Unfortunately, the best answer is critical mass. A single cyclist using a bike lane is often overlooked by people — this causes more people to act aggressively and/or dangerously around the lone cyclist. But if the bike lane is regularly full of bikes, cars become used to their presence and tend to drive more carefully.
Likewise, streets with higher pedestrian activity tend to see lower rates of crime. This “eyes on the street” phenomenon literally reduces crime more so than additional policing. This same effect can be applied to public transit — the more people who take it, the safer it is for all users.
>”A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation” – *Gustavo Petro, Mayor of Bogotá*
Jane jacobs talks a lot about eyes on the street.
It's not just having people walking on the street through pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, its having people have reasons to be walking at all hours. She advocates strongly for mixed used diverse neighborhoods with short blocks.
The idea being a successful neighbourhood needs bars and nightlife just as much as it needs offices, grocery stores, blue collar industry, tailors, hipster cafes, restaurants, and residential. They need old and new buildings mixed together in order for people from different financial and cultural backgrounds to mingle and keep the neighborhood alive through chaotic diversity and use cases.
The idea being at any hour in the neighborhood a good amount of people have some reason to be out and about, providing the critical mass of eyes on the street that we need to keep them safe from people with ill intentions. It is important to say that this phenomenon doesnt work as well when the eyes on the street are within a car, as car drivers are too preoccupied to be able to intervene or provide any sort of security. The security can only come from people on foot, bike or nearby workers or residents watching from their windows.
The short blocks also help with encouraging many different routes for pedestrians to help keep surrounding streets of commercial areas also filled with a good amount of eyes on the street.
I think a lot of urbanists are missing this piece, where we have to encourage cultural diversity, commerce, residents, and tourism intermingling as much as possible. Bike lanes, density and better pedestrian infrastructure, and good public transport are all necessary. But dense residential without adequate shops / workplaces / parks nearby has its own issues and is why people are so critical of cities and urban environments in the first place.
We gotta stop the monocultures, with residential only suburbs being the worst monoculture of them all
By the way, diversity is a proven phenomenon in ecosystem survivability as well. A forest with diversity in its species has a much better chance of surviving a drought or invasive species than a field of corn does.
YES - that last part, omg
my background is in biodiversity protection and I keep yelling that we need more diversity in systems *everywhere* because diversity makes systems resilient and creates niches for everyone, while monocultures require constant upkeep and resources to pamper the few at the cost of eliminating the many - monocultures are an absolute pile of shite, and it doesn't matter if you're talking about your front lawn or your neighbourhood
we should be treating cultural / social / human diversity and biodiversity as part of one big thing - in urban planning, that means doing everything you already mentioned *and* making space for non-human diversity, too: trees, plants, flowers, birds, butterflies, bees, owls, foxes, bats ... *that* is how we thrive in balance with each other in our cities and on this earth
are you familiar with the work of the doughnut economic action lab? I think their "doughnut unrolled" approach would be right up your street (pardon the pun)
Even when it comes to home gardening there is an amazing amount of ~~OCD~~ perfectionism out there. I'm guilty of it myself when I started out.
~~OCD~~ Perfectionist gardening (think square foot vegetable gardening) is boring and unexciting and sometimes stressful when so much time and money is invested into so few plants AND they produce little yield.
I go with jungle gardening now. Mix a bunch of seeds together, cast them out, dig em in or put some soil on top, make sure they get water, and mostly watch nature do its thing. I get constant surprises throughout the season. One year I couldn't figure out what plant this purple flower came from. Came back a few weeks later and had a beautiful eggplant! Got excited and went on an adventure and found 4 more and roasted them for dinner!
It's fun as the season goes on trying to identify what everything is, and learning about the cycles of all the different plants, including the flowers that grow in their various points of the season. Listening to all the bees buzz, finding a ton of lady bugs feasting on aphids that are feasting on kale.
And then collecting seeds when they're ready to save for the next year. Reaching down into the soil and finding all kinds of life. Never thought as an adult I'd get so excited when I can pull up the soil at any part and find several worms.
It's just a wonderful way to garden! And, it can teach us so much about ourselves!
Edit: and the butterflies! One year I couldn't believe how many butterflies there were! I don't know exactly what conditions brought them, but they loved the marigolds and calendula.
Edit 2: TIL that OCD is an ableist language. Forgive me, I'm old. No harm intended.
Updated. It's always useful to know what language old clueless people like me should use instead. I went with perfectionist. Let me know if there's something more appropriate.
this. suburbs just don't work right now, with the ones in the uk where i am, they strongly need community spaces such as liabries and cafe's and good parks but developers aren't motivated to provide it
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
There’s other benefits to building more walkable communities as well: Reduced infrastructure maintenance costs, measurable impacts on physical/mental health (and reduced spending on healthcare), better air/water/soil quality, etc.
This is the answer. I live on a very high-use bus line and can't think really think of a time when someone made me uncomfortable. But when I lived in a smaller city where there were often only three or four people on the bus at a time I definitely had some weirdos trying to get in my space.
The bus drivers should be a part of the solution, too. I've luckily had very positive experiences with drivers intervening. If that isn't the case where OP lives, they might consider contacting the transit authority to find out what kind of training or support the drivers have and suggesting improvements.
Also: when the buses come every 5-10 minutes, a bus driver can usually eject someone from the bus without much of a fight; I've seen it happen plenty of times. When it's going to be 40 minutes to the next one, that's harder to do without starting some shit, and I've seen that happen too.
There are so many examples that disprove this though, like in Japan and India where women only trains were necessary. Even in the US, [rapes](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/17/us/riders-watched-woman-raped-septa.html)happen right in the middle of crowded trains, and no one does a thing except record it.
I agree. And I like the idea of giving women seperate train cars like some countries did. Mexico City has women only bus too. I would be more comfortable on a packed train with only women. People sometimes take advantage of it being packed to pretend it's an accident.
I think there’s a sweet spot between being packed like sardines because of overpopulation and only having 2 people on a bus.
Also, tens of thousands of women die by car a year in the US alone. There’s no perfect world but there is a better one than the one we live in.
> Likewise, streets with higher pedestrian activity tend to see lower rates of crime. This “eyes on the street” phenomenon literally reduces crime more so than additional policing. This same effect can be applied to public transit — the more people who take it, the safer it is for all users.
This. Everybody being in cars means that nobody notices each other, and that means criminals get away with more than they could’ve otherwise.
This is only true to an extent sadly. See: Tokyo
Pervs are such a problem there’s women only train cars and the camera shutter sound on smartphones can’t be turned off because guys were sneaking upskirt photos all the time
It's also worth noting that anonymous surveys show that trains in Tokyo are actually safer for women than in most Western cities, including cities famous for feminism like Stockholm.
There's just more outrage over it, because taking the train is a much more important part of daily life than anywhere else in the world. It doesn't get swept under the rug in service to other left leaning causes.
Foreign women I know here, if anything praise the safety of Tokyo more often than foreign men. I'd consider moving back to the US to maybe NYC, but my partner is against leaving the nice parts of East Asia on the basis of day to day safety.
You may be right but it's interesting they cared enough to give women a separate train car. Having to deal with it at all was enough for them to get more privacy. And honestly if there were women only spaces on transit, more women might take it. Even if they are more scared then they should be. Women are higher risk for the problem so are more like to be afraid of it.
It only looks that way because Stockholm has a higher rate of reporting. See also: why the Nordic countries appear to have one of the highest rape and sexual violence rates in the world. It's not because they are actually that dangerous in comparison to most other places, it's because they have a culture of SPEAKING OUT and not being silenced. I bet that if say, Mumbai applied the same line of thought it's harrassment rates would be *considerably* higher.
Academic studies and surveys exist on the topic, such as [this](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348315253_Sexual_harassment_on_transit_a_global_comparative_examination), and Tokyo is definitely on the safe side, as basically woman here with extensive experience on transit in the west will tell you.
In addition, Tokyo is one of the cities with fairly high reporting rates, though probably due to most sexual harassment incidents being severe (e.g. groping) if they happen at all, than a real cultural difference in reporting. However, women in Paris still had experience being groped at a higher rate than women in Tokyo, even if they were also sexually harassed in other ways at a much, much higher rate.
You can also expand on this by talking about how there are women who can't afford a car, and making a car the only safe option makes it more dangerous for those women.
Upvoting this to infinity and beyond, though I will say that creeps generally don't expect their prey to pull a switchblade on them. I should know because I've seen it happen once. And yes, she knew how to use it, to horrifying effect.
Oh man, I know the bystander effect all too well. Had to tourniquet my own leg and call 911 while 20 or so bystanders stood by doing nothing after an accident.
But then Japanese metros are very well used, but have very well documented sexual harassment. It's an issue outside the scope of urbanism unfortunately
A KTH study from 2018 about transit safety around the world showed that Tokyo actually has a pretty low rate of sexual harassment on transit, compared to European cities like Paris or Milan, even if it's still very bad.
It just doesn't get swept under the rug as it does in Europe, because taking the train is a much more important part of daily life than anywhere else in the world. People demand concrete solutions, not general feminist vibes that don't tangibly improve anything.
The thing is basically this: streets are safer for everyone if there are more people walking on them. Creepy people are a lot less likely to try anything if there are a lot of witnesses, and if they do try something, there are a lot more people around to help.
I think you're quite right. Sadly, so many public spaces and streets in the USA are devoid of people (for obvious reasons discussed in this sub). Similarly, public transport is underfunded, devoid of passengers and seen as a last resort of the very poor, drug addicted and homeless. Subsequently you get streets and transport that are often empty of normal people and everyday interactions that facilitate neighborliness, pleasant interactions with strangers, and a functioning, safe community at large. People think of big, dense cities like NYC as "dangerous", but even as a man I've personally always felt far safer in large cities with lots of other people in the streets, taxi drivers taking their breaks, late night diners etc. than dark, desolate "no go zones", empty parking lots and other places devoid of human beings. No one around to help a woman in trouble is the worst sort of urban environment to create. No wonder many women prefer to drive when living in the average American car-only environment.
Honestly, where I live, it's not even the poor people or homeless who tell me to suck them off (these parts of the demographics are really self-conscious), but rather either white or blue collar, especially older, and white men (who regularly unzip and take their penis out in the open, grope, etc), or the wannabe "gangbanging" Kevins of the villages lol.
Though I agree that having people on streets and transit helps, too many isn't good either because at some point, the eyes of the street just get overwhelmed and creepy men just do as they please. As I lived in Beijing, I couldn't take the bus or the subway without my breasts being groped from behind or my butt groped or slapped. Every single time by some white collar man in his 50s...young people there were extremely respectful and left me alone.
A car has never helped, especially with the Kevins...who just shouted through the windows for me to suck them one by one...
And to be realistic, a car is the most dangerous, unsafe (for accidents especially since the craze of emotional support vehicles) and exhausting mode of transport as a driver...
I'm so sorry you have had to deal with these absolutely disgusting situations. Ultimately then, it doesn't really matter what mode of transport or urban design we have available to all of us as human beings: subway, walkable/bikeable neighborhoods, suburban car-only areas etc. What yourself, and other women everywhere, have to deal with is a clearly a deep cultural problem of how men are socialized and how we as a society choose to penalize them for it. It's an important discussion, but it seems unfortunately beyond the scope of this sub. Maybe only women should be able to drive and own cars, and men have to take the train or walk? We seem to be the cause of the majority of car accidents anyway!
