Jeremy Corbyn might actually win?

[baron]

This political correctness is to me a real worry, we need to be able examine all ideas not knee jerk a "no" because something doesn't fit in with our ideals.

I'm more against political correctness than most, and this is certainly not it.

Actually it isn't. If it was akin to that it would be suggesting women not be allowed on public transport.

It wouldn't at all. Segregation is not banning. Women are not banned from the streets of Islamic countries but frequently they are required to keep a distance from males and not to 'provoke' them by revealing even a square inch of flesh. A very fitting analogy. On the trains women apparently provoke crime by their presence and therefore need to be removed.

This idea is to deal with an apparently serious problem that actually exists. Is it an ideal solution of course not but for me the test would be will it work whilst we try to tackle the problems in other ways?

I'm open to it being discussed and if it can be shown to work then why would I oppose it?

Nobody has answered my question yet. Being that there is also a problem of racism on public transport, why is nobody proposing national discussion of Ethnics Only carriages*. We could have a sign like this:

<--- WHITES BLACKS --->

There's no difference at all between the two concepts, they are both posing indirect restrictions on the victims instead of the perpetrators and they are both implicitly assigning guilt to the victim if they choose not to be segregated and are then attacked or abused. "What did they expect? They should have been on the Blacks Only train."



* And yes, I'm aware racism can be against whites too but I'm addressing the majority issue on public transport.

 

[baron]

As I've already said, there is a gym near me that is open only to women.

It is legal, under various clauses such as reasonable objection. It's nebulous and I suppose such gyms are open to legal challenges, but really who's going to bother? My mate's owned such a gym for years and has never had a complaint.

 

[3point14]

I'm more against political correctness than most, and this is certainly not it.



It wouldn't at all. Segregation is not banning. Women are not banned from the streets of Islamic countries but frequently they are required to keep a distance from males and not to 'provoke' them by revealing even a square inch of flesh. A very fitting analogy. On the trains women apparently provoke crime by their presence and therefore need to be removed.



Nobody has answered my question yet. Being that there is also a problem of racism on public transport, why is nobody proposing national discussion of Ethnics Only carriages*. We could have a sign like this:

<--- WHITES BLACKS --->

There's no difference at all between the two concepts, they are both posing indirect restrictions on the victims instead of the perpetrators and they are both implicitly assigning guilt to the victim if they choose not to be segregated and are then attacked or abused. "What did they expect? They should have been on the Blacks Only train."



* And yes, I'm aware racism can be against whites too but I'm addressing the majority issue on public transport.

Does it make a difference that it's not comulsory?

 

[Craig B]

As I've already said, there is a gym near me that is open only to women.

There are exceptions to the principle I've stated. But the issue is NOT: this is a private business, so the government has no business interfering. The only issue is maximum profit.

But I agree, things like public toilets, sleeping accommodation in hostels and such like can be segregated by sex. It may be that gyms fall into that category; but check it out, if you think you should. Perhaps the law is being breached.

 

[baron]

Does it make a difference that it's not comulsory?

As I said, there would be significant pressure for women to use the women-only carriages to avoid apportionment of blame in the event of an incident.

 

[3point14]

As I said, there would be significant pressure for women to use the women-only carriages to avoid apportionment of blame in the event of an incident.

There would? Can you demonstrate that?

 

[baron]

There would? Can you demonstrate that?

Seriously? You've never heard of movements such as SlutWalk, that protest about the blame shunted onto female rape victims because 'they brought it on themselves'? Same thing here. Women would be seen to be complicit in crimes against them by reason of them choosing not to adopt restrictions.

Now answer the question I've asked several times. Would you be happy for Blacks Only carriages to combat racism?

 

[Craig B]

Women would be seen to be complicit in crimes against them by reason of them choosing not to adopt restrictions.

They would? Can you demonstrate that?

 

[baron]

Is it Groundhog day?

 

[shuttlt]

Is it Groundhog day?

