'Sending females by rail': the history of women-only carriages

First topic message reminder :

Why a well-intentioned move would create more problems than it would solve.

In 1977 British Railways abolished a railway institution 132 years old: ladies-only train accommodation. With sex offences rising by 32 per cent on London's tube and train network to record levels last year, Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn this week proposed a consultation on having women-only carriages on the London Underground after 10pm. While well intentioned, history suggests that these would create more problems than they would solve.

In the 19th century the ladies-only carriage was a reflection of the gender-segregation of Victorian public life and the lack of autonomy women often had within it (an 1862 guide to using the railways had a section entitled 'sending females' by rail, which rather demonstrates popular attitudes). They were also a reaction against numerous and recurring cases of sexual assault. British carriages were usually divided into compartments from which escape in an emergency was difficult. Before 1868 emergency cords were not legally required, and thereafter frequently malfunctioned. Consequently, female passengers could be at risk of serious assault with little prospect of help.

The most infamous incident occurred in 1875. Colonel Valentine Baker was a noted army officer, brother of explorer Samuel Baker, and friend of the Prince of Wales. He was also a sexual predator. While sat in a first-class compartment with 22 year old Rebecca Dickinson, Baker indecently assaulted her. Dickinson, unable to raise the alarm, climbed out of the window of the moving train, remaining half outside and half inside as Baker clung on to her, travelling for five miles until the train stopped at the next station. Baker was arrested and charged with indecent assault, dismissed from the army, and publicly disgraced. Dickinson was largely physically unharmed, but in other incidents women suffered serious injuries or death. In the wake of these there were widespread demands for separate ladies-only accommodation to prevent attacks from happening.

However, demands usually came from paternalistic middle-class men, not women. An 1896 correspondent calling himself 'Paterfamilias' explained that 'scarcely a week passes without one's reading of some more or less horrible outrage on the railway, and it should be the spontaneous act of every company to provide reserved accommodation by every train and for every class of carriage.' But among women the accommodation was strikingly unpopular. In 1888 only 248 of 1,060 ladies-only seats in a given period on the Great Western were used, with 5,141 women travelling in smoking compartments instead. The London, Tilbury & Southend ran all their trains between 1877 and 1882 with 'women and children only' compartments, but removed them due to unpopularity. The majority of companies had abolished permanent ladies-only accommodation; instead female passengers could request a compartment be designated Ladies-only. But requests were rare. Despite demands following each 'outrage', women simply didn't want the accommodation.

This low use had multiple causes. Families competed for space with single women, many of whom did not want to share with children. One correspondent explained 'women are, as a rule, very fond of their own children, but I for one draw the line at other people's children […] when they behave like little monsters.' The compartments became associated with stereotypical old-fashioned spinsters, with young women especially avoiding them. Safety concerns remained. Most women preferred to travel in standard accommodation with a few other people than alone in ladies-only, where male attackers could and did still gain entry.

The compartments also generated a discourse that the modern reader would consider 'victim blaming'. An 1875 newspaper promoting Ladies-only argued 'It is incumbent upon the gentler sex not to lay themselves open to the gibes and sneers of the vulgar upon such a point as this, and the sooner they do so the better, or they will be the victims of retaliation.' In short, travel in a ladies-only carriage or you deserve what you get. This kind of attitude is utterly unacceptable today, but ladies-only carriages act to reinforce it. Emphasis is placed upon potential victims to avoid assault rather than dealing with the cause of the problem, a regular criticism of ladies-only carriages in operation in other countries.

Ladies-only also became the target of ire for male passengers, annoyed at having to squeeze into overcrowded carriages when the Ladies-only were empty. The Metropolitan abandoned Ladies-only after a year because of male complaints. Other men began to demand full gender segregation, with one correspondent arguing 'Men mostly travel in silence; women […] talk almost incessantly. In the name of humanity let them have carriages reserved to themselves, but also let us men have carriages reserved to ourselves.' While Ladies-only was intended to provide a refuge for women, the result was the actions of female passengers came under scrutiny, with many women reporting hostile reactions from male passengers when they tried to travel in other parts of the train.

The solution was to open up trains. The tube railways, with their open carriages and numerous staff, encouraged a safer environment in which gender separation was considered unnecessary. The continuance of compartment carriages meant ladies-only survived on the railways for a considerable time, but today, with compartments abolished, the prime reason for their existence is gone. Instead, the last two centuries suggest that sexual harassment is better targeted by a larger staff presence, open trains (such as the new walk-through trains on the Metropolitan), CCTV to identify suspects, and the strong prosecution of offenders. With congestion appearing to be a prime cause of harassment by allowing offenders a degree of anonymity in the rush hour crowds, a movement towards larger trains and more regular services is also likely to help.

