Gender Contests in the Delhi Metro: Implications of Reservation of a Coach for Women

Introduction

An exclusive reserved coach for women in every Delhi Metro train was introduced from 2 October 2010 onwards. Children up to 12 years, accompanied by women passengers, were also allowed to travel in the reserved coach. This initiative of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (hereinafter DMRC) was in response to an increase in the number of women passengers and the significant number of reported cases of sexual harassment. ¹ Prior to this initiative, there were four seats reserved for women in each compartment of the four coaches ² of all Delhi Metro trains. This allotment in general coaches continues even after the reservation of an entire coach. The DMRC measure is not unprecedented in the context of Delhi as the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) buses have seats reserved for women and ‘Ladies Special’ buses plying on busy routes during rush hours. ³ However, in setting aside an entire coach for women, DMRC does seem to be a bit ahead of other Indian cities that have a metro service. ⁴

Though gender segregation of space in public transport is not universal, it can be argued that physical mobility is gendered across the world and governed by formal and informal norms. Several cities in the world have special policies in place to deal with the outcomes of such gendering and the limitations this imposes particularly on the mobility of women. ⁵ The issue of women and public transport is obviously also much larger than that of reservation of seats for women as it is tied to issues of women’s physical mobility that is directly related to the opportunities they have access to (Fernando & Porter, 2002; Rao, 2001; Uteng & Cresswell, 2008). Public transport is in particular important for women as they use it more than any other mode of transport. ⁶

It might be a useful exercise to dwell upon the trajectories that lead to a step like reservation of seats and coaches for women in any particular urban context. ⁷ However, here, we wish to shed light on some of the implications such a move has for gender relations in the public domain. The presence of women in public spaces is bound to be a source of unease in a society where their presence is not accepted unconditionally across the social spectrum. Very serious instances of gang rapes and even murder of women travelling in public and semi-public transport systems have already surfaced in the city of Delhi, making this an issue of significant social and political concern. A consideration of the implications of reservation policies in public transport thus acquires urgency and also offers insights into the ground realities of specific situations.

In a context where the domestic or private domain is often considered the most desirable place for women, the reservation of a coach for women in the Delhi Metro can be seen as efficacious primarily because, it is in some senses, a re-creation of a private space albeit in a public context. Apart from signalling the undoubted increase in travelling comfort and safety for women that this step has allowed, academic writings on this issue have thus dealt with how the reservation of a coach for women has paradoxically allowed the public–domestic dichotomy ⁸ to resurface within a public space (Tara, 2011). Such practices, sometimes referred to as forms of ‘portable purdah’, ⁹ are both, a reminder of the continued existence of a larger patriarchal and misogynist social order at the same time as they are arguably a necessary means for women to have greater spatial mobility within such a society. ¹⁰ It has also been suggested that this re-creation of a private space within the public domain has allowed women to appropriate ‘symbolic power’ and power dynamics have tilted in favour of women (ibid.).

While not denying the significance of this view, what we wish to draw attention to is that, rather inevitably and not surprisingly, this tilt in balance of power between men and women in the public domain has also opened up new areas of conflict and exaggerated older forms of gendered contestations and conflicts. This article suggests that while the shift from having some seats reserved for women in all coaches to the reservation of an entire coach for women in the Metro resolves some of the concerns about women’s safety in the public transport, it also generates new issues. In so far as such reservation is seen as ‘partitioning’ a scarce public resource, that is, space in public transport, along lines of gender, it invites a range of responses from men and women who use this mode of transport and creates new arenas of palpable tension. Significantly, such a move has increased and brought into the open misogyny and hostility towards women, which confirms fears regarding the long-term efficacy of such measures in rendering public spaces more conducive for women. ¹¹

