The Great Dutch Toilet Fight | Why Trump May Relish Losing the House

From design challenges to startups, the Dutch are developing a wave of gender-neutral public toilet solutions.

To highlight the lack of public facilities for women, Elisa Otañez set up a bright yellow mobile toilet with the words “Occupied by Women” printed on one side in a square in the Dutch market town of Eindhoven this June. The move quickly drew the attention of two police officers, who told Otañez, a graduate of Design Academy Eindhoven, that she needed a permit for the toilet she calls the Yellow Spot. But two other women stopped and joined the conversation, leaning in on Otañez’s behalf. Otañez wasn’t alone against the cops, and she isn’t alone in her protest.

The Netherlands, otherwise a bastion of freedom and feminism, finds itself in the middle of an unlikely battle over pee and toilets. Until recently, the country’s few free public toilets — Amsterdam has just 35 — were urinals designed only for men. But after a woman was fined for peeing in public during a night out in Amsterdam, protesters streamed into the streets.

The U.S. president prefers a fight, and with the new Congress, he’s sure to get one.

In 1987’s The Art of the Deal, Donald Trump, by way of ghostwriter Tony Schwartz, had this to say about his pugilistic nature. “[W]hen people treat me badly or unfairly or try to take advantage of me, my general attitude, all my life, has been to fight back very hard. The risk is you’ll make a bad situation worse, and I certainly don’t recommend this approach to everyone. But my experience is that if you’re fighting for something you believe in — even if it means alienating some people along the way — things usually work out for the best in the end.”

Or, as he put it on Wednesday when asked in a rollicking news conference if he would be able to work on bipartisan initiatives with Democrats if they pursue investigations into his administration: “If they do that, then it’s just — all it is, is a warlike posture.”

A critical turning point in the Trump presidency just arrived, and if he thought the Swamp was against him before, just wait until January.

Nearly 400,000 proud African-Americans served a country in World War I that was incapable of honoring their service.

Imagine it. Paris, July 14, 1919. The first Bastille Day since the “war to end all wars” ended the previous November — 100 years ago today. A landmark celebration of liberation for a people just starting to heal after years of bloodshed. French soldiers, some on crutches or in wheelchairs, march down the Champs-Elysées in the thousands, among them the Algerian and Senegalese warriors whose bravery on France’s behalf has won the hearts of a nation.

Also in that triumphant procession: U.S. General John Pershing, followed by a select group of American officers and about 1,500 U.S. soldiers representing one of France’s fiercest allies. But it is hardly a representative group. Roughly 380,000 African-American soldiers served in World War I, but there’s not a single Black face in Pershing’s group. For America’s military decision makers, the nation’s brave Black warriors were not heroes to be celebrated. They were a problem to be solved.