I agree with Laura Bates on this one.
“I don’t think at all that women-only carriages are the solution – I think it’s a step back. It seems to accept that the problem is inevitable, that men will harass women and that all we can do is contain them,” Laura Bates, founder of the Everyday Sexism Project, has argued.
Islam adopts a similar approach to women. Perhaps Comrade Corbyn would like all women to wear a burka – to stop harassment, naturally. If a problem exists, deal with that – i.e. the perpetrator. But, as is usual with hard-of-thinking socialists, punishing the many for the sins of the few is the easy option. Which is why the man is unfit to ever be prime minister. Still jumping onto a populist bandwagon is what this jerk seems to be good at.
I remember from my childhood that train stations had ‘Ladies Waiting Rooms’ which I always thought rather a nice idea. I wonder if our opinions today are shaped to some extent by the fear of appearing to accede to Muslim mores.
Jay
The worrying implication is that all men cannot be trusted, so we all have to be punished.This is typical of collectivist thinking that refuses to acknowledge individual responsibility. It shows Corbyn’s misanthropy in all its glory. What a vile little man.
I remember from my childhood that we invented railways and that is why we have railway stations, railway tickets, railway coaches, railway journeys and, dare I say it, railways not ‘train’ lines, (two letters shorter!).
If memory serves me right, some 60 years ago there were “Ladies Only” compartments adjacent to the Guards section on Southern Region trains in London.
No idea why, or when they were done away with.
I think ‘Ladies only’ waiting rooms were being phased out with modernisation during the 1970’s. Back in the day when there were station managers or attendants to supervise them.
If they were to be reintroduced, would the ‘communities’ demanding such facilities be willing to stump up the higher rail fares for the extra staff? Answers on the back of a plain envelope please……
I’m not sure they get as far as thinking in terms of punishing the many for the sake of the few. They are so devoid of reasoning abilities they have to have a rule for everything so nobody is ever faced with the shock of needing to make a decision.
This suggestion is so wrong on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to begin. Firstly, it buys into the idea of the “poor little defenceless girlies” – a stereotype which many women of a certain age spent a long time fighting to consign to history; secondly, it also insinuates that all men are potential harrassers and sex-pests, which is so far from the truth that it would be laughable if this weren’t a serious suggestion; thirdly, it presupposes that unwanted sexual advances are only ever made by men towards women – what about drunken groups of hen-night lasses harassing innocent male passengers? Or gay harrassers bothering members of their own sex? And lastly, it also makes the assumption that the only (or the only important) kind of unwanted attention one is likely to encounter on trains is of a sexual nature. What about pickpockets? Or muggers? Or chuggers? Or people who are just loud and abusive and verbally (or physically) aggressive, but not in a sexual way? Shouldn’t everyone, regardless of their gender, be protected from people like those by higher levels of rail staff patrolling trains and slinging such people off at the next station (or, preferably, before the next station!)? To be honest, I’d feel far less safe in a “women only” carriage into which a bunch of abusive teenage girls entered than I would in a mixed carriage where, in the event of a male-on-female assault of any kind, there are a good handful of male onlookers around who can (and I am sure, would) step in and – err – explain to said harasser the error of his ways …
Yes, indeed.
Yup, that too.
I am old enough to remember the Ladies Only compartments – not carriages – and waiting rooms. My understanding at the time was that their primary purpose was to accommodate nursing mothers who might have to feed their child during a journey and who, in those far off and different days, would have wished for a certain privacy to do so.