Jeremy Corbyn would consider women-only rail carriages

[amcluesent]

As an apprentice, I vividly remember walking through the upholstery shop at Fords Dagenham works. Those 'ladies' were certainly uninhibited making remarks of a sexual nature, my cheeks were red!

 

[trainophile]

Am I the first female to comment on this thread?

I think it is rubbish, for many reasons, most of which have already been aired. As a very frequent train user, I am more likely to have a man offer to lift my luggage down from the rack, or on/off the train, than be assaulted by him.

On the services I use, most of the passengers are in couples or families anyway, so would obviously have to sit in the non-segregated coach, which would make it more overcrowded due to males who were prohibited from accessing a considerable section of the train. How would people feel having to stand, if they could see that the female coach was half empty?

Very very rarely do I see any incidents where the gender of the perpetrator is a factor - more likely to be an obnoxious young woman shouting obscenities into her phone in my experience!

Even as a frequent Merseyrail traveller, which to be fair has its share of "scallies", their misbehaviour is not directed towards female passengers, but more of the feet-on-seats, abusive language between themselves variety. Of course I don't travel late at night so cannot comment on the situation then.

Jeremy Corbyn lives on another planet. Or doesn't use trains!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Allegation or belief, I think you're mature enough to spot the distinction without the need for a disclaimer.

So you're not going to stand by something you say and provide examples? Not even this once? Not even for me?

You do surprise me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it is rubbish, for many reasons, most of which have already been aired. As a very frequent train user, I am more likely to have a man offer to lift my luggage down from the rack, or on/off the train, than be assaulted by him.

On the services I use, most of the passengers are in couples or families anyway, so would obviously have to sit in the non-segregated coach, which would make it more overcrowded due to males who were prohibited from accessing a considerable section of the train. How would people having to stand feel, if they could see that the female coach was half empty?

Yep, I'd agree with all of that. I suspect Corbyn does too, given that "consultation" is simply a way of politicians kicking something they don't want to do into the long grass without saying no.

I suspect the motivation behind the question was similar to the one Andy Burnham received, when he was asked if Labour should have a female leader. He was vilifed when he said "at the right time", even though he couldn't have really said anything else; what was he going to say "yeah, you're right, don't vote for me vote for either of the women candidates"?

 

[thenorthern]

I reckon we should ask the Labour Leadership hopefuls to do an "ask me anything" like they have on reddit where we ask each of the candidates questions about the railways to see what garbage they come out with and see if they know what they are talking about or not.

 

[duncanp]

Perhaps we should have a woman as Prime Minister, to redress the perceived "inequality".

Oh, wait a minute, we already have (1979 - 1990) but I don't seem to recall the PC brigade being particularly happy with her.

 

[MarkyT]

Watching the BBC Indian Railways documentary over the last couple of evenings, I noted that whilst the suburban operations out of Mumbai definitely have segregated carriages for women only, long distance trains do not, neither in the 2nd class unreserved cars, where crowding can just as severe as in suburban, nor even in the reserved 1st class sleepers where, according to the female presenter, the four berth compartments can be allocated to mixed sex strangers, although for the journey featured in the programme, another female traveller was the presenter's sole companioin (although presumably the camera operator must have slept somewhere as well!). This in a country where the high prevalence of rape and assault has been in the headlines recently.

Back in UK, not only do I think female only accommodation would be impractical, but I think it is unnecessary in our typical open saloon and gangwayed vehicles, not to mention in our (hopefully!) more developed and equitable society. I don't criticise Corbyn or any other politician for raising any idea. A good public servant will drop an unworkable or counterproductive proposal quickly in the face of overwhelming contrary reasoned argument rather than continue to pursue it irrationally. We've seen this with Corbyn's initial stated opposition to HS2, recently now no longer mentioned.

 

[KnapweedMartha]

"For the last time, sir, this is an Ewok-only carriage"

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would work a treat on a 2 car unit! In all seriousness, assault of any kind is not good, but I think it is a wider societal issue that needs to be tackled. What next, segregated pubs?

I remember Ladies Compartments on trains still in the 1960s, I think that in Japan and India that these may still exist.

With regard to 2-car trains, I believe Iran of all places had segregation in the 141s. Not sure which group got the toilet though!

Of course those countries have a very different culture to the West so to draw a direct comparison is not really valid or helpful. Even Japan has a far bigger problem with subway groping than anywhere in the West, but that's an issue for Japanese society.

I don't believe segregation is the answer, nor do I believe it would be workable... But the behaviour of a minority of men is what has lead to this debate and it is probably a debate worth having providing we don't descend into a slanging match about "Political Correctness Gone Mad!" and the like.

 

[pemma]

They should be discriminatory, but in this PC-world it's only discrimination if it's AGAINST women, not FOR women.

Not always. It was decided it was discriminatory to automatically charge male drivers more for car insurance than female drivers because some male drivers are never involved in any accidents and some female drivers are involved in serious accidents which are their own fault.