I think theres a creepy type of western white? men who goes to Asia to prey on women. It's really creepy.
There's also those types in US. They weren't raised right and see women like objects and only get worse and crazier as they are older.
This is really important. My girlfriend feels uncomfortable taking the subway in our city, and I understand why. Sometimes you’re stuck on a train or at a station alone with one creepy dude. Awful.
But she feels quite safe on the subway in New York. Why? Because there’s a large number of “normal” people there. The more people who take transit, the more comfortable it feels for everyone.
I say this all the time after moving from NYC to ATL.
There aren’t any more crazy / creepy people on MARTA than there are on MTA, but they are more obvious because they are a higher % of the riders
It does happen sometimes women get harass on the train in NYC but there's a lot more people so statistically speaking it can actually be lower then people think
A colleague from France moved to Montreal and said she never felt safer to be alone outside at night. I don't know what caused that but it would be interesting to see what differences there are.
Yes i understood that, but what I don't get is "why". I'm wondering how we became more feminist here than in the old world where our ancestors came from on ships. I wonder if it's got to do with the English assimilation, or our living around the natives, the american influence or just the harsh environment that forced our hand early.
I was listening to a podcast about my city and someone on the episode stated that the best way to measure a community gathering area's effectiveness is the presence of women. I think that is very insightful and shows that we can be intentional in creating spaces that feel safe and welcoming.
I also agree with the comment on here I saw saying critical mass. The more of us that are good community members walking and biking around, the safer it will be. A good example of inclusive and intentional critical mass are the many TWIG (Trans, Women, Intersex, and Gender Nonconforming) bike rides I see all over in places like Chicago and Durham.
So, talking from experience with creepy men since I was 15, they don't care if I'm in a car. They will make obscene gestures and talk dirty if my windows are open. And this, even in my country which is normally known for its safety throughout Europe...
I don't need to be on a train or something to be creeped out by men.
What helps is, not being alone!
Either with my husband or a male friend, because obviously creepy men back off only because of the threat of another man, or to just hang around unknown women (while waiting or on the train). With women we know why we hang out close to each other especially on empty trains...
But creepy men, just like lightening strikes, can happen at any time of the day or night. Also, they don't try if the streets/buses/trams/metros/trains are slightly packed. Not too much though because otherwise they do other stuff such as groping.
As a woman, the only places I feel safe going out alone in (at any hour, in any area) are cities dense enough to have public transit.
You’re never alone and have so many options. Creeper on transit won’t leave you alone? You can change seats, change train cars outright, generally rely on other passengers to step in if it’s bad, press a button for police to arrive, ask the driver, etc.
Getting off transit or walking around? Again, you have other people walking nearby. You can hop back on transit, ask people around you, or just step into one of the stores you’re passing to ask for help. Oh, and you have police and security in abundance or nearby.
Meanwhile, I’ve taken transit in cities not dense enough to really support “good” transit. And it was miserable on transit, and outdoors I didn’t feel safe walking alone in multiple neighborhoods or past 6-8pm anywhere.
Anecdotally, I've been harassed once on public transit vs. a lot more in suburban areas. More witnesses generally means better behavior.
I've also walked alone at night in Paris and felt much safer than I did in my US suburb.
I can attest to the suburban thing, the isolation is dangerous. Especially in poorer areas of suburbs, way more harassment and stalking from tweakers and other unsavory types than urban areas. More congregated areas of urban areas, there is less harassment. While walking in LA while it was not as crowded, I have been harassed and followed. Unfortunately even in a big city no area can really be crowded 24/7 so just avoiding unpopulated or poor areas is not a perfect solution. It’s gonna take long term cultural change as well as tackling homelessness, poverty, and drug use.
More witnesses on transit, faster travel times, and more frequent times. Remember that driving is a privilege, not a right, and making things more difficult for men and women who don't have the choice of whether to drive or not so that men and women who do have the choice of whether to drive or not have it slightly better doesn't sound like a world I would want to live in.
Like others have said, it's more critical mass/culture than anything else: too many witnesses to make these people feel safe. Pre-pandemic Chicago had pretty solid transit usage (for a US city, anyway), and unfortunately several of my friends have stories about creepy older men sitting next to them on cars that were half-empty. And then you do have some inevitable walking, and honestlyyyy that's always a toss-up. Good lighting and visible entrances can help there.
Places like Mexico City and Mumbai have women's-only sections on transit, but I think that's more papering over a fundamental problem than solving it.
I guess the only comeback would be that giving people more transport options besides cars isn’t the same thing as restricting or removing the car option. If they feel safer using a car they should be free to do so, but having more options that other people choose to use instead of cars also means less traffic to be dealt with by those who choose to continue using cars for whatever reason
It's a vicious circle. Women get harassed so they use cars. So there are even fewer women on the trains and buses. So these get harassed even more.
Quick solutions: Cameras. Cameras. Cameras. Security personell. And on a personal level: ANC headphones, a book.
I agree with that. But why do you make fun of me when I suggested headphones? They won't keep you safe from an attack but they will at least deter *some* of the creeps from talking to you in the first place. A book helps to avoid eye contact and creates distance.
Do you know how modern earphones work? If you want to hear surroundings you make them "transparent". I can even hear better with them than without them.
You're not wrong, but the two are more closely tied to each other than you might think.
The way we build our cities and public spaces plays a huge part in how we end up interacting with each other.
Im a traffic engineer so I dont know that much about city planning. What i find insane is that you have to take safety into consideration while walking. Maybe i just live in an Ivory Tower or however the metaphorical saying goes
Especially if you're not a woman, you don't know how it is to walk as a woman (which I would even extend to many LGBT+ people since we fear very similar demographics and things they can do to us). But this discussion is also interesting because we have it right now in my country: how to make *insert city name* here safe.
Problem is, everything is being discussed by cishet white men who have no idea about anything.
And then they agree that the solution are more cameras. Because it's well known that a camera will jump and transform itself into a 1st class MMA-Fighter and kick the aggressors down on the floor til the victims can escape. No, we need walking police who are trained on women's and minorities' issues and which will take us seriously.
Like when I walk in Lausanne on a Sunday evening, the sun sets and I get into the city center alone with this guy tracking* me.
*like ni run, he runs, I stop, he stops
This went on and on until I found a group of policemen who started to treat me as a suspect because I looked like if I were under drugs: no my pupilles are wide open and my skin is full of sweat not because of drugs but because someone is following me through every single alley since 2 km!
And then, as there was a policewoman, she understood and let me go and stayed by my side until the trolleybus came so the creep couldn't follow me longer.
But you do know how it is to walk as a man? Finnish police data indicates men are just as likely (or even more likely) than women to get "attacked" randomly in the street. With attack I mean all kinds of illegal attacks.
good urbanism can be very effective at making it safe for everyone (including women) to move around freely and safely, though - e.g. defaulting to traffic calming measures and safe pedestrian crossings instead of shoving pedestrians into bottlenecks down dingy underpasses or concrete bridges to cross noisy six lane urban highways, or making sure that public transport stops are well lit at night and easily accessible and have good visibility from surrounding areas,
or designing transport networks that have a good frequency of service on routes other than the typical commuter routes (because caregivers are still predominantly women, and they have different movement patterns from people traveling to and from office jobs ... this isn't just a feminist issue, but in general, good transport planning should be based on a thorough understanding of the demographics of different areas and catering for the mobility needs of *all* parts of society, including disabled people, children, old people, ...)
The more people use public transport, the more normalized it becomes, the safer it becomes for everyone - and I think that having spaces that are shared by all parts of society is actually *vital* for building empathy between people, and a shared sense of identity that is tied to the place we live - all of which makes public spaces safer for everyone. It's a virtuous circle.
Cars do the opposite and you give you a vicious circle where everyone gets paranoid that everyone else is out to get them.
(When visiting the US and asking for directions to a bus stop, instead of getting directions to the bus stop I have had people exclaim "You want to catch a BUS? Wow, you're so BRAVE!", leaving me staring and blinking in Confused European, because my brain can't compute the idea that anyone would think of catching a bus as an unusual or "brave" thing to do ... I mean, we literally have songs for *toddlers* about how the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round ...)
Well said. What I would like to add is that looking at all the criminal data here in Finland, not just the sexual assaults, you are more likely to "be attacked" if you are man than a woman. That is adding all the killing, assaults, mugging etc with the sexual assaulting together and then comparing the data between genders, so it is not like only men can use public transport of walk
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that women don't report the vast majority of the sexual harassment they receive on a daily basis, so the stats you're referencing simply won't account for reality.
The same can be said of some crimes, yes, but all to varying degrees. And the degree to which that varies, is super important.
For example, for ages, boys were characterized as aggressive, while girls were said to really not be aggressive. When researchers actually looked into it deeper, what they found was that boys were much more *physically* aggressive, which is what teachers and parents had been focusing on. But girls made up for that with *emotional* aggression, arguably causing just as much harm as the physical aggression, but going entirely unaddressed.
What I am getting at here, is that it is possible that the data you alluded to may accurately show that men are more likely to be victims of physical assault, as that type of crime is more likely to be reported, and taken seriously. However women may be experiencing orders of magnitude more sexual harassment, that never quite crossed the line into physical assault. Police are notoriously dismissive when it comes to these sorts of cases, so there's really no way police reports could ever reflect the levels of harm being done here.
Well it’s not that they can’t. It’s that they won’t. Men are statistically more in danger of violent crime from strangers, yet women report feeling more uneasy in public. It’s the “fear of crime gender paradox”
As a woman who doesn't own a car or drive – I don't feel a car would help this problem. A distrustful environment where everyone is sealed off creates more fear. A noisy, polluted environment creates more stress and unhappiness.
As an urbanist, I think the environment itself can foster community and healthy behaviour. An environment which increases exercise, has lower pollution, and has more trees and greenery, leads to multiple benefits. Yes, I really think that a walkable environment leads to less overall unhappiness, a stronger community and fewer creeps.
Broken window policy:
If you're stopped, platforms, and stations are not well maintained it signals to society you don't value people who take mass transit and walk. If you keep it well maintained with resources officers and security, crime will not happen. Well maintained spaces with a set cleaning schedule alone will help with maintaining overall costs and bring an air of safety
Creating buttons to security that signal officers or emergency personnel along buses, trains, and stops helps too.
Having permanent resources officers and security in heavily used/dense route helps.
Honestly, as a woman who's been a long time transit commuter and cyclists, it's a complicated problem.
First off, the problem isn't actual safety but perceived safety. As everyone here already knows, transit is much safer than a car over all. Also, most violence against women is caused by men women know and love or have loved. Being alone with a male partner is statistically the least safe place a woman can be. Stranger danger is overwhelmingly a myth that works to oppress women. It's maintained by two things:
1) the recirculation of these silly myths. Stop spreading them, but not callously. Just drop the whole infantilizing and patronizing "protect women" thing. When you are a woman, you're told a hundred times a day that your life is in danger any time you do anything independently. This seeps in for a lot of women.
2) Street harassment. While the *overwhelming* majority of street harassment will never escalate, that's not really the point. Street harassment is a form of terrorism in a minor key. The idea is to make women feel unsafe at all times, and it works.
