UK: Anti-Women Urban Design?

Submitted by anthony on Fri, 2008-09-19 02:54

Article here. Excerpt:

'Have you ever queued for a toilet? Tried changing a baby's nappy on a park bench? Slid off the alleged "seat" at the bus stop (or failed to perch on it in the first place)? If so you are a victim of anti-women urban design. Research presented last month at the Royal Geography Society's annual conference found that our cities are still being designed for the benefit of men. The report, by Dr Gemma Burgess of Cambridge University, concluded that the vast majority of town planners are ignoring the gender equality planning regulations that were brought in last year. This is significant, because if public spaces were designed with women in mind, they would look entirely different, with much more lighting, better-situated car parks and more areas where residential and office spaces are mixed, making it far easier to juggle work and childcare.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

The article is, IMO, just more result-driven feminist-biased "research." Many of these things affect both genders. "More lighting" affects men too and in fact men are even more likely than women to be victims of violent crime. Men would certainly benefit from mixed-use develpment as well, in fact men have longer commutes than women and travel more on the job (the authors falsely claim men have more simple commutes). The "research" also totally ignores things like the lack of privacy in men's restrooms compared to women's restrooms (many men's rooms can be seen into when the door is open), as well as the lack of mirrors and diaper changing tables in many men's rooms (NCFM had to fight to get JFK Airport to put diaper-changing tables in men's rooms). By the same reasoning in this article, we could say that dangerous workplace environments have been "anti-male" because over 90% of job casualties are men and so they affect men more than women. Where is the balance and objectivity in this so-called "research"?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Marc A. on Fri, 2008-09-19 21:11

Public spaces are already designed with women in mind.

They are called shopping malls.

Where 70% of everything sold is targeted to women.

Note that two of the female-centric improvements -- better lighting and better-situated car parks -- are insinuations that women are going to be attacked by men.

Why not just have NO public spaces for women?

That would keep them safe and be a lot cheaper than wasting electricity on increased street lighting.

Let them stay at home and shop on the Internet.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Roy on Sat, 2008-09-20 01:44

Just another way for a woman to complain about something men have done, even if it's beneficial. Instead of thanking men for designing cities, something they don't seem to want to do, they're chastising them for not catering to the woman's every need. Nymphotropism and female entitlement in action. BTW, Matt has a very good point about the lack of privacy and change tables in men's rooms. And BTW, the queue for the women's room exists as a result of women taking forever in the bathroom, something men cannot be blamed for.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Mon, 2008-09-29 06:43