The NationStates Feminist Thread

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I'm sorry, are you literally blaming women for trying to take the train in peace for being assaulted? This isn't even subtle victim blaming here.

Maybe men shouldn't grope women on the fucking train?

Obviously, men shouldn't grope women on the train, but since we don't live in a perfect asshole-free world, it's just a practical reality that it would improve the situation if more women spoke up for themselves.

It doesn't mean groping is OK. It doesn't mean women are the source of the problem. It doesn't mean the police shouldn't do their own part by arresting gropers. It doesn't mean men shouldn't be taught to respect women's personal space.

I am just saying that there is something women could do that would help the situation -- i.e. speak up if someone is bothering them.

That could get them hurt or ridiculed.

We need to continue teaching women how to stand up for themselves, but I think a bigger issue would be teaching men to quit oppressing them.

[Dakini]

Right. So apparently your suggestion is not really going to help the situation.

I don't see why it wouldn't help, even if there is also room for improvement on other fronts. Just because speaking up doesn't always fix the situation doesn't mean it NEVER will, or that it won't at least draw attention to the extent of the problem.

In the meantime, I think it's pretty fair for women who just don't want to deal with that to have another option.

[Pope Joan]

If one is entitled to damages in Japan for being groped on the mass transit, I do not think trying to collect those damages should be called extortion.

[Dakini]

If one is entitled to damages in Japan for being groped on the mass transit, I do not think trying to collect those damages should be called extortion.

In this case, she was basically going to say "we can either take a trip to the bank machine, where you will pull out a wad of cash and give it to me or we will take a trip to the police station and I will press charges". Being groped on the train does not entitle victims to monetary compensation, it just means that if the perpetrator is caught, he can go to jail (and will probably lose his job).

[Chessmistress]

I don't see why it wouldn't help, even if there is also room for improvement on other fronts. Just because speaking up doesn't always fix the situation doesn't mean it NEVER will, or that it won't at least draw attention to the extent of the problem.

In the meantime, I think it's pretty fair for women who just don't want to deal with that to have another option.

Exactly.
I just want point out that is the same concept I used when I wrote about separatism: of course we are talking about very different situations, a ride on the metro and a relationship, but the basic idea is the same: women who just don't want to deal with that (eventual groping in the first case, eventual abuses in the second case) should have another option.

[Dakini]

In the meantime, I think it's pretty fair for women who just don't want to deal with that to have another option.

Exactly.
I just want point out that is the same concept I used when I wrote about separatism: of course we are talking about very different situations, a ride on the metro and a relationship, but the basic idea is the same: women who just don't want to deal with that (eventual groping in the first case, eventual abuses in the second case) should have another option.

Yes, because women are never abusive in relationships with other women and because expecting straight women to just develop an attraction to other women is totally reasonable.

[Chessmistress]

Exactly.
I just want point out that is the same concept I used when I wrote about separatism: of course we are talking about very different situations, a ride on the metro and a relationship, but the basic idea is the same: women who just don't want to deal with that (eventual groping in the first case, eventual abuses in the second case) should have another option.

Yes, because women are never abusive in relationships with other women and because expecting straight women to just develop an attraction to other women is totally reasonable.

Never said so. I just write about "option". Regarding abuses: everybody can be abusive, but, frankly, I think there's an HUGE difference between MRA propaganda about abusive women and the reality.
I think that the chances a woman would be abusive may be the same of a woman would grope you in a women-only metro: that's pure logic...

[Dakini]

Yes, because women are never abusive in relationships with other women and because expecting straight women to just develop an attraction to other women is totally reasonable.

Never said so. I just write about "option". Regarding abuses: everybody can be abusive, but, frankly, I think there's an HUGE difference between MRA propaganda about abusive women and the reality.
I think that the chances a woman would be abusive may be the same of a woman would grope you in a women-only metro: that's pure logic...

Not really. For starters, the people who grope others on the train are a different pool of people from the people who are going to be domestic abusers. We're talking about totally different situations here. Also, the women who make a point of going to the women-only train are also self-selecting to get away from that sort of thing (e.g. when I ride the train during rush hour, I'm not in the women-only train and I see other women who are taking their chances as well).