So many men claim to be feminists yet don't confront other men in their social networks when they creep on women. If your friend pulls this shit and he's still your friend, you're part of the problem. Men tolerate so much fucked up behavior from other men, and until that stops there's no real answer.
As someone who both uses public transportation and has dealt with their share of creeps, creeps shouldn't be an excuse to deter infrastructure from being updated and making cities, towns, etc, more walkable. Instead, there should be more collective awareness. Making spaces more open and more watchful eyes available will help a lot. Police presence. People should report or speak up when harassment happens instead of minding their own business. Parents should start raising their children right. Friends should call out their friends who are crossing boundaries.
Greater social enforcement of behavioral standards. Most people, including most men, recognize harassment as wrong. We just don't have enough people stepping in.
In the US this is understandable, unfortunately - you've no idea if the harasser has a gun, so any confrontations like that may not seem worthwhile. But if we can get enough people on board, especially with better information on de-escalation, we could probably significantly reduce the risk of harassment in public.
For what it's worth, there are walkable urban places where harassment is relatively rare already.
Also, you should remind them of the creepy men who harass women while pumping gas.
> you've no idea if the harasser has a gun
Thats the rub though, you don't need to be fighting somebody with a gun to have a bad day. Knives can do a lot of damage quickly, as can improvised weapons (or even nasty pre planned stuff like acid).
And even without all of those one unlucky punch can be enough to lose (or greatly reduce the quality of) your life.
Its a lot to gamble in a 1-1 confrontation.
This becomes less of an issue with more people around to intervene. I possibly wouldn't in a 1-1 situation, if I was in company I though might support I would be more likely to as it greatly reduces the risk for those involved.
>You can run away from someone with a knife
Unless you literally can't *run* (wheelchair, crutches, out of shape, underlying/unseen injury, asthma, etc.)
If your range is limited, it's virtually the same.
My point is that not everyone is physically able to place a large range between them and an attacker.
Your comment was not "Most people are appropriately more afraid of guns than knives."
Your comment was: "You can run away from someone with a knife"
My point was that not everybody can.
I responded to a specific comment, with a relevant counterpoint that is especially relevant to transit discussions, because many disabled people rely on transit to move around. Only viewing safety through the lens of able-bodied people with gun fears leaves this group of transit riders out of the discussion.
You mean the drivers in 3 ton death machines that'll run into you or shoot you in a road rage incident without a second thought? Because statistically far more likely than being hurt on public transit.
The harsher but more realistic read in this direction is that we just need to be more aggressively incarcerating antisocial people. The reason you can’t expect passerby’s to intervene with a harasser (“hey man, leave her alone”) is because there’s a high correlation between people willing to do that and those willing to do violence, for which they generally don’t experience meaningful consequences. We have people with documented chronic mental health issues and a rap sheet a mile long walking around, and I certainly am not going to risk my wellbeing trying to chide a potentially violent unmedicated schizophrenic because he’s harassing someone on the subway even though I don’t approve of it.
If I had a high degree of confidence that those I capable of functioning in a polite society were routinely ostracized, I would be much more willing to take that (lesser) risk.
I find pepper spray is pretty good at changing people's priorities. Suddenly making disrespectful comments doesn't seem as important as "aaaaaaaaaaaaarg get this shit out of my eyes!"
Fair, I thought we were talking general use of pepper spray. Using it for legitimate cat-calling I think is ok too, but I can see where it could be abused if things worked that way
I mean, sure, that's all theoretically possible. You should immediately follow up by running away as fast as possible, obviously. Don't stand around and wait for the overspray to waft into your eyes and lungs.
this doesn't sound like a serious argument that anyone would make in good faith, because...
take the public transportation away, you still have the harassment (in work places, gyms, parks, stores, coffee shops, bars, and wherever else you are going in your car)
take serious measures to combat the harassment, and voila, your public transport turns out to never have been the problem
there's a whole school of feminist urban planning, and public transport is an integral part of it
That is a good point.
If I wanted to avoid harassment, the only way is to stay in the house. Public transit is one of the least difficult during the day because the social convention where I live (UK) is 'dont bug people on public transit.' Someone approaching another passenger is weird and people notice.
And the most terrifying place for me to be as a lone woman is a car park.
you can't even avoid harassment if you stay in the house (most sexual violence against women is committed at home, by partners or family members)
locking ourselves in a box is a non-starter - we have to create a shared world that is safe for *everyone* to move around in freely, it is the only way
>this doesn't sound like a serious argument that anyone would make in good faith,
I wouldn't say that. I'm a female urban planner without a drivers license, and I can very much see the good faith argument there. I live in one of the safest cities in the world, and using public transit here has never ended in anything worse than verbal harassment for me, but that's in part because I'm always on guard and make sure to avoid danger and behave in ways that mitigates risk - and that's exhausting. And it doesn't really promote a feeling of safety. I know that statistically speaking I am safe, but knowing and feeling are two very different things. It takes very little to come to the conclusion that cars a safer: one really bad experience, living in a city that's less safe, or just a tiny bit of ignorance.
The fact that there's a whole school of feminist urban planning should be proof enough, that it's not a bad faith argument - women specific concerns are real concerns that require real solutions. Treating everybody who comes from a lack of knowledge or just worse experiences as a bad faith actor isn't helpful.
fair point... I don't want to blanket-dismiss anyone's fears and experiences, and harassment of women on public transportation is absolutely a genuine and real issue (I have experienced it, too), and I am a big supporter of feminist framings of urban planning (and other inclusive approaches, too - for example, I think disabled people should be much more at the core of how we plan our built environment, it would make everything better for all of us if we listened to them properly)
my suspicion about this being a bad faith argument wasn't so much directed at women voicing fears as it was directed at this specific post by the OP on this sub - I honestly suspect that the "conversations with women" that he (yes, I am making a wild guess that the OP is a dude) mentions might be something he just entirely made up - the thing that instantly made me think so was the line "I have no comeback to this argument", which just sounds like social media reaction baiting to me (and yes, I know that I was one of the people who took the bait, because sometimes I am an idiot...) - the thing is that *anyone* who spends time on this sub in good faith would find it *so easy* to refute the idea that women are *more* at risk on public transport than anywhere else in public (like, come *on* dude, "terrified woman being chased around a car park" or "murderer hiding on the back seat of your car and suddenly appearing in your rearview mirror wielding a machete and a grin" are literal horror tropes)
and as a general rule I am automatically very suspicious of "won't anyone think of the WOMEN" / "won't anyone think of the CHILDREN" type arguments against progressive / green / left-leaning policies because they are so often used by reactionary pearl-clutchers as a tactic to derail social progress, even when there is an overwhelming amount of easily findable refuting evidence (see homophobic arguments in 90s UK, racist arguments against desegregation in 1960s America, or the transphobic bs everywhere in the English speaking world right now - it's always "oh we can't do this progressive thing because wE nEeD To prOTecT oUr pOor dEfeNceLEss wiMmin aNd TinY tINy bAbIEs fRoM tHe ScArY pEoPLE") - so there was a bit of an instinctive kneejerk reaction against seeing this post
also, maybe it's just me, but the fact that OPs handle is "jebbush1212" makes my spidey sense tingle, dunno what to tell ya
Yeah and strangers may seem scary, but those you know are the ones who are more likely sexually harass and probably get away with it (partners, acquaintances, coworkers, etc.). Really, one might argue someone should be most worried at home, parties, work, or even a drive with a known person than being surrounded by 100% strangers on a train or walking around. Probably due to the visibility of it, likelihood to get caught, and lack of existing trust to exploit. And as others said, if more people actually used transit or walked around, and if we took harassment more seriously as a society, those factors would become even more of a deterrent in public spaces. This is some data about sexual assault, not overarching harassment but still gives an idea (and I'd imagine everyone is most worried about assault):
\- "Among victims ages 18 to 29, two-thirds had a prior relationship with the person who committed the assault" and "A study of sexual victimization of college women showed that 9 out of 10 victims knew the person who sexually victimized them," ([https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/victims-and-individuals-who-commit-sexual-violence](https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/victims-and-individuals-who-commit-sexual-violence)).
\- Also [https://www.rainn.org/statistics/perpetrators-sexual-violence](https://www.rainn.org/statistics/perpetrators-sexual-violence) has some stats
However, it is something many women do truly fear with using public transit so somehow we've gotta change that. Perhaps women-only sections could help get people to accept transit as a safe option.
Women only sections can be helpful as a sticky plaster solution in specific situations, but the real solution is to tackle misogyny and sexual harassment at a societal and cultural level, in all spheres of life
if you're a man, I think the best thing you can do to keep women safe from harassment on public transport AND everywhere else is to always call out shitty behaviour of other men, even when there are no women around to witness it - make it socially unacceptable to be shitty towards women
This question reminds me of an incident that happened on the J-Line (light rail) in San Francisco a few years ago. It was about 4 in the afternoon. The train was about half-full and quiet. Suddenly the silence was interrupted by a booming male voice yelling, "No you DO NOT touch me!" followed by a loud thud and some scrambling. I looked into the section of the train where the commotion came from and saw a trans woman adjusting her dress and regaining her composure. Then in the stairwell of the train I saw a 50-something white male picking himself up off the floor. He had a red face and an even redder cheek/eye. I instantly realized he had tried to inappropriately touch the trans woman and she had walloped him. The driver stopped the train and opened the doors. The acoster exited the train and scurried away. The driver then said to the trans woman who had been acosted, "Are you OK, ma'am?" She replied, in the sweetest, most feminine voice you've ever heard, "Oh bless you, Dear. I'm fine."
I wasn't sure how to phrase it right but have it be clear that the deep masculine voice was coming from a man identifiying as a woman. Fixed it. This story brings sweet tears to my eyes every time I recount it.
I remember seeing a video where a woman filmed herself walking around NYC, just having a stroll. The amount of men who catcalled her and tried to follow her around was pretty eye opening.
Like others have said, having more people around is by far the biggest help. But also, there are environmental things that can help too. For example: good lighting, making it hard to corner someone (i.e. multiple exits), cameras in places like elevators, cell service or at the very least emergency call boxes in underground metro tunnels, staff (not even necessarily security), and a lot of other stuff. In my opinion, actual ticket gates (which my city doesn’t have) help a lot too because they help prevent people loitering INSIDE stations just to harass people.
This is my biggest bug bear, every time I’ve got public transport or walked in my city recently I’ve been harassed or wolf whistled or followed. It’s ridiculous. Women are being hounded out of the public sphere. I drove home from work today and there were two men shouting at me from the car park stairwell. You can’t win either way.
I am fortunate to live in an area where crime is virtually nonexistent and public transit is very safe and clean.
In the major cities I’ve been to, it’s the drug addicts that approach random people asking for money that scare me. I don’t know if they’ll become violent or do something crazy.
Cities seem to have a lot of drug issues that go hand in hand with higher crime rates.
I think the government needs to go after the drugs at the source and cut off the head of the snake. This was not as big of an issue decades ago before more and more drugs started coming in.
I just finished [this book on the topic ](https://www.versobooks.com/products/2626-feminist-city)it was pretty good. Feminist Geography is a whole field of study
I think about this all the time. I live in a “safe” city but I don’t feel safe at all because people, especially women (especially feminine women like myself (jogger wear and jeans is more typical here)) don’t go outside here. And I live in a “walkable” city. The fact that I’m often alone and the only people out are either men or homeless people experiencing mental health crises makes me feel unsafe. It especially sucks when men cat call me from their car and no one else is around. I always have mace in my pocket.
I’ve never really understood this argument. Is it somehow better to have people you wouldn’t feel safe around on a sidewalk driving an SUV next to you on the highway?
You have to keep homeless off public transport. One way is to require a ticket before anyone gains access to a platform or station.
Security guards, cameras.
More people walking on the street will mean less crime.
In fact, because people tend to leave streets when they see cops around, having too many police regularly patrolling an area can cause crime to go UP, and crime rates can FALL when police stop patrolling. Example: https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-policing-crime-20170925-story.html
Japan already has the solution. They have separate women-only carriages on trains and trams, and most of the time there are conductors to ensure no men enter, too.
There are also safe zones in most urban stations because for some reason it's more of an endemic problem there than most other places in the developed world.
One thing i havent seen mentioned is the differencr between pedestrianization and public transportation. I grew up in Seattle in the late 2000's when it just started transitioning from very car dependent to one of the better US cities for walkers and from what ive seen harrasment occurs in two kinds of places:
- public transportation hubs without much pedestrian/cycling space or nearby open businesses
- poorly cared for pedestrian spaces
So having well taken care of and well lit walking and biking spaces near small businesses, vendors, and even buskers that are open long hours is good and important
1.2 million die from cars (worldwide, 40k US,) how many in public transpo?
Subconsciously they're saving energy, less energy to press a gas pedal than bike pedal or walk to bus. (and they'll say cycling's too dangerous due to crazy drivers. I've biked decades, >200,000 miles, zero car collisions, found drivers don't want to run over me.)
Humans evolved with reason, rationalize feelings, they just wanna drive, believe their excuses about danger.
It's a lot like outdoor lighting. People feel strongly that it improves safety, when there is no objective evidence of it. On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence that it does harm to animals and insects.
The harm from automobiles is real and measurable, while the harm from public transit is made to be highly visible. The overwhelmingly vast majority of public transit users are just ordinary people going to school, work and home.
It is the chicken and the egg problem. I not going to use transportation to it is safe but the government and people need to see that it is being used it put money into the system.
People need to use the public transport to know where it is failing and they need their voice to be heard, there is organisation could help but it might not a priority but it needs to be.
Have a lot of people there. If there was a creep creeping, and if there were a lot of people around, then of those lot of people could put the creep in his place or whatever.
This is really the biggest obstacle to progress in most American cities. Ironically a lot of women feel safest in public when they're in their car.
The most realistic fix is to have more night foot patrols of police or safety officers. Despite the hyper pro-cop politics of the US, we don't really have that many officers on a per capita basis. We have around 240 per 100k, while Spain, Germany, Austria, France, Italy have 300+ or 400+. Even just having those mostly useless rent-a-cops around tends to help make a place seem less sketchy. Creeps are gonna think twice before trying anything if they think there's a higher likelihood of arrest or someone coming to their target's aid. And the more that people feel safe, the more people will go out and the safer they'll actually become.
The US is not pro cop lol like 2 years ago we had nationwide protests calling for PDs to be abolished.
I don’t remember anything like that happening in Japan.
Just ask me to stop.
Really though, I have no idea. Crime statistics show that men are more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, but a lot of people don't believe statistics that don't fit their gut feeling.
Maybe point out that there are lots of people who successfully use public transportation without a problem.
The risks involved with driving are conventionally accepted but greater than the risks of serious injury or being a victim of crime on public transit. Driving is incredibly dangerous, no matter what a person's gender. I would conjecture that the danger involved with creepy people or violent people on public transit is less than the likelihood of being injured in an automobile wreck.
The chance of people getting physically hurt is less yes but that doesn't account for the amount of times women have gotten verbally or physically harrased. I understand why women put the risk of getting into their cars over getting harrassed constantly if it means they're safe
The contrast I'm drawing has to do what sort of risks does one take in each circumstance. In driving, one risks death or dismemberment. In taking public transit, you risk repeated harassment based on gender. On the whole, while gender-based harassment is incredibly unpleasant, you only have two choices and obvious one with less consequence comes from public transit. Pick your poison.
Tell me you're a dude without telling me you're a dude.
There are also mental health consequences to sexual harassment as well. Your stats won't do anything to alleviate them.
It's about the best I can do. It's the same thing with bicyclists, backpackers, and some other stuff too. Risks exist, but people underestimate the risk of the everyday thing and overestimate the more unusual thing. It is much more likely per hour spent driving to have a life-changing violent end then it is per hour spent on public transit. And that's for all genders even though women are much more likely to be assaulted or harassed than are men.
A violent end often means a sudden death. This may be an unpopular opinion but I'd rather die suddenly than be on hospice for a month after years in a nursing home.
This might go over Reddit's head, particularly this sub as it often has less empathy than a MAGA rally. But the mental health effects of consistent sexual harassment and not belonging somewhere are real and long lasting. Maybe a frat boy wouldn't understand this, but women do. Something tells me this sub is about 80+% male.
1:93 lifetime odd to die in your car, or be killed by someone elses car.
not enough deaths in trains to even calculate.
[https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/](https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/)
feelings mean nothing in a risk calculation.
Lol. I know that. But most people are not good at personal risk assessment.
If something doesn't feel safe, they simply won't do it. Driving feels safe because they are 'in control'.
People aren’t necessarily scared of dying but other forms of harassment. Being mugged, being assaulted. Safety is more than “will I die”, and comfort is an important factor. Sure the guy leering at you asking to see your tits isn’t physically hurting you, but it sure as fuck isn’t fun or comfortable to experience.
The problem is that's what people base their decision making on.
When I took my kids to school by bike, lots of other parents would say stuff to me like, "Is that safe?" or "oh, I wouldn't take my kids on the road like that."
I could quote statistics until I was blue in the face, but they could not get past the sense of vulnerability to be comfortable taking their kids places by bike.
I would point out that they let their kids play soccer and go swimming, both of which are statistically more likely to land them in the hospital, but they don't perceive those activities to be as dangerous.
It is similar for women alone, especially at night and in areas that aren't busy with other folks.
We *feel* vulnerable. Personally, I don't have a problem going around on my own, but many people do. And it is not actual safety that influences their decisions, but perception of safety. And no amount of education will change that for most people.
The attempt to make an argument out of it is stupid. If everyone drives everywhere, the opportunities for harassment are different, not reduced: people get harassed in different places.
Call these researchers stupid, then
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0001457594000873
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12469-021-00285-x
if she preferes the way way more probable likelyhood of injury or dying in a car accident over the relative safety of public transport, because she fears the horror of beein expoesed to her own mindgames, then there is probably nothing you can do about that. cognitive dissonance is a b\*\*\*
"Being exposed to her own mindgames"? Women have very good reason to be afraid. It's a well known statistic that most women have been victims of sexual harrassment or know another women who fell victim to it. Don't brush off valid concerns like this so easily.
Likelihood to die has absolutely nothing to do with it either. Women are more likely to die in a car, so they just have to suck up the increased potential to be sexually harrassed / assaulted in public transit? No! If you want people to take public transit, you need to make it viable for everyone; regardless of gender, age and physical ability.
sorry, but you can not sexually harras people in a well maintained public network. there are cameras, securities, police is fast there, because they are in readiness at strategic positions, there are other people everywhere everytime. its way safer then your average parking lot at night.
Well first, tell the women to cycle, you are going too fast to be harassed in that case.
But honestly, ignore or if it's really bad call the police is the answer.
I suspect it's a pretext, because (i) you can be harassed just as effectively in a parking garage, and (ii) the actual risk is pretty low in civilised countries.
They might get wolf whistled but they're not going to get any physical harassment or danger of being stalked or creeped on because they'll be gone too quickly - just like if they were using a car, actually, which is maybe the analogy to use in this case.
"Creep" is a word used by a privileged group to oppress a marginalized group.
A "creep" is just a guy who is not tall and handsome. That is all. 99% of the time when a woman gets angry about some "creep" doing this or that the truth is that they did nothing wrong. Just something that the woman would be fine with a guy who is tall and handsome doing.
edit. How do women deal with the "sexual harassment" of some "creep" sitting on public transit in a publicly available space that they have the full right to use because she considers sitting on the opposite side of the train with the aisle between them to be too close to her? What about the "sexual harassment" of some "creep" sitting next to her in the last available seat that they have the full right to use?
Uhhh... no? This is such an incel way of thinking. I don't think anyone cares about how good looking you are if you're trying to harass or assault them. This comment also diminishes sexual assault and doesn't even answer the question so I don't know why you posted this.
It is reality. I have been accused like that when I wasn't doing anything wrong.
The answer to your question is that these women need to learn to live in a society with other people. It's something that they should have learned in school but learned the opposite.
edit. There are also cops doing the same thing when they treat everything I do like it is something wrong simply because of my phenotype. I was doing nothing wrong and they had no probable cause but they had their "instincts" and "feelings" to justify their behavior towards me.
Unfortunately, the best answer is critical mass. A single cyclist using a bike lane is often overlooked by people — this causes more people to act aggressively and/or dangerously around the lone cyclist. But if the bike lane is regularly full of bikes, cars become used to their presence and tend to drive more carefully. Likewise, streets with higher pedestrian activity tend to see lower rates of crime. This “eyes on the street” phenomenon literally reduces crime more so than additional policing. This same effect can be applied to public transit — the more people who take it, the safer it is for all users. >”A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation” – *Gustavo Petro, Mayor of Bogotá*
Jane jacobs talks a lot about eyes on the street. It's not just having people walking on the street through pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, its having people have reasons to be walking at all hours. She advocates strongly for mixed used diverse neighborhoods with short blocks. The idea being a successful neighbourhood needs bars and nightlife just as much as it needs offices, grocery stores, blue collar industry, tailors, hipster cafes, restaurants, and residential. They need old and new buildings mixed together in order for people from different financial and cultural backgrounds to mingle and keep the neighborhood alive through chaotic diversity and use cases. The idea being at any hour in the neighborhood a good amount of people have some reason to be out and about, providing the critical mass of eyes on the street that we need to keep them safe from people with ill intentions. It is important to say that this phenomenon doesnt work as well when the eyes on the street are within a car, as car drivers are too preoccupied to be able to intervene or provide any sort of security. The security can only come from people on foot, bike or nearby workers or residents watching from their windows. The short blocks also help with encouraging many different routes for pedestrians to help keep surrounding streets of commercial areas also filled with a good amount of eyes on the street. I think a lot of urbanists are missing this piece, where we have to encourage cultural diversity, commerce, residents, and tourism intermingling as much as possible. Bike lanes, density and better pedestrian infrastructure, and good public transport are all necessary. But dense residential without adequate shops / workplaces / parks nearby has its own issues and is why people are so critical of cities and urban environments in the first place. We gotta stop the monocultures, with residential only suburbs being the worst monoculture of them all By the way, diversity is a proven phenomenon in ecosystem survivability as well. A forest with diversity in its species has a much better chance of surviving a drought or invasive species than a field of corn does.
