Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Not sure if anyone has a strong opinion about gender of DiS.
unisex carriage (quiet)
unisex carriage (party)
business carriage (third class)
unisex carriage (quiet) and quiet carriage?
no student sex in t'other
are there any rules?
a fight carriage (Ufc)
a fight carriage (street fighter II: turbo edition)
if you prefer
1 you do not talk about the fight carriage
2 you do not talk about the fight carriage
3 no shoes, no shirt
4 if it's your first time on fight carriage you must fight
5 it's cheaper if you didcot your tickets
Something about ghost trains.
WHAT DOES THAT SAY, EH?
hash tag just sayin
What do women think about it?
Really you are.
hope you're well.
That would end up like the toilet situation, mens carriages would be filthy awful boxes of hell.
the conversations :(
The banter might be awful though.
Wasn't really commenting on women's toilets though, just saying men's are usually awful and their carriages probably would be also.
but I can assure that at both school and in an old office, memos had to be sent out several times about the state of the female toilets, whereas there was never any issue with the gents. CASE CLOSED.
Prove me wrong.
I used to be responsible for cleaning public toilets in a popular area of London and will say that sure, men's toilets can be a little messy, the odd missed bowl, usual standard toilet fare. Women's toilets on the other hand was always where we came across the "oh god hold your nose try not to gag too late bleurgh" scenarios.
About the OUTRAGE over someone leaving an enormous poo in the bowl in the ladies toilets. Lots of shocked whispers of "but clients use those too!". Top bants.
And they also say that the worst kitchen is the one in Marketing.
Even your mates weren't allowed to talk to you about it.
"Better since the Chelsea result"
*loud goblin alarm*
*gets dragged off train*
Good idea, probably unworkable
I remember my uni having a women's nightbus, that seemed to work fine.
Every train service is different to one nightbus
I think so, quiet carriages don't work as the trouble makers will ignore the rules. Would need extra security to enforce, which would be a different idea. If the idea was extra security, workable.
So it would be unworkable unless it was made to work? Lovely stuff.
Think most would have read my post in the sense it was meant, I.e it is a nice idea but unlikely to happen due to the extra measures needed to enforce it, but instead you seem to just look for opportunities to post unfunny gifs
and then we don't need to worry about this.
Sexually harassing women.
Not all men?
the ones who stare and comment and touch.
it's good enough for Jezza Corbyn.
and that it seems like a good idea for people to feel safe, is indicative of a wider problem that should be addressed in a better way than just segregating people.
but then i read further and saw I was agreeing with a Tory MP so quickly changed my mind.
My point was more about JUST segregating people as well, obviously it's sickening that it's got to the point that it's needed and I can only support for the fact that people should feel safe. The point I was making is that my worry would be that everything else would 'carry on as normal' and the culture that led to it being needed goes unaddressed while some guys dust their hands, are pleased with themselves and act like the problem was fixed.
Given the things that go on, it should already be in place and we should only really be discussing how we address the root cause, if that makes sense?
on public transport to have separate white and BME carriages?
I don't think the solution to any social problem is segregation.
High chance that the GF will be coming too. I know the rules about bringing outsiders but I don't care.
For committing the enormous faux pas of bringing a woman.
- having a women-only carriage isn't the same as segregation or "having separate white and BME carriages", obviously
- it's kind of hilarious to see dudes make lofty statements about segregation not being these answer instead of shutting up and trying to find out if this is something women actually want or not. next up: not seeing race, etc.
offering it as a 'solution' massively opposed to.
It's not the same thing, and you're a little scamp for suggesting it.
'It's kind of hilarious to see dudes make lofty statements about segregation not being these answer instead of shutting up and trying to find out if this is something women actually want or not. next up: not seeing race, etc.'
but again, it's pretty common for you to not understand things, so....
The best way to counteract it is to bring down the gap in social inequality.
Sorry big man but the answer's always eat the rich.
#sorrynotsorry #makeuthink #headsgone #trainbeers
you don't have to imagine!
All Corbyn has said is that he'd consult with various groups and if that's something they feel or can demonstrate would help, it's an action to consider.
I think this is a good idea and would make me feel safer at night. But there'd have to be a security guard enforcing it, otherwise drunk men would get on and go 'hurr hurr I'm in the ladies carriage, ooh, talk to me' and then it would be even worse.