Additionally, to take the case of Japan, while 64% of women in Tokyo report being groped on the train, 33% of Japanese women report domestic violence. One is simply much more likely to be groped on the train than to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Furthermore, it is possible to exit relationships, even abusive ones. It's not always the easiest thing to do, but it's possible. In general though, being in a relationship is entirely optional, while working is not. If one has a job that operates during normal business hours, one has to ride the morning train during rush hour with everyone else. A woman should not have to put up with someone groping her every day during her commute, whether or not he stops when she yells at him in order to work. Additionally, while there are way more non-abusive men out there than there are abusive ones, most jobs require this sort of morning commute (otherwise it wouldn't be rush hour), so it's much easier to find a non-abusive boyfriend or husband than it is to find a job that doesn't require a commute during rush hour (at least around Tokyo).

Basically, most men aren't abusive so it's possible to avoid abusive relationships without avoiding men. While most men also don't grope women on trains, a majority of women living and commuting in Tokyo have been groped on trains during rush hour. Since most jobs require employees to be at work for 9 in the morning, most women are required to be on the rush hour trains in order to work. Providing women-only cars is a reasonable alternative for women who don't want to worry about being groped on the trains.

Suggesting that straight women have the option to enter into relationships with women, on the other hand, is pretty stupid. Straight women aren't into women... otherwise they wouldn't be straight. This is much more akin to saying that gay conversion "therapy" is totally reasonable than anything else.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Women need to be encouraged to stand up for themselves and draw attention to the fact when they are being sexually assaulted by men. Women should feel as if calling for help will bring a stop to the assault and not make the matter worse. Encouraging women to remain quiet while they are being assaulted by men is a symptom of rape culture. The public not feeling comfortable coming to the aid of a woman being sexually assaulted is a symptom of rape culture. We all need to learn to stand up to men who sexually assault women, and not pretend it isn't happening or commit the sin of allowing intervention to make the matter worse.

[Chessmistress]

Never said so. I just write about "option". Regarding abuses: everybody can be abusive, but, frankly, I think there's an HUGE difference between MRA propaganda about abusive women and the reality.
I think that the chances a woman would be abusive may be the same of a woman would grope you in a women-only metro: that's pure logic...

Not really. For starters, the people who grope others on the train are a different pool of people from the people who are going to be domestic abusers. We're talking about totally different situations here. Also, the women who make a point of going to the women-only train are also self-selecting to get away from that sort of thing (e.g. when I ride the train during rush hour, I'm not in the women-only train and I see other women who are taking their chances as well).

Additionally, to take the case of Japan, while 64% of women in Tokyo report being groped on the train, 33% of Japanese women report domestic violence. One is simply much more likely to be groped on the train than to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Furthermore, it is possible to exit relationships, even abusive ones. It's not always the easiest thing to do, but it's possible. In general though, being in a relationship is entirely optional, while working is not. If one has a job that operates during normal business hours, one has to ride the morning train during rush hour with everyone else. A woman should not have to put up with someone groping her every day during her commute, whether or not he stops when she yells at him or not in order to work. Additionally, while there are more non-abusive men out there than there are abusive ones, most jobs require this sort of morning commute (otherwise it wouldn't be rush hour), so it's much easier to find a non-abusive boyfriend or husband than it is to find a job that doesn't require a commute during rush hour (at least around Tokyo).

Basically, most men aren't abusive so it's possible to avoid abusive relationships without avoiding men. While most men also don't grope women on trains, a majority of women living and commuting in Tokyo have been groped on trains during rush hour. Since most jobs require employees to be at work for 9 in the morning, most women are required to be on the rush hour trains in order to work. Providing women-only cars is a reasonable alternative for women who don't want to deal with this.

Suggesting that straight women have the option to enter into relationships with women, on the other hand, is pretty stupid. Straight women aren't into women... otherwise they wouldn't be straight. This is much more akin to saying that gay conversion therapy is totally reasonable than anything else.

First: never wrote most males are abusive.
Second: there's a difference between 64% and 33%, but it's not so huge - it's not even twice.
Third: it is possible to exit relationships, even abusive ones? Really?
I think it's more difficult to exit from an abusive relationship than to exit from a metro wagon: and in both cases usually you consider to exit after the abuses - so that doesn't prevent abuses at all.
Also, domestic abuses are many times more severe than harassment within a crowded public place like a metro, because the massive presence of other persons always limits at certain extent the actions of the aggressor.