We thus wish to argue that new sites for contestation and reaffirmation of gender relations and ideologies have opened up in the Delhi Metro with coaches reserved for women. First, consequent to the reservation, new ‘liminal’ ¹² spaces have arisen in the trains that are sites of gendered confrontations. For example, as we show below, the passages between the reserved and general coaches as well as the entries and exits to the women’s coach are now spaces with heightened potential for gendered contestations. Second, there are perceptions and interpretations of reservation for women in the Metro as a form of exclusion. Men, whether young, old or disabled, who travel in the coach reserved for women, are a prime example of those who may generally or sporadically feel excluded from space in public transport. However, women who might travel in the general coaches may also feel very unwelcome in what have now been unofficially recast as ‘men’s coaches’. These ‘people out of place’ invite, participate in or are forced into, gendered confrontations, contestations and reaffirmations. Focussing on such gendered locations and contexts, we believe, is both a necessary corrective to a view that treats the creation of a private space in the public domain in somewhat simplistic terms and also need to be factored into long- and short-term interventions and policy measures.

In the rest of this article, we elaborate upon these new arenas of gendered contestations that have opened up owing to reservation of a coach for women. A part of our discussion is based upon an analysis of responses to a semi-structured questionnaire administered to men and women who use the Delhi Metro (both regular and non-regular commuters). The interviews, lasting from half an hour to one hour, were conducted mostly in north and north-west Delhi and the respondents were selected through a method of ‘convenience sampling’. This involved interviewing people who were known to be Metro users and were easily accessible to the researcher. ¹³ Such a method was considered appropriate as the purpose of this research was to discover some salient trends in the gendered experiences arising out of the reservation of a coach for women. A deliberate attempt was made to interview young and middle-aged persons. A total of around 60 men and women participated in this survey that was conducted in August–September 2012. However, since the sample was not numerically large, we have used the responses as indicative of attitudes and not as statistically representative. We have also used a very small selection of blogs written by men and women passengers to highlight some aspects of our argument. There are many extremely misogynist discussions around the ‘women’s coach’ in the ‘blogosphere’. ¹⁴ On the other hand, blogs written by women also indicate that they are not unambiguous in their perception of this reservation. While it is beyond the scope of this article to do a comprehensive analysis of such writing, we use some instances for the purpose of illustration.

Reservation as Confusion: ‘Liminal Spaces’

We begin this discussion with a consideration of a new ‘liminal’ space, which also provides a microcosmic view of interactions between anonymous men and women in Indian urban public spaces. The area that separates the coach reserved for women in the Delhi Metro train from the immediately adjoining coach, which is an unreserved general coach, is one such space. The entry and exit points of the women’s coach is another such space.

In every train with a reserved compartment, there is only one passage which partitions the reserved and unreserved coaches as the other end of the reserved coach is attached to the driver’s cabin. This space is liminal not only because it is a point of transition but also because of ambiguity of its reservation status. Following the reservation of a coach for women, this physical location has been appropriated by men leading to contestations over its usage. Since this space does not belong unambiguously either to the women’s coach or to the general coach adjoining it, men spill over into the women’s coach through this opening and also sometimes quickly retreat to it when they have entered the train through the entry to the reserved coach.

It is relevant that many of the women we spoke to pointed out how a large number of men are concentrated in this space and sometimes it is evident that the coach that adjoins the women’s coach is also the most crowded. While many men whom we spoke to had not noticed this concentration in the intermediate space and would like to discourage it, several believe it is justified for men to be in this area when there are women travelling with them as this allows them to ‘stay in touch’ with their female co-travellers. Women, on the other hand, are more conscious of the men’s presence in this space and felt that the excuse of being co-travellers was not valid; rather, they regarded it as a deliberate attempt to ‘sneak in’. As frequently observed, DMRC allocates Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) security guards at the partition to prevent men from bursting into the women’s coach.

