On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 13:19:51 on Mon, 29
Nov 2010, Roy Badami remarked:

Assuming that it's supposed to be safer for women travelling alone,
or something like that, then I don't see how that's actually going to
work in practice without staff to enforce it -- in which case it's
actually the presence of staff that makes the platform safer, and not
the single sex waiting room.

It's not going to stop an axe-murderer rushing in and doing his worst,
but there's quite a bit of social pressure for men not to use the
Ladies Waiting Room - much the same as not using the ladies toilets.

Sure, but you've still not convinced me what (perceived) need such a
facility fulfills.

Keeps the ladies away from drunks and tramps.

Bloody good idea too. You have no idea how bothersome the drunks and
tramps find them.

tom

--
Men? Women? Give me a colossal death robot any day!

On Nov 29, 6:05*pm, Walter Briscoe
wrote:
In message
s.com of Mon, 29 Nov 2010 09:48:22 in uk.transport.london,
writes

On Nov 29, 3:27*pm, (Roy Badami) wrote:

A google search finds very little information about women-only waiting
rooms, but I did find one suggestion that they went out of favour
largely as a result of such concerns.

It used to be Ladies waiting room and General waiting room; I've never
seen a Gentlemen's waiting room; were there ever such things? *There
were also 1st and 3rd class waiting rooms, but that was before my
time. *There were also Ladies only compartments of course; I'm not
sure when they went out of use, but they were still around in about
the early '70s.

There is a window etched "Ladies Waiting Room" - it may be "LADIES
WAITING ROOM" - on the eastbound platform (2) at South Woodford (George
Lane). When I queried this by email, along with the lack of signage of
the male toilets on the westbound platform, LU's answer was incomplete.
ISTR phoning and being told I could ignore "Ladies" in this case. There
is only one eastbound waiting room. I suppose I should have insisted on
an answer by email.
--
Walter Briscoe

I used to wonder if this was meant to be interpreted as Ladies, and
also Waiting room, ie the waiting room is the way to the Ladies, but
there would be no point in only putting the sign to the latter inside
the room.

On Nov 29, 6:05*pm, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

writes

On Nov 29, 3:27*pm, (Roy Badami) wrote:

A google search finds very little information about women-only waiting
rooms, but I did find one suggestion that they went out of favour
largely as a result of such concerns.

It used to be Ladies waiting room and General waiting room; I've never
seen a Gentlemen's waiting room; were there ever such things? *There
were also 1st and 3rd class waiting rooms, but that was before my
time. *There were also Ladies only compartments of course; I'm not
sure when they went out of use, but they were still around in about
the early '70s.

There is a window etched "Ladies Waiting Room" - it may be "LADIES
WAITING ROOM" - on the eastbound platform (2) at South Woodford (George
Lane). When I queried this by email, along with the lack of signage of
the male toilets on the westbound platform, LU's answer was incomplete.
ISTR phoning and being told I could ignore "Ladies" in this case. There
is only one eastbound waiting room. I suppose I should have insisted on
an answer by email.

Why?

In message
s.com of Mon, 29 Nov 2010 15:42:43 in uk.transport.london, Mizter T
writes

On Nov 29, 6:05*pm, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

writes

On Nov 29, 3:27*pm, (Roy Badami) wrote:

A google search finds very little information about women-only waiting
rooms, but I did find one suggestion that they went out of favour
largely as a result of such concerns.

It used to be Ladies waiting room and General waiting room; I've never
seen a Gentlemen's waiting room; were there ever such things? *There
were also 1st and 3rd class waiting rooms, but that was before my
time. *There were also Ladies only compartments of course; I'm not
sure when they went out of use, but they were still around in about
the early '70s.

There is a window etched "Ladies Waiting Room" - it may be "LADIES
WAITING ROOM" - on the eastbound platform (2) at South Woodford (George
Lane). When I queried this by email, along with the lack of signage of
the male toilets on the westbound platform, LU's answer was incomplete.
ISTR phoning and being told I could ignore "Ladies" in this case. There
is only one eastbound waiting room. I suppose I should have insisted on
an answer by email.