[Dakini]

Women need to be encouraged to stand up for themselves and draw attention to the fact when they are being sexually assaulted by men. Women should feel as if calling for help will bring a stop to the assault and not make the matter worse. Encouraging women to remain quiet while they are being assaulted by men is a symptom of rape culture. The public not feeling comfortable coming to the aid of a woman being sexually assaulted is a symptom of rape culture. We all need to learn to stand up to men who sexually assault women, and not pretend it isn't happening or commit the sin of allowing intervention to make the matter worse.

Agreed. In the meantime, however, I don't think it's unreasonable to allow women a safe space on the train.

Not really. For starters, the people who grope others on the train are a different pool of people from the people who are going to be domestic abusers. We're talking about totally different situations here. Also, the women who make a point of going to the women-only train are also self-selecting to get away from that sort of thing (e.g. when I ride the train during rush hour, I'm not in the women-only train and I see other women who are taking their chances as well).

Additionally, to take the case of Japan, while 64% of women in Tokyo report being groped on the train, 33% of Japanese women report domestic violence. One is simply much more likely to be groped on the train than to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Furthermore, it is possible to exit relationships, even abusive ones. It's not always the easiest thing to do, but it's possible. In general though, being in a relationship is entirely optional, while working is not. If one has a job that operates during normal business hours, one has to ride the morning train during rush hour with everyone else. A woman should not have to put up with someone groping her every day during her commute, whether or not he stops when she yells at him or not in order to work. Additionally, while there are more non-abusive men out there than there are abusive ones, most jobs require this sort of morning commute (otherwise it wouldn't be rush hour), so it's much easier to find a non-abusive boyfriend or husband than it is to find a job that doesn't require a commute during rush hour (at least around Tokyo).

Basically, most men aren't abusive so it's possible to avoid abusive relationships without avoiding men. While most men also don't grope women on trains, a majority of women living and commuting in Tokyo have been groped on trains during rush hour. Since most jobs require employees to be at work for 9 in the morning, most women are required to be on the rush hour trains in order to work. Providing women-only cars is a reasonable alternative for women who don't want to deal with this.

Suggesting that straight women have the option to enter into relationships with women, on the other hand, is pretty stupid. Straight women aren't into women... otherwise they wouldn't be straight. This is much more akin to saying that gay conversion therapy is totally reasonable than anything else.

First: never wrote most males are abusive.
Second: there's a difference between 64% and 33%, but it's not so huge - it's not even twice.
Third: it is possible to exit relationships, even abusive ones? Really?
I think it's more difficult to exit from an abusive relationship than to exit from a metro wagon: and in both cases usually you consider to exit after the abuses - so that doesn't prevent abuses at all.
Also, domestic abuses are many times more severe than harassment within a crowded public place like a metro, because the massive presence of other persons always limits at certain extent the actions of the aggressor.

64% is pretty close to being twice 33%.
And yes, it's definitely possible to leave all kinds of relationships, even abusive ones. It's way easier to leave a relationship than it is to find a job that doesn't involve ever having to pile onto the rush hour train, in fact.

I note that you didn't address the point that telling straight women that dating women is totally an option is unreasonable. I'll take that as a concession.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Women need to be encouraged to stand up for themselves and draw attention to the fact when they are being sexually assaulted by men. Women should feel as if calling for help will bring a stop to the assault and not make the matter worse. Encouraging women to remain quiet while they are being assaulted by men is a symptom of rape culture. The public not feeling comfortable coming to the aid of a woman being sexually assaulted is a symptom of rape culture. We all need to learn to stand up to men who sexually assault women, and not pretend it isn't happening or commit the sin of allowing intervention to make the matter worse.

Agreed. In the meantime, however, I don't think it's unreasonable to allow women a safe space on the train.

Trains are crowded enough as it is without shuffling people between carriages. Besides, we need to address the problem head on and not resort to actions which can suggest the problem is being accommodated.

[Dakini]

Agreed. In the meantime, however, I don't think it's unreasonable to allow women a safe space on the train.

Trains are crowded enough as it is without shuffling people between carriages. Besides, we need to address the problem head on and not resort to actions which can suggest the problem is being accommodated.

Nobody's being shuffled. At each station, it's clearly labeled that a car will be a woman-only car during rush hour (though that's actually a misnomer since it's women, children, the handicapped and anyone accompanying a child or a handicapped person) and the station attendants tell men to exit the lines for that car and go into a different line. The women-only car is typically at one end of the train and at most station the stairs are in the middle, so you actually have to make an effort to go to that car instead of another (e.g. you're not just going to be rushing up or down the stairs and missing the train because you have to avoid that car). But all of the cars seem to end up being pretty full so I really don't think it makes much of a difference as far as how crowded the cars end up being.