There is no doubt that sexual harassment remains a serious issue on Britain's railways, but women-only carriages are unlikely to prove a 'silver bullet' and probably counterproductive. As Funny Folks reported on the end of Ladies-only on the Metropolitan in 1875, 'It would not do; the 'ladies only' compartments had to be given up to 'the mixture as before;' and man – proud man, got a lesson in the difficulties of legislating in the interests of the fair sex!'

Simon Abernethy is a historian at Cambridge looking at social class, gender, and public transport in London.

- See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/simon-abernethy/sending-females-rail-history-women-only-carriages#sthash.UiZyDdJ9.dpuf

feelthelove wrote:

sassy wrote:

See, I said intelligent company, the dog, because you are the dimmiest arsehole I normally come across.  I have come across others, but only in 'special' places.  My grandaughter who has celebral palsy has more gumption and brains than you.

What do you mean by "special" places?

So much bias, so many insults. "Special places" ? What does that mean?

Do you not think you are being disrespectful of those with disabilities?

feelthelove wrote:

feelthelove wrote:

What do you mean by "special" places?

So much bias, so many insults. "Special places" ? What does that mean?

Do you not think you are being disrespectful of those with disabilities?

I guess what you post can be as low and disgusting as you like  It matters only who the post is to.

I wonder what the reaction would have been had this comment been made to anyone else, particularly posters who have relatives with disabilities.  

I can almost hear the calls of discrimination and disgust drums from here.  Pathetic.

I dislike that word in the context it's used anyway.

Raggamuffin wrote:I dislike that word in the context it's used anyway.

Me too Raggs.  It's a derogatory term used in such a way and to me is as disrespectful and as unacceptable as any racist or sexist comment  

feelthelove wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I dislike that word in the context it's used anyway.

Me too Raggs.  It's a derogatory term used in such a way and to me is as disrespectful and as unacceptable as any racist or sexist comment  

Well it didn't start off as derogatory did it? It was used to replace other words which had become derogatory. It's like "care in the community" or "learning difficulties". All these words and phrases get misused in the end.

Besides, the word "special" was used a lot when I was young, and it meant something very different to "special needs". I just think that people are trying to be PC and failing.

Raggamuffin wrote:

feelthelove wrote:

Me too Raggs.  It's a derogatory term used in such a way and to me is as disrespectful and as unacceptable as any racist or sexist comment  

Well it didn't start off as derogatory did it? It was used to replace other words which had become derogatory. It's like "care in the community" or "learning difficulties". All these words and phrases get misused in the end.

Besides, the word "special" was used a lot when I was young, and it meant something very different to "special needs". I just think that people are trying to be PC and failing.

I personally don't see saying someone has special needs as being derogatory.  Calling someone "special" in a negative way is discriminating and disrespectful.  

The way the term has been used here has been as an insult to someone who clearly isn't someone with from a "special place".  

"Special places" died out thankfully years ago when people realised that people with learning issues and mental health problems needed help not prejudice, locking up or painful so called "therapy"

Well, well, well, and that's a big hole you have dug for yourself.  So - you didn't come on to have a go at me, it was all about the context of the word 'special'.  The fact is, I said 'special places'.  Now that could have been a mental asylum or it could have been something else.  But it's rather beside the point as you never said anything about this (with apologies to Nems and Eddie for quoting them, but it's relevant):

Nems wrote:

eddie wrote:

Nems wrote:

You are your own special creation xxxx

Thank nems xx

Erm unless by special you mean......"special"

Lol spelt speshul!

I'm often told I'm an old soul

At least I think that's what they said!



Now, if you were really indignant about the word you would have said something about that, so your hypocrisy is right up there.

Make sure you don't drown in the syrup you use to disguise the bovver boots you wear.  Now I'm putting you permanently on ignore, because your nasty little games are so see through and you are not going to do it to me again.  I've moved on with my life and your games have absolutely no interest for me.  You would have thought after over two years you would have as well, but something runs very deep in you, and it's not nice and it's not sweet, contrary to the persona you like to portray.

Now can I suggest, putting it very politely, you seek you pleasures elsewhere, there is another way of putting that, but I'll leave you to work it out.

feelthelove wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well it didn't start off as derogatory did it? It was used to replace other words which had become derogatory. It's like "care in the community" or "learning difficulties". All these words and phrases get misused in the end.