Although, there are some types of so called gender discrimination which are very dubious. Take the example of Asda checkout workers being paid less than Asda warehouse operatives, there are men and women in both roles and the female workers were earning the same male workers in the same role. However, as there were more female checkout workers than male and more male warehouse operatives than female, some groups called it gender discrimination.

 

[zuriblue]

I remember Ladies Compartments on trains still in the 1960s, I think that in Japan and India that these may still exist.

In Japan they certainly do. (groping is a pretty bad problem on the Subway in Tokyo) and India they may still exist as well. India has a pretty bad problem with rape on public transport so I wouldn't be surprised.

When I first moved down to London in the late 80s there were single compartments on some of the slam door stock on the lines I used in South London and they all had a red stripe painted above the doors after there were a couple of rapes in them. (I don't remember the class, most of my formative years were spent on AM4/304s)

One thing though, to touch on a stereotype, what makes a forum full of rail enthusiasts think they have any handle on the needs of women? Most rail enthusists don't have a great deal of experience with such creatures.

 

[DarloRich]

Because it isn't unlawful to discriminate against in terms of sex in this manner. Private members clubs can deny membership to women- the R&A golf club only voted to allow female members in September last year- and there are many exceptions.

I don't think the proposal is a good idea for many many reasons, but "it's not fair!" isn't one of them.

Railways are not private members clubs! On what basis would this not be discriminatory?

 

[amcluesent]

Most rail enthusists don't have a great deal of experience with such creatures

 

[Howardh]

If certain groups - could be women, elderly, children etc - feel vunerable, where is the uniformed presence on a train? Can the guard not sit in an open-access area in one of the carriages so people can sit near him/her and raise the alarm if being bothered?

Thing is, in a women-only carriage, what happens if an uninvited male enters? Who raises the alarm? Who throws him out?? What if he refuses??? We are back to square one of getting the guard to patrol the train to watch for unsociable behaviour, and that doesn't need a women-only carriage.

If guards are too busy on other duties then some trains after a certain hour could have visible security at minimal rates placed in one carriage (G4S??) or patrolling the carriages.

Even as a bloke I would want the guard to be accessible at all (reasonable) times, for security and often to buy a ticket!

 

[pemma]

Thing is, in a women-only carriage, what happens if an uninvited male enters? Who raises the alarm? Who throws him out?? What if he refuses??? We are back to square one of getting the guard to patrol the train to watch for unsociable behaviour, and that doesn't need a women-only carriage.

And what if he appears to enter the female only carriage to assist a lady with her loading her luggage on to the train? Does someone then call for security?

 

[trainophile]

If certain groups - could be women, elderly, children etc - feel vunerable, where is the uniformed presence on a train? Can the guard not sit in an open-access area in one of the carriages so people can sit near him/her and raise the alarm if being bothered?

Thing is, in a women-only carriage, what happens if an uninvited male enters? Who raises the alarm? Who throws him out?? What if he refuses??? We are back to square one of getting the guard to patrol the train to watch for unsociable behaviour, and that doesn't need a women-only carriage.

If guards are too busy on other duties then some trains after a certain hour could have visible security at minimal rates placed in one carriage (G4S??) or patrolling the carriages.

Even as a bloke I would want the guard to be accessible at all (reasonable) times, for security and often to buy a ticket!

I was just trying to find out whether DOO had been mentioned already (not according to the search box!), as obviously this skews the feelings of relative safety for any and all travellers. But that's not what this thread is about, so I apologise as I know there are other discussions running.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And what if he appears to enter the female only carriage to assist a lady with her loading her luggage on to the train? Does someone then call for security?

Or if he's her husband meeting her off her train!

 

[Willr2094]

This is an unworkable policy. The train companies will hate it if it ever becomes law because it would increase platform dwell time at stations dramatically (which in today's punctuality obsessed railway would have the potential to cause delay and lead to trains losing their paths).

Also I can foresee another problem. If a man is delayed on a station and has to run for his train and just catches it and finds that the only remaining seat is in the ladies carriage, it would mean that he would be ejected from his seat and fined - which kind of sends a message out that women should always get a seat on a train but men should always stand.

Plus most modern rolling stock has on board CCTV cameras and recording equipment fitted now, so people are protected wherever.

 

[trainophile]

Where would transvestites be expected to sit?

 

[duncanp]

Where would transvestites be expected to sit?

Or transgender people, or those in drag?

 

[Howardh]

This is an unworkable policy. The train companies will hate it if it ever becomes law because it would increase platform dwell time at stations dramatically (which in today's punctuality obsessed railway would have the potential to cause delay and lead to trains losing their paths).

Also I can foresee another problem. If a man is delayed on a station and has to run for his train and just catches it and finds that the only remaining seat is in the ladies carriage, it would mean that he would be ejected from his seat and fined - which kind of sends a message out that women should always get a seat on a train but men should always stand.