I thought when female only carriages were last available, women largely didn't use them? Is this wrong, or have things changed and they would now be under pressure to use them?

 

[Craig B]

I thought when female only carriages were last available, women largely didn't use them? Is this wrong, or have things changed and they would now be under pressure to use them?

During those times, were women accused of collusion with their attackers if they had the temerity to enter mixed carriages, and were harassed there?

 

[shuttlt]

During those times, were women accused of collusion with their attackers if they had the temerity to enter mixed carriages, and were harassed there?

I don't know, but by the look of it they didn't feel under huge pressure to use them so I assume the situation can't have been that bad.

 

[baron]

During those times, were women accused of collusion with their attackers if they had the temerity to enter mixed carriages, and were harassed there?

Are women sometimes accused of 'provoking' men into rape when they walk down the street in short skirts? No.

Oh, I mean yes.

 

[shuttlt]

Are women sometimes accused of 'provoking' men into rape when they walk down the street in short skirts? No.

Oh, I mean yes.

Lots of things sometimes happen. I had mistakenly thought that focus was on the experience of the bulk of train using women who I thought it was being implied would feel pressured to use the female only carriage and excluded from the general carriage for fear of being blamed if they were raped.

 

[Craig B]

Are women sometimes accused of 'provoking' men into rape when they walk down the street in short skirts? No.

Oh, I mean yes.

Mr Groundhog repeats

During those times, were women accused of collusion with their attackers if they had the temerity to enter mixed carriages, and were harassed there?​

 

[baron]

Lots of things sometimes happen. I had mistakenly thought that focus was on the experience of the bulk of train using women who I thought it was being implied would feel pressured to use the female only carriage and excluded from the general carriage for fear of being blamed if they were raped.

I've known several instances - not just involving women - of a person being the victim of a crime and the response of the police being, "Well, what were you doing there at that time of night?" or "If you know he's going to come out and abuse you why not walk down another street?" This is just another example of the same concept.

 

[baron]

Mr Groundhog repeats

During those times, were women accused of collusion with their attackers if they had the temerity to enter mixed carriages, and were harassed there?​

If it were Groundhog Day you'd have asked me that question, not someone else. I have no idea what the response was to women being harrassed in mixed carriages prior to 1977.

Now, for the fifth time of asking, at least once addressed to you, Are you or are you not happy to have Blacks Only carriages?

It's funny how I'm badgered to answer other poster's questions by people who refuse to answer my own.

 

[shuttlt]

I've known several instances - not just involving women - of a person being the victim of a crime and the response of the police being, "Well, what were you doing there at that time of night?" or "If you know he's going to come out and abuse you why not walk down another street?" This is just another example of the same concept.

Like I said, I thought it was being claimed that women would generally be pressured into using these female only carriages. That's not what you are saying. There is nothing to argue about.

 

[3point14]

Seriously? You've never heard of movements such as SlutWalk, that protest about the blame shunted onto female rape victims because 'they brought it on themselves'? Same thing here. Women would be seen to be complicit in crimes against them by reason of them choosing not to adopt restrictions.

Easy tiger. I'm not stating an opinion in any way, I'm just trying to establish if this is big a deal as you think it is.

I'm not sure your evidence for women being balmed for not useing the women only carriage is a strong as you think it is. I think these are different circumstances and, perhaps, things may not play out that way.

Now answer the question I've asked several times. Would you be happy for Blacks Only carriages to combat racism?

No. I'm not even going to dignify that with an answer. I'm not advocating anything, I feel no need to defend myself.

 

[Craig B]

If it were Groundhog Day you'd have asked me that question, not someone else. I have no idea what the response was to women being harrassed in mixed carriages prior to 1977.

Now, for the fifth time of asking, at least once addressed to you, Are you or are you not happy to have Blacks Only carriages?

It's funny how I'm badgered to answer other poster's questions by people who refuse to answer my own.

I do not want blacks only carriages or whites only carriages. I'm surprised you need me to state that explicitly. But I'll say it five times if you need me to do so.