2015 UK Politics Megathread

[CoraSpia]

If you're on a 4-carriage train of which 1 carriage is women's only, and 1 is first class - men have a choice of 3 carriages and women have a choice of 4. That doesn't change the price of the tickets.

And even if ALL the women went into the women's carriage... they'd just be vacating seats in one of the other sections. The ratio of bodies versus seats hasn't changed... so the price hasn't changed.

That's the ideal case distribution scenario: you get the segregated carriage full leaving equivalent number of seats in other carriages.
Worst case scenario is of course that no women would want to use the segregated carriage leaving the carriage empty and requiring men at next station to take another train (as women can take the empty carriage) or else fork out for company adding third general carriage.
Average case would probably be under-utilised segregated carriage, leading to same issues as in worse case scenario but to lesser extent. Fact is segregation undoubtedly leads to less efficient distribution of resources, because of unequal utilisation of resources.

Exactly: the only women who I could envisage using it are those travelling alone or with young children.

[Grave_n_idle]

If you're on a 4-carriage train of which 1 carriage is women's only, and 1 is first class - men have a choice of 3 carriages and women have a choice of 4. That doesn't change the price of the tickets.

And even if ALL the women went into the women's carriage... they'd just be vacating seats in one of the other sections. The ratio of bodies versus seats hasn't changed... so the price hasn't changed.

That's the ideal case distribution scenario: you get the segregated carriage full leaving equivalent number of seats in other carriages.
Worst case scenario is of course that no women would want to use the segregated carriage leaving the carriage empty and requiring men at next station to take another train (as women can take the empty carriage) or else fork out for company adding third general carriage.
Average case would probably be under-utilised segregated carriage, leading to same issues as in worse case scenario but to lesser extent. Fact is segregation undoubtedly leads to less efficient distribution of resources, because of unequal utilisation of resources.

If no one used the carriage on certain lines, trains wouldn't have an extra carriage on those lines.

But it's not an 'ideal' distribution - it's a probable distribution. If the rest of the train is filling up and there's more space in the women's carriage, women will tend to gravitate towards it if for no other reason than space - because that's what people do (if you don't believe me, next time you ride a commuter train, watch the process by which a carriage fills). If the women's carriage was more full, some women would choose to ride other carriages. Again, because people do.

So it doesn't have to be 'ideal' distribution - it just has to follow relatively normal behaviour, and it will reach an equilibrium.

[CoraSpia]

That's the ideal case distribution scenario: you get the segregated carriage full leaving equivalent number of seats in other carriages.
Worst case scenario is of course that no women would want to use the segregated carriage leaving the carriage empty and requiring men at next station to take another train (as women can take the empty carriage) or else fork out for company adding third general carriage.
Average case would probably be under-utilised segregated carriage, leading to same issues as in worse case scenario but to lesser extent. Fact is segregation undoubtedly leads to less efficient distribution of resources, because of unequal utilisation of resources.

If no one used the carriage on certain lines, trains wouldn't have an extra carriage on those lines.

But it's not an 'ideal' distribution - it's a probable distribution. If the rest of the train is filling up and there's more space in the women's carriage, women will tend to gravitate towards it if for no other reason than space - because that's what people do (if you don't believe me, next time you ride a commuter train, watch the process by which a carriage fills). If the women's carriage was more full, some women would choose to ride other carriages. Again, because people do.

So it doesn't have to be 'ideal' distribution - it just has to follow relatively normal behaviour, and it will reach an equilibrium.

What is the proportion of single women travelling on trains? Also, I can't imagine the special womens carriage being dropped on any routes, because nationalisation loves standardisation.

[Irona]

If no one used the carriage on certain lines, trains wouldn't have an extra carriage on those lines.

But it's not an 'ideal' distribution - it's a probable distribution. If the rest of the train is filling up and there's more space in the women's carriage, women will tend to gravitate towards it if for no other reason than space - because that's what people do (if you don't believe me, next time you ride a commuter train, watch the process by which a carriage fills). If the women's carriage was more full, some women would choose to ride other carriages. Again, because people do.

So it doesn't have to be 'ideal' distribution - it just has to follow relatively normal behaviour, and it will reach an equilibrium.

