On 2015-08-27 18:06:19 +0000, said:

Who remembers Roman and Martin's Laugh-In? "Vairy Interesting... but
stoopid""

That was Rowan and Martin. The character was Wolfgang the German
soldier - the actor who played him is still around at 86.

E.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:19:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, 27 August 2015 18:32:35 UTC+2, Charlie Hulme wrote:
On 27/08/2015 00:37, Recliner wrote:


One obvious point is that women-only carriages have a serious cost: you
need more carriages, as segregated pax won't fit neatly into the existing
fleet.

In days long gone, when I was a teenage trainspotter, various
non-corridor EMUs, e.g. Manchester - Altrincham did have a single
12-seat 'Ladies Only' compartment at one end.

But as others have said, in today's UK conditions and general
attitude it would be about as enforceable as the 'quiet coach' idea.

Quiet Coaches work well on the SWT Portsmouth Direct route.

It might be feasible to have one carriage late at night which was
designated as having a security guard in attendance.

As the possessor of a Y chromosome (well lots of copies of the same one), who has occasionally found the environment of late night trains uncomfortable, I certainly would welcome that idea.

Robin

More BTP on certain trains would be helpful.

In article 2015082810060678835-email@domaincom,
(eastender) wrote:

On 2015-08-27 18:06:19 +0000, said:

Who remembers Roman and Martin's Laugh-In? "Vairy Interesting... but
stoopid""

That was Rowan and Martin. The character was Wolfgang the German
soldier - the actor who played him is still around at 86.

Sorry, my typo. I thought I wrote Rowan and Martin.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 26/08/2015 09:20, y wrote:
It seems the intellectual powerhouse masquarading as a naive wet 70s throwback
has suggested women only carraiges would be a good idea.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...arriages-a-pos
sibility-under-jeremy-corbyn

Aside from the obvious problems with enforcing it, I'd love to know how this
towering genius suggests this would take place on the walk through trains that
are becoming more and more popular such as LU S Stock and 378s.

--
Spud



This came up on Any Questions and one of Corbyn's supporters pointed out
that he did not call for women only carriages, just that it should be
put out for consultation (or something like that). Makes me think this
is one of the problems with Corbyn, he could not say that it was a
stupid idea but puts out everything for discussion / consulation / etc.
He does not like making decisions.

On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 14:13:17 +0100, MB wrote:

On 26/08/2015 09:20, y wrote:
It seems the intellectual powerhouse masquarading as a naive wet 70s throwback
has suggested women only carraiges would be a good idea.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...arriages-a-pos
sibility-under-jeremy-corbyn

Aside from the obvious problems with enforcing it, I'd love to know how this
towering genius suggests this would take place on the walk through trains that
are becoming more and more popular such as LU S Stock and 378s.

--
Spud



This came up on Any Questions and one of Corbyn's supporters pointed out
that he did not call for women only carriages, just that it should be
put out for consultation (or something like that). Makes me think this
is one of the problems with Corbyn, he could not say that it was a
stupid idea but puts out everything for discussion / consulation / etc.
He does not like making decisions.

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

In article ,
(Christopher A. Lee) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 14:13:17 +0100, MB wrote:

This came up on Any Questions and one of Corbyn's supporters pointed out
that he did not call for women only carriages, just that it should be
put out for consultation (or something like that). Makes me think this
is one of the problems with Corbyn, he could not say that it was a
stupid idea but puts out everything for discussion / consulation / etc.
He does not like making decisions.

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

Only a few types of stock had Ladies-only compartments, of course. And most
compartments were got rid of on safety grounds. Compartments would be
completely impractical in today's open stock. They would also probably make
vulnerable people more vulnerable.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 09:22:22
on Sat, 29 Aug 2015, remarked:

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

Only a few types of stock had Ladies-only compartments, of course.

Pretty much all the suburban and outer suburban stock on the Liverpool
St line in the 60's/70's had compartments, and these trains also had
"women only" compartments.

As a schoolboy I was chucked out of one by platform staff, despite being
the only occupant.
--
Roland Perry

On 2015-08-29 14:22:22 +0000, said:

In article ,
(Christopher A. Lee) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 14:13:17 +0100, MB wrote:

This came up on Any Questions and one of Corbyn's supporters pointed out
that he did not call for women only carriages, just that it should be
put out for consultation (or something like that). Makes me think this
is one of the problems with Corbyn, he could not say that it was a
stupid idea but puts out everything for discussion / consulation / etc.
He does not like making decisions.

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

Only a few types of stock had Ladies-only compartments, of course. And most
compartments were got rid of on safety grounds. Compartments would be
completely impractical in today's open stock. They would also probably make
vulnerable people more vulnerable.

There were women only waiting rooms I believe at some stations - do
they still exist?

On trains I see no reason why there can't be carriages designated for
women/couples/children at night, as there are carriages designated as
'quiet'. There's a role for peer pressure.

E.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
09:22:22 on Sat, 29 Aug 2015, remarked:

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

Only a few types of stock had Ladies-only compartments, of course.

Pretty much all the suburban and outer suburban stock on the
Liverpool St line in the 60's/70's had compartments, and these trains
also had "women only" compartments.

As a schoolboy I was chucked out of one by platform staff, despite
being the only occupant.

The Windsor lines stock that I travelled on generally didn't have them.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article 2015082918091647526-email@domaincom,
(eastender) wrote:

On 2015-08-29 14:22:22 +0000, said:

In article ,

(Christopher A. Lee) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 14:13:17 +0100, MB wrote:

This came up on Any Questions and one of Corbyn's supporters pointed
out that he did not call for women only carriages, just that it should
be put out for consultation (or something like that). Makes me think
this is one of the problems with Corbyn, he could not say that it was
a stupid idea but puts out everything for discussion / consulation
/ etc. He does not like making decisions.

Don't forget, a lot of people from the "Ladies only" era of
compartment stock, wrongly called compartments carriages.

Only a few types of stock had Ladies-only compartments, of course. And
most compartments were got rid of on safety grounds. Compartments would
be completely impractical in today's open stock. They would also
probably make vulnerable people more vulnerable.

There were women only waiting rooms I believe at some stations - do
they still exist?

Some still exist, essentially as ante-rooms to Ladies' loos.

On trains I see no reason why there can't be carriages designated for
women/couples/children at night, as there are carriages designated as
'quiet'. There's a role for peer pressure.

The more open stock becomes, as with Underground S stock and Overground 378s
, the less practical that is. There is an argument that isolation makes
women more not less vulnerable.

--
Colin Rosenstiel