Be Excellent To Each Other

Yes, I appreciate he's said he'd "consult" with women's groups etc., but I'm just amazed he would even consider such a policy rather than reject it out of hand, as to me it seems incredibly regressive, defeatist and, very likely divisive? (As well as, you know, a *really* shit, impractical, unworkable idea, given the huge overcrowding that already goes on)

I don't really agree with your point about what the press would make of it if he had rejected out of hand (whereas now they're going to have a field day of course). For the sake of argument some theoretical statistical case could possibly be made that 'you're more likely to be mugged by a black person' or whatever (?), but no-one in their right mind would be advocating "non black carriages" and no-one, including the press, would claim that you were putting people at risk by said out of hand rejection? Well, that's how I see it anyway.

Apparently we *did* have all-women carriages in the UK once. Last seen in 1977....

God what's next? Separate toilets for men and women?!

I think that's a slightly different scenario, Russ.

Ages back, I was at a ball in a recently opened theatre. I'd done the decent thing and got reasonably drunk. Anyways, I needed a wee so went to the toilets. "This is a bit liberal" I thought to myself as I looked at the large, circular urinal with suspended faucets to sluice the wee away. Anyway, I was quite happily draining the old chap and there was the sound of bolts being drawn. My friend veronica emerged looking resplendent in her ballgown from a cubicle and politely asked why I was in the women's toilets and should I really be pissing in the sink? It was somewhat chastening.

If you look at the part of his site that details it, the whole thing is really benign, and part of a wider consultation with leading anti-harassment groups.

http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/end_street_harassment

I do also think it's a bit of a non-story.

He's basically said 'I do not know enough about this issue to make a steadfast statement at this current time and would seek advice on this before making a policy decision'. I think it's a bit of a sad state of affairs that a politician can be buffeted from both sides because he admits that he doesn't have yet enough facts and advice to give snap answers. To say you'd look into something further and consult the relevant groups and advisors shouldn't be a negative thing.

When some of the woolly 'policies' given by other candidates on things like the education amount to 'we'll make education a priority' with no measurable content of ideal then I don't see why not having an immediate answer as to whether we should have female train carriages is in any way wrong.

On a personal note, though I doubt it would be workable in a practical sense, I do wish that there was a space on trains for women and family groups with children. The amount of hassle I used to get from horrible men on the Euston-Glasgow line was really upsetting. I'd travel at the most ridiculous times to try to avoid it, but twice had to be rescued by a train manager and sit in or next to the train managers little cabbie bit because of the stuff I was expected to put up with as a girl in my 20s travelling alone. In the end I used to arrange my journeys to fit with the regular travel times of a particular train manager who'd been one of the ones who'd helped me out, as he always made sure that I was not being hassled and just checked in with me on journeys to make sure I was ok.

I agree it's useful to read the whole source item for context (thanks ), but at the end of the day there is still:



My position, I think, is that any notion of women-only carriages is wrong-headed from the outset, as well as demonstrably impractical given the state of overcrowding etc., and therefore further consultation doesn't really seem appropriate? Surely there must be at least an initial prima facie/common sense review before floating any idea out there in the public domain and/or for formal consultation; if something is a total non-starter.

I am not, of course, suggesting that we shouldn't be thinking of ways to solve what is clearly a major problem - but let's sort out the wheat from the chaff in terms of practical, workable solutions like CCTV, like more police on trains, punishing offenders on a zero-tolerance basis and suchlike?

On a purely personal, philosophical level, I am pretty much against any measure that separates and/or segregates people on any basis, be that their gender as in this case, or their sexuality, age, ethnic background or whatever else (I am not, of course, including lavatories in this ). In 2015, we need more intelligent, better thought out solutions.

It suits my agenda to make noise and call it daft, though.

I agree it is likely unworkable, but it's something that has been suggested by people trying to reduce harrassment. I suspect this is unlikely to be around peak times when trains are overcrowded anyway.

All in all, I think you can easily find way sillier things to beat each Labour contender with, including Corbyn.

I think that's being too charitable; he's gone a lot further than to simply state "not sure what to do about this, I'll consult with womens groups and others", he's actually floated the specific idea/measure of women-only carriages out there, however caveated. For this, in my opinion at least, he deserves to be criticised for the reasons I've mentioned, and as you yourself also refer to in terms of how workable it would be.



Of course no-one, least of all me (with two daughters of my own) is saying that ghastly men on trains who hassle women in any way and for any reason is a non-problem or is something we don't really need to find solutions for. Clearly it is a major, rising issue as the stats in that BBC piece suggest, and it is essential that things are done (and current measures are by definition inadequate).