Besides, the word "special" was used a lot when I was young, and it meant something very different to "special needs". I just think that people are trying to be PC and failing.

I personally don't see saying someone has special needs as being derogatory.  Calling someone "special" in a negative way is discriminating and disrespectful.  

The way the term has been used here has been as an insult to someone who clearly isn't someone with from a "special place".  

"Special places" died out thankfully years ago when people realised that people with learning issues and mental health problems needed help not prejudice, locking up or painful so called "therapy"

I didn't say that "special needs" is derogatory, I said that it was overly PC - in an attempt to stop people using other derogatory words or phrases. It doesn't work though, and it sounds a bit silly to me tbh.

I have to be honest, when I used the word special in that quoted post, I meant special as in "a bit weird" which people have said about me a lot!

As to sassy's comment, if I'd given it any thought at all, (I had to go back and re-read it) when she said "special places" I thought she meant places where there are certain types of people she thinks of as special?

I agree with rags anyway; I get a bit frustrated by PC - I sometimes don't know what's horrible and what's not!
My other half and I call each other some things that are meant as jokes - others perhaps, would find them offensive!

I loath PC with a passion.  My grandaughter has celebral palsy, I think she's very 'special'.  In fact, she's the funniest girl I know.

Support the union in calling for more staff and less cuts to make it safer for all.
It's the right way.

Irn Bru wrote:Support the union in calling for more staff and less cuts to make it safer for all.
It's the right way.

Get rid of the Unions and then we might start to see some normality return which would bring guards back.

Wow I feel this is a bit my fault, I called Eddie her own special creation (speshul) thankfully she took it in the spirit it was intended.
As to the other posts about special places for people I think it needs to be acknowledged that FTL's point is valid. Her point is, inappropriate comments are allowed if they are aimed at Didge because lots hate him. If that special places comment was aimed at anyone else it would have been acted upon or at least commented upon.
Fact is only FTL commented on it. What does that show? That she is her own person and will post what she honestly feels, isn't that what we all claim we do?
Im not speaking for her she is capable of speaking for herself but I will say this, FTL is the last person that should be accused of playing games on a forum, especially when her accuser is just coming off being found to be trying to get online acquaintances to join here to shout down Didge. If that isn't the epitome of game playing then I don't know what is.

Nems wrote:Wow I feel this is a bit my fault, I called Eddie her own special creation (speshul) thankfully she took it in the spirit it was intended.
As to the other posts about special places for people I think it needs to be acknowledged that FTL's point is valid. Her point is, inappropriate comments are allowed if they are aimed at Didge because lots hate him. If that special places comment was aimed at anyone else it would have been acted upon or at least commented upon.
Fact is only FTL commented on it. What does that show? That she is her own person and will post what she honestly feels, isn't that what we all claim we do?
Im not speaking for her she is capable of speaking for herself but I will say this, FTL is the last person that should be accused of playing games on a forum, especially when her accuser is just coming off being found to be trying to get online acquaintances to join here to shout down Didge. If that isn't the epitome of game playing then I don't know what is.

Wow so its okay if posters hate someone to make such vile comments even though you yourself jump on comments made by others, proving you are again nothing more than a hypocrite out to cause as much trouble as possible.
Sassy as per usual plays the victim card as is she is the only one who has relatives that suffer from conditions.
Its pathetic and even further pathetic you try to excuse off hating people as if that makes something okay to make such comments.
That has to be the most illogical and contradictive view point you have ever made, further proving your hypocrisy.
Why anyone would hate when we are just posters on a thread is daft.
I do not even hate you or Sassy. I Just think you are immature idiots with playground mentality and your imput towards threads is at best poor.
At least FTL is impartial where as seen you are that pathetic, if you hate me, lol I find that amusing, where to me you are just insignificant as are some other posters here, but hate? blimey, get a life love, where I have no need to hate you.

SDeriously Nems you have plenty of growing up to do

"Support the UNIONS" is your brain addled? they'r the ones who nearly brought the country down in the seventies with there endless strikes mostly because union leaders had commies in their ranks. I suppose you support the Unite leaders now who are leading the sheep to their commie utopia?