The statements of our male respondents provided us insights into how this space is perceived and used by men. A 21-year-old responded to a question about the use of this passage in our survey in a manner that is indicative of the gender dimension of the space and its usage. The young man suggested that

According to many men this is their space; they also argue with women who are in their territory (general compartment). Also many chivalrous men’s loved ones are in women’s coach so (they use this space) to keep an eye on them. And also for many that’s the best place to witness all the beauties that are flocked together.

Thus, the men’s presence in this particular liminal space can be treated as a form of their resistance to women’s presence in ‘male territory’; in addition, on the pretext of watching out for their own women, the space offers possibilities for male voyeurism. Deliberate intentions to harass women, overcrowding and the perception that this is not a reserved space were other elements mentioned in responses to this question. A 28-year-old software engineer suggested that these men ‘might even be eve teasers’. A 21-year-old man felt this place was used ‘to stare at women, or…to stand and travel if one has a woman companion’. A 17-year-old girl said that men may stand in the passage ‘to go on looking at women and hence make them uncomfortable’. Another man felt that use of this space was legitimate as it was not a reserved space. Some men also suggested that when the rest of the Metro is very crowded, this passage is useful to be in as it allows easy boarding and de-boarding through the women’s coach. It is significant that men often justify the use of this space on the grounds of overcrowding and we will see that this also turns into a general argument in favour of most violations of the norm of a separate coach for women.

One write-up freely available online deserves a detailed mention here as it is a first-person account of a young male traveller on the Delhi Metro. ¹⁵ The author speaks to the (ostensibly male) reader in the following terms: ‘Welcome readers. Have you ever travelled in a Delhi Metro [train]? If yes, then have you ever experienced the exciting journey of Delhi Metro in the ladies compartment? If no, then go for it but you have to be slightly clever.’ He goes on to describe one of his journeys as follows:

The crowd was linearly increasing as soon as I was getting close to my destination. When Metro (sic) was about to depart from the Yamuna Bank, my condition was such that I was standing at the border [that is, in the dividing passage] of the ladies compartment and general compartment in the Metro. On one hand, I was cursing the crowd but on the other hand, I was enjoying the beautiful faces of angels in the…above mentioned compartment. The sight was attracting (sic) and worth enjoying. Those short skirts, stylish bodies, conversation skills, eye contacts and pinned hairs were taking away my breath positively. My heart beat was about to cross the speed of light (lagta hai kuch zyaada bol diya). My heart was signalling me to ask one of them about the time (baat shuru karne ke liye koi topic toh chahiye hi) but my mind signalled me to block my path (tab kya hoga jab sab pakkadkar mujhe sandalo se maarengi)… I am still waiting for this exciting journey again.

The author of the above blog is openly inviting other men to indulge in voyeuristic pleasures that the public presence of women appears to encourage; women often enough regard such behaviour as sexual harassment. The Metro may even be viewed by men as a space for socialising with women, an opportunity that is thwarted by the introduction of the women’s coach. One has only to remember that many romances in Hindi films blossom in public transport systems, or while waiting for a train or bus and it is hard to deny the existence of such fantasies. A social networking website titled Metromates.in asks its users to share their travel schedule online with other ‘Metro-mates’, so that they can meet up in Metro trains and make their daily journeys more fun and interesting. The site was launched on the Valentine’s Day in 2011 and explicitly promotes itself as a dating site for men and women (Bhambri, 2011a). Clearly, a majority of users of the website are men looking for interaction with women.

