but it was a quad of separate 'thrones' like yours, originally separated by screen fences about 5 ft. high. A couple had fallen down and there was no roof at all. Don't think there ever was one as there were no roof parts laying about from a collapse.

It rains so little here, why would you need one. You sat in an open air cubicle. As a result there was no contained smells to assault you upon entering. Nice idea!

Duane

[Greenbare Woods]

It is more accepted for guys than for women.
Duane

Glad you more or less agree with my observations, Duane.   I think the main problem women have is not so much acceptability as inconvenient clothing.  Women these days wear pants, or at least panties and struggle not to pee on their clothes.  The traditional female skirt made it easy and mostly out of sight.

Bob

[jbeegoode]

Years ago, at a weekly market in a town in Boliva, I watched an Indian woman in full pettycoats and billowing skirt simply squat at the side of the curb as a stream went down the street starting between her legs. That was the old fashion way and a squat. Other than the stream it was discrete.

As a child living in post war Japan, grandmas in kimono would squat on the side of the road. The major waste was accrued into "honey buckets" a fertilizer rig of ancient science, but a quick pee near the trail is a millennia tradition.

 
Jbee

[eyesup]

Sanitation would be the main concern in a major population area. Europe in the middle ages and even into the renaissance had issues with handling of human waste.

Rural areas though are not such a problem.

Duane

[Greenbare Woods]

Sanitation would be the main concern in a major population area. Europe in the middle ages and even into the renaissance had issues with handling of human waste.

Rural areas though are not such a problem.
Duane

Indeed.  I heard an opinion on TV just this week that sanitation was the greatest change in medical treatment ever.  London before the sewer system was a huge shitty mess, as were most European cities.  Cholera and other diseases were very common as the mess seeped into drinking water.  As world population continues to increase sanitation is becoming more and more of a worldwide problem.

Imperial Rome dealt with the sewer problem with running water public toilets at their Baths.  Rome built Baths as a major project everywhere they went.  Clean and sanitary prevented a lot of diseases. 

[John P]

Yes, Bob. People's lives can be greatly improved by wise government action, if there's a willingness by the population to recognize the benefit they'll receive.

[Peter S]

Cholera and other diseases were very common as the mess seeped into drinking water

This was one of the first, if not the first, practical instance of statistical analysis leading the way. A doctor called John Snow in the 1850s mapped the instances of cholera, and found a concentration centred on a standpipe used as the common water source for one particular area. That led to the realisation of cholera being water borne and how to prevent it. Additional help came from the discovery that brewery workers rarely suffered from cholera - this was because they drank beer instead of water, which had of course been processed to get rid of all the nasties (except the hangover bugs). The rise in cholera had been caused by the banning of cesspits and the requirement for all waste to be directed to the Thames - which then polluted the water supply.

A combination of Snow's work and the Great Stink of 1858 led to the construction of the sewer network, then probably the greatest public engineering works yet undertaken, certainly within a major city.

[jbeegoode]

You'd think that the problem of waste disposal would have been addressed centuries earlier. It is...a mess. One of the first things that a camper does is create and map out a depository. Anyone goes into the woods away from others. Animals create problems with it. So, why didn't this carry into the cities for centuries. I suspect that the historical data is skewed somehow, but I don't know.

People did dump out into the streets, the animals lived in the houses right next to people. In Pompeii the streets were set for uniform cart wheels where the stuff was placed and people walked along sidewalks above, but the rest of Europe didn't get it. Did the massive amounts of rain wash it out and wash it away? I've been to bars and Inns in South America where you still just head out to where the pigs are. The only sensible place was Japan, where they would transfer waste into standardized honey buckets for fertilizer, but that bouquet would permeate the entire countryside. Even King Louis got sick of the summer in the city and headed out to Versailles.

Seeing the process is one thing, but smelling and slogging through it is another. Along the free range trail, an odoriferous nest is a distraction in contrast to the natural surroundings. Guess people get used to these things, like I got somewhat desensitized to those horrific diapers when my son got off off the breast milk.

