DUPLICATING THE TEPID BATH.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17217, 7 December 1923, Page 6

DUPLICATING THE TEPID BATH.

The need for separate baths for men and women in Christchurch has long been recognised, and the present hot spell has emphasised it very strongly. On four occasions lately, during women’s hours, the doors have had to be closed, and as groups of bathers have left the baths others have been admitted. The congestion of the bath may be imagined when it is learned that the custodian has had to lower- the water in the bath so that more standing room could be provided in the enlarged shallow end, where no swimming or diving has been possible. The dressing boxes, also, have proved so inadequate that committee rooms in the building have had to be pressed into service. This state of congestion has been most marked during the women’s hours for several reasons. In (fee first place, the ordinary fresh water baths in the city and suburbs, not to mention the Surf Club Pavilions, are available to men only, with few exceptions, and the cold artesian water is rather chilly for women, in addition to which the baths have not the privacy, dressing facilities or the warm showers provided at the tepid bath. In the case of young girls, particularly, and those learning to swim, the tepid bath also has the great safeguard of attendants and life-saving equipment. From almost every point of view; indeed, the women appear to have the strongest claim on the tepid both, and it is only when the receipts are counted up that the overwhelming argument from the men’s point of view is realised.

At present the popularity of file bath is discounted largely by the necessarily restricted hours both for men and women. The existing timetable is designed to catch the largest groups of both sexes, but to many men and women the baths arc as good as Closed because of inconvenient hours. Then, again, there are those who would prefer to dress and bathe in surroundings set aside exclusively for their own sex. , When these and other points are considered the case for separate baths becomes unanswerable, and the question comes down largely to.finance. Certainly the cause ought not to be considered on the strength of hot weather figures alone, but it ought to be realised that the present aggregate receipts could be largely augmented with separate baths, popularised by liberal concessions during the winter months. The City Council could build a smaller bath for women in the same block, where very valuable frontages are already going to waste. A report on this subject would be greatly welcomed by the swimmers of the city, for whom the public bathing facilities have not kept pace with the growth of population.