(I'm now thinking if there *was* a security guard, maybe there then wouldn't be a need for a women's carriage! But this way you'd only need to hire one extra member of staff for each train).
Late night trains can be intimidating for anyone. In fact, not that it's a competition, but I'd hazard a guess that violence and fights are more statistically common than sexual assaults. Both are issues but if you're a bloke and been in a late train with a bunch of aggro cunts, it's also a problem. Guards on trains would stop all of this and no one has to be segregated or feel guilt by association at all.
please have this delicious biscuit that you're so clearly angling for, for being good enough never to have personally assaulted a woman
It's about everyone's feelings.
It's about addressing an issue that disproportionately affects women. If the means to address that hurt your feelings, tough titties. It isn't about you.
Full Definition of DISPROPORTIONATE. : being out of proportion — dis·pro·por·tion·ate·ly adverb.
up until they raise fares to pay for it all.
Genuinely think a women's carriage would be respected, especially in combo with CCTV/fines.
Actually think one potential problem would be the same one as with first class - on those occasions when the train is too busy everyone bundles in regardless and no ticket inspector can be arsed taking on a whole train of nobbers.
On a packed tube weekend evening tube train there wouldn't be enough capacity for it - and to expand capacity accordingly for this end is a price most people wouldn't think worth paying (when ticket prices rise).
care to show the data you've got backing this up?
It might be possible on quiet night time trains, when women perhaps feel more at risk, but I highly suspect assaults happen a lot more often at peak commuter times.
In July 2002, JR West became the third company in Japan to run trains with women-only cars, and the JR West trains in Osaka became the first to offer women-only cars during morning rush hour. The same year, two more Osaka-area railways, Hankyu Railway and Keihan Railway, added women-only cars to their limited express trains, and Hankyu became the first company to run women-only cars all day long. Other Osaka-area companies followed suit, including Osaka Municipal Subway, whose Midosuji Line, which carries passengers at as much as 160% capacity, had a reputation for having the worst groping problem in all of Japan. Tokyo-area companies resisted the change because of logistical difficulties and fear of overcrowding in mixed-gender cars, but in 2005 they introduced women-only cars during rush hour, after awareness campaigns and tougher sentencing proved ineffective.
so it is, in fact, possible to do this at rush hour in a crowded system.
*copies and pastes from Wikipedia*
that states that there are no peak-service women only trains in japan
It's not 2008 anymore. Wikipedia skepticism is no longer a hip position to hold, sorry pal.
Also, the concern would be that there'd never be enough room for all women in the segregated carriage, so some would have to go in the normal ones, and if anything happens in there, there could be an attitude of 'you should have gone in the women's carriage, then'.
are wrong about this. #knowyourplace
but it feels like a bit on an airy debate-club hypothetical to me - I don't honestly feel that people would suddenly have this attitude? I'm sure they'd be just as appalled by train assault in this case as otherwise, certainly in the UK.
But fear of that attitude might stop women reporting incidents. I like Corbyn's idea of a 24 hour reporting line, staffed by women.
feel like it might appeal to nice_squirrel too)
I'd imagine there'd be pretty substantial campaigning, that hotline thing he's talking about setting up too. I don't think it's a case of slapping a few extra carriages on and then forgetting about it all.
just a female security guard employed by the train company.
If the train is busy it's definitely not as scary anyway - the worst journeys are when it's the evening and there's only a handful of people in a carriage.
I have felt more threatened in busy carriages. When there are people crushed up all around you and you can't even tell which man it is who has his hand up your skirt, ugh. When it's empty there are fewer ways for a perve to hide.
although people do seem as likely to be awful when there's no-one around.
24 hour women carriages please. And buses (every time I've been furtively pressed-up-against has been on a bus).
Actually, seems like a no brainer in that context. Girl power! *does the sign*
this thread is bringing back bad memories of the time I had to catch the last train out of Manchester and I cleverly bought myself a first class ticket so I could avoid the commoners and then everyone bundled on and I ended up sitting in the fucking luggage rack fml
- The time I was asleep around 7pm in a window seat on a SW Train and woke up to find the man next to me pushing the side of his body against mine with his hand up my skirt and was trying to get his fingers inside my knickers
- The time on a busy central line carriage a man put his hand up my skirt and ripped away the gusset of my tights
- The other five or so occasions a man on the tube has groped me, though at least all the rest were outside clothing
I'm not sure segregated carriages are the right thing, but we need to do *something*
where do I buy a hatpin?
