Do you support women-only carriages?

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately there will always be rapists no matter how severely they are punished so the emphasis has to be on trying to protect women.

It would be better to do that by providing security staff (female ones, too), CCTV etc and generally working in society to make it clear that it is not tolerable behaviour, and strong prison sentences for anyone committing the crime.

 

[yorkie]

You're quite right, the key factor is the presence of a second person rather than said person's job title....

...Visibility is also key. If said person remains out of sight in a back cab throughout the journey their presence will make very little difference.

I am certain most passengers would agree with this.

 

[bramling]

The problem is we will never be in a position where every single potential rapist is locked up and unable to attack men and women.

We'd better all stay at home and fit bars across all our windows then.

 

[RichmondCommu]

We'd better all stay at home and fit bars across all our windows then.

I'll bring the bars, I just need your address.

 

[RichmondCommu]

It would be better to do that by providing security staff (female ones, too), CCTV etc and generally working in society to make it clear that it is not tolerable behaviour, and strong prison sentences for anyone committing the crime.

I concur that security staff would be a step in the right direction although of course they don't have the power to arrest people. However I'm afraid CCTV and lengthy prison sentences will not stop a rapist.

 

[AlterEgo]

I concur that security staff would be a step in the right direction although of course they don't have the power to arrest people. However I'm afraid CCTV and lengthy prison sentences will not stop a rapist.

Not much will stop rapists except for education.

 

[BestWestern]

I concur that security staff would be a step in the right direction although of course they don't have the power to arrest people. However I'm afraid CCTV and lengthy prison sentences will not stop a rapist.

I disagree about cctv, I would imagine most would be very highly unlikely to attack in front of a camera, but I agree that the punishment won't always deter. But it is at this point that, as grown ups, we must acknowledge our society is not risk free, and never will be. Life is not risk free. That poor family on the motorway at 3am last week didn't expect to happen upon a lorry sat stationary on the carriageway because its driver was drunk, but sadly terrible things sometimes happen. We can't eliminate every risk of human wrongdoing, whether malicious or just negligent, and there is a 'tipping point' at which discriminating against people or restricting their liberty 'just in case' becomes unacceptable.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I disagree about cctv, I would imagine most would be very highly unlikely to attack in front of a camera, but I agree that the punishment won't always deter. But it is at this point that, as grown ups, we must acknowledge our society is not risk free, and never will be. Life is not risk free. That poor family on the motorway at 3am last week didn't expect to happen upon a lorry sat stationary on the carriageway because its driver was drunk, but sadly terrible things sometimes happen. We can't eliminate every risk of human wrongdoing, whether malicious or just negligent, and there is a 'tipping point' at which discriminating against people or restricting their liberty 'just in case' becomes unacceptable.

What happened on the motorway was just awful but essentially it was just a terrible accident. There was never any intention to kill anyone, at least from what we can tell. However rape or assault is of course very different.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Not much will stop rapists except for education.

Well yes but many are repeat offenders despite the best efforts of the prison service to change their ways.

 

[BestWestern]

What happened on the motorway was just awful but essentially it was just a terrible accident. There was never any intention to kill anyone, at least from what we can tell. However rape or assault is of course very different.

Well, some would argue that taking yourself several times over the drink drive limit and then climbing into an articulated lorry is reckless beyond the parameters of an 'accident', although I agree of course the collision wasn't intentional. The point is though that humans don't do blanket compliance, and for various reasons there will always be those who indulge in wrongdoing. The US has some pretty tough jails for those who break the law, however their degree of human non-compliance is such that every policeman has to have a lethal weapon in his belt. It is what it is...

 

[rebmcr]

Hmm a male centric forum and thread of posts which I can only assume to be from men who claim such an idea is 'stupid' and could increase the likelihood of attacks doesn't surprise me. Along with the idea that it would completely segregate man and women is also laughable.

I mean its not like they have these else where in the world where they have a voyeuristic and touching problem and such carriages have reduced this risk to women but it cant work here because men on this forum think its 'stupid'.

Well as a female who travels a lot on her own I must say I'm not surprised by the views of the men who have posted on this thread shows we still have a long way to go till people understand the threat women still feel when on their own.


The biggest reason why this wouldn't work in this country is because we simply do not staff our railways properly.

Given that a lone male is more likely to be assaulted than a lone female, maybe you should consider that you are in fact speaking from a position of privilege.

If men are expected to take care of themselves in that situation, then society cannot justifiably provide special treatment to women, based on nothing other than the fallacy that they have inferior capability.

You're not some frail princess who must be protected by the big strong men, we're all just regular humans who have to deal with a minority of other nasty humans, and the only real difference based on gender is that you are actually less vulnerable than your male counterparts. Strength and fitness is provably equivalent between genders for a typical person, it's only at the top end of sporting prowess that any differences become significant.

 

[fowler9]

Given that a lone male is more likely to be assaulted than a lone female, maybe you should consider that you are in fact speaking from a position of privilege.

If men are expected to take care of themselves in that situation, then society cannot justifiably provide special treatment to women, based on nothing other than the fallacy that they have inferior capability.

You're not some frail princess who must be protected by the big strong men, we're all just regular humans who have to deal with a minority of other nasty humans, and the only real difference based on gender is that you are actually less vulnerable than your male counterparts. Strength and fitness is provably equivalent between genders for a typical person, it's only at the top end of sporting prowess that any differences become significant.