Why?

1) So I could rely on my email database rather than my memory.
2) So I could adduce permission to use.

That waiting room is probably not an anteroom for female toilets.
(I have the following note on South Woodford toilet facilities:
P1W 06.00-19.00: F; M hidden at far end.)
--
Walter Briscoe

On 2010\11\29 22:18, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 13:19:51 on
Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Roy Badami remarked:

Assuming that it's supposed to be safer for women travelling alone,
or something like that, then I don't see how that's actually going
to work in practice without staff to enforce it -- in which case
it's actually the presence of staff that makes the platform safer,
and not the single sex waiting room.

It's not going to stop an axe-murderer rushing in and doing his
worst, but there's quite a bit of social pressure for men not to use
the Ladies Waiting Room - much the same as not using the ladies
toilets.

Sure, but you've still not convinced me what (perceived) need such a
facility fulfills.

Keeps the ladies away from drunks and tramps.

Bloody good idea too. You have no idea how bothersome the drunks and
tramps find them.

Yeah, them hobo humpin' slobo babes.

In message . li, at
22:18:04 on Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Tom Anderson
remarked:
Equality Act 2010 c29:

(1) A person (a service-provider) concerned with the provision of a
service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not)
must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not
providing the person with the service.

Followed by various other statements of the same idea. This law is new,
but it replaces, amongst other things, one from 1975 which i understand
said much the same thing.

I suspect that providing a ladies' waiting room but neither a
gentlemen's nor a general one *is* a breach of the act, but until
someone brings an action, we won't know, and it won't change. I imagine
nobody being discriminated against by the lack of provision of a small,
cold room adjacent to some public toilets for people of their gender is
sufficiently bothered about it to do so.

And what about places with only one gender of toilet? Is that a breach
too.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 06:48:11PM +0000, Bill Borland wrote:

I think Ladies Only compartments lasted right up to the end of
compartment stock.

If they did, I never noticed 'em, which means that they would have
disappeared, at least from the lines I regularly used, by the early
eighties at the latest, whereas there was slam-door stock still
operating, with first class compartments and some second-class
compartments, right up until 2005.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice

On 2010-11-29 18:48:11 +0000, Bill Borland said:

In article
s.com, writes
On Nov 29, 3:27*pm, (Roy Badami) wrote:

A google search finds very little information about women-only waiting
rooms, but I did find one suggestion that they went out of favour
largely as a result of such concerns.

It used to be Ladies waiting room and General waiting room; I've never
seen a Gentlemen's waiting room; were there ever such things? There
were also 1st and 3rd class waiting rooms, but that was before my
time. There were also Ladies only compartments of course; I'm not
sure when they went out of use, but they were still around in about
the early '70s.
As recently as last year (and it may still be there) there was a
Ladies' Waiting Room on Plat 4 at Orpington, with the Ladies' toilet
opening off it. What is annoying is that was no "General" waiting
room and that station is *cold*.
I think Ladies Only compartments lasted right up to the end of
compartment stock.

Surely not? The last I remember were on the GN suburbans prior to
electrification in 1976. Compartments lasted after that, even if you
discount corridor stock. What about the 302 stock, for instance? Some
compartments but no ladies-only.

In message , at 12:29:16
on Tue, 30 Nov 2010, David Cantrell remarked:

Sure, but you've still not convinced me what (perceived) need such a
facility fulfills.
Keeps the ladies away from drunks and tramps.

The need there is to keep drunks and tramps away from normal people, not
to only keep them away from women.

Some people think it's nevertheless a good idea to start by protecting
the more vulnerable.
--
Roland Perry

"eastender" wrote in message
...

Does London Bridge have waiting rooms, preferably heated?

Would it not have been OK for him to have gone into one of the coffee shops
or, if over 18, one of the bars?

Ian