Your assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone, they don't. The carriage would be underused because only women who travel alone or with small children would use it at all and only a proportion of them would do so anyway.

[CoraSpia]

Your assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone, they don't. The carriage would be underused because only women who travel alone or with small children would use it at all and only a proportion of them would do so anyway.

exactly what I said.

[The Heart of Hypatia]

I don't even know where to begin with this whole special carriage idea. If you are abused or assaulted on a train inform the staff, if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the police, and if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the Independent Police Complaints Commission. If all of those options fail then it's time to involve the press and your member of parliament, if you haven't already.

I don't even think people being anti-social on public transport is a gendered issue, generally speaking. Different categories of anti-social behaviour seem to be dominated by single groups, sure, but speaking purely anecdotally I don't think I have ever felt more uncomfortable on public transport than when sharing it with mouthy, drunk women.

[Grave_n_idle]

Your assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone, they don't. The carriage would be underused because only women who travel alone or with small children would use it at all and only a proportion of them would do so anyway.

No, I'm not assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone - it just doesn't affect the distribution.

e.g. when you watch one carriage fill, you notice people who come on alone sit on their own roughly equidistant from as many other passengers as they can. If they come on in groups they do the same thing, except as a group - i.e. if you have just two groups of strangers on one carriage, they will situate themselves at opposite ends of the carriage (not necessarily right at the end, that's not the point). Seriously, watch a carriage fill next time you're on a train - watch human behaviour, and you'll see why women alone OR as part of a group will not affect the distribution except in extremely statistically anomalous circumstances.

[Grave_n_idle]

I don't even know where to begin with this whole special carriage idea. If you are abused or assaulted on a train inform the staff, if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the police, and if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the Independent Police Complaints Commission. If all of those options fail then it's time to involve the press and your member of parliament, if you haven't already.

I don't even think people being anti-social on public transport is a gendered issue, generally speaking. Different categories of anti-social behaviour seem to be dominated by single groups, sure, but speaking purely anecdotally I don't think I have ever felt more uncomfortable on public transport than when sharing it with mouthy, drunk women.

There's a difference between feeling uncomfortable and being sexually assaulted.

[Grave_n_idle]

What is the proportion of single women travelling on trains? Also, I can't imagine the special womens carriage being dropped on any routes, because nationalisation loves standardisation.

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle. Nationalisation doesn't love standardisation so much that it makes every train have the same number of carriages, or even the same types.

[CoraSpia]

What is the proportion of single women travelling on trains? Also, I can't imagine the special womens carriage being dropped on any routes, because nationalisation loves standardisation.

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle. Nationalisation doesn't love standardisation so much that it makes every train have the same number of carriages, or even the same types.

Are our trains nationalised at the moment?

[Imperializt Russia]

Really why not just have a security/police presence in a single carriage which is a designated safe space for anyone to go to if they are feeling threatened by another passenger regardless of their gender or the other passengers gender? That is a sensible policy.

Security yes, police no. No need to overstretch the police because someone's feeling vulnerable.

Since when is assuaging public fear not in the remit of the police?

If you're on a 4-carriage train of which 1 carriage is women's only, and 1 is first class - men have a choice of 3 carriages and women have a choice of 4. That doesn't change the price of the tickets.

And even if ALL the women went into the women's carriage... they'd just be vacating seats in one of the other sections. The ratio of bodies versus seats hasn't changed... so the price hasn't changed.

but most women won't, because a lot of women have families/like to travel with men. So you've got one dirt-cheep carriage because they can't sell seats in it, meaning their'll be a gender difference in price.

I've been using rail travel in Britain for four years and I have never seen them sell off cheap tickets because it's not filled. That's when tickets become more expensive.

If no one used the carriage on certain lines, trains wouldn't have an extra carriage on those lines.

But it's not an 'ideal' distribution - it's a probable distribution. If the rest of the train is filling up and there's more space in the women's carriage, women will tend to gravitate towards it if for no other reason than space - because that's what people do (if you don't believe me, next time you ride a commuter train, watch the process by which a carriage fills). If the women's carriage was more full, some women would choose to ride other carriages. Again, because people do.

So it doesn't have to be 'ideal' distribution - it just has to follow relatively normal behaviour, and it will reach an equilibrium.

