Abstract
This case study seeks to explore the complex social rituals and unspoken etiquette observed among men in public toilets. Through a series of informal observations conducted in pubs, the research identifies consistent behavioural patterns including strategic urinal spacing, eye-contact avoidance, and vocalisations. These findings aim to contribute to the emerging field of Urinology.
Introduction
From workplaces and families to online communities, human social behaviour has been studied in countless contexts, yet one of the most fascinating and overlooked arenas remains the men’s public toilet. This environment, governed by centuries of unspoken rules, offers a rare glimpse into male psychology.
This study began, as many great studies do, in Wetherspoons, and out of sheer curiosity and mild boredom. It was prompted while observing a man choosing to urinate in a cubicle despite five empty urinals being available and my best friend telling me that he always makes a beeline for his favourite urinal, affectionately known as “trap two” – the second urinal from the left.
Methodology
Observations were conducted over a two-week period in public toilet environments in pubs at different times of the day. Data was gathered discreetly through casual observation and a combination of “pretending to wash my hands for an unusually long time” and “standing at a urinal.” Notes were recorded mentally, as carrying a notepad and pen would have been, frankly, weird.
Findings
1. Conversations and Noises
Over the study period, it was observed that most men do not talk in public toilet spaces at all. Indeed, only around 18% of case study subjects engaged in banter or casual chat. Conversation was more prominent during sporting events, with a noticeable uplift during football matches being shown on TV. Common exchanges included remarks such as “Cracking goal, that, weren’t it?” and comments about player performances.
Around 10% of this chat occurred around the sinks rather than the urinals, meaning a truer reflection for the purposes of this study would be that only 8% of men talk while actually urinating.
Similarly, the noises men make while relieving themselves depended on the time of day. In afternoon visits to pubs during the case study period, subjects were largely silent. In the night, however, heavy sighs, “aahs”, and other vocalisations of relief were frequent, usually among those in a more inebriated state.
On two occasions, one man was heard singing a slurred version of the George Ezra classic “Shotgun,” while another whistled a random tune. The only other audible emissions recorded were the occasional trump, typically followed by big grins from nearby individuals appreciating a well-timed and hearty fart noise.
2. Urinal Selection Dynamics
Across the study period, urinals varied in both number and type. This included individual units to the less sophisticated “pig trough” design. It was observed that the number and style of urinals directly influenced men’s behaviour.
To illustrate this, the following examples were recorded:
Five urinals in a row
With five standalone urinals (or “traps”) and the researcher positioned at trap 3 with all others free, 95% of men chose traps 1 or 5, maintaining a respectful gap. The remaining 5% bypassed the urinals entirely, heading to empty cubicles where they proceeded to urinate with the door open.
When traps 1, 3, and 5 were occupied, 72% of men squeezed into traps 2 or 4, while 18% either waited for a free urinal to maintain the “one-trap gap” rule or opted to wait for a cubicle. It was observed that 0% of men chose to stand directly next to another man if a free cubicle was available.
Seven urinals in a row
There are numerous permutations to consider in a seven-urinal setup, and for transparency, not all were witnessed. However, 98% of men maintained at least one urinal of distance where possible. A slightly higher proportion (76%) were willing to occupy even-numbered traps than in the five-urinal configuration, with the remainder waiting or using a cubicle. Notably, 2% of men chose trap 2 when traps 1 and 3 were occupied — despite multiple free options elsewhere — displaying a bold disregard for the established one-trap rule.
Three urinals in a row
All observed cases showed that men initially selected traps 1 and 3, leaving the central trap 2 empty whenever possible. When traps 1 and 3 were occupied, 94% of men used trap 2 if the cubicle was full, while only 54% did so when the cubicle was empty, meaning 46% of men opted for the privacy of the cubicle if 1 and 3 were busy.
On two occasions, however, a man was found standing in trap 2 with his hands on his hips, while traps 1 and 3 remained empty. The researcher noted down that this was “a bold and dominant move and stance”, which “displayed a rare level of confidence and social indifference that challenges conventional urinal etiquette.”
Two urinals
The study showed that when a man was already standing in trap 1 or 2, 89% of subsequent arrivals used the adjacent urinal rather than the cubicle, with the remaining 11% choosing the cubicle if available. This is an odd data point that raises some questions with the case study conclusion.