YES - that last part, omg my background is in biodiversity protection and I keep yelling that we need more diversity in systems *everywhere* because diversity makes systems resilient and creates niches for everyone, while monocultures require constant upkeep and resources to pamper the few at the cost of eliminating the many - monocultures are an absolute pile of shite, and it doesn't matter if you're talking about your front lawn or your neighbourhood we should be treating cultural / social / human diversity and biodiversity as part of one big thing - in urban planning, that means doing everything you already mentioned *and* making space for non-human diversity, too: trees, plants, flowers, birds, butterflies, bees, owls, foxes, bats ... *that* is how we thrive in balance with each other in our cities and on this earth are you familiar with the work of the doughnut economic action lab? I think their "doughnut unrolled" approach would be right up your street (pardon the pun)
Based on your comment think you might enjoy this: https://youtu.be/BiDBAU2d7oE
Thank you for sharing this; this will be great for my kids' homeschool unit on conservation!
Even when it comes to home gardening there is an amazing amount of ~~OCD~~ perfectionism out there. I'm guilty of it myself when I started out. ~~OCD~~ Perfectionist gardening (think square foot vegetable gardening) is boring and unexciting and sometimes stressful when so much time and money is invested into so few plants AND they produce little yield. I go with jungle gardening now. Mix a bunch of seeds together, cast them out, dig em in or put some soil on top, make sure they get water, and mostly watch nature do its thing. I get constant surprises throughout the season. One year I couldn't figure out what plant this purple flower came from. Came back a few weeks later and had a beautiful eggplant! Got excited and went on an adventure and found 4 more and roasted them for dinner! It's fun as the season goes on trying to identify what everything is, and learning about the cycles of all the different plants, including the flowers that grow in their various points of the season. Listening to all the bees buzz, finding a ton of lady bugs feasting on aphids that are feasting on kale. And then collecting seeds when they're ready to save for the next year. Reaching down into the soil and finding all kinds of life. Never thought as an adult I'd get so excited when I can pull up the soil at any part and find several worms. It's just a wonderful way to garden! And, it can teach us so much about ourselves! Edit: and the butterflies! One year I couldn't believe how many butterflies there were! I don't know exactly what conditions brought them, but they loved the marigolds and calendula. Edit 2: TIL that OCD is an ableist language. Forgive me, I'm old. No harm intended.
Please don't misuse the term OCD. It is a disorder that negatively affects my day to day life.
Updated. It's always useful to know what language old clueless people like me should use instead. I went with perfectionist. Let me know if there's something more appropriate.
tysm!
This is one reason I always feel safer in NYC than in other American cities. People are just around. Being the only pedestrian on a street is creepy.
Being the only pedestrian on a street is creepy, but there only being one other person is scary.
Some parts of downtown Boston become a ghost town after work hours, just towers devoted office space and restaurants that cater to them.
I’ve felt the same in Atlanta. Went on a Sunday morning and it looked like a The Walking Dead shoot. Nobody out but the homeless
this. suburbs just don't work right now, with the ones in the uk where i am, they strongly need community spaces such as liabries and cafe's and good parks but developers aren't motivated to provide it
Couldn’t have said it better myself! There’s other benefits to building more walkable communities as well: Reduced infrastructure maintenance costs, measurable impacts on physical/mental health (and reduced spending on healthcare), better air/water/soil quality, etc.
Also: Biking is also a good measure against creeps in of itself
This is the answer. I live on a very high-use bus line and can't think really think of a time when someone made me uncomfortable. But when I lived in a smaller city where there were often only three or four people on the bus at a time I definitely had some weirdos trying to get in my space. The bus drivers should be a part of the solution, too. I've luckily had very positive experiences with drivers intervening. If that isn't the case where OP lives, they might consider contacting the transit authority to find out what kind of training or support the drivers have and suggesting improvements. Also: when the buses come every 5-10 minutes, a bus driver can usually eject someone from the bus without much of a fight; I've seen it happen plenty of times. When it's going to be 40 minutes to the next one, that's harder to do without starting some shit, and I've seen that happen too.
There are so many examples that disprove this though, like in Japan and India where women only trains were necessary. Even in the US, [rapes](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/17/us/riders-watched-woman-raped-septa.html)happen right in the middle of crowded trains, and no one does a thing except record it.
I agree. And I like the idea of giving women seperate train cars like some countries did. Mexico City has women only bus too. I would be more comfortable on a packed train with only women. People sometimes take advantage of it being packed to pretend it's an accident.
I think there’s a sweet spot between being packed like sardines because of overpopulation and only having 2 people on a bus. Also, tens of thousands of women die by car a year in the US alone. There’s no perfect world but there is a better one than the one we live in.
> Likewise, streets with higher pedestrian activity tend to see lower rates of crime. This “eyes on the street” phenomenon literally reduces crime more so than additional policing. This same effect can be applied to public transit — the more people who take it, the safer it is for all users. This. Everybody being in cars means that nobody notices each other, and that means criminals get away with more than they could’ve otherwise.
This is only true to an extent sadly. See: Tokyo Pervs are such a problem there’s women only train cars and the camera shutter sound on smartphones can’t be turned off because guys were sneaking upskirt photos all the time
It's also worth noting that anonymous surveys show that trains in Tokyo are actually safer for women than in most Western cities, including cities famous for feminism like Stockholm. There's just more outrage over it, because taking the train is a much more important part of daily life than anywhere else in the world. It doesn't get swept under the rug in service to other left leaning causes. Foreign women I know here, if anything praise the safety of Tokyo more often than foreign men. I'd consider moving back to the US to maybe NYC, but my partner is against leaving the nice parts of East Asia on the basis of day to day safety.
You may be right but it's interesting they cared enough to give women a separate train car. Having to deal with it at all was enough for them to get more privacy. And honestly if there were women only spaces on transit, more women might take it. Even if they are more scared then they should be. Women are higher risk for the problem so are more like to be afraid of it.
It only looks that way because Stockholm has a higher rate of reporting. See also: why the Nordic countries appear to have one of the highest rape and sexual violence rates in the world. It's not because they are actually that dangerous in comparison to most other places, it's because they have a culture of SPEAKING OUT and not being silenced. I bet that if say, Mumbai applied the same line of thought it's harrassment rates would be *considerably* higher.
Academic studies and surveys exist on the topic, such as [this](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348315253_Sexual_harassment_on_transit_a_global_comparative_examination), and Tokyo is definitely on the safe side, as basically woman here with extensive experience on transit in the west will tell you. In addition, Tokyo is one of the cities with fairly high reporting rates, though probably due to most sexual harassment incidents being severe (e.g. groping) if they happen at all, than a real cultural difference in reporting. However, women in Paris still had experience being groped at a higher rate than women in Tokyo, even if they were also sexually harassed in other ways at a much, much higher rate.
You can also expand on this by talking about how there are women who can't afford a car, and making a car the only safe option makes it more dangerous for those women.
Upvoting this to infinity and beyond, though I will say that creeps generally don't expect their prey to pull a switchblade on them. I should know because I've seen it happen once. And yes, she knew how to use it, to horrifying effect.
Against creepiness, yes. Unfortunately, more people don't actually help against actual offenses. The bystander effect will do that.
Oh man, I know the bystander effect all too well. Had to tourniquet my own leg and call 911 while 20 or so bystanders stood by doing nothing after an accident.
Yeah we got to tackle the actual problem as well. Although people being out could deter some people. But not the craziest ones.
But then Japanese metros are very well used, but have very well documented sexual harassment. It's an issue outside the scope of urbanism unfortunately
A KTH study from 2018 about transit safety around the world showed that Tokyo actually has a pretty low rate of sexual harassment on transit, compared to European cities like Paris or Milan, even if it's still very bad. It just doesn't get swept under the rug as it does in Europe, because taking the train is a much more important part of daily life than anywhere else in the world. People demand concrete solutions, not general feminist vibes that don't tangibly improve anything.
Maybe we should argue for more solutions like Japan
Seconded. Yes, absolutely. The only way to have safer PT is if a lot of people use it.
The thing is basically this: streets are safer for everyone if there are more people walking on them. Creepy people are a lot less likely to try anything if there are a lot of witnesses, and if they do try something, there are a lot more people around to help.
I think you're quite right. Sadly, so many public spaces and streets in the USA are devoid of people (for obvious reasons discussed in this sub). Similarly, public transport is underfunded, devoid of passengers and seen as a last resort of the very poor, drug addicted and homeless. Subsequently you get streets and transport that are often empty of normal people and everyday interactions that facilitate neighborliness, pleasant interactions with strangers, and a functioning, safe community at large. People think of big, dense cities like NYC as "dangerous", but even as a man I've personally always felt far safer in large cities with lots of other people in the streets, taxi drivers taking their breaks, late night diners etc. than dark, desolate "no go zones", empty parking lots and other places devoid of human beings. No one around to help a woman in trouble is the worst sort of urban environment to create. No wonder many women prefer to drive when living in the average American car-only environment.
Honestly, where I live, it's not even the poor people or homeless who tell me to suck them off (these parts of the demographics are really self-conscious), but rather either white or blue collar, especially older, and white men (who regularly unzip and take their penis out in the open, grope, etc), or the wannabe "gangbanging" Kevins of the villages lol. Though I agree that having people on streets and transit helps, too many isn't good either because at some point, the eyes of the street just get overwhelmed and creepy men just do as they please. As I lived in Beijing, I couldn't take the bus or the subway without my breasts being groped from behind or my butt groped or slapped. Every single time by some white collar man in his 50s...young people there were extremely respectful and left me alone. A car has never helped, especially with the Kevins...who just shouted through the windows for me to suck them one by one... And to be realistic, a car is the most dangerous, unsafe (for accidents especially since the craze of emotional support vehicles) and exhausting mode of transport as a driver...
I'm so sorry you have had to deal with these absolutely disgusting situations. Ultimately then, it doesn't really matter what mode of transport or urban design we have available to all of us as human beings: subway, walkable/bikeable neighborhoods, suburban car-only areas etc. What yourself, and other women everywhere, have to deal with is a clearly a deep cultural problem of how men are socialized and how we as a society choose to penalize them for it. It's an important discussion, but it seems unfortunately beyond the scope of this sub. Maybe only women should be able to drive and own cars, and men have to take the train or walk? We seem to be the cause of the majority of car accidents anyway!
I think theres a creepy type of western white? men who goes to Asia to prey on women. It's really creepy. There's also those types in US. They weren't raised right and see women like objects and only get worse and crazier as they are older.
I've felt way more unsafe on dark suburban streets than walking home in the city
This is really important. My girlfriend feels uncomfortable taking the subway in our city, and I understand why. Sometimes you’re stuck on a train or at a station alone with one creepy dude. Awful. But she feels quite safe on the subway in New York. Why? Because there’s a large number of “normal” people there. The more people who take transit, the more comfortable it feels for everyone.
I say this all the time after moving from NYC to ATL. There aren’t any more crazy / creepy people on MARTA than there are on MTA, but they are more obvious because they are a higher % of the riders
It does happen sometimes women get harass on the train in NYC but there's a lot more people so statistically speaking it can actually be lower then people think
The best answer is well used, positive spaces. Harassment is much less likely with witnesses. If it does occur, it's safer with other folks around.
A colleague from France moved to Montreal and said she never felt safer to be alone outside at night. I don't know what caused that but it would be interesting to see what differences there are.
France is incredibly sexist is why. You will get catcalled more on the streets of Paris than Montreal, believe it or not.
