Do you support women-only carriages?

[RichmondCommu]

If you are suggesting public transport is any less safe than private forms of transport, or walking, then I disagree.

In all fairness I have never suggested that.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Does this happen a lot on trains in the UK?

Well my youngest daughter was sexually assaulted on the North London Line so clearly it seems does happen. I don't know how you quantify "a lot"

 

[Bromley boy]

True, though I'd argue that until recently, indigenous English people had a culture of normalised violence towards women.

I wouldn't disagree with you there.

However I reckon, as societies go we've come a long way and the UK today is pretty good one in which to be a female - certainly compared to swathes of the Middle East, India and Pakistan etc.

That's why this suggestion of gender apartheid in 21st century Britain seems all the stranger...

 

[WelshBluebird]

Public transport is great as long as you don't get beaten up, sexually assaulted, raped or murdered.

The idea behind women only carriages was to try and prevent women from being raped or sexually assaulted. I've never met a women who wanted to be raped or sexually assaulted.

Taking that logic, men are more likely to be physically assaulted and beaten up by other men. So women only carriages would increase the chance of a man being beaten up, and indeed the likelihood of that happening in general is higher than the likelihood of a woman being sexually assaulted. Works both ways sadly.

(To make it clear, my point is that the idea is totally nuts and is not sensible, would not protect people from crime and would not be feasible).

 

[BML247]

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.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Clearly it would not prevent this.
.

In all fairness I've not suggesting that women only carriages would prevent women from being assaulted or indeed worse.

 

[Harbornite]

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

What would the solution be for single carriage services?

 

[Bromley boy]

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.

Being female or male is largely irrelevant to one's opinion on this topic. I can assure you many, many women also believe this is a ridiculous idea (take a look at the mumsnet discussions I linked to above). You are in danger of going down quite a sexist route yourself with the above comment.

Perhaps you could elaborate on why you believe this is actually a good idea in light of the numerous arguments against it.

 

[AlterEgo]

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.

Can I ask why you feel the need to be segregated from all men?

Do you support gender segregation in other public places, like bars, where women are more likely to be assaulted?

Do you support ethnic or racial profiling in principle, given that terror attacks on British people are mostly committed by people from a select few ethnicities?

Given that people of ethnic background are more likely to suffer assault than white people (btw, 2308 race hate crimes on our railways in 2016/7 compared to 1325 sexual assaults), should we ethnically segregate railway carriages too, with certain carriages for non-whites to travel in?


It's not under doubt that if you segregate men and women, the risk to women goes down. But such a policy is backwards, unworkable, and grossly discriminatory against men (the vast, VAST majority of whom are not rapists or woman-touchers).

I could avoid being a victim of crime by hiding in my room all day, but I wouldn't suggest that's a good idea.

 

[Bantamzen]

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.

I don't think anyone here believes that putting in measures to protect women from assault are "stupid", but the consensus here is that not only is the idea unworkable but also it is the wrong way to approach it.

Implementing much together and stricter punishments for offenders has to always be the first option, and this is not the responsibility of train operators but governments and the courts, and of course in education. Where TOCs can come in is providing better on-board security measures, providing more CCTV coverage, keep at least some form of visible on-board crew, even encouraging passengers (female or male) to report anything they see that might be an offense, or leading to one.

If pursued, female only carriages would only encourage more segregation elsewhere in society, something that is the start of a slippery slope, and will not elevate the problem for the wider facets of society. And logistically speaking, what proportion of trains would you apply? One carriage per train (could be interesting on a 153), 25% of capacity, maybe 50%? And what happens if the female carriage is full, what about women wanting to use it when they can't board? It just leads to way too many issues, and like so many other positive discrimination "solutions" in modern day life doesn't actually address the problem.

I have every sympathy for women who do feel threatened when travelling, and I would encourage TOCs to try as much as possible to elevate these fears. But as has been articulated previously, many women do not want this option of segregation. And as has also been stated, women are not the only victims of assault, attack and discrimination. You can't tackle societal problems with such punitive measures. It is applied in other countries, but does it solve the problems of assault in the same?

 

[GB]

Obviously the child isn't a potential rapist or bum-toucher yet. It's only when the male becomes a full grown man that women need to be kept safe from him.

Well that an absolutely ridiculous statement if I ever heard one. Only adults can be sex offenders can they?

Unless that was sarcasm and if so apologies.

 

[6Gman]

Does this happen a lot on trains in the UK?

No.

It doesn't.

(Though it does depend on how you define "a lot".)

 

[AlterEgo]

Well that an absolutely ridiculous statement if I ever heard one. Only adults can be sex offenders can they?

Unless that was sarcasm and if so apologies.

It was sarcasm...

 

[GB]

Thanks, and again, apologies.

 

[fowler9]

What a provocative comment.

No one wants to see women living in fear of rape and sexual assult. But, if theres going to be women only compartments, then we should have women only buses, streets, bars, towns etc. Perhaps to make it even more relavent we could have seperate facilities for every other person who isn't a white anglo saxon male. So we are all segregated into our own little ghettos, for easy control. The key is to make the deterent sufficient to deter the 0.00001% of men who would contemplate such action. The pinko lefty liberal elite have succeeded in apologising for all criminal activity since the second world war and its time it changed. We should come down hard on criminal activity especially when it involves the defenceless. Discipline should start at school. Bad behaviour should be punished not excused.

"The pinko lefty liberal elite". Sweet Jesus. I'm a dirty great lefty and I don't agree with women only carriages nor do I apologise for criminals. I'm not a liberal and I don't know what a Pinko is.

 

[PeterC]

We used to have women only accomodation but only on non corridor compartment stock.

