‘Ladies Only’ : How effective is IT?

In the recent years, we have heard an abundance of the term ‘ladies only’ circulating around as amenities and facilities has begun to dedicate a space for female users only (e.g.: at parking areas, on public transport). This concept of ladies only space refers to an area that allow access to only females to ensure comfort and safety for them while being in the public. However, it is important to discuss the effectiveness of this particular implementation in public spaces. While the dedicated areas are intended to reduce criminal assaults against women, these establishments appear to be pushing aside the real issue. Though by putting up multiple safety measures, they can be rendered useless without tackling the main cause which is the perpetrators. Additionally, some has agreed that the initiative of opening public spaces and areas to women deemed to be rather counterproductive, as stated by Herbert Glasauer, it serves as ‘a sort of backlash, perpetuating a view of the "damsel in distress" instead of addressing actual violence’. Thus, the question leads to whether it is an effective measure to curb the crimes committed against women worldwide.

Let’s look at the example of ladies only spaces on parking areas. Ladies only parking spaces were first introduced back in 1990 in Germany with the intention to improve women's safety and reduce sexual crimes against women during that time. With 36% of reported rape incidents by female victims happened in public parking area/garage, it was imperative for the safe space to be put in place as parking areas were often dark and deserted. This can also be seen next in multiple countries such as China, Indonesia and Malaysia. With multiple surveillance systems installed and enforced security guarding area near exits, the effort is put in place to make women feel safer. However, multiple issues had risen along with the implementation of these gender-exclusive zones.

The spaces are often abused by irresponsible parties. The lack of enforcement by the management along with clear disregard for the rules by some men or couples who force their way into the ladies’ zone has prevented the space from being used properly. Thus, it is clear the respect for it is absent despite the multiple measures that have been put to place. Additionally, while it is a great incentive for female city dwellers, some find it impractical. This is because women travelling with male partners must be separated, and additional costs may be incurred just to dedicate a space specifically for a particular sex. However, it is understandable that the ultimate goal for its establishment is to keep women safe. Thus, it is critical to recognise that, while the effort is far from flawless, it is crucial since these establishment appear to have a favourable impact on crime rates. Thus, as a society, we have to put in effort in making the world a safer place for women. Mari Marcel Thekaekara, human rights activist once stated, “To me, it’s a move backwards. We are seeking safety in womenonly buses, trains and taxis. But it’s the only solution currently on the horizon to keep women safe.”

With that being said, implementing more ladies-only areas is not and should never be the only solution. Putting the responsibility solely on women to avoid from being abused, rather than condemning the perpetrators for doing it in the first place, is not the best way to address nor to solve the problem of sexual harassment and assault. While the current effort should be praised and recognised for what it is worth, it is also important to acknowledge that this step of sex segregation demonstrates how we, as a society, have to resort to such measures to ensure female safety. That the world is not designed for women to exist peacefully. Despite the ladies only spaces almost being a successful story, it also reflects the society’s treatment of women in general while being in the public sphere. Educating people about decent behaviour and etiquette would bring a lot more closure to this problem, rather than segregation.

“They don’t reduce terror but diffuse it. They don’t dismantle myths; they capitalize on them. They not only operate within parameters that accept the violence but commodify it.” - Soraya Chemaly, an award-winning author, and activist.

Written by Balqish Iman binti Murad

Bachman, R. "Violence against Women: A National Crime Victimization Survey Report." Office of Justice Programs, 1994, p. 23, https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/145325NCJRS.pdf.

Chemaly, Soraya. “Change Culture, Not Cabs: Woman-Only Taxis and Commodifying Female Fear.” HuffPost, The Huffington Post, 8 Nov. 2014, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/change-culture-not-cabs-woman-only-taxis-andcommodifying-female-fear_b_5785326.

Herbert Glasauer Gewalt ist nicht immer und überall, Georg Glasze, Robert Pütz, Manfred Rolfes: Diskurs, Stadt, Kriminalität: Städtische(Un-)Sicherheiten aus der Perspektive von Stadtforschung und kritischer Kriminalgeographie. transcript Verlag, 2005

Thekaekara, Mari Marcel. “Life's Juggernaut Rolls on. by Mari Marcel Thekaekara.” Banbury | 30 Dec 2014 | Amnesty International UK, 30 Dec. 2014, https://www.amnesty.org.uk/groups/bloxham/life%E2%80%99s-juggernaut-rollsmari-marcel-thekaekara.