Plus most modern rolling stock has on board CCTV cameras and recording equipment fitted now, so people are protected wherever.

1. Suppose it's a disabled bloke and all the open seats have been taken but seats in the women's are available....do we discriminate against disabled men?

2. CCTV may prevent crime, but if it's used to detect crime then it's failed as the crime's already happened. Think it's always better to have a uniformed presence - if a crime looks like it's about to be committed a camera can't actually stop it but a guard/security might.
Example, a man might be a nuisence but not actually acting illegally; a guard could (hopefully) move him on - tell him to improve his behaviour etc. A camera can't.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where would transvestites be expected to sit?

On my knee....I might even pay for their ticket!

 

[Willr2094]

1. Suppose it's a disabled bloke and all the open seats have been taken but seats in the women's are available....do we discriminate against disabled men?

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

1) Good point - I have a disabled friend who I travel on trains with frequently - if they put the wheelchair space in the ladies coach, would that mean that he would be prohibited from it because he's male? Also would it mean that if he was allowed, would I, as an able bodied male, have to sit in complete isolation from him in another carriage?

 

[KnapweedMartha]

Where would transvestites be expected to sit?

Or transgender people, or those in drag?

Cool story: Trans people are not in fact a joke.

On my knee....I might even pay for their ticket!

Nor just sexual fetish objects.

And the possibility of trans women being at increased risk of violence both in a women's only carriage (because some other woman decides that she ought to not be there) and a mixed carriage (because it is more male-dominated) is a serious problem to add to the list.

 

[thedbdiboy]

And next we have jews, moslims, children, hooligans, gypsy, black, homo, lesbian etc. etc.

Sorry, you seems to have lost your way. The Daily Mail website is elsewhere.

 

[Howardh]

1) Good point - I have a disabled friend who I travel on trains with frequently - if they put the wheelchair space in the ladies coach, would that mean that he would be prohibited from it because he's male? Also would it mean that if he was allowed, would I, as an able bodied male, have to sit in complete isolation from him in another carriage?

Yes, a male or female wheelchair user often has a male helper.

So many different senarios means it's a totally unworkable policy.

Far better to have specific areas of trains where any vunerable/elderly can sit and there's someone keeping a good eye open, even if it's only through CCTV.

 

[HH]

I'm all for it, as long as I can make the wife sit in it!

 

[Antman]

If certain groups - could be women, elderly, children etc - feel vunerable, where is the uniformed presence on a train? Can the guard not sit in an open-access area in one of the carriages so people can sit near him/her and raise the alarm if being bothered?

Thing is, in a women-only carriage, what happens if an uninvited male enters? Who raises the alarm? Who throws him out?? What if he refuses??? We are back to square one of getting the guard to patrol the train to watch for unsociable behaviour, and that doesn't need a women-only carriage.

If guards are too busy on other duties then some trains after a certain hour could have visible security at minimal rates placed in one carriage (G4S??) or patrolling the carriages.

Even as a bloke I would want the guard to be accessible at all (reasonable) times, for security and often to buy a ticket!

Security guards on minimal rate? There is an old saying about getting what you pay for and I suspect they would cause more problems than they would solve and they really would be no substitute for BTP officers.

 

[Greenback]

As I suspected, more and more reasons are emerging which show this to be a silly and unworkable idea.

As if we didn't have enough reasons in the first couple of pages!

 

[BestWestern]

Perhaps we should just rename First Class as Female Class...

 

[Tetchytyke]

Railways are not private members clubs! On what basis would this not be discriminatory?

The same basis that giving priority to wheelchair passengers in a specific part of the train isn't discriminatory. So long as you didn't have women-only trains, making men wait for the next one, it wouldn't be discriminatory.

It might be a daft thing to do, but that's not the same as illegal.

Where would transvestites be expected to sit?

Transvestites are people who wear the clothes of another gender than their birth gender.

Transgendered people are people who identify as someone of another gender than their birth gender.

It's not a joke either. There's an issue if women in a woman-only carriage don't agree that someone identifies as a woman, and not everyone does.

Ironically the really right-on people, like in NUS, are steadily getting rid of gender segregated bathrooms, etc. We have some gender neutral toilets in our building.

 

[physics34]

A backward idea from a backward MP of a backward party.

 

[DarloRich]

The same basis that giving priority to wheelchair passengers in a specific part of the train isn't discriminatory. So long as you didn't have women-only trains, making men wait for the next one, it wouldn't be discriminatory.

It might be a daft thing to do, but that's not the same as illegal.

of course it is illegal (prima facie): they are limiting entry to one part of the service to all but one section of the customer base.

The analogy with a disabled space is false in that, while clearly a reasonable adjustment to the premises to facilitate access to those with mobility issues, I am not prevented from sitting in their seat. I would be prevented from sitting in a seat in the female only carriage!

Of course this would have to be tested at law - perhaps you have some legislation or case law to support your position?