“I’ve heard about Broadway mashers and ‘L’ mashers, but I didn’t know Fifth Avenue had a particular brand of its own…. If New York women will tolerate mashing, Kansas girls will not.”
I enjoy the idea of poking gropers with a pin, though
As this is a Corbyn thing, it'll be interesting to see how Cooper responds. She's tried to position herself as the most viable feminist candidate, but as usual without really saying anything. I wonder if the Stop Corbyn At All Costs thing will be put to one side for this and the street harassment proposals
that seem silly and patronising at first because in what kind of world would this even be needed?
Then you think - oh yeah, this world, the one with all the cunts in it.
rather than the cause isn't it!
but you know, one step at a time
if we tackled rape culture by deciding every step toward doing so is treating the symptom rather than the cause, we'll be done in no time!
the only people who can stop rape culture are men, the rapists.
in a discussion about it.
Then someone else has suggested expanded the idea to be a "No cis men carriage" for trans inclusivity.
b/c there's not enough for us to know what you mean by it, but it's still somehow fighty enough to provoke multiple reactions =D
STOP BEING CUNTS (MEN)
Get a life.
Not to enforce but more because I'd be worried about the idea of women only carriages being perceived as the only safe spaces on the underground.
During times when the underground is less busy I can definitely see there being a case for either having more guards or having women only carriages but I also wonder if one of the issues that's leading to public harassment being so widespread is the lack of repercussions from bystanders or security. Even if Corbyn isn't made leader it'd definitely be good to the steps outlined here to be acted on http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/end_street_harassment to be acted on.
that someone's trying to stop harrassment of women. insight into both your psyches there
As for your mad hatter 2 + 2 = 15 comment Brusma, my own personal troll, I'm 1) Asking opinions ans 2) My only opinion has been that segregation is not the answer.
In fact I think segregation is a fucking dreadful idea which comes with a zillion of it's own problems.
I think your conclusion jumping says a lot about your psyche. Right back atcha.
It's voluntary exclusion at best
he's the guy getting mad that committees on diversity didn't invite white men to 100% of their meetings
be the dominant overlord, oppressing all beneath him. why do you hate minorities, moker? because you do, we all know that now
(a) corbyn has proposed this exactly, he's just said that a few people have suggested it to him and he'd be willing to look into it / other ways of stopping harassment on public transport and in general. which is a bit different to him introducing full sharia law
(b) not sure that you'd need a guard or something to stop people entering, it's not like people go into the first class carriage without paying for it as a rule anyway. surely the standard system for people breaking rules on trains would work (get the transport police at the next available opportunity)
(c) if it was put in place as a scheme, i think you'd need to look carefully on how not to be exclusionary to e.g. transgendered people (female-to-male people are also at risk of harassment but may not identify as women), genderqueer people etc, while still offering the same protection.
(d) there could also be issues where a girl could want to be with her boyfriend but would feel safer on the women's only carriage etc
maybe it would be better to have a banter carriage to distract all the creeps (though i guess then you'd still have the 'dirty-old-perv' style harassers)
or to gloss over certain issues, not to say the policy should be dropped but I don't think there's anyway to make it a one size fits all type of solution.
idk, i can't think of a way of doing it but that doesn't mean in principle it's not available.
maybe even something simple like an optional curtain you can pull down to cover a certain region of seating would be a part solution
I guess I don't think there's necessarily an easy physical solution to a social/cultural problem.
maybe the wording could be 'safe carriage' or similar.
with B, on commuter trains in London everyone sits in first class. Because it's crowded, there's no ticket inspectors to enforce it, and it's essentially just a sign saying 1 at the end of a normal carriage. I wouldn't want the women's/safe carriage to end up like that.
there is no first class, even though the seats and carriages say they are. It's just a case of using the available rolling stock.
Remember that guy who got vilified on here because he chucked that cocky scrote off the train? No-one would try and touch up girls if there was the chance of a good old fashioned thrashing.
loud as a moker bike
but couldn't bust a grape in a fruit fight
Parks & Recreation called Ann Perkins.