That's why people drank tea, and alcoholic beverages. The water became dangerous.

I've always found myself in policy to not get involved in other peoples heavy plumbing and figured that in the golden rule of consideration that they would appreciate that, too. My thinking may be wrong but, to me, it is a time for privacy...to make myself clear, excluding a leak among friends, male or female.
Jbee

[Greenbare Woods]

Even King Louis got sick of the summer in the city and headed out to Versailles.

Sanitation accommodations were not much in European culture. 

I have read that the royal Palace at Versailles did not have a single toilet room among its hundreds of lavish rooms.   It is said that people often used stairwells. 

I have read that polite European society in the 18th century often kept a piss pot in the dining room for dinner guest to pass water without leaving the conversation. 

I saw a TV building show about some rich guy in Florida who built an exact replica of an 17th century French manner house.  His only significant change, he said, was to replace the single central open toilet room which had originally served the entire building.  Modesty about body functions was not important to European aristocracy or peasants either probably.

People did dump out into the streets, the animals lived in the houses right next to people. In Pompeii the streets were set for uniform cart wheels where the stuff was placed and people walked along sidewalks above, but the rest of Europe didn't get it.

The Roman Empire was way ahead of everyone who came later.  Public baths (toilets) and cities had running water sewers.  The streets of Pompeii probably had running water flushing waste.  I'm not sure if the ruts were cart wheels or open sewers.  They did have steps and walks above the waste.  Rome built clean water fountains, baths, and sanitary sewers everywhere they went.  Roman Londinium apparently had a lot more attention paid to sanitation than London did before the 1850s. 

I can appreciate JB's experience with the smell of Japanese fields.  I have driven through Iowa (US) in July.  Iowa is known for corn farms and cattle feeding.  Driving through Iowa on an Interstate highway in summer, the whole state smells like bovine fertilizer.   Denver used to have big stock yards on the north side of the city when I was there in abut 1970.  A summer breeze from the north and the whole city smelled like cowshit. 

Its mostly a matter of quantity vs. space.  One or ten people in ten acres of woods wouldn't make much of a problem.  Nature makes it go away in a very few days and the plants love it.  A few thousand people in a village and it starts to pile up.  A million people is a big problem.

That's why people drank tea, and alcoholic beverages. The water became dangerous.

Tea or beer were healthy to drink.  Water got boiled. 

I've always found myself in policy to not get involved in other peoples heavy plumbing and figured that in the golden rule of consideration that they would appreciate that, too. My thinking may be wrong but, to me, it is a time for privacy...to make myself clear, excluding a leak among friends, male or female.
Jbee 

On the whole I think the modern prudism about body functions is part of the prudism that puts clothes on people.  The French manner house had a central toilet room for all to share.  The modern American house has the owners toilet in a one meter square locked door closet located off a locked door bathroom accessed off a locked door bedroom.  Are 3 locked doors sufficient to maintain appropriate modesty to take a dump?   Judging by homes that are being built in America today, the 3 locked doors are needed.  Our needs for privacy is almost entirely based on what we are used to. 

On the whole, the 16th century French were a lot more sane about bodies, in my opinion.  All they needed was indoor water plumbing for sanitation. 

Bob

[jbeegoode]

I have my toilet set to view out a french door to the ridge, with rock formations, vegetation and saguaro. It is a nice place to sit, although these days the squatty potty makes my business brief. I put clear shower curtains around the tub for light, sense of room and lack of need. They are generally drawn back anyway. the curtains by the door/window are usually left with a soap film. It gives privacy to visitors. When I have company, or a party, it is curious how people react to the window to look out. They figure people can look in. People don't. Unless it is night, they wouldn't see much, unless they stood and stared. Some women I noticed have held back using it, even though everyone else is busy in the living-room and not likely to be leaving the event and wander into the back yard. Completely irrational.

It is the textile people that have a problem. Textile with probable overweight body issues have been the extremes.