 

[Geezertronic]

I think it should be sold as Men only carriages so that men can be kept away from Women rather than Women being kept away from Men :roll:

[/SARCASM]

 

[RichmondCommu]

I've never met anyone who wanted to be raped or sexually assaulted. Your point is...?

My point is I'm aware of women who will not use public transport on certain routes late at night because they are worried about suffering sexual assault or being raped.

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

 

[Harbornite]

My point is I'm aware of women who will not use public transport on certain routes late at night because they are worried about suffering sexual assault or being raped.

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

And how will women-only carriages address this? We can infer from your posts that you think women-only carriages are a good idea, even though you deny it.

 

[NSEFAN]

We used to have women only accomodation but only on non corridor compartment stock.

A chap once told me that these were self-policing. He rushed for the train at Waterloo, and only realised he'd gotten into a women-only compartment when the train was leaving. Met with death glares and silent, pursed lips from the 8 women seated in the compartment, he hastily alighted at Vauxhall and got the next train!

My point is I'm aware of women who will not use public transport on certain routes late at night because they are worried about suffering sexual assault or being raped.

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

I agree that public transport needs to be safer, but I think that segregated compartments is the wrong way to go about it in the age of a de-staffed railway. And again, there's the issue of what message it sends that we have to provide spaces to protect vulnerable people on public transport, rather than locking up the attackers who are the cause of the problem in the first place.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I agree that public transport needs to be safer, but I think that segregated compartments is the wrong way to go about it in the age of a de-staffed railway. And again, there's the issue of what message it sends that we have to provide spaces to protect vulnerable people on public transport, rather than locking up the attackers who are the cause of the problem in the first place.

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.

 

[Bromley boy]

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.

That's true but there comes a point where we have to accept a small residual risk.

As a bloke I'm far more likely to be physically attacked than a female is passenger is likely to be sexually assaulted. That's a risk I have to take - until there is a policeman posted in every carriage.

For the reasons highlighted above, segregating female passengers is not a sensible or practical solution to the (small) risk of sex attacks and is a completely irrational response when you consider that women are just as likely to be attacked on the street, or any other public area.

This discussion is now becoming circular!

 

[Bromley boy]

Slightly off topic perhaps (and not to turn this into another DOO v guards thread), but anecdotally passengers of both genders often say they feel safer on trains with a guard.

Are there any official figures on whether attacks are more common on DOO services than guarded services?

 

[BestWestern]

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.

There is a growing problem with knife crime, more recently with (disgustingly) idiots throwing acid, even ride-by robberies by gangs on scooters, who also are sometimes brazen enough to smash their way through shop windows. Many of these incidents occur on busy streets in broad daylight. So should we lock everybody indoors out of harms way? Post a food parcel through the letterbox and have everyone tuned into some sort of TV or radio station for their contact with the rest of humanity? Or should we, perhaps, accept that no society is ever perfect and there will always be 'bad people' to some degree? Children have been snatched off the street countless times over the years, sometimes fortunate enough to be returned, sometimes not. Indeed, on one terrible occasion even by other children. Should we segregate our youngsters from the rest of sociey? Even from other children? Convoys to get to and from school perhaps?

As you can see, living as quivering wrecks trying desperately to 'be safe' simply doesn't work. A woman is far more likely to be attacked walking home from the station than she is on a train, where there is a chance that others will intervene. There was a post here recently about a truly shocking incident involving a teenager attacked twice in the vicinity of a railway station. No amount of 'female' only carriages would have been of any help there. The idea serves no practical purpose, other than to provide a false sense of security.

 

[RichmondCommu]

As you can see, living as quivering wrecks trying desperately to 'be safe' simply doesn't work. A woman is far more likely to be attacked walking home from the station than she is on a train, where there is a chance that others will intervene. There was a post here recently about a truly shocking incident involving a teenager attacked twice in the vicinity of a railway station. No amount of 'female' only carriages would have been of any help there. The idea serves no practical purpose, other than to provide a false sense of security.

I concur. In my opinion we need better policing on late night trains to act as a deterrent to any crime that is committed on trains. However that would require resources that the BTP simply don't have.

 

[Clip]

For the reasons highlighted above, segregating female passengers is not a sensible or practical solution to the (small) risk of sex attacks and is a completely irrational response when you consider that women are just as likely to be attacked on the street, or any other public area.

!

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.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Segregation doesn't work, as its not always a male attacking a female - there has been instances where a female has attacked a male, evidence of this can be found online.

The soloution to the problem is to weed out those, regardless if their male or female, who make others unpleasant and ban them from travelling on public transport.

 

[BestWestern]

I concur. In my opinion we need better policing on late night trains to act as a deterrent to any crime that is committed on trains. However that would require resources that the BTP simply don't have.

Indeed. 'Security' has been used previously though, on Southern a few years back and of course currently on Merseyrail. SWT had their 'Travelsafe' officers. So it can be done.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Slightly off topic perhaps (and not to turn this into another DOO v guards thread), but anecdotally passengers of both genders often say they feel safer on trains with a guard.

Are there any official figures on whether attacks are more common on DOO services than guarded services?

I am a big supporter of keeping Guards on trains and them having full operation of the doors but... in the context you have described, does it really matter whether they are a guard or an OBS or any member of staff? The point I think you were trying to make was people feel safer when there is a second (or more) member of staff on board.

 

[Bromley boy]

I am a big supporter of keeping Guards on trains and them having full operation of the doors but... in the context you have described, does it really matter whether they are a guard or an OBS or any member of staff? The point I think you were trying to make was people feel safer when there is a second (or more) member of staff on board.

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

I suppose at the margins a would-be attacker may be less likely to act in the certain knowledge that a second staff member is present rather than that they may be present as with an OBS, particularly if a high % of services in fact run without an OBS.

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.