Pig troughs
The study revealed that men invariably headed for the far corners of the trough, often angling their bodies slightly away from each other for additional privacy.
For transparency, the trough observed during this study was 2.1 metres in length, so it remains unclear whether size affects behaviour. When two men occupied opposite ends, any newcomer consistently chose the centre — mimicking the “one-trap gap” rule observed elsewhere. However, when three men were already in position, 100% of new arrivals either retreated to the cubicle or waited for space.
Heightened tension was often observed in the faces of case subjects, while the mixture of silence broken crudely by the splashing of piss on metal created a distinctly awkward atmosphere. Direct glances to the side were universally avoided.
Conclusion
The data gathered during this study provides a revealing insight into the psychology of men in public toilets.
Firstly, the overwhelming silence observed suggests that men treat urination as a solitary, almost meditative act, treating it as a sacred moment of introspection rather than a social opportunity. The avoidance of conversation, particularly at the urinal, indicates a deep-seated cultural belief that eye contact or verbal exchange in this environment constitutes a breach of the social contract. Men will happily chat away in almost any other setting, but the moment trousers are unzipped, all dialogue ceases.
Secondly, the Urinal Selection Dynamics reveal a strong adherence to invisible spatial rules. This behaviour indicates an evolutionary instinct towards territorial preservation and threat avoidance. The “one-trap gap” rule, followed by the “cubicle escape strategy,” may represent subconscious efforts to balance vulnerability and privacy. Essentially, it’s a survival mechanic where proximity to another man mid-stream could be perceived as danger.
In smaller toilets with only two urinals, behaviour changes noticeably. A higher percentage of men will stand next to another man compared with larger facilities. This suggests that in confined surroundings, waiting is seen as an admission of weakness, as if standing back implies insecurity. By occupying the adjacent urinal, the man asserts dominance, signalling he has “nothing to hide.” It is a quiet act of masculine bravado, a test of inner strength to step up or admit you’re a loser.
Of particular note were the rare individuals in the three trap urinals who deliberately positioned themselves from the outset in trap 2 when both traps 1 and 3 were available. This bold and unorthodox move can only be interpreted as an act of psychological dominance. It’s nothing short of a territorial display signalling supreme confidence.
The pig trough, meanwhile, represents the ultimate test of composure. With privacy obliterated and awkward acoustics amplifying every splash, men revert to various coping mechanisms. These include avoiding eye contact, focusing intently on the wall, or simply fleeing to a cubicle. In these moments, the male façade of confidence dissolves completely, exposing an underlying fragility that all men keep tucked away.
With the highest percentage of men retreating to cubicles rather than standing side-by-side with other men, there’s clearly something that terrifies men about troughs. It’s probably the saddest finding in this case study. After all, these wouldn’t be the type of people you’d want to send out into the trenches with their fellow men. You’d want men that can “man up” and stand with their tackle out doing something completely natural with their fellow men. If that frightens them, imagine them totally out of their comfort zone? Overall, the trough environment exposes the vulnerability of male confidence more than any other configuration.
There are, of course, exceptions. Alcohol consumption appears to erode all boundaries, with drunk men far more likely to break the one-trap rule entirely. This supports the theory that sobriety fuels self-consciousness, while lager temporarily suppresses it (supported by research into social inhibition and alcohol use (Steele & Josephs, 1990, Psychological Bulletin). It’s also not out of the question that Urinology just doesn’t apply to some people, perhaps free-spirited, rebellious men who have never stuck to conventional rules.
In summary, male toilet behaviour mirrors wider male psychology. The inner psyche of a man is silent, territorial, and insecure, even if he appears entirely different on the outside. Urinals simply draw out that internalised version of masculinity. Beneath the surface of bravado lies anxiety and fear. Yet, it’s also true that no man truly feels normal with his willy out in public. It’s a necessary act, but an awkward one. Consequently, men develop their own coping strategies to survive it.
Further research is recommended.
References
- Steele, C. M., & Josephs, R. A. (1990). Alcohol myopia: Psychological Bulletin, 107(3), 367–384.
- Ezra, G. (2018). Shotgun [Recorded by George Ezra]. Sony Music.
- Wetherspoons, JD. (2023). A Long Walk for a Short Piss: An Ethnographic Study of Wetherspoons Staircases. Proceedings of the Institute for Applied Booze Studies, Vol. 9.
Leave a Reply