What is the proportion of single women travelling on trains? Also, I can't imagine the special womens carriage being dropped on any routes, because nationalisation loves standardisation.

In my experience, quite high. Because they're usually mothers with children, students or commuters.
Couples are pretty frequent, of course, but I'd say they're not exactly 50/50

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle. Nationalisation doesn't love standardisation so much that it makes every train have the same number of carriages, or even the same types.

Are our trains nationalised at the moment?

Why do you think HS2 will have the same number of carriages as Sheffield to Lincoln?

Long-distance trains are vast. Short-distance trains are not. Cross-country trains are the average size of 4-5 total carriages.

[Grave_n_idle]

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle. Nationalisation doesn't love standardisation so much that it makes every train have the same number of carriages, or even the same types.

Are our trains nationalised at the moment?

That's actually a red herring. You're not going to have ten carriages on the line from Walton-On-The-Naze to Frinton-On-Sea just because there's ten carriages from Luton to King's Cross - nationalised or not.

[CoraSpia]

Actually, the train from Worcester to London only has 4 carriages, and that's one of the main pickup/dropoff points for Oxford and Reading as well.

@Imperialist Russia: I'm not replying to a multi-quote post in that sense, so here goes:
1. Because it's a ridiculous, unjustified, irrational fear. The level of sexual assault on the trains is far too low to require a police presence, it's like putting the police at every school to guard against possible pedo teachers.
2. Actually, if you go in first class, the upgrades can become stupidly cheep. This is what this unfilled train carriage will turn into.
3. The level of women on their own or with small children is certainly lower than thenumber of passengers overall, meaning that you'll have a carriage that can only be filled by a small number of passengers, who may or may not want to fill it.

[The Archregimancy]

What is the proportion of single women travelling on trains? Also, I can't imagine the special womens carriage being dropped on any routes, because nationalisation loves standardisation.

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle.

This isn't necessarily true.

While the Midland mainline sometimes offers trains with up to six carriages, and the Carlisle-Settle line can offer trains with as few as two carriages, in the last five years I've taken four-carriage trains on both lines.

What consistently differs between the two routes is the type and capacity of carriage, not necessarily the number of carriages.

[Vassenor]

Are our trains nationalised at the moment?

That's actually a red herring. You're not going to have ten carriages on the line from Walton-On-The-Naze to Frinton-On-Sea just because there's ten carriages from Luton to King's Cross - nationalised or not.

And clearly someone didn't even bother to do research on the matter anyway. Considering that during BR days the number of carriages wasn't fixed within a given train class.

Example: Class 165 Networker with two carriages, Class 165 Networker with three carriages.

[Geilinor]

I don't even know where to begin with this whole special carriage idea. If you are abused or assaulted on a train inform the staff, if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the police, and if they don't take your complaint seriously inform the Independent Police Complaints Commission. If all of those options fail then it's time to involve the press and your member of parliament, if you haven't already.

I don't even think people being anti-social on public transport is a gendered issue, generally speaking. Different categories of anti-social behaviour seem to be dominated by single groups, sure, but speaking purely anecdotally I don't think I have ever felt more uncomfortable on public transport than when sharing it with mouthy, drunk women.

There's a difference between feeling uncomfortable and being sexually assaulted.

Separating men and women is not a response. That makes sexism and gender stereotypes worse.

[Irona]

Your assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone, they don't. The carriage would be underused because only women who travel alone or with small children would use it at all and only a proportion of them would do so anyway.

No, I'm not assuming that everybody who rides a train does so alone - it just doesn't affect the distribution.

e.g. when you watch one carriage fill, you notice people who come on alone sit on their own roughly equidistant from as many other passengers as they can. If they come on in groups they do the same thing, except as a group - i.e. if you have just two groups of strangers on one carriage, they will situate themselves at opposite ends of the carriage (not necessarily right at the end, that's not the point). Seriously, watch a carriage fill next time you're on a train - watch human behaviour, and you'll see why women alone OR as part of a group will not affect the distribution except in extremely statistically anomalous circumstances.

Yes people do try and stay away from sitting by strangers on trains but that doesn't change that a women only carriage will be avoided by women in groups with males. People don't diffuse like gas. The carriage that's women only will be underused.