Cuchulain wrote:

Nems wrote:Wow I feel this is a bit my fault, I called Eddie her own special creation (speshul) thankfully she took it in the spirit it was intended.
As to the other posts about special places for people I think it needs to be acknowledged that FTL's point is valid. Her point is, inappropriate comments are allowed if they are aimed at Didge because lots hate him. If that special places comment was aimed at anyone else it would have been acted upon or at least commented upon.
Fact is only FTL commented on it. What does that show? That she is her own person and will post what she honestly feels, isn't that what we all claim we do?
Im not speaking for her she is capable of speaking for herself but I will say this, FTL is the last person that should be accused of playing games on a forum, especially when her accuser is just coming off being found to be trying to get online acquaintances to join here to shout down Didge. If that isn't the epitome of game playing then I don't know what is.

Wow so its okay if posters hate someone to make such vile comments even though you yourself jump on comments made by others, proving you are again nothing more than a hypocrite out to cause as much trouble as possible.
Sassy as per usual plays the victim card as is she is the only one who has relatives that suffer from conditions.
Its pathetic and even further pathetic you try to excuse off hating people as if that makes something okay to make such comments.
That has to be the most illogical and contradictive view point you have ever made, further proving your hypocrisy.
Why anyone would hate when we are just posters on a thread is daft.
I do not even hate you or Sassy. I Just think you are immature idiots with playground mentality and your imput towards threads is at best poor.
At least FTL is impartial where as seen you are that pathetic, if you hate me, lol I find that amusing, where to me you are just insignificant as are some other posters here, but hate? blimey, get a life love, where I have no need to hate you.

SDeriously Nems you have plenty of growing up to do

Didge you baffle me, honestly you do. I refuse to believe you are that thick, so you must be trying to wind me up. Jog on as they say

nicko wrote:"Support the UNIONS"  is your brain addled?     they'r the ones who nearly brought the country down in the seventies with there endless strikes mostly because union leaders had commies in their ranks.  I suppose you support the Unite leaders now who are leading the sheep to their commie utopia?  

Well said nicko
In over 20 years have they brought about bringing guards on trains and tubes back even under Labour Governements?
No
Union leaders care only for themselves as they always have done. They are not fit for purpose.

eddie wrote:I have to be honest, when I used the word special in that quoted post, I meant special as in "a bit weird" which people have said about me a lot!

As to sassy's comment, if I'd given it any thought at all, (I had to go back and re-read it) when she said "special places" I thought she meant places where there are certain types of people she thinks of as special?

I agree with rags anyway; I get a bit frustrated by PC - I sometimes don't know what's horrible and what's not!
My other half and I call each other some things that are meant as jokes - others perhaps, would find them offensive!

It's not that per se, it's the way people keep coming up with new words or phrases in order to make the old "offensive" words or phrases obsolete. It's a waste of time because it's not the words which are the problem, it's the way they're used.

I personally dislike the phrase "special needs" - it just sounds stupid to me. I don't know about "special places" - to me that means somewhere with a special meaning for someone.

Nems wrote:Wow I feel this is a bit my fault, I called Eddie her own special creation (speshul) thankfully she took it in the spirit it was intended.
As to the other posts about special places for people I think it needs to be acknowledged that FTL's point is valid. Her point is, inappropriate comments are allowed if they are aimed at Didge because lots hate him. If that special places comment was aimed at anyone else it would have been acted upon or at least commented upon.
Fact is only FTL commented on it. What does that show? That she is her own person and will post what she honestly feels, isn't that what we all claim we do?
Im not speaking for her she is capable of speaking for herself but I will say this, FTL is the last person that should be accused of playing games on a forum, especially when her accuser is just coming off being found to be trying to get online acquaintances to join here to shout down Didge. If that isn't the epitome of game playing then I don't know what is.

Nobody would have reported that post or have had any reason to.

Shout down?  No - inform.  I invited an Israeli to come and counter him, in fact I often invite people for all kinds of reasons to grow the forum and get more views.  And I not going to comment again about FTL, she's not worth it.

sassy wrote:

Nems wrote:Wow I feel this is a bit my fault, I called Eddie her own special creation (speshul) thankfully she took it in the spirit it was intended.
As to the other posts about special places for people I think it needs to be acknowledged that FTL's point is valid. Her point is, inappropriate comments are allowed if they are aimed at Didge because lots hate him. If that special places comment was aimed at anyone else it would have been acted upon or at least commented upon.
Fact is only FTL commented on it. What does that show? That she is her own person and will post what she honestly feels, isn't that what we all claim we do?
Im not speaking for her she is capable of speaking for herself but I will say this, FTL is the last person that should be accused of playing games on a forum, especially when her accuser is just coming off being found to be trying to get online acquaintances to join here to shout down Didge. If that isn't the epitome of game playing then I don't know what is.

Nobody would have reported that post or have had any reason to.

