A room of one’s own: sex segregation on public transit
Some
of the readings in this class have dealt with the attempt to make
transportation safer by separating different users: freeways for cars only, or
cul-de-sacs that prevent through traffic, or one road with separate lanes for
every mode. Each form of separation has unforeseen consequences: freeways have
cut through neighborhoods, cul-de-sacs force pedestrians onto unsafe roads, and
even separate lanes (or so it is argued) shift our regard away from one
another.
I’ve been wondering if there’s a philosophical similarity between mode separation and separation of the sexes. The latter may generally be a patriarchal practice, but it also has specific and important benefits for women trying to avoid male violence or voyeurism – and it keeps coming up in public transportation policy.
When rail travel became popular in Victorian England, the enclosed cars on a moving vehicle created a specific kind of dangerous environment. Concerned women successfully sought compartments of their own to avoid sexual harassment and assault.
They seem to have been the minority of female passengers, most of whom used other cars. By the time the last “ladies only” compartment was discontinued in 1977, there wasn’t much perceived need for it. But there was still sexual harassment and assault on public transportation. In 2017, the British Transport Police received 2,382 reports of sexual offenses on rail lines (including the London Underground).
As a result, Labour Party politicians have repeatedly revived the idea of women-only cars in the last few years. They’re looking to countries like India and Japan, where women use these cars heavily. Current users say they provide a sense of ease and security. Whether this type of policy would reduce the total number of assaults in the UK or US is difficult to say with the kind of data that’s available. And in a way, it doesn’t actually matter, because perception is more important than data when people are making decisions about their security.
One perception-based argument for sex segregation is that it might enable more women to ride transit more often; another is that women engage more with experiences when they feel safe. If you have your face stuck in your phone and headphones on purely to avoid unwanted attention, you miss out on a lot.
One argument against is that, even as women in their own spaces build their own capacity, men in their own spaces are also building solidarity. Current such systems only identify women-only cars; all other cars are mixed -- but if enough women did depart for their own cars, would remaining spaces turn into a version of the ‘men’s locker room’? Another argument against is that it would normalize sex segregation in a way that could be detrimental to integration in the workplace and other public spaces.
I think this is at least superficially similar to the pros and cons of separating drivers and cyclists. People are more likely to ride bikes if they feel safe doing so, and they tend to feel safer in protected lanes or separated paths. On the other hand, the argument goes, why should cyclists cede any roadways to cars? And don’t freeways foster driving behaviors that translate very poorly into mixed-mode spaces?
I don’t have a clear answer to any of these questions. But I do think that the only just solutions possible are those that prioritize the most vulnerable users, whether we’re talking about transit or road lanes, sex or mode or any of the other ways that people can be hazards to one another in this most essential of daily activities.
(Edited by Kate Wihtol.)
References
“100 Women: Are journeys safer with women-only carriages?” BBC News. October 17, 2017. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-41603115
Dumbaugh, Eric, and Robert Rae. “Safe Urban Form: Revisiting the Relationship Between Community Design and Traffic Safety.” Journal of the American Planning Association 75(3), Summer 2009: 309-329.
Kelly, Jon. “The era of ‘ladies only’ train compartments.” BBC News Magazine. August 26, 2015. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34061094
McCarthy, Julie. “On India's Trains, Seeking Safety In The Women's Compartment.” NPR. March 28, 2018. https://www.npr.org/2013/03/28/175471907/on-indias-trains-seeking-safety-in-the-women-s-compartmen
Topham, Gwyn. “Sexual offences on UK railways more than double in five years.” The Guardian. March 12, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/12/sexual-offences-uk-railways-more-than-double-five-years
I’ve been wondering if there’s a philosophical similarity between mode separation and separation of the sexes. The latter may generally be a patriarchal practice, but it also has specific and important benefits for women trying to avoid male violence or voyeurism – and it keeps coming up in public transportation policy.
When rail travel became popular in Victorian England, the enclosed cars on a moving vehicle created a specific kind of dangerous environment. Concerned women successfully sought compartments of their own to avoid sexual harassment and assault.
They seem to have been the minority of female passengers, most of whom used other cars. By the time the last “ladies only” compartment was discontinued in 1977, there wasn’t much perceived need for it. But there was still sexual harassment and assault on public transportation. In 2017, the British Transport Police received 2,382 reports of sexual offenses on rail lines (including the London Underground).
