Women and Public Spaces

LRD I can generally reach the top shelf - things don't seem to be so high in my local supermarkets - but I remember having trouble getting down to the bottom shelf when I was pregnant!

One of the problems with accessibility legislation is that it is reactive not proactive therefore unless somebody complains about it, in many situations accessibility will not be improved.
Large companies and councils are often slightly more proactive and will give a nod in the direction of improvements because they have been the target of some expensive litigation on the subject.
Lesson from this is - if areas / facilities aren't accessible, complain (formally by letter) it might not work (as they may only react to being sued) but it may give them the kick up the bum they need. Many places are inaccessible because people don't realise. Telling them gives them no excuse for their ignorance.

I'm also unable to get stuff off the top shelf at supermarkets. Usually I find someone to do this for me, but my default position is that if there were no one to help and I was in a bad mood, I would stand on the bottom shelf ... and bring the lot down!

Dragon Yes, I have never been able to reach the top shelf. It drives me nuts!

Oh, sorry - I said, I've never been totally unable to reach the top shelf.

But I'm interested you have! I'm 5'5 but I can't say I've ever thought about it hard. Obviously this is also an issue where if you're disabled it must be a right pain.

totally unable to reach the top shelf

Me too. This is an issue for the managers of Tesco. There is nothing in the planning system that would make shops have lower shelves.

I must admit that I feel embarrassed trying to reach the top shelf. I'm sure I look a bit comical.

the current government have just abolished EIA's as being an unnecessary bit of red tape.

EIAs are more to do with the environmental effects of large scale developments, e.g., pollution, noise, effect on nature, etc. It is nothing to do with the detailed design of public spaces and buildings.

There is more guidance here.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7676/155958.pdf

That's a really good point alex, that makes total sense.

I was wondering - what about public spaces that are also spaces associated with 'wifework', like the supermarket? I'm not sure I can immediately think of anything much, except that I've never been round Tesco and been totally unable to reach the top shelf, the way I'm struggling to get my bag up on the train or to reach the highest bookshelf in Waterstones. But I've never thought about it much.

and I haven't even mentioned the steps outside loads of older buildings - some have ramps, some don't...

I count myself as able-bodied. I have one small issue which means that I do not drive. I also have children, one with SN. I am telling you this as I am speaking from my own experience in this context.

I believe that it is a gendered issue, simply because the overwhelming numbers of carers are women, most small children are cared for by women, the vast majority of children with disabilities are looked after by mothers. And obviously, because it is women who become pregnant.

I never thought about this issue when I lived in a big city and I was childless. I could not drive, but the public transport was great and I had easy access to wherever I wanted to go. The pavements were also well built and wide.

Then I moved to a smaller town. Public transport was unreliable, but it didn't bother me, as I could walk wherever I wanted to go. The pavements were narrow, but again, this was not an issue.

Now I have children and everything has changed. I can still walk, but I also need public transport - one of my children has hypotonia and cannot manage long distances. He can barely manage the ten-minute walk to the end of the road on some days. I use a buggy with him, but it can get tiring pushing it all day long - much better to take the bus. The narrow pavements mean that I cannot push the buggy along the pavement and I have to walk in the road - this goes for anyone with a baby in a pram/ buggy/ whatever. This is where there are pavements, of course, as in a lot of places there simply aren't any.

Public toilets seem to have been designed for thin able-bodied people. There is generally no space to take the buggy in, and the cubicles are narrow, sometimes you can barely close the door. Often there is no disabled loo, although this is getting better. There are also not many public toilets and you have to walk for miles to get to them - fine if you are by yourself, but with the children I generally find myself going into a cafe and asking to use the toilets in there.

Next year, the school run will be an issue - it will take me at least half an hour to walk the children to school in the morning (and half an hour back again for me!).

Of course, I realise that these could be problems for anyone, but as I said at the beginning of my post, the majority of carers are women, the majority of people pushing buggies and taking small children to public toilets are women, the majority of parents taking children to school are women.

It's always great to see people desperate to declare on the feminism section, that nothing is a gendered issue.

Given that the geographical man-made (and I use that term deliberately) features of the world around us were designed for and by able bodied white men and largely still is, how can it NOT be a gendered issue? There have not been Equality Impact Assessments conducted on every bit of road and building design throughout history and oh look - the current government have just abolished EIA's as being an unnecessary bit of red tape. Because wanting to ensure that whatever product or service you develop is usable by everyone in society, not just the strongest and tallest, is red tape. Most of our physical infrastructure is pre-EIA red tape, so it is designed for men by men. Like older cars, furniture etc.

Interesting OP. I am going to have to think about this one and get back to you tomorrow. Way too knackered now.

Yes, god forbid we discuss a gendered issue in the feminism section.

leith, why do you dismiss the needs of pregnant disabled people? You may not mean to come across that way, but your whole post sounds as if you just don't think they're very important. And that's a bit shit, really, isn't it?

Leith, you say this isn't a gendered issue, but then go on to agree with me about the situation for pregnant disabled women. Men, disabled or otherwise, cannot be pregnant, so by definition it is a gendered issue! You also didn't refer to my point about the risk of sexual assault being greater for a disabled woman than for a disabled man.