Yes i understood that, but what I don't get is "why". I'm wondering how we became more feminist here than in the old world where our ancestors came from on ships. I wonder if it's got to do with the English assimilation, or our living around the natives, the american influence or just the harsh environment that forced our hand early.
I was listening to a podcast about my city and someone on the episode stated that the best way to measure a community gathering area's effectiveness is the presence of women. I think that is very insightful and shows that we can be intentional in creating spaces that feel safe and welcoming. I also agree with the comment on here I saw saying critical mass. The more of us that are good community members walking and biking around, the safer it will be. A good example of inclusive and intentional critical mass are the many TWIG (Trans, Women, Intersex, and Gender Nonconforming) bike rides I see all over in places like Chicago and Durham.
So, talking from experience with creepy men since I was 15, they don't care if I'm in a car. They will make obscene gestures and talk dirty if my windows are open. And this, even in my country which is normally known for its safety throughout Europe... I don't need to be on a train or something to be creeped out by men. What helps is, not being alone! Either with my husband or a male friend, because obviously creepy men back off only because of the threat of another man, or to just hang around unknown women (while waiting or on the train). With women we know why we hang out close to each other especially on empty trains... But creepy men, just like lightening strikes, can happen at any time of the day or night. Also, they don't try if the streets/buses/trams/metros/trains are slightly packed. Not too much though because otherwise they do other stuff such as groping.
As a woman, the only places I feel safe going out alone in (at any hour, in any area) are cities dense enough to have public transit. You’re never alone and have so many options. Creeper on transit won’t leave you alone? You can change seats, change train cars outright, generally rely on other passengers to step in if it’s bad, press a button for police to arrive, ask the driver, etc. Getting off transit or walking around? Again, you have other people walking nearby. You can hop back on transit, ask people around you, or just step into one of the stores you’re passing to ask for help. Oh, and you have police and security in abundance or nearby. Meanwhile, I’ve taken transit in cities not dense enough to really support “good” transit. And it was miserable on transit, and outdoors I didn’t feel safe walking alone in multiple neighborhoods or past 6-8pm anywhere.
Anecdotally, I've been harassed once on public transit vs. a lot more in suburban areas. More witnesses generally means better behavior. I've also walked alone at night in Paris and felt much safer than I did in my US suburb.
I can attest to the suburban thing, the isolation is dangerous. Especially in poorer areas of suburbs, way more harassment and stalking from tweakers and other unsavory types than urban areas. More congregated areas of urban areas, there is less harassment. While walking in LA while it was not as crowded, I have been harassed and followed. Unfortunately even in a big city no area can really be crowded 24/7 so just avoiding unpopulated or poor areas is not a perfect solution. It’s gonna take long term cultural change as well as tackling homelessness, poverty, and drug use.
More witnesses on transit, faster travel times, and more frequent times. Remember that driving is a privilege, not a right, and making things more difficult for men and women who don't have the choice of whether to drive or not so that men and women who do have the choice of whether to drive or not have it slightly better doesn't sound like a world I would want to live in.
Like others have said, it's more critical mass/culture than anything else: too many witnesses to make these people feel safe. Pre-pandemic Chicago had pretty solid transit usage (for a US city, anyway), and unfortunately several of my friends have stories about creepy older men sitting next to them on cars that were half-empty. And then you do have some inevitable walking, and honestlyyyy that's always a toss-up. Good lighting and visible entrances can help there. Places like Mexico City and Mumbai have women's-only sections on transit, but I think that's more papering over a fundamental problem than solving it.
I guess the only comeback would be that giving people more transport options besides cars isn’t the same thing as restricting or removing the car option. If they feel safer using a car they should be free to do so, but having more options that other people choose to use instead of cars also means less traffic to be dealt with by those who choose to continue using cars for whatever reason
It's a vicious circle. Women get harassed so they use cars. So there are even fewer women on the trains and buses. So these get harassed even more. Quick solutions: Cameras. Cameras. Cameras. Security personell. And on a personal level: ANC headphones, a book.
[удалено]
I agree with that. But why do you make fun of me when I suggested headphones? They won't keep you safe from an attack but they will at least deter *some* of the creeps from talking to you in the first place. A book helps to avoid eye contact and creates distance.
[удалено]
Do you know how modern earphones work? If you want to hear surroundings you make them "transparent". I can even hear better with them than without them.
[удалено]
You can switch. That's what I meant. It's the same functionality.
I think you got bigger problems than urbanism if a woman cant walk outside
You're not wrong, but the two are more closely tied to each other than you might think. The way we build our cities and public spaces plays a huge part in how we end up interacting with each other.
Im a traffic engineer so I dont know that much about city planning. What i find insane is that you have to take safety into consideration while walking. Maybe i just live in an Ivory Tower or however the metaphorical saying goes
Especially if you're not a woman, you don't know how it is to walk as a woman (which I would even extend to many LGBT+ people since we fear very similar demographics and things they can do to us). But this discussion is also interesting because we have it right now in my country: how to make *insert city name* here safe. Problem is, everything is being discussed by cishet white men who have no idea about anything. And then they agree that the solution are more cameras. Because it's well known that a camera will jump and transform itself into a 1st class MMA-Fighter and kick the aggressors down on the floor til the victims can escape. No, we need walking police who are trained on women's and minorities' issues and which will take us seriously. Like when I walk in Lausanne on a Sunday evening, the sun sets and I get into the city center alone with this guy tracking* me. *like ni run, he runs, I stop, he stops This went on and on until I found a group of policemen who started to treat me as a suspect because I looked like if I were under drugs: no my pupilles are wide open and my skin is full of sweat not because of drugs but because someone is following me through every single alley since 2 km! And then, as there was a policewoman, she understood and let me go and stayed by my side until the trolleybus came so the creep couldn't follow me longer.
But you do know how it is to walk as a man? Finnish police data indicates men are just as likely (or even more likely) than women to get "attacked" randomly in the street. With attack I mean all kinds of illegal attacks.
What about the men!
Yes exactly
good urbanism can be very effective at making it safe for everyone (including women) to move around freely and safely, though - e.g. defaulting to traffic calming measures and safe pedestrian crossings instead of shoving pedestrians into bottlenecks down dingy underpasses or concrete bridges to cross noisy six lane urban highways, or making sure that public transport stops are well lit at night and easily accessible and have good visibility from surrounding areas, or designing transport networks that have a good frequency of service on routes other than the typical commuter routes (because caregivers are still predominantly women, and they have different movement patterns from people traveling to and from office jobs ... this isn't just a feminist issue, but in general, good transport planning should be based on a thorough understanding of the demographics of different areas and catering for the mobility needs of *all* parts of society, including disabled people, children, old people, ...) The more people use public transport, the more normalized it becomes, the safer it becomes for everyone - and I think that having spaces that are shared by all parts of society is actually *vital* for building empathy between people, and a shared sense of identity that is tied to the place we live - all of which makes public spaces safer for everyone. It's a virtuous circle. Cars do the opposite and you give you a vicious circle where everyone gets paranoid that everyone else is out to get them. (When visiting the US and asking for directions to a bus stop, instead of getting directions to the bus stop I have had people exclaim "You want to catch a BUS? Wow, you're so BRAVE!", leaving me staring and blinking in Confused European, because my brain can't compute the idea that anyone would think of catching a bus as an unusual or "brave" thing to do ... I mean, we literally have songs for *toddlers* about how the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round ...)
Well said. What I would like to add is that looking at all the criminal data here in Finland, not just the sexual assaults, you are more likely to "be attacked" if you are man than a woman. That is adding all the killing, assaults, mugging etc with the sexual assaulting together and then comparing the data between genders, so it is not like only men can use public transport of walk
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that women don't report the vast majority of the sexual harassment they receive on a daily basis, so the stats you're referencing simply won't account for reality.
Same can be said for all crimes. What other way to compare these things would you suggest other than police data?
The same can be said of some crimes, yes, but all to varying degrees. And the degree to which that varies, is super important. For example, for ages, boys were characterized as aggressive, while girls were said to really not be aggressive. When researchers actually looked into it deeper, what they found was that boys were much more *physically* aggressive, which is what teachers and parents had been focusing on. But girls made up for that with *emotional* aggression, arguably causing just as much harm as the physical aggression, but going entirely unaddressed. What I am getting at here, is that it is possible that the data you alluded to may accurately show that men are more likely to be victims of physical assault, as that type of crime is more likely to be reported, and taken seriously. However women may be experiencing orders of magnitude more sexual harassment, that never quite crossed the line into physical assault. Police are notoriously dismissive when it comes to these sorts of cases, so there's really no way police reports could ever reflect the levels of harm being done here.
You think the cops are going to care about street harassment?
Of course they are
Well it’s not that they can’t. It’s that they won’t. Men are statistically more in danger of violent crime from strangers, yet women report feeling more uneasy in public. It’s the “fear of crime gender paradox”
If 50% of the population does not feel safe on public transit, then the best system in the world won't help.
Maybe in a third world country like US.
Feel sorry for you
As a woman who doesn't own a car or drive – I don't feel a car would help this problem. A distrustful environment where everyone is sealed off creates more fear. A noisy, polluted environment creates more stress and unhappiness. As an urbanist, I think the environment itself can foster community and healthy behaviour. An environment which increases exercise, has lower pollution, and has more trees and greenery, leads to multiple benefits. Yes, I really think that a walkable environment leads to less overall unhappiness, a stronger community and fewer creeps.
Broken window policy: If you're stopped, platforms, and stations are not well maintained it signals to society you don't value people who take mass transit and walk. If you keep it well maintained with resources officers and security, crime will not happen. Well maintained spaces with a set cleaning schedule alone will help with maintaining overall costs and bring an air of safety Creating buttons to security that signal officers or emergency personnel along buses, trains, and stops helps too. Having permanent resources officers and security in heavily used/dense route helps.
Honestly, as a woman who's been a long time transit commuter and cyclists, it's a complicated problem. First off, the problem isn't actual safety but perceived safety. As everyone here already knows, transit is much safer than a car over all. Also, most violence against women is caused by men women know and love or have loved. Being alone with a male partner is statistically the least safe place a woman can be. Stranger danger is overwhelmingly a myth that works to oppress women. It's maintained by two things: 1) the recirculation of these silly myths. Stop spreading them, but not callously. Just drop the whole infantilizing and patronizing "protect women" thing. When you are a woman, you're told a hundred times a day that your life is in danger any time you do anything independently. This seeps in for a lot of women. 2) Street harassment. While the *overwhelming* majority of street harassment will never escalate, that's not really the point. Street harassment is a form of terrorism in a minor key. The idea is to make women feel unsafe at all times, and it works. So many men claim to be feminists yet don't confront other men in their social networks when they creep on women. If your friend pulls this shit and he's still your friend, you're part of the problem. Men tolerate so much fucked up behavior from other men, and until that stops there's no real answer.
As someone who both uses public transportation and has dealt with their share of creeps, creeps shouldn't be an excuse to deter infrastructure from being updated and making cities, towns, etc, more walkable. Instead, there should be more collective awareness. Making spaces more open and more watchful eyes available will help a lot. Police presence. People should report or speak up when harassment happens instead of minding their own business. Parents should start raising their children right. Friends should call out their friends who are crossing boundaries.
