Feminised streets
One of the major calls of the feminist movement over the past decades has been about women’s safety and their right to live free from violence. I’ve always known that a variety of disciplines could have particularly feminist strands - but I must admit I’d never heard of “architectural feminism” before this article in yesterday’s Sunday Times.
Clearly, the journalist is struggling with her suppressed desire to get a “political correctness gone mad” story out of this (and yes, I recognise that by using the term “PC” I have violated Polly Toynbee’s first law); even my office of women had a bit of a snigger at the idea of creches in nightclubs and hairdryers in public loos. As one new mother of my acquaintance said, “so, I’m supposed to get off my face and then pick up my son at 2am, am I?!”
But those slightly loopy ideas aside, the idea that “feminisation” can make our high streets a happier place to be is a good one. My priority would be better, safer, cleaner public loos, to replace the current system where you have to try to use them whilst achieving the minimum contact with seat, door, soap dispenser, floor, tap, hand dryer - from an unscientific sample of my colleagues, the no contact toileting stop is a growing into an art form, and everyone had a loo horror story, the loos at Oxford station being a particular hate. Surely it’s not that hard to understand? Railway=travellers=luggage, right? But railway also = terrorist threat = no leaving luggage anywhere ever, right? So exactly what do you do with luggage + tiny cubicles + floor swimming with not quite clear water, as is the case in Oxford station? Quite how families manage to change nappies and deal with toddlers I don’t know, unless they spend two pound in Starbucks every time the littl’un needs to spend a penny.
But beyond powdering one’s nose, women and men surely have other expectations of their town centres. I like the ideas about improving the feeling of safety and wellbeing, by cutting down hedges, moving bus stops etc, and for sheer convenience, getting rid of cobblestones would be great. (Wonder if English Heritage would let us asphalt Radcliffe Square, which has killed so many shoes in its time?)
Of course, improving safety in towns by changing the built environment only goes so far, as despite the stereotype of stranger danger, women are far more likely to be attacked by someone they know.
… the loos at Oxford station being a particular hate.
I admit they’re pretty awful, but at least they’re free!
Radcliffe Square I’d actually leave the pebbles in, although in my time I have fallen off my bicycle onto them having misjudged their bumpiness.
I think one can overdo changes to the built environment: whilst (obviously) they are often important, I think there are two general problems with that approach.
(i) most importantly, the ‘light in the gutter’ problem: there are many things that will affect urban safety in Radcliffe Square area, some more than others. We should not fall in to the trap of behaving as if the easiest ways of attempting to improve a situation are the same as the most effective. If I’ve dropped my keys in the gutter and it’s dark, moving twenty yards along to be under the streetlight will not make it easier to find them since they’re not there, and a=although changing a very restricted road surface would improve safety, it may not (a) improve it very much, (b) improve it in a very cost-effective way, or (c) improve it at a low cost in terms of other aspects of its amenity.
(ii) there are also many other reasons for being concerned about urban environments other than safety, although safety is obviously very important. The pebbles make Radcliffe Square special and beautiful, and that’s one of the reasons why people come to visit it. Personally I tend to the view that lighting is more important that surfaces, and after all, there are proper roads and pavements all the way around and across Radcliffe Square for people who do have concerns (perfectly legitimately) about doing their ankle in, who if they wish can quite easily avoid the pebbles.
Tim.
On t’other hand, Radcliffe Square has much more important things going for it than cobbles, which are always being torn up because heavy vehicles use it. Perhaps if most of it were to be grassed over, leaving pathways for access.
When I was at Wadham they had to knock a hole in the 17th-century MCR to provide disabled access. It was done as unobtrusively as possible, of course - but living people before history.
Hm. Creches in nightclubs sounds very silly. I think the alterations should aim to make the streets and public places generally safer and more “people” friendly at night. What worries me is the way this report plays upon female fear of sexual attack, which I consider very socially controlling. 1 in 4 young woman should not be terrified of getting raped.