[Dakini]

Also, the idea of "shuffling" in a rush hour train is pretty laughable. You're lucky if you can move one metre away from the door you entered to get on the train. Hell, it's a good day if you can avoid being squished between the two doors and manage to stand in front of some seats.

[Chessmistress]

64% is pretty close to being twice 33%.
And yes, it's definitely possible to leave all kinds of relationships, even abusive ones. It's way easier to leave a relationship than it is to find a job that doesn't involve ever having to pile onto the rush hour train, in fact.

I note that you didn't address the point that telling straight women that dating women is totally an option is unreasonable. I'll take that as a concession.

Frankly, I find your comparison with "gay conversion therapy" insulting: I'm talking about an option that everyone should consider (if she's open minded) not enforcing something.
Queer theory already demonstrated that some (and maybe most) "straightness" is just only the result of heteronormativity enforced by the patriarchal system.
And sexual fluidity is a real thing too
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... xperiences
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/0 ... nt-page-2/

Note that the second link is not feminist at all.

64% is pretty closer to be twice of 33%, but consequences of an abusive relationships are most times worse than consequences of a grope on metro: sexual assault, though an horrible crime, is most times less severe than permanent injuries, multiple rapes, femicide. All these things cannot happen within a metro, but can happen within domestic violence.

[Super Perfect Cell]

I am a very liberal anime supervillain.

I support equal absorption rights for all sexes and genders, not just males and females - and also the other ones, like transsexuals or intersexes. Hell, if I was pure man or pure woman absorber, I would have never become perfect, because I needed both 17 and 18.

[Super Perfect Cell]

Accidental double-post, proceed to Barrage Death Beam the opposition.

[Dakini]

64% is pretty close to being twice 33%.
And yes, it's definitely possible to leave all kinds of relationships, even abusive ones. It's way easier to leave a relationship than it is to find a job that doesn't involve ever having to pile onto the rush hour train, in fact.

I note that you didn't address the point that telling straight women that dating women is totally an option is unreasonable. I'll take that as a concession.

Frankly, I find your comparison with "gay conversion therapy" insulting: I'm talking about an option that everyone should consider (if she's open minded) not enforcing something.

Open-mindedness has nothing to do with it. Either you're attracted to women and want relationships with them or you're not. Not every woman is a lesbian or bi/pansexual. I think it's even pretty silly for all bi/pan women to impose such arbitrary limitations.

Queer theory already demonstrated that some (and maybe most) "straightness" is just only the result of heteronormativity enforced by the patriarchal system.
And sexual fluidity is a real thing too
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... xperiences
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/0 ... nt-page-2/

Note that the second link is not feminist at all.

The second link also mostly talks about women who already identify as not straight from the outset. They didn't follow a large group of women who were a representative sample for a long period of time: they followed 70 women who identified as bisexual, lesbian and "unlabeled".

The first link doesn't really refer to any studies unless you count a show of hands.

64% is pretty closer to be twice of 33%, but consequences of an abusive relationships are most times worse than consequences of a grope on metro: sexual assault, though an horrible crime, is most times less severe than permanent injuries, multiple rapes, femicide. All these things cannot happen within a metro, but can happen within domestic violence.

So? Avoiding dating men doesn't mean avoiding an abusive relationship. Avoiding men on the train appears to mean avoiding getting groped there.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Trains are crowded enough as it is without shuffling people between carriages. Besides, we need to address the problem head on and not resort to actions which can suggest the problem is being accommodated.

Nobody's being shuffled. At each station, it's clearly labeled that a car will be a woman-only car during rush hour (though that's actually a misnomer since it's women, children, the handicapped and anyone accompanying a child or a handicapped person) and the station attendants tell men to exit the lines for that car and go into a different line. The women-only car is typically at one end of the train and at most station the stairs are in the middle, so you actually have to make an effort to go to that car instead of another (e.g. you're not just going to be rushing up or down the stairs and missing the train because you have to avoid that car). But all of the cars seem to end up being pretty full so I really don't think it makes much of a difference as far as how crowded the cars end up being.

Also, the idea of "shuffling" in a rush hour train is pretty laughable. You're lucky if you can move one metre away from the door you entered to get on the train. Hell, it's a good day if you can avoid being squished between the two doors and manage to stand in front of some seats.

Seems a lot of extra work for something that shouldn't even be required in the first place.

I don't know how or where you catch trains, but I've never found I had much of a choice which carriage I boarded when the train stopped. You enter in the door which stops closest to you, and where you end up depends on how early you get to the station; the later you get there, the closer to the station entry you are along the platform. It sort of works at the moment because nobody is fussed which carriage they get on, I'd hate to think of what happens when you put people who want to ride at one end of the train in the mix, particularly if they arrive late. You have station attendants and lines, we don't. You just stand around in a mob and slowly walk towards the door in a bottleneck.

[Tahar Joblis]

Yes, because women are never abusive in relationships with other women and because expecting straight women to just develop an attraction to other women is totally reasonable.

Never said so. I just write about "option". Regarding abuses: everybody can be abusive, but, frankly, I think there's an HUGE difference between MRA propaganda about abusive women and the reality.
I think that the chances a woman would be abusive may be the same of a woman would grope you in a women-only metro: that's pure logic...

Reality checking:

It is not mere "MRA propaganda" that lesbians are no less abusive than straight partners. This is extensively established in virtually all scientific studies examining the subject. This has, in fact, been known for longer than the modern internet-based wave of the MRM has existed.

Certain sorts of feminists have a political stake in denying or refusing to acknowledge that lesbians are no less abusive than, say, straight couples, because it is inconvenient for their ideology and the model of domestic violence as a form of patriarchal oppression.

[Dakini]

Nobody's being shuffled. At each station, it's clearly labeled that a car will be a woman-only car during rush hour (though that's actually a misnomer since it's women, children, the handicapped and anyone accompanying a child or a handicapped person) and the station attendants tell men to exit the lines for that car and go into a different line. The women-only car is typically at one end of the train and at most station the stairs are in the middle, so you actually have to make an effort to go to that car instead of another (e.g. you're not just going to be rushing up or down the stairs and missing the train because you have to avoid that car). But all of the cars seem to end up being pretty full so I really don't think it makes much of a difference as far as how crowded the cars end up being.

Also, the idea of "shuffling" in a rush hour train is pretty laughable. You're lucky if you can move one metre away from the door you entered to get on the train. Hell, it's a good day if you can avoid being squished between the two doors and manage to stand in front of some seats.

Seems a lot of extra work for something that shouldn't even be required in the first place.

I don't know how or where you catch trains, but I've never found I had much of a choice which carriage I boarded when the train stopped. You enter in the door which stops closest to you, and where you end up depends on how early you get to the station; the later you get there, the closer to the station entry you are along the platform. It sort of works at the moment because nobody is fussed which carriage they get on, I'd hate to think of what happens when you put people who want to ride at one end of the train in the mix, particularly if they arrive late. You have station attendants and lines, we don't. You just stand around in a mob and slowly walk towards the door in a bottleneck.

I take the trains in Tokyo. I would have thought that was obvious since this is what I've been talking about.

When you wait on the platform, there are barriers with doors (to keep passengers from falling or jumping into the tracks) and when the train arrives, these doors open along with the train doors. The train stops in the same place each time so all the doors line up and everyone knows what car will be stopping where. So you can line up for a specific door on a specific car and wait for your train to come along. It's all quite orderly and it's very convenient if you have to make a transfer because you can wait at the correct door to make the fastest escape to your next train (e.g. when I ride in the morning, I take the first car on one train because the train I transfer to is in that direction; if I'm going to meet up with some friends in the evening, I take one of the last cars on the same train because I usually transfer to a different train going a different way; when I tried a different route to work, I'd aim for a particular door in a car somewhere in the middle because that usually put me close to the stairs at one station so I could most conveniently transfer to my other train).

The station attendants are mostly around to keep order (e.g. there are some stations and train lines where the platform can become too crowded so they also rope off areas to keep too many people from coming onto the platform) and to deal with situations that can arise, like if there's a train delay. In principle, they can also retrieve things from the tracks or stop trains to rescue people if you're at a station without barriers. They also get to help push passengers onto the train if it's too crowded, but everyone is determined to get on that particular train. Their role in keeping men out of the women-only car is a pretty small part of their job.

I'm pretty sure the system would not work with this many people in any other way.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Seems a lot of extra work for something that shouldn't even be required in the first place.