A second liminal space in the Delhi Metro is the entry and exit doors of the women’s coach. While the Metro entry and exit doors have always been a point of a literal ‘clash’ between boarding and departing passengers, the clash becomes exacerbated with the introduction of the women’s coach. Almost all the men and women we interviewed agreed that men often enter the women’s coach sometimes en route to the general coach and at other times to remain there. Although the rules in this regard are fairly clear, there is a high incidence of men not adhering to them unless forced to. According to one report, the DMRC had collected a fine to the tune of ₹ 3,200,000 in a two-year period from 12,757 men who violated the rule regarding men’s entry into women’s coach (Bajpai, 2012; Indo-Asian News Service, 2012). These violations appear to be men’s attempts to either openly challenge the reservation or to subvert it to a certain extent by claiming the right to use it at least for the purpose of passing through. As the comments of some male commuters of the Metro will show below, there are other less defensible motives that also underlie men’s use of women’s coaches to enter, remain in or pass through them. Ill manners, callous attitude, indifference, mischief, ignorance, outsider status, etc. are thus other reasons claimed for this transgression by men. The following accounts illustrate that men are also cognisant of the fact that it is not mere convenience but also less innocent reasons, such as, voyeurism, that encourage the use of entry and exit points in the women’s coach.

A 21-year-old man claimed that

This thing varies from person to person…. Many times I have used the entrance of the women’s compartment to enter into general one. It’s quite convenient to enter this entrance when one is in hurry. But not all men, using the entrance or entering the women’s compartment are in hurry, the common amassing of women in one place somewhat pleases many perverted eyes.

In a similar vein, a 23-year-old male student claimed that ‘it depends on the individual. Some enter in a hurry to switch into the general compartment through the connecting passage. Some enter to get into the women’s coach, for right or wrong reasons. Others enjoy breaking the rules.’

Apart from the fact that men often willy-nilly or even deliberately use the entry to the reserved coach to enter the train, the entry and exit points acquire a further salience in particular contexts. Women commuters have observed that the last/first station of a train route heightens the conflict potential of this liminal zone as at these stations the reserved coach gets converted into a general coach and one of the general coaches gets converted into a women’s coach. Since the position of the reserved coach is fixed next to the driver’s cabin, which is located at both ends of the train, this coach also has to be alternated as and when the train reaches its final destination and readies to move in the reverse direction. Many women experience greater hostility from men at such points of transition as at such stations anyone can get into the compartment that was reserved for women on the previous trip. Harassment of women passengers de-boarding at Inderlok and Mundka stations was witnessed by the researcher. In fact, DMRC has already responded to the complaints of women in this context and is experimenting with alternatives to this mode of switching coaches. ¹⁶

There are some reports which suggest that men also start laying claim to the women’s coach after a particular time at night; the assumption is that the number of women passengers decreases after a certain time (Menon, 2011). Thus, women who travel at night may find men in the women’s compartment who deny the existence of any reservation at that hour. The implication is that women have no right to travel beyond a certain time. Such strategies are similar to claims men make regarding the reserved seats in DTC buses when they insist that such reservation is valid only from the starting point of the bus. That there are no clearly worded public signs regarding the scope of reservation only helps such claims.

It is relevant that almost all our female respondents had encountered men entering the reserved coach. While most men and women we spoke to suggested that men should not enter and stay in the women’s coach, others said that this may be justified when the general coach is too crowded, when they are old or disabled or when are travelling with women who are pregnant or indisposed. Women respondents accepted that men enter the coaches either deliberately or when there is overcrowding, they are travelling with women or are in a hurry. Some also suggested that they could be in women’s coach if they do not have ‘bad intentions’! Still others felt that while use of the entrance was acceptable, remaining in the compartment was not. Interestingly, one man even pointed out that men may need to enter the women’s coach to deal with other men who might have entered it with inappropriate designs. Hence, as with the attitude towards space between the general coach and the women’s coach, there is an opinion shared by a minority of men and women that sometimes it is legitimate for men to enter the women’s coach, others think that men enter this area for wrong reasons and need to be strongly discouraged from doing so.

Reservation as Exclusion: ‘People out of Place’

Another very strong perception that has grown after the reservation of a coach is that the general compartments are ‘men’s compartments’ in which women should no longer travel since they now have a reserved compartment of their own. Although most women we interviewed preferred to travel in the women’s coach, some liked to travel in both. A small number of women also felt that the very existence of the women’s coach was a sign of a lack of gender equality—but a larger number put comfort and security first in their preference for a reserved coach.