Yeah that is an interesting point. As a bloke by the age of 28 I had been a victim of aggravated burglery (Tied up and held at knife point for 4 hours), I'd been mugged twice (One time requiring 21 stitches in the back of my head) and I had been attacked in a city centre with a knife requiring two stitches in my wrist.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yeah that is an interesting point. As a bloke by the age of 28 I had been a victim of aggravated burglery (Tied up and held at knife point for 4 hours), I'd been mugged twice (One time requiring 21 stitches in the back of my head) and I had been attacked in a city centre with a knife requiring two stitches in my wrist.

Nobody will cry for you because you're a man and can look after yourself. Women are weaker and need protecting. But women and men are still equal.

That's how the theory goes; feminist hypocrisy in a nutshell.

 

[fowler9]

Nobody will cry for you because you're a man and can look after yourself. Women are weaker and need protecting. But women and men are still equal.

That's how the theory goes; feminist hypocrisy in a nutshell.

Oh, I almost forgot, I got happy slapped by a teenage girl at the end of my road who basically knew I wouldn't do anything, which I didn't. Just walked past me and slapped me in the face. Possibly more humiliating than anything that has happened to me.

Rape is a heinous crime, women only carriages won't stop it.

 

[Bromley boy]

They wouldn't have to use the coaches if they didn't want to and felt safer in a busier carriage... You know about thinking about a wider picture rather than showing faux outrage at such an idea.

For goodness sake - faux outrage? I'm not outraged by this idea, I am bemused by it.

As others have pointed out elsewhere in the thread, if we are going down the road of women only carriages, why stop there? How about carriages for whites/non whites or even individual carriages so that we can all sit in splendid isolation from one another....

The "bigger picture" is that this proposal is discriminatory, irrational, irrelevant madness. But what else can we expect from Labour these days?!

 

[goblinuser]

Yeah that is an interesting point. As a bloke by the age of 28 I had been a victim of aggravated burglery (Tied up and held at knife point for 4 hours), I'd been mugged twice (One time requiring 21 stitches in the back of my head) and I had been attacked in a city centre with a knife requiring two stitches in my wrist.

May I ask whereabouts you live? That sounds rather awful.

 

[aviator]

I am certain most passengers would agree with this.

Reading through everyone's posts ... we shouldn't be so polarised, this isn't a yes/no issue. A good example of an alternative is Translink in Brisbane, Australia
(read about a third of the way down this page)
https://translink.com.au/travel-with-us/safety-and-security

Every mainline train after 7pm on Friday and Saturday nights, and select trains on other nights, have a carriage or two with staff always present for security. Obviously this does not gender discriminate and is a better way of dealing with any possible conflicts - aggro, drunkenness, "sporting rivalries"

 

[Dent]

The "bigger picture" is that this proposal is discriminatory, irrational, irrelevant madness. But what else can we expect from Labour these days?!

This was not "from Labour". This was from one isolated MP, and was denounced by the party.

 

[Bromley boy]

This was not "from Labour". This was from one isolated MP, and was denounced by the party.

The proposer is a member of the shadow cabinet: hardly "one isolated MP". Lest we forget JC himself mooted this idea during his first leadership campaign.

 

[AlterEgo]

This was not "from Labour". This was from one isolated MP, and was denounced by the party.

...once they realised people don't go for this nonsense.

 

[Clip]

For goodness sake - faux outrage? I'm not outraged by this idea, I am bemused by it.

As others have pointed out elsewhere in the thread, if we are going down the road of women only carriages, why stop there? How about carriages for whites/non whites or even individual carriages so that we can all sit in splendid isolation from one another....

The "bigger picture" is that this proposal is discriminatory, irrational, irrelevant madness. But what else can we expect from Labour these days?!

And there in the second paragraph is the faux outrage all wrapped up nicely.

Best get back to the daily mail for more really outlandish talk because its wasted in here

 

[fowler9]

May I ask whereabouts you live? That sounds rather awful.

Yeah no worries. I live in Liverpool but the aggravated burglary and one of the muggings took place during my 4 year spell at Uni in Bradford, when I got my wrist slashed I was in Warrington. The time I got 21 stitches i my head was down the road from where I live in a very nice area of Liverpool called Mossley Hill but was done by a guy from Birkenhead over on the Wirral.

 

[fowler9]

Reading through everyone's posts ... we shouldn't be so polarised, this isn't a yes/no issue. A good example of an alternative is Translink in Brisbane, Australia
(read about a third of the way down this page)
https://translink.com.au/travel-with-us/safety-and-security

Every mainline train after 7pm on Friday and Saturday nights, and select trains on other nights, have a carriage or two with staff always present for security. Obviously this does not gender discriminate and is a better way of dealing with any possible conflicts - aggro, drunkenness, "sporting rivalries"

Hmm. Yeah I spent a good month and a half with distant relatives in the Translink area, indeed the father of the family was the chief project and electrical engineer for the company that builds the buses. I saw nothing any better than what happens on Merseyrail.

 

[Bromley boy]

And there in the second paragraph is the faux outrage all wrapped up nicely.

Best get back to the daily mail for more really outlandish talk because its wasted in here

I'll stick to the Guardian, thanks!

The point is that the logic underpinning women only carriages to protect women from sex attacks also underpins ethnic minority carriages to protect then from racist attacks, etc. which presumably wouldn't be considered acceptable in a tolerant modern society (along with a plethora of other reasons).

It's a stupid policy which wouldn't work as has been discussed at length on this thread. Rather than criticising my posts, perhaps you can add something meaningful to the thread by explaining why you think it would?