What's the turning round guy from?
Sounds pretty good to me!
and I don't like policies"
to see the different types of violence on trains, in 2007, this paper says it was:
violence against the person (87%),
sexual offences (5%)
and robbery (8%)
I haven't read / can't see if that's split by gender but I'd have to assume that most violence cases are men vs men. It's a hamfisted but fair assumption.
Therefore, surely this is a good reason to have a safe carriage, not a women only carriage, and this goes back to having guards on the train.
Here's the paper so ou can read it and explain to me why I'm wrong and hate women.
Sexual offenses are the only ones that are rising as we speak. It may be because women are more ready to speak out and report it but it's certainly an issue that needs addressing before others. I can see what you're saying about a general safe carriage, who wouldn't want that. But I can't see why if women want a private space they can't have one too (and that it wouldn't be actually pretty helpful in today's society).
The paper even puts it at 4% saying it's in line with the national average.
I just think that it's not just women who need to be protected on trains. And from the minor bit of digging, the stats show this. Kinda.
I dunno. Someone else do some digging.
I've never reported a stranger to the police for subtly stroking my leg on public transport. But my life would be loads more fun if that didn't keep happening.
I've never reported it when it's happened to me. It's probably happened to almost every woman who regularly gets a crowded bus or train.
Nearly every lady I know has been the victim of something like this on public transport. It doesn't get reported. Even the more serious cases of sexual assault.
I'd imagine there are more reported cased of GHB, physical assault etc. than reported rapes, but do you really want to bounce into that conversation all "GUYS stop selfishly focusing on women there are many more assaults than rapes so let's deal with this instead, also your ideas make me feel sad"
to remind everyone they're utter oppurtunistic shitcunts again
for putting themselves in other people's shoes.
Carriages with salaried sex workers?
Or big screens with porn on?
you've been posting some right old shit the last week or so
people like you and Theo have been trying to get everyone to think I have so you can make me one of your bullying victims
"Good principle, not sure how practical it is. But it annoys people like CG and moker so I'm for it."
that alluded to treating a problem and not a symptom whilst using academic papers and widely accepted anecdotal evidence to emphasise a wider issue in society of late night travel as opposed to myopically concentrating on tackling what might seem like an important or well meaning issue but is in fact a bit of a misnomer when we take into account the bigger picture.
Also bitches 'aint shit and up the men's rights. HAPPY NOW?
for the apostrophe in ain't
In the women's carriage
this is why when you go to the doctors with a railway spike embedded in your torso, the doctor's job is simply to remove the spike. the use of any resource to address the gaping rupture in your flesh is simply a waste and the doctor must be struck off immediately
analogy are the ones who need to have a rethink here.
To put women in a carriage on their own sends the very clear message [that] harassment and sexual offences from men towards women are inevitable."
If we run with this analogy that harrassment = symptom and cause = the attitudes that men have towards women, we're in the extremely weird position of arguing that we can't fight everyday harrassment while we're trying to change attitudes: that is, the symptom is less important than the cause. This is not only terrible as an analogy (most of a medical professional's job is treating symptoms!) but also a form of reasoning that completely restricts intervention and action. It's whatabouttery, as I believe it's been dubbed upthread.
Not that I'm completely against what's in that quote - that argument is that the ground level action could actively hinder addressing the deeper causes. I don't agree with Laura Bates that it's a 'clear' message really though; and what I'd like to ask her (and others against it) is whether it might be worth the greater campaign to change men's (and societal) attitudes taking this minor hit if that means countless women can commute safely to work.
is not necessarily saying any attempt to work on the symptoms of the issue are null and void, it's just questioning how effective this particular one might be and querying the message it's sending.
the analogue here would be if a doctor treated the infection caused by the spike without removing it.
come on, pal.
you are bad at this
Think you've missed the point a bit here - he's not saying don't treat the cause, rather that it doesn't make sense to treat the cause without addressing the symptoms.
genuinely posted that too soon by doing a comedy pratfall onto my keyboard and mashing it with my palm
and then I go to the doctor's rather than A+E to have it removed I deserve all I get.
