Turn on thread page Beta

Should London underground implement women's only coach? watch

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    Course not. I've written posts longer than yours, I just refuse to get into an argument with a silly pud about this stupidness. You need to calm down, it's not that serious. You're acting like you're getting groped. Ah...the things people e-agree with and advocate for reps :daydreaming:
    what is your obsesh with people trying to get reps?

    seriously who the **** gives a **** about reps?

    you're right though, this is just some ****ty forum for people who are basically you.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    well...once there's a...a ...female...only coach then....inevitably..there...will be a ...male's only coach... so....yea...
    how?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForgetMe)
    Why not just divide everything into several groups, e.g. buses for men, women, trans only; shops for each gender only; everything for each gender only. We should make cities, towns, countries for each gender only too.
    You wait all day for a bus and then a trans one, a boys' one and a girls' one come along at once!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eternallyapril)
    Groping is most certainly a problem.
    I knew someone would wilfully misinterpret: OK, groping on the train is not endemic. When it happens it's a problem but it happens rarely, I'd say, or at least nowhere near as much as those countries, like Japan, which have had to institute women-only coaches. Happy?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I wouldnt mind
    As i will be the only guy who would go on the female only carriage to get their digits:cool:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    Tl; dr.


    When did I say anything for anyone or any women? I literally only said "aint nuthin wrong wit a lil gropin" and put a smiley. Clearly it was dark humour/sarcasm. They can be both, who do you think you are again? Oh, on a rep quest. Have at it then, pal.
    'Oh come on, folks, it's just a lil bit uh ass grabbin'
    Implying that others should agree, or stop complaining. o.o If you were being sarcastic, you'd be implying you agree it's a problem, which from your replies to this thread you clearly don't.

    People don't like being touched, ha ha. Bless 'em. Dude you're just insulting me for no apparent reason.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    cheers mate should be revising though :/
    This so much tho
    I am procrastinating so hard
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maid Marian)
    But then we'll have a whole fuss about which carriage transexuals go into.
    Why would there be? First of all, the term is transgender and NOT transsexual, and furthermore, that's a particularly demeaning way to refer to us - you wouldn't say "blacks", you'd say black people. Similarly, you would say trans people and not "transexuals".
    I digress. There would be no fuss. Trans women would go in the women-only carriage, if they so desired. Why would there be a fuss? Maybe you could explain for me.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by supreme overlord)
    'Oh come on, folks, it's just a lil bit uh ass grabbin'
    Implying that others should agree, or stop complaining. o.o If you were being sarcastic, you'd be implying you agree it's a problem, which from your replies to this thread you clearly don't.

    People don't like being touched, ha ha. Bless 'em. Dude you're just insulting me for no apparent reason.
    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    what is your obsesh with people trying to get reps?

    seriously who the **** gives a **** about reps?

    you're right though, this is just some ****ty forum for people who are basically you.
    :yawn:

    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    how?
    SIGH. Seriously? If they make a women's only coach, picture in your little brain women all subsequently in one coach. Thus...men...will all be...in another, exclusively. :damnmate:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    well...once there's a...a ...female...only coach then....inevitably..there...will be a ...male's only coach... so....yea...
    "once there's a female only coach"

    There won't be.

    Mixed coach + female only coach (at specific times in the day)

    That's how it works in Japan, so it wouldn't be inevitable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by supreme overlord)
    This so much tho
    I am procrastinating so hard
    literally exam on monday, exam on wednesday. i'm surrounded by paper and books and coffee and I'm here promoting feminism like it's my job and I'm a ****ing white male for ****s sake. I mean, that should have no bearing on it but still, I just laugh. Who the **** do I think I am :')

    but still. you seem cool.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    SIGH. Seriously? If they make a women's only coach, picture in your little brain women all subsequently in one coach. Thus...men...will all be...in another, exclusively. :damnmate:
    so you think that all women would go to the women's only coach? what if I'm on the tube with bae? is she going to go to the women's only coach without me?

    who's the one with the little brain?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    :yawn:



    SIGH. Seriously? If they make a women's only coach, picture in your little brain women all subsequently in one coach. Thus...men...will all be...in another, exclusively. :damnmate:
    Wrong.