As a result, Labour Party politicians have repeatedly revived the idea of women-only cars in the last few years. They’re looking to countries like India and Japan, where women use these cars heavily. Current users say they provide a sense of ease and security. Whether this type of policy would reduce the total number of assaults in the UK or US is difficult to say with the kind of data that’s available. And in a way, it doesn’t actually matter, because perception is more important than data when people are making decisions about their security.
One perception-based argument for sex segregation is that it might enable more women to ride transit more often; another is that women engage more with experiences when they feel safe. If you have your face stuck in your phone and headphones on purely to avoid unwanted attention, you miss out on a lot.
One argument against is that, even as women in their own spaces build their own capacity, men in their own spaces are also building solidarity. Current such systems only identify women-only cars; all other cars are mixed -- but if enough women did depart for their own cars, would remaining spaces turn into a version of the ‘men’s locker room’? Another argument against is that it would normalize sex segregation in a way that could be detrimental to integration in the workplace and other public spaces.
I think this is at least superficially similar to the pros and cons of separating drivers and cyclists. People are more likely to ride bikes if they feel safe doing so, and they tend to feel safer in protected lanes or separated paths. On the other hand, the argument goes, why should cyclists cede any roadways to cars? And don’t freeways foster driving behaviors that translate very poorly into mixed-mode spaces?
I don’t have a clear answer to any of these questions. But I do think that the only just solutions possible are those that prioritize the most vulnerable users, whether we’re talking about transit or road lanes, sex or mode or any of the other ways that people can be hazards to one another in this most essential of daily activities.
(Edited by Kate Wihtol.)
References
“100 Women: Are journeys safer with women-only carriages?” BBC News. October 17, 2017. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-41603115
Dumbaugh, Eric, and Robert Rae. “Safe Urban Form: Revisiting the Relationship Between Community Design and Traffic Safety.” Journal of the American Planning Association 75(3), Summer 2009: 309-329.
Kelly, Jon. “The era of ‘ladies only’ train compartments.” BBC News Magazine. August 26, 2015. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34061094
McCarthy, Julie. “On India's Trains, Seeking Safety In The Women's Compartment.” NPR. March 28, 2018. https://www.npr.org/2013/03/28/175471907/on-indias-trains-seeking-safety-in-the-women-s-compartmen
Topham, Gwyn. “Sexual offences on UK railways more than double in five years.” The Guardian. March 12, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/12/sexual-offences-uk-railways-more-than-double-five-years
Great post! The sex segregation comparison is perfect in this case. I think both sides on the transportation integration/separation argument make great points. I agree that priority should be given to the most vulnerable, and that's why bikes, scooters and pedestrians should have access to roadways as well as dedicated paths that exclude autos. Riding a bike in a car-less path is certainly safer, and I can't expect anyone to want to risk their life biking or walking amongst cars. On the other hand, separating autos does make drivers less aware and expecting of bikes/peds. Also, bike/ped paths are sometimes congested with slow users that make commuting on them inefficient. In these cases, roadways are very useful. Infrastructure that is exclusively for auto use (freeways) don't belong in urban areas.
ReplyDeleteAwesome post. I enjoyed the historical background given to this issue, it provided an interesting context to an often overlooked issue in public transit.
ReplyDeleteThanks! The more history we know, the less effort we can waste reinventing the wheel. Sometimes old ideas are treated as these brand-new things that have to be re-piloted and re-experienced... even though the current context isn't all that different from the past.
DeleteThis idea worked really well in Mexico City's subway. Sexual harassment and other offences have gown down. If a man is caught in a wagon he will get arrested for 25 hours or get a ticket between $80 to $150 (USD). I understand concerns that segregating subway carts may lead to people thinking that sex-aggregation on other areas such as the workplace is ok; however, I do not think this is going to be a problem. People are smart enough to know that sex segregation is not acceptable in the workplace while it is acceptable in the subway. I understand that this measure doesn't tackle the roots of the problem mainly sexism and a sense of male entitlement over women's bodies but these issues are complex and take years to dismantle. In the meantime sex segregation in the subway sounds like a common sense measure that protects women and female children.
ReplyDelete