But what I am suggesting is that there surely are better, far less divisive and impractical ways of achieving this, through CCTV and other modern technologies investment and good old "bobbies on the beat" style policing on trains (especially late trains with pissheads on them), than just to say 'no men in this carriage fullstop'. To me, as I've said, this seems both regressive and defeatist, and punishing the many for the sake of a tiny minority of horrible people.

Oh sure, that's a rich vein of gold to be mined if ever there was, but it's not actually my intention. This particularly irritated me, but wondered what the Beex Hive Mind thought about it.

Japan do it, and they're hardly a model of quiet, uncrowded railways.

Fair point.
To my mind, it does seem like a sledgehammer to crack a nut type approach, though, and ultimately, defeatist.

I've actually nothing really against the idea though.

Yes, #notallmen are wankers, but the vast majority of (if not all) women will have been subject to harrassment. For some it might not be a big deal, and some will have sadly been conditioned to expect it as being something that just happens. There are lots, however, who would see this as a good thing.

It's sometimes hard to imagine that it's such a big issue as we're good people and we tend to associate with other good people, but a quick look at places like Everyday Sexism can be eye-opening (and terrifying). There are a lot more shitheads out there than you would think.

So, if the extremely minor inconvenience of not using a particular train carriage is to the benefit of loads of women to not feel attacked, and to feel that people care about not exposing them to more idiots than is necessary, then surely that's a worthwhile endeavour?

It is, perhaps, not the most idealistic solution. It is, however, pragmatic, and certainly cheaper than the other suggestions.

I suppose my main objection is a philosophical one, Curio - I just don't like the idea of any enforced segregation of people as based on their gender, or any other parameter. We should always be aiming for less, not more of this, in an ever evolving, ever improving, ever more equal, equitable and egalitarian society?

If all else failed, then maybe as an absolute last resort, but why not try far less radical, common sense measures like proper surveillance, panic communication devices, proper policing of trains and suchlike first? (I'm sure that some of these would cost more money, but then if some evil twat really is intent on doing stuff like this, is a sign saying "no men allowed" even going to deter them, might even encourage them?)

Oh, I totally agree, but CCTV has been in trains for decades and means nothing without the staff to police it, review it, and law agencies to investigate and prosecute those who are abusive or cause harassment.

The costs involved in actually providing adequate train company or police staff for transport to ensure that people, families and women feel safe on trains just is just a bit of a dream, I think. I've never, ever seen adequate staffing on a train to be equipped and able to deal with 12 idiots on a train that are harassing someone. I've seen the occasional transport police person get on a few stops later, after about 45 minutes of this, alone, totally in equipped to deal with anything. All that ever gets done is that they move the victim(s).

What, like first class?

AMIRITE, Comrades?

Come off it Mark. First class is basically if people want to pay more, or not, but either way they have a choice regardless of gender or anything else.

If you're going to widen the whole equality thing to whether or not you have money, that's one big can of worms.

I was just joking, there.

I think this is a total non-starter of an idea but in terms of daft ideas that get mooted I'd much rather this came to pass than some of the utterly vile shite that comes out of the Tory think tanks. But I imagine he doesn't have as many layers of people filtering the message as Cameron et al do.

We need to deal with the bigger issues first. A segregated carriage for people who think that its reasonable to take up a seat with their bag on a rush hour train is first on the list.

What about people eating cheese and onion pasties on packed train carriages? I'm not sure your priorities are correct.

My pet hate is some young, well-bodied twat sitting in priority disabled seat on the Tube, with some elderly lady positively falling all over him for six stops and still does not give up his seat.

I've said something before now and just been told to knob off, and even the person I've said it for has looked mortified, too. Needless to say, no-one else says owt, and all wear that "...I can't believe you've said something on the Tube to people you don't know, you complete northern oik" look.

Other than that, people who don't appear to know what deodorant is for, mothball-chewers entirely unacquainted with either toothbrush or mouthwash and/or eaters of raw garlic (or at least, those filling an entire hot carriage with garlic-stench that makes me gag) aren't exactly my favorites, either. Paramount among even these is the sick-burp emitting, semi-conscious drunk, whom you're terrified of entering into his 3 metre radius projectile vomit exclusion zone - like some fetid, foul-smelling, piss-stained Mount Vesuvius in human form, venting sulphurous fume and showing distinct warning signs of imminent, catastrophic eruption. Ah, the joys of public transport...