Shout down?  No - inform.  I invited an Israeli to come and counter him, in fact I often invite people for all kinds of reasons to grow the forum and get more views.  And I not going to comment again about FTL, she's not worth it.

Come off it Sassy! We all saw the tweets you were specifically wanting people to come here because of Didge. You know as well as I do if you told Didge grass is green he would disagree for the sake of it, so good luck with trying to inform him on anything.
Im not getting into arguing with you over FTL because you know that calling her a game player is unfair. Kettle pot and black and all that!

Blimey I do not have even to be imvolved and I am centre of attention for the girlies

Hee hee.

Just for the record Nems, I unlike many people can admit when wrong, you are just too easy to wind up and bite easily, as you did earlier. Lets face facts, how many minds have been changed by people giving views? I have changed views though, so what does that tell you? That actually I do listen to some people, like Victor for example, I listen to Eilzel, Quill, Ben, FTL and others. We are all guilty of getting wound up, but if anyone is innocent here it is FTL.

She like Cass are the most impartial posters on here.

FTL is innocent of any wrongs.

Cuchulain wrote:Blimey I do not have even to be imvolved and I am centre of attention for the girlies

Hee hee.

Just for the record Nems, I unlike many people can admit when wrong, you are just too easy to wind up and bite easily, as you did earlier. Lets face facts, how many minds have been changed by people giving views? I have changed views though, so what does that tell you? That actually I do listen to some people, like Victor for example, I listen to Eilzel, Quill, Ben, FTL and others. We are all guilty of getting wound up, but if anyone is innocent here it is FTL.

She like Cass are the most impartial posters on here.

FTL is innocent of any wrongs.

Yes Didge I know she is that's why I said so
I try to ignore you but you are so irritating

FTL did keep on about Sassy's post though.

Nems wrote:

sassy wrote:


Nobody would have reported that post or have had any reason to.

Shout down?  No - inform.  I invited an Israeli to come and counter him, in fact I often invite people for all kinds of reasons to grow the forum and get more views.  And I not going to comment again about FTL, she's not worth it.

Come off it Sassy! We all saw the tweets you were specifically wanting people to come here because of Didge. You know as well as I do if you told Didge grass is green he would disagree for the sake of it, so good luck with trying to inform him on anything.
Im  not getting into arguing with you over FTL because you know that calling her a game player is unfair. Kettle pot and black and all that!

I asked one person with regard to didge because of Israel and my tweets, which I put on here, show that.

And I am not being drawn in to discussing FTL

Was FTL here when that business about the word "retard" was going on?

Nems wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:Blimey I do not have even to be imvolved and I am centre of attention for the girlies

Hee hee.

Just for the record Nems, I unlike many people can admit when wrong, you are just too easy to wind up and bite easily, as you did earlier. Lets face facts, how many minds have been changed by people giving views? I have changed views though, so what does that tell you? That actually I do listen to some people, like Victor for example, I listen to Eilzel, Quill, Ben, FTL and others. We are all guilty of getting wound up, but if anyone is innocent here it is FTL.

She like Cass are the most impartial posters on here.

FTL is innocent of any wrongs.

Yes Didge I know she is that's why I said so
I try to ignore you but you are so irritating

Nah, you adore me really.

Cuchulain wrote:

Nems wrote:

Yes Didge I know she is that's why I said so
I try to ignore you but you are so irritating

Nah, you adore me really.

FFS that made me laugh Didge!

What happened to Cass by the way?

nicko wrote:What happened to Cass by the way?

She is fine. Not online much at the moment. She has been busy

She's busy reading all the books she borrowed from the Library.

Raggamuffin wrote:Was FTL here when that business about the word "retard" was going on?

Don't think so, what happened? Retard, spastic, "special", spaz, limp wristed, gay all those terms are not acceptable insults

feelthelove wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Was FTL here when that business about the word "retard" was going on?

Don't think so, what happened? Retard, spastic, "special", spaz, limp wristed, gay all those terms are not acceptable insults

It's just that Didge objected to the word, and then someone found some posts where Didge had used the word himself.

I truly did not remember using, but I do for one hate it being used and why it makes it even worse that I did use.

"These female only carriages can get sooo crowded"



Sorry ......the devil in me made me do it.....

victorismyhero wrote:


"These female only carriages can get sooo crowded"



Sorry ......the devil in me made me do it.....

What a load of old bull

are you insinuating I'm talking bullocks?

victorismyhero wrote:are you insinuating I'm talking bullocks?

Nah, you were just taking the bull by the horns lol