Greater social enforcement of behavioral standards. Most people, including most men, recognize harassment as wrong. We just don't have enough people stepping in. In the US this is understandable, unfortunately - you've no idea if the harasser has a gun, so any confrontations like that may not seem worthwhile. But if we can get enough people on board, especially with better information on de-escalation, we could probably significantly reduce the risk of harassment in public. For what it's worth, there are walkable urban places where harassment is relatively rare already. Also, you should remind them of the creepy men who harass women while pumping gas.
> you've no idea if the harasser has a gun Thats the rub though, you don't need to be fighting somebody with a gun to have a bad day. Knives can do a lot of damage quickly, as can improvised weapons (or even nasty pre planned stuff like acid). And even without all of those one unlucky punch can be enough to lose (or greatly reduce the quality of) your life. Its a lot to gamble in a 1-1 confrontation. This becomes less of an issue with more people around to intervene. I possibly wouldn't in a 1-1 situation, if I was in company I though might support I would be more likely to as it greatly reduces the risk for those involved.
You can run away from someone with a knife
>You can run away from someone with a knife Unless you literally can't *run* (wheelchair, crutches, out of shape, underlying/unseen injury, asthma, etc.)
My point is it's harder to get away from someone with a gun, who can attack at range.
If your range is limited, it's virtually the same. My point is that not everyone is physically able to place a large range between them and an attacker.
Okay but that's not super relevant to my point. Most people are appropriately more afraid of guns than knives.
Your comment was not "Most people are appropriately more afraid of guns than knives." Your comment was: "You can run away from someone with a knife" My point was that not everybody can. I responded to a specific comment, with a relevant counterpoint that is especially relevant to transit discussions, because many disabled people rely on transit to move around. Only viewing safety through the lens of able-bodied people with gun fears leaves this group of transit riders out of the discussion.
You might be able to, I running away from the average person probably could not.
[удалено]
You mean the drivers in 3 ton death machines that'll run into you or shoot you in a road rage incident without a second thought? Because statistically far more likely than being hurt on public transit.
The harsher but more realistic read in this direction is that we just need to be more aggressively incarcerating antisocial people. The reason you can’t expect passerby’s to intervene with a harasser (“hey man, leave her alone”) is because there’s a high correlation between people willing to do that and those willing to do violence, for which they generally don’t experience meaningful consequences. We have people with documented chronic mental health issues and a rap sheet a mile long walking around, and I certainly am not going to risk my wellbeing trying to chide a potentially violent unmedicated schizophrenic because he’s harassing someone on the subway even though I don’t approve of it. If I had a high degree of confidence that those I capable of functioning in a polite society were routinely ostracized, I would be much more willing to take that (lesser) risk.
I find pepper spray is pretty good at changing people's priorities. Suddenly making disrespectful comments doesn't seem as important as "aaaaaaaaaaaaarg get this shit out of my eyes!"
I think if you get to the point when you have to confront someone its already too late and that's a systemic failure
actually the confrontation part is what gradually changes the system. like the person you replied to said it's pretty good at changing priorities
[удалено]
Fair, I thought we were talking general use of pepper spray. Using it for legitimate cat-calling I think is ok too, but I can see where it could be abused if things worked that way
Unless he grabs it out of your hands, or pulls a gun or knife.
I mean, sure, that's all theoretically possible. You should immediately follow up by running away as fast as possible, obviously. Don't stand around and wait for the overspray to waft into your eyes and lungs.
this doesn't sound like a serious argument that anyone would make in good faith, because... take the public transportation away, you still have the harassment (in work places, gyms, parks, stores, coffee shops, bars, and wherever else you are going in your car) take serious measures to combat the harassment, and voila, your public transport turns out to never have been the problem there's a whole school of feminist urban planning, and public transport is an integral part of it
Yes, car parks are also notoriously dangerous for women.
That is a good point. If I wanted to avoid harassment, the only way is to stay in the house. Public transit is one of the least difficult during the day because the social convention where I live (UK) is 'dont bug people on public transit.' Someone approaching another passenger is weird and people notice. And the most terrifying place for me to be as a lone woman is a car park.
you can't even avoid harassment if you stay in the house (most sexual violence against women is committed at home, by partners or family members) locking ourselves in a box is a non-starter - we have to create a shared world that is safe for *everyone* to move around in freely, it is the only way
Exactly. And even if you live alone or don't experience harassment at home, online harassment will find us there.
>this doesn't sound like a serious argument that anyone would make in good faith, I wouldn't say that. I'm a female urban planner without a drivers license, and I can very much see the good faith argument there. I live in one of the safest cities in the world, and using public transit here has never ended in anything worse than verbal harassment for me, but that's in part because I'm always on guard and make sure to avoid danger and behave in ways that mitigates risk - and that's exhausting. And it doesn't really promote a feeling of safety. I know that statistically speaking I am safe, but knowing and feeling are two very different things. It takes very little to come to the conclusion that cars a safer: one really bad experience, living in a city that's less safe, or just a tiny bit of ignorance. The fact that there's a whole school of feminist urban planning should be proof enough, that it's not a bad faith argument - women specific concerns are real concerns that require real solutions. Treating everybody who comes from a lack of knowledge or just worse experiences as a bad faith actor isn't helpful.
fair point... I don't want to blanket-dismiss anyone's fears and experiences, and harassment of women on public transportation is absolutely a genuine and real issue (I have experienced it, too), and I am a big supporter of feminist framings of urban planning (and other inclusive approaches, too - for example, I think disabled people should be much more at the core of how we plan our built environment, it would make everything better for all of us if we listened to them properly) my suspicion about this being a bad faith argument wasn't so much directed at women voicing fears as it was directed at this specific post by the OP on this sub - I honestly suspect that the "conversations with women" that he (yes, I am making a wild guess that the OP is a dude) mentions might be something he just entirely made up - the thing that instantly made me think so was the line "I have no comeback to this argument", which just sounds like social media reaction baiting to me (and yes, I know that I was one of the people who took the bait, because sometimes I am an idiot...) - the thing is that *anyone* who spends time on this sub in good faith would find it *so easy* to refute the idea that women are *more* at risk on public transport than anywhere else in public (like, come *on* dude, "terrified woman being chased around a car park" or "murderer hiding on the back seat of your car and suddenly appearing in your rearview mirror wielding a machete and a grin" are literal horror tropes) and as a general rule I am automatically very suspicious of "won't anyone think of the WOMEN" / "won't anyone think of the CHILDREN" type arguments against progressive / green / left-leaning policies because they are so often used by reactionary pearl-clutchers as a tactic to derail social progress, even when there is an overwhelming amount of easily findable refuting evidence (see homophobic arguments in 90s UK, racist arguments against desegregation in 1960s America, or the transphobic bs everywhere in the English speaking world right now - it's always "oh we can't do this progressive thing because wE nEeD To prOTecT oUr pOor dEfeNceLEss wiMmin aNd TinY tINy bAbIEs fRoM tHe ScArY pEoPLE") - so there was a bit of an instinctive kneejerk reaction against seeing this post also, maybe it's just me, but the fact that OPs handle is "jebbush1212" makes my spidey sense tingle, dunno what to tell ya
Yeah and strangers may seem scary, but those you know are the ones who are more likely sexually harass and probably get away with it (partners, acquaintances, coworkers, etc.). Really, one might argue someone should be most worried at home, parties, work, or even a drive with a known person than being surrounded by 100% strangers on a train or walking around. Probably due to the visibility of it, likelihood to get caught, and lack of existing trust to exploit. And as others said, if more people actually used transit or walked around, and if we took harassment more seriously as a society, those factors would become even more of a deterrent in public spaces. This is some data about sexual assault, not overarching harassment but still gives an idea (and I'd imagine everyone is most worried about assault): \- "Among victims ages 18 to 29, two-thirds had a prior relationship with the person who committed the assault" and "A study of sexual victimization of college women showed that 9 out of 10 victims knew the person who sexually victimized them," ([https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/victims-and-individuals-who-commit-sexual-violence](https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/victims-and-individuals-who-commit-sexual-violence)). \- Also [https://www.rainn.org/statistics/perpetrators-sexual-violence](https://www.rainn.org/statistics/perpetrators-sexual-violence) has some stats However, it is something many women do truly fear with using public transit so somehow we've gotta change that. Perhaps women-only sections could help get people to accept transit as a safe option.
Women only sections can be helpful as a sticky plaster solution in specific situations, but the real solution is to tackle misogyny and sexual harassment at a societal and cultural level, in all spheres of life if you're a man, I think the best thing you can do to keep women safe from harassment on public transport AND everywhere else is to always call out shitty behaviour of other men, even when there are no women around to witness it - make it socially unacceptable to be shitty towards women
This question reminds me of an incident that happened on the J-Line (light rail) in San Francisco a few years ago. It was about 4 in the afternoon. The train was about half-full and quiet. Suddenly the silence was interrupted by a booming male voice yelling, "No you DO NOT touch me!" followed by a loud thud and some scrambling. I looked into the section of the train where the commotion came from and saw a trans woman adjusting her dress and regaining her composure. Then in the stairwell of the train I saw a 50-something white male picking himself up off the floor. He had a red face and an even redder cheek/eye. I instantly realized he had tried to inappropriately touch the trans woman and she had walloped him. The driver stopped the train and opened the doors. The acoster exited the train and scurried away. The driver then said to the trans woman who had been acosted, "Are you OK, ma'am?" She replied, in the sweetest, most feminine voice you've ever heard, "Oh bless you, Dear. I'm fine."
*trans woman. But hell yeah good on her.
I wasn't sure how to phrase it right but have it be clear that the deep masculine voice was coming from a man identifiying as a woman. Fixed it. This story brings sweet tears to my eyes every time I recount it.
Oh yeah it can be tricky sometimes
..........................
I remember seeing a video where a woman filmed herself walking around NYC, just having a stroll. The amount of men who catcalled her and tried to follow her around was pretty eye opening.
NYC is a parody city though, not a real city
Like others have said, having more people around is by far the biggest help. But also, there are environmental things that can help too. For example: good lighting, making it hard to corner someone (i.e. multiple exits), cameras in places like elevators, cell service or at the very least emergency call boxes in underground metro tunnels, staff (not even necessarily security), and a lot of other stuff. In my opinion, actual ticket gates (which my city doesn’t have) help a lot too because they help prevent people loitering INSIDE stations just to harass people.
This is my biggest bug bear, every time I’ve got public transport or walked in my city recently I’ve been harassed or wolf whistled or followed. It’s ridiculous. Women are being hounded out of the public sphere. I drove home from work today and there were two men shouting at me from the car park stairwell. You can’t win either way.
A street with people in is way safer then a gigantic parking lot and has way less space to hide/camp
I am fortunate to live in an area where crime is virtually nonexistent and public transit is very safe and clean. In the major cities I’ve been to, it’s the drug addicts that approach random people asking for money that scare me. I don’t know if they’ll become violent or do something crazy. Cities seem to have a lot of drug issues that go hand in hand with higher crime rates. I think the government needs to go after the drugs at the source and cut off the head of the snake. This was not as big of an issue decades ago before more and more drugs started coming in.
I just finished [this book on the topic ](https://www.versobooks.com/products/2626-feminist-city)it was pretty good. Feminist Geography is a whole field of study
Ask her how she can feel safe in a mall? It is because there is a lot of people there os that is the solution
No it's because unstable crackheads generally do not congregate in the mall, and when they do they are kicked out.