You can sort a lot of things out at the pharmacy these days.
yvette cooper just got off the tube and most of the passengers were women
quite a few of them are telling her sort it out.
even if something is provably untrue with 2 seconds of googling they're just gonna go for it in the hope people won't check it out
Laura Bates of everyday sexism has actually spoken out against the idea
I wonder what she's up to these days.
it does make sense form a feminist view point though, in so much as segregation in no way helps equality. But that's not to say that woman shouldn't feel like they'd prefer the idea.
I wouldn't see it as a sign of weakness of women though, I'd see it as a sign of women having to yet again having to deal with the weakness of men in a less than ideal way.
questioning whether it's a move that places too much focus on a woman's ability to protect herself over a societies responsibility to take care of it's people.
I'm sure all will agree it's men that need to change. I'm just saying i can understand why they wouldn't be in favour of it, yes because it undermines a woman's abilities compared to a man's, but also because of the inequality of the idea.
I'm sure Corbyn isn't planning to be all 'you've got your carriage now, rape culture's over'.
If they use it or not. Although that could lead to victim blaming but that's never a valid argument
I don't see it as victim-blaming at all, and would make me feel so much safer. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I really don't see that having women-only spaces would lead to a harrassment free-for-all everywhere else.
If anything, it would increase awareness of it. Men who are indignant about being lumped in with sex criminals might realise that if they drunkenly try to start a conversation with me when I'm on my own at night, I have no way of knowing their intentions and am therefore often afraid.
"It sends the message that harassment and sexual abuse is inevitable and somehow innate, which is not only hugely insulting to the majority of men but also gives a free pass to perpetrators.".
is laura bates actually moker idk
wouldn't women just bundle in the women-only carriage and everything would be fine? Thank you
but that would probably make them all horny
I'm not particularly pro the idea, but women will actually still be getting assaulted whilst a debate as to whether it is "victim blaming" goes on by a load of people who probably have enough money to get cabs home all the time (or are men). With the 24 hour tube coming in I think it's a perfectly reasonable suggestion to discuss and if it has been proven to work (no idea if it has) then wahey. How far does the "victim blaming" thing go back? We shouldn't have a police force?
Yvette Cooper has made herself look like an absolute bellend of the highest order here jumping on the sensationalist straw man media argument.
have derailed a set of policy proposals about consulting on ways to tackle street harassment into some kind of train segregation hoo ha.
Peter Fielder, 83, said: “Separate carriages for men and women sounds like a retrograde step to me. With the emancipation of women, if I can call it that, segregation seems like a step back. The other thing is that if a woman’s in trouble, if men are around they’ll be able to come and help her.”
do people who are against this also tend to be against other forms of top-down 'authoritarian'-type regulation of stuff?
I rest my case
Batman trying to help someone on a train but the (woman) guard is stopping him, saying "sorry, sir, this is women-only". Corbyn looks on approvingly.
someone pushed a bit too far with their word of the day toilet paper
like the Caroline Criado-Perez quote: “The answer is never to limit where women can go but to tackle the men who are carrying out this type of abuse.”
No-one's trying to say women will only be allowed in women carriages! Fuck's sake.
just using this as an attempt to do corbyn as much damage as possible
"Not sure if anyone has a strong opinion about gender of DiS."
I especially agree with "We also forget that education takes time and I'm supposed to wait until the patriarchal sexist education is reversed to feel safe?"
he's still got it
No, it wouldn't be the solution to all sexism everywhere, any more than women-only part of your gym or the bit in your contract which asks you kindly not to grope the other staff are. It's just something that would allow some people to be feel a bit safer and freer to do the things they want to do. You could possibly, maybe do this whilst also doing the relationship/sexism education thing, I don't think this is a dichotomy unless, unless...
Unless nobody actually is really fucked off about this suggestion, aside from possibly moker (^ not reading all that shit), and most of the "backlash" is generated by, let's say, a senior and increasingly desparate opponent of Jeremy Corbyn, whose key platform now seems to be "just react with blind rage to whatever he proposes".
It may well be that the other candidates all said perfectly reasonable things such as "I agree that we should consider all the options to tackle this issue, including education to improve men's behaviour, making reporting attacks easier, and practical safety steps. However, I do not agree with women's carriages because blah blah blah".
Then the media obviously would pick up the last line and ignore the rest.
Don't know if it's happened on this occasion or not, but it very frequently does.