    Not all women would go in the women only coach.

    Is it hard for you to picture in your little brain that there are families who use trains?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EatAndRevise)
    Wrong.

    Not all women would go in the women only coach.

    Is it hard for you to picture in your little brain that there are families who use trains?
    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    so you think that all women would go to the women's only coach? what if I'm on the tube with bae? is she going to go to the women's only coach without me?

    who's the one with the little brain?
    What kind of women's only coach is that then? No one said there was a choice. One would naturally assume that women's only would mean women are mandated to use it. Now this conversation has become even more pointless. If there's a carriage exclusively for women like the VIP section of a tube, whilst they still pointlessly can wander into any other carriage, then someone should have said that, because I certainly didn't fathom something so asinine. I'm glad you guys did.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Well the way that our society works now is that we don't ''officially'' give people privileges or cause them to be disadvantaged based on their gender, sexuality, age, race, religion, physical ability etc, no - we just give people privileges or cause them to be disadvantaged based on how much money they have. How progressive of us! /sarcasm

    So the only 'solution' to overcrowding that is actually realistic within a society which favors the rich, would be for the tube to just do what train companies do and have 1st class carriages = paying extra for personal space. I personally would rather that didn't happen but I'm surprised that it hasn't been implemented on the tube because they could, if they wanted, charge really extortionate rates for first class seats, rake in a lot of money and cram more in cattle class.

    No one is going to give you extra space based on anything other than how much money you have.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    What kind of women's only coach is that then? No one said there was a choice. One would naturally assume that women's only would mean women are mandated to use it. Now this conversation has become even more pointless. If there's a carriage exclusively for women like the VIP section of a tube, whilst they still pointlessly can wander into any other carriage, then someone should have said that, because I certainly didn't fathom something so asinine. I'm glad you guys did.
    my god you're thick.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    What kind of women's only coach is that then? No one said there was a choice. One would naturally assume that women's only would mean women are mandated to use it. Now this conversation has become even more pointless. If there's a carriage exclusively for women like the VIP section of a tube, whilst they still pointlessly can wander into any other carriage, then someone should have said that, because I certainly didn't fathom something so asinine. I'm glad you guys did.
    (Original post by Feline_Nymphet)
    One would naturally assume that women's only would mean women are mandated to use it.
    Why would anyone assume that? That would be even more ridiculous than having a women-only coach. You seriously can't fathom that families use trains?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    my god you're thick.
    Well then share this endless knowledge of yours with the rest of the class so we can all be on your level. OP nor did anyone else ever specify that the women's only coach was an option. I figured it was segregating women from men. Now if it has selectively become, for the sake of winning an e-argument, an option and not mandated segregation...you need to clarify that.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrinceOfOrange)
    kill all men would be easier and cheaper imo
    I agree.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poohat)
    Only if we can have white-people only coaches/areas too. Either statistical discrimination is justified, or it isnt.

    The vast majority of men do not grope women - yes some do, but most don't. If the existence of a small minority justifies segregation then "white people only" areas seems like an appropriate response to the fact that (eg) black people commit much, much more crime on average, even if most black people are not criminals.

    It would actually be interesting to see the racial breakdown of Underground gropers - for example, certain non-white groups are far more likely to engage in street harassment/cat-calling even if the media usually tries to avoid mentioning this uncomfortable fact whenever the issue comes up.
    Firstly, I would love to see the statistics for each point you made.
    Secondly, you contradicted yourself. You say it is not right to make a "vast majority" based on a "small minority", namely men, yet you proceed to make a gross generalisation of black people based on nothing more than your ignorance and further stereotype all "non-white groups". Unless you have witnessed every case of harassment and cat-calling and have witnessed every single crime committed to make an accurate judgement, I suggest you sit the **** down.
 
 
 

2,684

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.