I don't know how or where you catch trains, but I've never found I had much of a choice which carriage I boarded when the train stopped. You enter in the door which stops closest to you, and where you end up depends on how early you get to the station; the later you get there, the closer to the station entry you are along the platform. It sort of works at the moment because nobody is fussed which carriage they get on, I'd hate to think of what happens when you put people who want to ride at one end of the train in the mix, particularly if they arrive late. You have station attendants and lines, we don't. You just stand around in a mob and slowly walk towards the door in a bottleneck.

I take the trains in Tokyo. I would have thought that was obvious since this is what I've been talking about.

When you wait on the platform, there are barriers with doors (to keep passengers from falling or jumping into the tracks) and when the train arrives, these doors open along with the train doors. The train stops in the same place each time so all the doors line up and everyone knows what car will be stopping where. So you can line up for a specific door on a specific car and wait for your train to come along. It's all quite orderly and it's very convenient if you have to make a transfer because you can wait at the correct door to make the fastest escape to your next train (e.g. when I ride in the morning, I take the first car on one train because the train I transfer to is in that direction; if I'm going to meet up with some friends in the evening, I take one of the last cars on the same train because I usually transfer to a different train going a different way; when I tried a different route to work, I'd aim for a particular door in a car somewhere in the middle because that usually put me close to the stairs at one station so I could most conveniently transfer to my other train).

The station attendants are mostly around to keep order (e.g. there are some stations and train lines where the platform can become too crowded so they also rope off areas to keep too many people from coming onto the platform) and to deal with situations that can arise, like if there's a train delay. In principle, they can also retrieve things from the tracks or stop trains to rescue people if you're at a station without barriers. They also get to help push passengers onto the train if it's too crowded, but everyone is determined to get on that particular train. Their role in keeping men out of the women-only car is a pretty small part of their job.

I'm pretty sure the system would not work with this many people in any other way.

Probably not. I'm also pretty sure that segregated carriages would not work with any other system so I take it you meant "reasonable" as "reasonable for Tokyo".

[Dakini]

I take the trains in Tokyo. I would have thought that was obvious since this is what I've been talking about.

When you wait on the platform, there are barriers with doors (to keep passengers from falling or jumping into the tracks) and when the train arrives, these doors open along with the train doors. The train stops in the same place each time so all the doors line up and everyone knows what car will be stopping where. So you can line up for a specific door on a specific car and wait for your train to come along. It's all quite orderly and it's very convenient if you have to make a transfer because you can wait at the correct door to make the fastest escape to your next train (e.g. when I ride in the morning, I take the first car on one train because the train I transfer to is in that direction; if I'm going to meet up with some friends in the evening, I take one of the last cars on the same train because I usually transfer to a different train going a different way; when I tried a different route to work, I'd aim for a particular door in a car somewhere in the middle because that usually put me close to the stairs at one station so I could most conveniently transfer to my other train).

The station attendants are mostly around to keep order (e.g. there are some stations and train lines where the platform can become too crowded so they also rope off areas to keep too many people from coming onto the platform) and to deal with situations that can arise, like if there's a train delay. In principle, they can also retrieve things from the tracks or stop trains to rescue people if you're at a station without barriers. They also get to help push passengers onto the train if it's too crowded, but everyone is determined to get on that particular train. Their role in keeping men out of the women-only car is a pretty small part of their job.

I'm pretty sure the system would not work with this many people in any other way.

Probably not. I'm also pretty sure that segregated carriages would not work with any other system so I take it you meant "reasonable" as "reasonable for Tokyo".

I've taken the subway in Toronto and in Vienna... both seemed to involve waiting on the platform and the train coming to a stop in a pretty similar spot instead of this free-for-all train boarding that you describe.

Also, the Tokyo train system is the busiest (e.g. moves the most people) and probably most complicated in the world. It's definitely a really efficient and good system.

[Tahar Joblis]

Probably not. I'm also pretty sure that segregated carriages would not work with any other system so I take it you meant "reasonable" as "reasonable for Tokyo".

I've taken the subway in Toronto and in Vienna... both seemed to involve waiting on the platform and the train coming to a stop in a pretty similar spot instead of this free-for-all train boarding that you describe.

Also, the Tokyo train system is the busiest (e.g. moves the most people) and probably most complicated in the world. It's definitely a really efficient and good system.

I've used the Bay Area, Los Angeles, Boston, New York, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, and Portland local / regional rail systems, and ridden Amtrak around the country.