[Great Nepal]

If no one used the carriage on certain lines, trains wouldn't have an extra carriage on those lines.

What if no one at certain times used those carriage or certain days?

But it's not an 'ideal' distribution - it's a probable distribution. If the rest of the train is filling up and there's more space in the women's carriage, women will tend to gravitate towards it if for no other reason than space - because that's what people do (if you don't believe me, next time you ride a commuter train, watch the process by which a carriage fills). If the women's carriage was more full, some women would choose to ride other carriages. Again, because people do.
So it doesn't have to be 'ideal' distribution - it just has to follow relatively normal behaviour, and it will reach an equilibrium.

That is assuming women are travelling with no male partner, family, friends etc - essentially this carriage will only be suitable for women travelling alone or in group of other females. Further with exception of certain lines, changing carriages in undergrounds involves actually getting off the train - probably not going to be very much used. What you'll get is this distribution being disturbed leading to women's only carriage being used less compared to other carriages because fewer group of people can use these carriages.

[The Matthew Islands]

That's just silly. A train from Leicester to London does not have the same number of carriages as a train from Settle to Carlisle.

This isn't necessarily true.

While the Midland mainline sometimes offers trains with up to six carriages, and the Carlisle-Settle line can offer trains with as few as two carriages, in the last five years I've taken four-carriage trains on both lines.

What consistently differs between the two routes is the type and capacity of carriage, not necessarily the number of carriages.

Well yes I suppose that train operators will add or subtract carriages as demand dictates but I don't that was what Grave_n_idle was getting it, its more about Coraspia's random notion that if the trains were nationalised every train line everywhere would have the exact same amount of carriages regardless of demand or distance.

[CoraSpia]

This isn't necessarily true.

While the Midland mainline sometimes offers trains with up to six carriages, and the Carlisle-Settle line can offer trains with as few as two carriages, in the last five years I've taken four-carriage trains on both lines.

What consistently differs between the two routes is the type and capacity of carriage, not necessarily the number of carriages.

Well yes I suppose that train operators will add or subtract carriages as demand dictates but I don't that was what Grave_n_idle was getting it, its more about Coraspia's random notion that if the trains were nationalised every train line everywhere would have the exact same amount of carriages regardless of demand or distance.

That wasn't what I said at all. I said we didn't know what would happen if they were nationalised.

[Vassenor]

Something else to consider: Just about every train in use today is a fixed rake. It's not possible to add or remove carriages on a whim.

[CoraSpia]

Something else to consider: Just about every train in use today is a fixed rake. It's not possible to add or remove carriages on a whim.

Even if it was, they operate at such a tight schedule it'd have to be done quickly.

[The Nihilistic view]

If you're on a 4-carriage train, of which 1 carriage is womens only and 1 is first class, men have a capacity of 2 carriages, while women have a choice of 3. All it'll do is provide dirt-cheep travel for women.

If you're on a 4-carriage train of which 1 carriage is women's only, and 1 is first class - men have a choice of 3 carriages and women have a choice of 4. That doesn't change the price of the tickets.

And even if ALL the women went into the women's carriage... they'd just be vacating seats in one of the other sections. The ratio of bodies versus seats hasn't changed... so the price hasn't changed.

Also local trains that small only have a small first class compartment or two. It's really 3.8 carriages of standard class. Based on that they could look at demand and have say half a carriage or as they already ask people to move around when it's busy they would ask women to move into the women only carriage if it was not full.

Regardless this is not going to happen. Very few think it's a good idea.

[The Nihilistic view]

Except you're making totally unsupported assumptions.

Not least being the totally illogical assumption that there will be dirt cheap seats. If they are cheap, women will sit there. If they sit their, the seats won't be empty, so they won't be cheap. There would be an immediate price equilibrium - but even ignoring THAT, you assume women would simply choose NOT to sit in the carriage. Which makes no sense.

So are you saying that women would choose to sit in a segregated carriage rather than with their families?

Also, is this a women-only carriage, or a non-men carriage? It seems a little odd not to allow children.

I'm sure there would be some common sense rules around allowing children up to a certain age in them too.

[Shamhnan Insir]

Ladies and Gents, perhaps we could steer the conversation back to politics, and let the inevitable clusterfluck of Corbyns railway ideas derail themselves?