Nudes are generally my more hippyish friends. They are a different breed and don't have these issues. They are just more open to others. They are not crude, uncouth as prudes might want to see them.

In Versailles, there were some closets for those purposes that were probably used more as secret or discrete passages in the night, the toilet as an excuse. The King had the privileged come in to awake him. He was dressed with them present. No privacy. I suppose that a society coming from one room waddle and dab hut cottages with the livestock sharing it, had some various customs as this modesty thing evolved. The whole of the medieval royalty and knights often slept in the main keep together. There had to be a lack of inhibition, I'm sure. Bob, I think you are correct that covering bodies and toilet business have gone hand in hand. It is still linked. There is exposure in it all.
Jbee
Jbee 

[eyesup]

The Roman Empire was way ahead of everyone who came later.  Public baths (toilets) and cities had running water sewers.  The streets of Pompeii probably had running water flushing waste.  I'm not sure if the ruts were cart wheels or open sewers.

Excavations on the island od Santorini, of ancient Minoan towns, have shown widespread use of running water and sewer systems. Don't know if the Romans knew this or invented on their own. Most likely the latter. But the ideas certainly predate western European developments.

Duane

[eyesup]

. . . this was because they drank beer instead of water, which had of course been processed to get rid of all the nasties . . .

Without knowing why, they understood that bad water was bad. Brewers always attempt to use the best water they can find. You have to boil the water and the fermentation process itself helps to fix the problem. Bacteria cannot tolerate alcohol. Even the bacteria responsible for fermentation ceases to function at high alcohol levels. You have to find a yeast with a tolerance for alcohol to get those high alcohol BEERs.

It was the wine and BEER industries in the 1860’s that, on the orders of Napolean III to “Fix the bad wine problem!”, that lead to the discovery of bacteria being the cause of the problems. We can thank them for bringing us so many of the benefits of modern society.

Yay, wine! Yay, BEER! Yay, Pasteur!

Duane

[nudewalker]

The Roman Empire was way ahead of everyone who came later.  Public baths (toilets) and cities had running water sewers.  The streets of Pompeii probably had running water flushing waste.  I'm not sure if the ruts were cart wheels or open sewers.

Excavations on the island od Santorini, of ancient Minoan towns, have shown widespread use of running water and sewer systems. Don't know if the Romans knew this or invented on their own. Most likely the latter. But the ideas certainly predate western European developments.

Duane

The Romans were quick to adapt the better points of the people they conquered, often leaving local governments in place but under Roman rule. I don't know if they discovered sanitation as much as borrowed it but the aqueducts are a marvel of engineering. Much like the "Life of Brian" when they say "What have the Roman's done for us?". How about running water and sanitation to name a few? One of the problems the Jewish people had with Roman occupation was the Greek influence they brought with them. It was determined that influence was undermining the power of the Jewish elders. And we know how that turned out.

My thinking is that with the fall of the Roman Empire there was an effort to rid the populace of any Roman influences. So things like running water, sanitation and the baths went the way of being a bad influence on the population. Honestly, I've never studied it or read anything on it, just conjecture on my part.

[Greenbare Woods]

My thinking is that with the fall of the Roman Empire there was an effort to rid the populace of any Roman influences. So things like running water, sanitation and the baths went the way of being a bad influence on the population. Honestly, I've never studied it or read anything on it, just conjecture on my part.

Interesting speculation.   My guess is that maintenance and operation costs eventually did in the Roman baths.  People generally liked them, but after Roman rule vanished there wasn't a government with sufficient technical and administration organizations to pay for and provide ongoing maintenance over centuries.   

There are still Imperial Roman fountains functioning in Italy and a few other places.  I have a vague memory of seeing photos of a Roman Bath that still exists somewhere in the UK, and perhaps with some marginal function.  I think some roads still exist too. Stone construction lasts a long time.  Roman infrastructure eventually failed or became inadequate though after its management and maintenance ended.