CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Are infrastructure and changing facilities sexist?

(44 posts)
  • Started 1 week ago by I were right about that saddle
  • Latest reply from crowriver

No tags yet.


  1. unhurt
    Member

    Bingo!

    Posted 6 days ago #
  2. jonty
    Member

    The comments both in and below the EEN article about the council planning to get rid of the Telfer subway were quite striking - from my scan it seemed that most of the people going "it's fine! what a waste of money!" were male and the ones going "can't happen soon enough, horrible place" were female.

    If we're talking about classism too, it's also interesting to (slightly provocatively) note that there are at least solid plans to get rid of the Telfer Subway - which connects the West End to Merchiston - yet I'm not aware of any official aspirations to get rid of a single subway under Calder Road.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  3. mgj
    Member

    This all assumes that there is some sort of magic wand that can be waved to put in place universal infrastructure suitable for all needs of all types of cyclists. There isn't; we need to first change the behaviour and attitudes of non-cyclists and then embed good design into any new facilities designed to make cycling even better.

    And if women are less likely to cycle, that may explain why some of the worst close passes, MGIFs and 'get out of my ways' have been from women drivers, so I would think that MAMILS and other male groups of cyclists have an interest in getting as many women cycling as possible.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  4. mgj
    Member

    @jonty how are pedestrians and cyclists meant to traverse the WAR then?

    Posted 6 days ago #
  5. jonty
    Member

    https://consultationhub.edinburgh.gov.uk/sfc/roseburntounioncanal/supporting_documents/7.%20WAR%20Toucan.pdf

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=15762#post-204715

    Did people who responded to that consultation get a letter saying it was delayed, or are you just meant to assume that by now?

    Posted 6 days ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    From first link -

    This proposed new section of shared pedestrian and cycle way will be segregated from the West Approach Road city-bound carriageway and link between the Dalry Community Park and Morrison Crescent.

    How many years has this not been coming??

    Posted 6 days ago #
  7. steveo
    Member

    But "making sure cars got through in fabulous 60's wealth making fashion" was (and is) sexist, racist and classist.

    I'm obviously working to a different definition of the above.

    None of these things were deliberately set out to exclude or undermine any group, if anything they were built to encourage people who couldn't afford to live in the posh city centre to at least drive there. I don't see how its helpful to brand it in such a way? The sign above it says no bikes not no Woman, no Coloureds and no Irish.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  8. steveo
    Member

    yet I'm not aware of any official aspirations to get rid of a single subway under Calder Road.

    Assuming you ignore the pedestrian crossing that's been added bypassing the worst of the underpasses then yeah, fair point...

    Posted 6 days ago #
  9. jonty
    Member

    I was talking about the ones at the roundabout but fair point - are you talking about the canal bit?

    Posted 6 days ago #
  10. crowriver
    Member

    "None of these things were deliberately set out to exclude or undermine any group,"

    In diversity terminology, that would be indirect discrimination (i.e. when there's a practice, policy or rule which applies to everyone in the same way, but it has a worse effect on some people than others), or unintentional discrimination. As opposed to direct discrimination (i.e. when you are treated differently and worse than someone else because of who you are).

    Mind you it can be argued that shunting pedestrians into an underpass to allow motorists unimpeded use of the roads is direct discrimination. But then you can say, aha but ALL pedestrians are treated equally badly regardless of gender, class, race, etc. But given that females, the poor and ethnic minorities are more likely to be pedestrians (especially in the 1960s but also now) then we're back to indirect discrimination.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  11. steveo
    Member

    are you talking about the canal bit?

    No, but now you question me I can't remember whether its at the Silver Wing or the college.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  12. steveo
    Member

    In diversity terminology, that would be indirect discrimination

    ah, okay fair enough. I'll stand down :)

    Posted 6 days ago #
  13. neddie
    Member

    The WAR should be closed to private motors. There is no sense trying to draw cars into a "Transformed" city centre that is mostly pedestrianised and blocked to through traffic, right?

    Posted 6 days ago #
  14. crowriver
    Member

    @neddie, but what about all the shoppers that need to load/unload fridges in their hatchback supermini city cars? The city centre will be a desert of empty shops.....er.....wait.

    Posted 6 days ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin