Jeremy Corbyn’s consideration of female-only carriages in public transport shows an ignorance of the causes of sexual harassment and what it may take to solve the issue, argues Paula Zoido-Oses

Zoido, Paula

LSE Research Online

By Democratic Audit UK 2015-8-28Jeremy Corbyn’s ‘women only carriages’ proposal shows analarming lack of understanding of the real causes ofharassmentdemocraticaudit.com /2015/08/28/jeremy-corbyns-women-only-carriages-proposal-shows-an-alarming-lack-of-understanding-of-the-real-causes-of-harassment/Jeremy Corbyn’s consideration of female-only carriages in public transport shows an ignorance of the causes ofsexual harassment and what it may take to solve the issue, argues Paula Zoido-Oses.Credit: っ, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY SA 3.0Jeremy Corbyn recently said he would consider the possibility of introducing female-only carriages in publictransport as a means of reducing harassment rates. After having faced some serious backlash regarding this issue,his team rapidly pointed out that this was not his own initiative, but precisely the suggestion of women he hadconsulted over the issue. If female-only carriages became a reality, this would only be because women themselveswant them. And what could possibly be wrong with granting victims of harassment precisely what they envision as asolution to the issue? The answer is simple: the idea of female-only carriages is wrong because it does not pose asolution to the problem of harassment. If anything, by replicating the same structures that lead to the harassment offemales in public transport, it becomes part of the problem.To begin with, one thing needs to be made clear: sexism is about power. In our society sexism takes the form ofpatriarchy, which is the general assumption that females are weaker than men, that as such deserve differenttreatment, and by extension different rights. It also assumes that men are stronger and therefore they are morepowerful, or at least more deserving of power and of different rights too. Catcalls, glances, winks, unsolicited smilesand so on are never a form of flattery, but only an open exercise of the superior power men have been culturallyassigned.I have always compared harassment on public transport to the way some of us may react upon encountering a1/3puppy on the tube. One may play with it, unsolicited, imposing one’s desires over those of the animal that we see asdifferent to us and thus deserving of a different measure of respect than our human counterparts. I ignore thereasons that move a man to leer at me during the whole 19 minutes of my daily tube journey; however if there is onething that can stop him from ever doing that again it would be a sharp understanding and assimilation of the fact thatI am not weaker than him. That as a woman I deserve exactly the same measure of respect as his malecounterparts. That there is no excuse for harassment, regardless of what society has taught him. That leering atwomen may seem like a harmless form of entertainment to him – like playing with a puppy – but it is just onemanifestation of a form of discrimination that corrosively pervades our society. Unless we begin by addressingsexism in a radical and sustained way, we cannot hope to ever end with the issue of female harassment in publictransport.Sexist discrimination can manifest itself in a varied number of ways, sometimes so sophisticatedly disguised assomething else that it can be hard to see it clearly for what it is. For instance, when a man offers a woman his seaton the tube only because she is a woman, he does it because he has been taught that this is the polite or courteousthing to do. Despite of his good intentions, he is (most likely inadvertently) replicating an attitude that is ultimatelygrounded on the seminal patriarchal notion of female weakness.I do not doubt of Jeremy Corbyn’s good intentions, but the myopia of his proposal is alarming. Now we do not onlyget a seat, but an entire carriage – that is how weak we have become. The fact that Corbyn’s team has adduced asa defence that the idea of female-solo carriages was introduced by women who have experienced harassmentthemselves shows an even greater misunderstanding of the issue. I can only imagine two possible scenariosconducive to women demanding female-only carriages: either they have assimilated sexism to the point of beingconvinced that as women they are weaker and powerless and therefore deserving of different rights, or they knowthey are not but are so lacking in support to propose curtailing their own freedom instead of that of their aggressorsas a desperate last measure. Both options show the harrowing extent of sexism in our society. The fact that Corbynand his team have not picked up on this is beyond concerning.We will only see the end of harassment in public transport once our society as a whole has understood that menhold no power over women. This may be too great a task for Corbyn alone to take under his stride, but a good startwould be to empower women so that they can make this point whenever they fall victims of sexist discrimination. It isnot the responsibility of women only to teach society that they deserve equal rights and treatment, however it isproblematic that they are constantly faced with issues when raising their voice about this. Along with the all-femalecarriages, Corbyn has also proposed a number of measures that could help fight in this direction, such as 24-hourhotline for women to report harassment or cabinet members for women’s safety on local councils. These show abetter understanding of the roots of harassment, and of what it may take to eradicate it.It requires a joint effort from all social and political actors to challenge and change one of the deepest and moreculturally ingrained commonplaces of our society: that women are not as powerful as men. The consideration offemale-only carriages as a plausible solution represents a spectacular failure in this regard. It is worrying thatcitizens have suggested this measure in the first place, but that professional politicians and policymakers seem tooready to pick it up and push it forward shows an alarming lack of understanding of the real causes of harassmentand of what it may take to end it.—Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of Democratic Audit, nor of the London School ofEconomics. It originally appeared on the LSE Politics and Policy blog. Please read our comments policy beforeposting.—2/3Paula Zoido-Oses is a PhD candidate in the European Institute in the London School ofEconomics. She is writing a thesis that explores Isaiah Berlin’s thought. She is particularlyinterested in political and moral philosophy, liberalism and value pluralism, continentalphilosophy and philosophy of history.3/3

Jeremy Corbyn’s ‘women only carriages’ proposal shows an alarming lack of understanding of the real causes of harassment

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online