Almost all transit systems in the US have target "platforms," but the precision of trains actually hitting those marks is limited, and at intermediate stops on a given line, you aren't guaranteed that a particular car will be available for entry (some cars may be full while others are not). They are also not, as a general rule, set up with orderly doors and queues; you have instead an uneven mob of individuals, who are directed by signage (and occasionally transit employees) to stay clear of the tracks until the train has come to a stop. Exactly how disorderly this is depends on the community, time of day, crowding, and how smoothly the system is running (are trains short of cars, for example). Waiting at the wrong spot may mean having to wait for the next train.

You may note a similar lack of neat orderly queues in the Paris metro rail system, or London. Of course, there's also no indication that the West has the same sort of transit groping problems that Japan appears to have; Western feminists seem more concerned with "manspreading," which is to say, men sitting with their legs apart. (As opposed to women passengers choosing to take up additional space on the subway.)

[Dakini]

I saw this while not logged in so whatever..

I've taken the subway in Toronto and in Vienna... both seemed to involve waiting on the platform and the train coming to a stop in a pretty similar spot instead of this free-for-all train boarding that you describe.

Also, the Tokyo train system is the busiest (e.g. moves the most people) and probably most complicated in the world. It's definitely a really efficient and good system.

I've used the Bay Area, Los Angeles, Boston, New York, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, and Portland local / regional rail systems, and ridden Amtrak around the country.

Almost all transit systems in the US have target "platforms," but the precision of trains actually hitting those marks is limited, and at intermediate stops on a given line, you aren't guaranteed that a particular car will be available for entry (some cars may be full while others are not). They are also not, as a general rule, set up with orderly doors and queues; you have instead an uneven mob of individuals, who are directed by signage (and occasionally transit employees) to stay clear of the tracks until the train has come to a stop. Exactly how disorderly this is depends on the community, time of day, crowding, and how smoothly the system is running (are trains short of cars, for example). Waiting at the wrong spot may mean having to wait for the next train.

You may note a similar lack of neat orderly queues in the Paris metro rail system, or London.

I will agree that I haven't seen a train system with the sort of mostly ordered queuing that exists in Japan nor the precise stopping of the trains in very specific places. However, other trains do stop in roughly similar spots because the platform is typically about as long as the train (maybe a bit longer), so while the place you're waiting might not end up being the exact right place for the door, if you stand at one end of the platform, you're likely to get into a front car (maybe not the front car, but a front car) and you're going to end up at the opposite end of the train if you stand at the other end of the platform. A system where everyone piles onto the train at one end and fills up the train until it is full (as described by Vitaphone Racing) sounds really inefficient and weird.

Of course, there's also no indication that the West has the same sort of transit groping problems that Japan appears to have;

That depends how you define "the West". Groping is definitely a problem on the NYC subway (as far as I've heard) as are things like men masturbating while staring at women when it's not crowded... which just sounds revolting and is also a form of sexual harassment/assault. Also, as mentioned by Chessmistress, Germany also has segregated cars and that's typically considered part of "the West".

Western feminists seem more concerned with "manspreading," which is to say, men sitting with their legs apart. (As opposed to women passengers choosing to take up additional space on the subway.)

1. I definitely witnessed an instance of "manspreading" on the Tokyo train just today on my way home from work. Two men were occupying 1.5 seats each and the train was crowded enough that people had to stand. This is not the first time I have seen this, nor is it likely to be the last (I have also witnessed men who have obviously had a few too many drinks pass out across several seats, this is in contrast to everyone else who just passes out sitting or standing up). People do not tend to take up extra seats with their bags around here. I might have ever seen it, but it's usually on trains that aren't crowded enough that people have to stand.
2. Tokyo Metro has posters which discourage this and other behaviours (including putting shopping bags on the seat, listening to loud music, blocking doors, applying makeup etc) and the other train companies around here have similar signage. The signs by Tokyo Metro usually feature androgynous cartooney animals though.
3. There are definitely more articles about subway sexual assaults in NYC on a quick glance than there are about "manspreading" in general, despite MRAs freaking the fuck out about anyone mentioning this term (e.g. some MRAs in London, Ontario decided they had to create a petition because the TTC in Toronto, Ontario might think about creating posters similar to the one in NYC which was really just part of a bigger campaign about being polite on the subway even though the TTC had not even announced it was going to do any sort of new politeness campaign). There are also really old posters produced for the NYC subway that discourage the exact same behaviour that just isn't called "manspreading" so people being annoyed by men sitting with their legs excessively far apart on the train isn't a new thing.