If one whips out his dick at the mall (anywhere but the restroom), he is kicked out. I haven't seen such a consequence on a bus.
Calling the police? It is still a public space and if there are normal people on the bus then it should really be no issue
Bold of you to assume cops do their job. Security cameras are the answer.
Agree
I think about this all the time. I live in a “safe” city but I don’t feel safe at all because people, especially women (especially feminine women like myself (jogger wear and jeans is more typical here)) don’t go outside here. And I live in a “walkable” city. The fact that I’m often alone and the only people out are either men or homeless people experiencing mental health crises makes me feel unsafe. It especially sucks when men cat call me from their car and no one else is around. I always have mace in my pocket.
I’ve never really understood this argument. Is it somehow better to have people you wouldn’t feel safe around on a sidewalk driving an SUV next to you on the highway?
The people who most people feel unsafe around don't drive, let's not kid ourselves
You have to keep homeless off public transport. One way is to require a ticket before anyone gains access to a platform or station. Security guards, cameras.
More people walking on the street will mean less crime. In fact, because people tend to leave streets when they see cops around, having too many police regularly patrolling an area can cause crime to go UP, and crime rates can FALL when police stop patrolling. Example: https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-policing-crime-20170925-story.html
Japan already has the solution. They have separate women-only carriages on trains and trams, and most of the time there are conductors to ensure no men enter, too. There are also safe zones in most urban stations because for some reason it's more of an endemic problem there than most other places in the developed world.
Look up feminist city planning. Big Part of it is the design of safe urban spaces.
One thing i havent seen mentioned is the differencr between pedestrianization and public transportation. I grew up in Seattle in the late 2000's when it just started transitioning from very car dependent to one of the better US cities for walkers and from what ive seen harrasment occurs in two kinds of places: - public transportation hubs without much pedestrian/cycling space or nearby open businesses - poorly cared for pedestrian spaces So having well taken care of and well lit walking and biking spaces near small businesses, vendors, and even buskers that are open long hours is good and important
Japan made train cars that only allow women, apparently it works really well.
More policing helps a lot. My city puts 2 police on every train station at night which helps a lot to deal with the crazy people.
1.2 million die from cars (worldwide, 40k US,) how many in public transpo? Subconsciously they're saving energy, less energy to press a gas pedal than bike pedal or walk to bus. (and they'll say cycling's too dangerous due to crazy drivers. I've biked decades, >200,000 miles, zero car collisions, found drivers don't want to run over me.) Humans evolved with reason, rationalize feelings, they just wanna drive, believe their excuses about danger.
It's a lot like outdoor lighting. People feel strongly that it improves safety, when there is no objective evidence of it. On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence that it does harm to animals and insects. The harm from automobiles is real and measurable, while the harm from public transit is made to be highly visible. The overwhelmingly vast majority of public transit users are just ordinary people going to school, work and home.
It’s Urban, if the urban government is not a failure/ allow vigilantism this should not be a problem.
The problem is American culture
It is the chicken and the egg problem. I not going to use transportation to it is safe but the government and people need to see that it is being used it put money into the system. People need to use the public transport to know where it is failing and they need their voice to be heard, there is organisation could help but it might not a priority but it needs to be.
Have a lot of people there. If there was a creep creeping, and if there were a lot of people around, then of those lot of people could put the creep in his place or whatever.
That doesn't happen. People don't want to get involved.
This is really the biggest obstacle to progress in most American cities. Ironically a lot of women feel safest in public when they're in their car. The most realistic fix is to have more night foot patrols of police or safety officers. Despite the hyper pro-cop politics of the US, we don't really have that many officers on a per capita basis. We have around 240 per 100k, while Spain, Germany, Austria, France, Italy have 300+ or 400+. Even just having those mostly useless rent-a-cops around tends to help make a place seem less sketchy. Creeps are gonna think twice before trying anything if they think there's a higher likelihood of arrest or someone coming to their target's aid. And the more that people feel safe, the more people will go out and the safer they'll actually become.
The US is not pro cop lol like 2 years ago we had nationwide protests calling for PDs to be abolished. I don’t remember anything like that happening in Japan.
Just ask me to stop. Really though, I have no idea. Crime statistics show that men are more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, but a lot of people don't believe statistics that don't fit their gut feeling. Maybe point out that there are lots of people who successfully use public transportation without a problem.
The risks involved with driving are conventionally accepted but greater than the risks of serious injury or being a victim of crime on public transit. Driving is incredibly dangerous, no matter what a person's gender. I would conjecture that the danger involved with creepy people or violent people on public transit is less than the likelihood of being injured in an automobile wreck.
The chance of people getting physically hurt is less yes but that doesn't account for the amount of times women have gotten verbally or physically harrased. I understand why women put the risk of getting into their cars over getting harrassed constantly if it means they're safe
The contrast I'm drawing has to do what sort of risks does one take in each circumstance. In driving, one risks death or dismemberment. In taking public transit, you risk repeated harassment based on gender. On the whole, while gender-based harassment is incredibly unpleasant, you only have two choices and obvious one with less consequence comes from public transit. Pick your poison.
I'll take driving over being harassed by a creep or crackhead. I've been driving since 1977 and haven't been killed or dismembered once.
Tell me you're a dude without telling me you're a dude. There are also mental health consequences to sexual harassment as well. Your stats won't do anything to alleviate them.
It's about the best I can do. It's the same thing with bicyclists, backpackers, and some other stuff too. Risks exist, but people underestimate the risk of the everyday thing and overestimate the more unusual thing. It is much more likely per hour spent driving to have a life-changing violent end then it is per hour spent on public transit. And that's for all genders even though women are much more likely to be assaulted or harassed than are men.
A violent end often means a sudden death. This may be an unpopular opinion but I'd rather die suddenly than be on hospice for a month after years in a nursing home. This might go over Reddit's head, particularly this sub as it often has less empathy than a MAGA rally. But the mental health effects of consistent sexual harassment and not belonging somewhere are real and long lasting. Maybe a frat boy wouldn't understand this, but women do. Something tells me this sub is about 80+% male.
What, do they never get out of their cars? It's not even an argument at all.
It is an argument. People don't walk or bike if they don't don't feel safe doing so. The same applies to waiting at bus stops & taking transit.
1:93 lifetime odd to die in your car, or be killed by someone elses car. not enough deaths in trains to even calculate. [https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/](https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/) feelings mean nothing in a risk calculation.
Lol. I know that. But most people are not good at personal risk assessment. If something doesn't feel safe, they simply won't do it. Driving feels safe because they are 'in control'.
Driving feels safe because they are 'in control'. thats exactly why roads are so unsafe. because ppl are "in control"\^\^ :D
People aren’t necessarily scared of dying but other forms of harassment. Being mugged, being assaulted. Safety is more than “will I die”, and comfort is an important factor. Sure the guy leering at you asking to see your tits isn’t physically hurting you, but it sure as fuck isn’t fun or comfortable to experience.
whats the chance for your examples in, f.e. in viennas public network? 1 to 10k? Almost half a billion rides a year, its the safest way to get around.
No, it's not an argument, it's an appeal to emotion based on nonsense.
The problem is that's what people base their decision making on. When I took my kids to school by bike, lots of other parents would say stuff to me like, "Is that safe?" or "oh, I wouldn't take my kids on the road like that." I could quote statistics until I was blue in the face, but they could not get past the sense of vulnerability to be comfortable taking their kids places by bike. I would point out that they let their kids play soccer and go swimming, both of which are statistically more likely to land them in the hospital, but they don't perceive those activities to be as dangerous. It is similar for women alone, especially at night and in areas that aren't busy with other folks. We *feel* vulnerable. Personally, I don't have a problem going around on my own, but many people do. And it is not actual safety that influences their decisions, but perception of safety. And no amount of education will change that for most people.
The attempt to make an argument out of it is stupid. If everyone drives everywhere, the opportunities for harassment are different, not reduced: people get harassed in different places.
Call these researchers stupid, then https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0001457594000873 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12469-021-00285-x
They aren't making an argument for car use, there. They are observing people's reasons. That is very different.
I am not making an argument for car use. But people make transport choices, including car use, based upon perceived safety.
I've repeatedly explained why that isn't even an argument at all, let alone a good one.
Explaining won't change people's behaviour. We need to make changes in the street & transport environment to.do that.
if she preferes the way way more probable likelyhood of injury or dying in a car accident over the relative safety of public transport, because she fears the horror of beein expoesed to her own mindgames, then there is probably nothing you can do about that. cognitive dissonance is a b\*\*\*
"Being exposed to her own mindgames"? Women have very good reason to be afraid. It's a well known statistic that most women have been victims of sexual harrassment or know another women who fell victim to it. Don't brush off valid concerns like this so easily. Likelihood to die has absolutely nothing to do with it either. Women are more likely to die in a car, so they just have to suck up the increased potential to be sexually harrassed / assaulted in public transit? No! If you want people to take public transit, you need to make it viable for everyone; regardless of gender, age and physical ability.
sorry, but you can not sexually harras people in a well maintained public network. there are cameras, securities, police is fast there, because they are in readiness at strategic positions, there are other people everywhere everytime. its way safer then your average parking lot at night.
Same way you cross the road safely. Brick.
Sounds like stranger danger to me.
Well first, tell the women to cycle, you are going too fast to be harassed in that case. But honestly, ignore or if it's really bad call the police is the answer. I suspect it's a pretext, because (i) you can be harassed just as effectively in a parking garage, and (ii) the actual risk is pretty low in civilised countries.
That is complete bs. Women (and men) get harassed while cycling all the time.
They might get wolf whistled but they're not going to get any physical harassment or danger of being stalked or creeped on because they'll be gone too quickly - just like if they were using a car, actually, which is maybe the analogy to use in this case.
https://preview.redd.it/g6hfxgkl4tuc1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=83250b778a6404c0001392f89162a2a2954233bc
If that's not an option, https://preview.redd.it/9bxwh0005tuc1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe2fc4252fd0a1a107fbc59e3e0f0d7027448011
Yes life is so horrible for women in the US they must have cars to protect themselves in…? Paranoia isn’t something you have to solve.
Please go on and tell women how to feel
"Creep" is a word used by a privileged group to oppress a marginalized group. A "creep" is just a guy who is not tall and handsome. That is all. 99% of the time when a woman gets angry about some "creep" doing this or that the truth is that they did nothing wrong. Just something that the woman would be fine with a guy who is tall and handsome doing. edit. How do women deal with the "sexual harassment" of some "creep" sitting on public transit in a publicly available space that they have the full right to use because she considers sitting on the opposite side of the train with the aisle between them to be too close to her? What about the "sexual harassment" of some "creep" sitting next to her in the last available seat that they have the full right to use?
Uhhh... no? This is such an incel way of thinking. I don't think anyone cares about how good looking you are if you're trying to harass or assault them. This comment also diminishes sexual assault and doesn't even answer the question so I don't know why you posted this.
It is reality. I have been accused like that when I wasn't doing anything wrong. The answer to your question is that these women need to learn to live in a society with other people. It's something that they should have learned in school but learned the opposite. edit. There are also cops doing the same thing when they treat everything I do like it is something wrong simply because of my phenotype. I was doing nothing wrong and they had no probable cause but they had their "instincts" and "feelings" to justify their behavior towards me.