• Deceptichum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Exactly right, it doesn’t.

    Which is why the owners are responsible for providing the safe clean place for them.

        • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          My local authority in East London pays local cafes a small amount if they make their toilets available to the general public and display a sign on the door. This feels like a good pragmatic solution to me.

          • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, that is definitely a nice, pragmatic solution. I imagine it’s cheaper for the local council than running public toilets themselves, too.

    • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Making the other customers suffer, and potentially get ill, isn’t a reasonable response to a business doing something shitty. Just don’t go to restaurants that don’t provide baby-changing facilities. Don’t expose innocent people to your baby’s shit.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Collateral damage in a just war. Don’t patronize restaurants that charge for the restroom and you’re in the clear there, while also being on the morally correct side of history.

            • frog 🐸@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t patronise restaurants that charge for toilet use. But that doesn’t put me on the side of parents who put their baby’s shitty arse on tables where people eat. Both sides of this “war” are shitty people that I want nothing to do with.