This is a prime example of intersectional oppression. A disabled woman will experience some types of oppression in common with non disabled women. She will also experience some types of oppression in common with disabled men. However, she will experience some unique forms of oppression that neither non-disabled women nor disabled men will know because she is both female and disabled.

Might be best to park this here rather than take the thread too far on a tangent.

Of, course, as usual,there are few women in very senior positions in the planning and architecture business.

I like to think that most kids will grow out of pink fluffiness. When I was a child I was told to stop playing with the mechano in infant school as the boys didn't like a girl playing with it!!! Thankfully, that attitude didn't prevent me from going into a career in the built environment.

Yes, many public modern spaces are quite clean and crisp but I don't personally see that as being masculine.

However, I hate a lack of pavements (dangerous to both sexes), dark unlit urban spaces which I try to avoid, and big kerbs that you can't get a pram up.

Kritique stop making this a gendered issue it just is not. Many, people with a huge range of impairments will need the toilet more, or will get tired very quickly and very easily by standing in a Que., absolutely nothing to do with their gender. The point about being pregnant with a disability is however a good case in point as the numbers of severely disabled women who are allowed firstly to become sexual, then to carry on as normal whilst they are carrying their child is still so low that planners and designers have not yet been confronted with the numbers large enough to make an impression on planning and specific provision.

However that is an aside as it is a specific and personal issue, you state that laws provide for better compliance, it might but it also never happens as so many loopholes exist. The biggest one being that if it is a refurbishment then no compulsion is on the those commisioning the work to include access. Thats why many pubs, shops, offices, churches, listed buildings, are still not accessible

Playschool, thank you for the current stats, perhaps the shock of that figure and the fact that public spaces are still designed with predominately abled bodied, women, children, and men in mind will focus the minds of some. However as you quoted part M, you will be aware that they are a standardised set of rules that seek to do that almost impossible thing of being one size fits all. What is often the case is that part M may be used but done so in such a way as to make the implementation of them pointless. All very well having a disabled toilet, but not down some dank corridor, with a door hung the wrong way round so it does not open fully. Those are the joys of disability as experienced equally by impaired women and men.

I'm a female town planner. I'd say about 30% are female. However, I do believe things have improved substantially over the last 20 years in respect of disabled access. See Part M of the building regs or check the Council's planning policies for evidence.

I agree - there was a MNer who worked on this sort of thing a while ago. She was saying the same about standard heights/town planning. And I think inde is right, it's often not great for men who aren't average height, either.

My dad is 5'4, and works in a very male-dominated industry, so that for a long time he only had one female colleague. He and she used to bond over the fact that conference room tables were always the wrong height for them!

I also think it's interesting that space for luggage on trains is overhead runners/two-shelf compartments. Both of those require a fair amount of upper-body strength (as well as height) to get stuff up there.

My favourite example is old buildings - if you look at some very old buildings that used to be men-only spaces, look at see where the ladies' loos are. Increasingly this is changing, but lots of buildings used to have a much smaller number of women's loos than they actually need, because some of the plumbing dates back to when they needed one or two loos for (female) cleaners and lots for men.

Very few old buildings have more women's loos than men's, even though women take longer in the loo.

"Up till the mid to late 80's town planning and architecture were male dominated"

Does that mean they're not now? What percentage of town planners and architects are women? 50%? Really?

I agree with wonky's point that it's not just the designers to blame for not-fit-for-purpose spaces and premises. Apologies if I seemed to suggest this. I agree that corners often get cut, particularly when there are pressures on budget. And, of course you can get commissioners who think they know best, overriding advice from the people they pay to tell them how to get it right!

Changes in the law, particularly related to disability access standards, have meant that those who don't see a problem (because they don't have the experience of living with a disability) are forced to do things in a different way to comply. That doesn't meant hey don't still try and cut back, or take the advice of those who recommend doing the very least.

Also, there can be competing priorities and tensions. It's not easy to square needing public spaces to be well lit to improve the sense of personal safety and reduce the risk of tripping, falling, etc., with the need to reduce the carbon footprint and cut energy costs.

Leithlurker - I don't think the height of installation can be put down to tall men doing the job. It's my understanding that carpenters, electricians, etc., aren't generally given carteblanche to put things wherever they fancy. They put things in accordance with the design specification.

Yes, there are more women in architecture, town planning and the building trades, but they are still a small minority within what remain white, male, non-disabled dominated industries. Even when they are there, they rarely occupy many of the senior, most influential positions. As is often the case with male-dominated fields, the handful of women can come under considerable pressure to conform to the established "culture" to avoid being harassed and marginalised even further.

Finally, I would actually suggest that "having a disability in terms of access," isn't automatically gender neutral. For example, a disabled woman might be pregnant and find it challenging to stand for long periods, need more frequent access to toileting facilities, etc., than a man with the same type of disability. A disabled woman is more at risk of sexual harassment or a sexual assault than a disabled man. Yes, some things will be the same, but I don't think it's ever safe to assume that "all things are equal," as a rule.

I agree with wonkylegs some of the problem is able bodied people just not "seeing" the issue so it makes it easier to cut those items that may make a space more open to a large number of people easier to cut as the build goes along.