Actually, the worst problem is women (and I'm afraid it is only women, albeit only a handful) who get on a packed rush hour train, sit in a seat, and proceed to apply make-up vigorously for the length of the entire journey - often creating a cloud of foundation powder in their wake (and over peoples suits) and a lot of painful elbows in ribs as they frantically buff away. And then, seemingly unaware of their antisocial behaviour to date, tut and sigh when someone moves a fraction of an inch within 20 yards of them as they try and precisely apply mascara, normally as the train is going over some points.

But Corbyns 'plan' inadvertently solves that one too.

A carriage which automatically catches fire, yes?

Men only trains?

I've seen people applying make up whilst driving,moo. It's ridiculous.

... But don't pretend to us you don't put your Lipstick and mascara on whilst on the tube, you pretty thing.

It's not entirely forced segregation, just a safe space within a larger area. One carriage in ten. We won't be herding women into them and pulling them away from their husbands, etc.

And I think this is more about consistent 'low level' harrassment rather than all out assaults. To police that would be pretty much impossible without every third passenger being a cop.

This could be avoided if all these train wankers would just use cars instead, like proper people. Concrete over the lot of it.

My uni used to offer a night bus after all the paid busses had finished travelling to help stranded people get back to their halls.

It was women only, even if you were travelling in a pair or as a group, so the women would get on, and leave their drunk men friends stranded in a ditch or where-ever.

10 carriages! Lucky to get 4 at rush hour to leeds on airedale line

Yes, and if it did happen I'd open this up to not being just women, but family groups (men and women) accompanying children.

You sometimes get similar areas in football grounds, where I used to take the twins out.

There used to be a free bus for all students where I was.

Though there was also a scheme that if you were stranded and without money, you called or hailed a cab and the porter would cover the fare. It was to stop students being stranded alone after getting separated whilst out. There had been a series of student rapes, and for tge sake of the occasional covered fare was a great scheme that potentially stopped a number of awful things.

I don't know anyone who ever needed or used it, personally, but it was a well advertised scheme, and one that was appreciated for tge knowledge it existed.

I noticed on a commuter train from London to Brighton on Friday that a lot of people get on at London Bridge, sit down in the aisle seat at a table, then fall asleep, annexing the window seat like a colossal, selfish, snoring ape. In the same carriage I witnessed four men do the same thing.

They will be sorry when they wake up with my crotch in their face as I climb over them in a straddly fashion.

"Teabag" 'em?

I should imagine that's almost as bad a faux pas as talking to someone.

I nearly had to move carriages the other day. 7.30am on Thursday, on the London Overground. Middle-aged lady sat next to me, opened a large Tupperware container and started eating lasagna and chips. 7.30 in the morning! It was so gross I almost felt like applauding her chutzpah. I hope to see her next week for a pre-sunrise moussaka and garlic bread, or maybe a casserole.

Good God man. I could ask them to move but, y'know, London.

Crikey, we don't have these problems in Crewe or Middlewich...

I am in Middlewich this weekend

Poor caveys house price

Really? Are you about around late lunch, we could have a quick get together and a pint!
(I am doing mega Wedding Mk II (tm) preps though and am under orders, so soz mate it could only be a flying hello! I'd bring the Harley though! )

Our house isn't in Middlewich old bean

You clearly don't realise how big a splatterzone Malia creates.

I will see what The Agenda is, as MrsA us somewhat regimented about these weekends in a cottage with a group. Hopefully i should be able to get away.

Broken hearts and shattered dreams, broken hearts and shattered dreams.

Saturday looks best. We cannot get in until 3pm so I think we might arrive in the vicinity at about half one to grab lunch. I shall find out more and let you know tomorrow.

In the interests of balance there are a fair few articles around the place (including from women) defending Corbyn on several points, notably:

1) There really is a problem with harassment and assaults on women on trains, which is getting worse - and in lieu of LOADS OF MONEY to spend on a magic army of police and extra staff and all that lovely stuff (because as we know the Tories love chucking money at this sort of thing), safe carriages for women might not be such a terrible idea. Whilst the separate carriages might not be their top choice, sometimes a compromise a decent option in lieu of the ideal solution.

2) It's a system that's used in several other countries with apparently, some degree of success and acceptance.

3) It's not a policy statement, it's one of several things Corbyn would consider as part of a wider package of measures designed to make life better for women in a range of situations and scenarios (no bad thing, surely?). He's also explicitly stated that it would be a inclusive consultation process with, y'know, loads of women.

http://www.allmediascotland.com/broadca ... -together/

Fucking yes.