Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Reproductive Justice and Gender

Are Women-Only Spaces the Solution to Sexual Harassment?

By Jessica Valenti, The Nation. Posted January 30, 2008.


Some cities are using segregated public transportation to make women safer. But instead of preventing sexism, in many ways, this trend excuses it.

Last week Mexico City unveiled women-only buses as a way to battle the increasing sexual harassment on public transportation.

Some men treat women so badly that the subway system has long had ladies-only cars during rush hour, with police segregating the sexes on the platforms.

But that hasn't helped women forced to rely on packed buses, by far the city's most-used form of public transportation -- until this week.

Acting on complaints from women's groups, the city rolled out "ladies only" buses, complete with pink signs in the windshields to wave off the men.

Pink signs, huh? I'm all for safe spaces for women, but is segregation really an answer to sexism? I've written about this trend of women-only spaces before, most recently for The Guardian, and I still fail to see how this is anything but a temporary solution to a systemic problem.

There's no doubt the harassment women face in public spaces needs to be addressed -- whether it is on the street, the train, or even the internet. We've been subjected to regular catcalls and groping for far too long. But while the idea of a safe space is compelling, this international trend -- which often comes couched in paternalistic rhetoric about "protecting" women -- raises questions of just how equal the sexes are if women's safety relies on us being separated. After all, shouldn't we be targeting the gropers and harassers? The onus should be on men to stop harassing women, not on women to escape them.

Betsy Eudey, director of gender studies at California State University, says that while some single-sex environments could be beneficial -- locker rooms where people are expected to be naked are an obvious example -- she finds that "segregated spaces only enhance division by sex, and prevent the necessary actions needed to make public spaces safe and welcoming to all."

The Nation's own Katha Pollitt, in an interview for this article, said that she doesn't think that the rise of women-only spaces will excuse society from confronting harassment and violence, but instead offer a small respite for women in a male-dominated world.

"Obviously, there would never be enough women-only space to accommodate all women all the time -- half the subway cars or half the hotels ... Women-only space is just a little breathing place for a few women every now and then."

I'm pro-breathing space, but I have larger concerns as well. What happens when a woman is groped -- or worse -- in a train car that isn't women-only? Will she be blamed for not taking advantage of the "safe" space provided? (After all, women are all too used to being blamed when it comes to assault, questioned as to why they were out on their own/wearing a short skirt/drinking).

If we're going to make women safe, let's make them safe everywhere -- not just in designated areas.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: gender, harassment

Jessica Valenti is the executive editor of Feministing.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Alternatives?
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jan 30, 2008 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point of this article is valid, but what are the alternatives?

Have you SEEN Mexico City? Changing the culture by policing would be a daunting task.

Peer pressure, from the other people standing around, seems like the only thing that would actually help. The gropers are really just thieves, cheating on the social contract. For the guy standing next to him, that could perfectly well be his own wife, daughter, or sister - and that applies in spades to the other women in the crowd.

So how do we evoke social shaming to control this kind of behavior? It isn't limited to Mexico City, of course.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They are a nice idea, but...
Posted by: aerdrie on Jan 30, 2008 2:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to agree with the author. The first thing I thought of when reading this article was Saudi Arabia. Women are segregated from the men there "for their protection."

The onus should definitely be on the men that commit these crimes to stop abusing women, not on women to try to escape the abuse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHAT A SHAME!
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 30, 2008 2:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most men are nice to be around. Fun, good company, manners. But a small percentage really do make it bad for all the others. There should be a way to weed them out and let the others stay. Offices are the same story. Mostly nice guys but a few who make it bad for the rest, not to mention the women. I prefer mixed company myself, but the few obnoxious creeps just won't go away. Do they know what they're like? Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Segregation is not protection
Posted by: lepidopteryx on Jan 31, 2008 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone should be able to go anywhere, on any public conveyance, without fear of being assaulted.

If segregation equals protection, then you could argue that having separate buses for different races "protects" minorities. Bullshit.

This is every bit as wrong as Jim Crow was. You don't isolate the people being harmed - you prosecute the people who do harm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've had my own experiences with "women's only spaces."
Posted by: yellow on Feb 1, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I drove cab in Madison, WI in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Our Taxi Co-op contracted to provide supplemental cab service to women with an operation called Womens' Transit which was established sometime in the early 1970s in order to deal with the large and growing rape problem on campus. The idea was a great one at first. Who could argue with a rape prevention service for women? The service was free and got its funding from a combination of University and city funding as well as private donations and fund raising drives. In time things went terribly awry.

As demand for the service increased while service capacity remained low the need to contract out became greater. Naturally Womens' Transit went to our company which was a worker owned and operated coop that also hired many women and maintained a progressive outlook. Soon the service went beyond its original purpose of safe rides around campus and to and from campus for female students. Increasingly it included the growing population of welfare mothers, recently up from Chicago, in section 8 housing far off campus. These women, who often left their kids alone at night to take free rides to bars and house parties, became the majority of transits passengers straining service capacity for the original target group. This was not the original plan of the service and not what the donors had in mind when they made their generous contributions.

But the feminists angrily protested that since all men make society unsafe for all women any use of the service was justified so long as the male taxpayer paid and the service was used only by women passengers. But the contracting system with our cabs got expensive since they were entirely free of charge to the passengers and the off campus rides at night went longer distances. Reasonable people argued that the contract with our coop began offering services that were a complete contradiction of Womens' Transits original purpose. Here we were taking women from home, where they were relatively safe, to Bars full of sexually aggressive, drunken men, not exactly the true mission of a genuine rape prevention service. The fact that we became party to these women's neglect of their children was also disturbing.

Women's safety takes careful planning using depoliticized, practical solutions managed by responsible people. Madison feminists hardly fit the bill and their mentality is typical of everything that was wrong with "progressivism" in that town in the good old days.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]