The important point here is that considerable hostility and anger is directed at women who travel in the general compartment. This is a major source of tension as now that a coach has been reserved for women not all men are willing to share the ‘general’ space with women and when women enter this area they can be seen as deliberately entering a male domain when they could have arguably chosen not to do so. The general compartment has thus been claimed as exclusively belonging to men by excluding women who, it is claimed, have their own space. ‘Please Mend the Gap’, a citizen-led initiative to promote gender equality and commuter safety in public spaces, has observed that the view that the general compartment is now the ‘men’s compartment’ has become deeply entrenched and is even referred to as such. The group also organised a ‘flash mob’ to highlight the harassment to which women have been subjected consequent to the reservation (Bhambri, 2011b). Both men and women in our survey confirmed that women are chided for using the general coach when they already have a separate reserved coach. Most of our male respondents did not believe that the general compartment was meant exclusively for men and agreed that this is a common though false perception.

That sometimes women are subject to extreme forms of harassment when they travel in the general compartments is evident from a case reported in a blog. Here a young woman narrates her ordeal in a crowded general compartment:

My station arrived and I pushed my way to make it to the door before it could close and during this struggle my top was pulled by a man to expose my breasts for 15 good seconds while at the same time somebody grabbed my behind. I somehow got onto the platform and they were laughing at me…. I am not playing victim here and not trying to grab eyeballs. (see Ritika Popli, 2012)

This example explicitly highlights the hostility that women experience in the general compartment. At least one commentator on the blog chastised the woman for wearing clothes that allowed men to do what they did! The argument is distressingly familiar: women invite trouble because of the way they dress.

Reserved seats for women in the general coaches are another source of gender contestations. If women are not subjected to outright hostility in the general coaches, their desire or demand for a seat in these coaches may very likely invite it. One man claimed that he had heard/seen many times that ‘If a woman asks for a seat in the general coach, she gets responses like Madam aap logo ke liye toh special coach banaya gaya hai. Waha jaake bathiye na.’ (Madam, you people already have a special coach for yourself. Go and sit there.) Thus, the creation of a reserved coach is often seen as a good excuse for men to reclaim the remaining spaces as theirs and treat women who may enter such areas as unwanted intruders.

Furthermore, the idea of ‘need’ appeared as the major prism through which people perceive the issue of reservation. Many men claimed that ‘gender should not be the base’ of reservation of seats and people should vacate seats on the basis of need. Some others claimed that general coach seats should not be reserved for women though others felt that this facilitated men and women travelling together. ‘I usually offer my seat to aged people/women rather than young females. Also keeping in the mind if there’s not a crowded situation in that case I may give it to any woman irrespective of the age,’ shared a young commuter.

This brings us to two situations about which there is considerable ambiguity among both male and female commuters. One of these is with regard to whether old and disabled men should be allowed to enter and remain in the compartment reserved for women. Although again as the opinion on the issue is quite divided, such ambiguity creates conditions in which older men are often tolerated in the reserved compartment. While almost half the respondents felt that since there were reserved seats for old and disabled men in the general coaches, they did not need to enter the women’s compartment, and others felt that they are needy and hence should be permitted to use the women’s coach. One man even suggested that this should not be permitted as it would allow women to make ‘unnecessary remarks…about males ogling’ and suggested that the coach should be renamed to include need which would allow old and disabled men to use it. It is also apparent from the above discussion that a major perception behind such suggestions is that women’s coaches are often less crowded than the general coaches. This is obviously the case as there are still far fewer women in public spaces as compared to men. However, it is interesting to note that this in itself becomes a reason for men to make a claim to space in the women’s coach even if this is only treated as justified under particular conditions.

Second, there is the question of how a mixed gender couple or group should travel. Though not necessarily a source of conflict in itself, the fact that men and women often travel together sometimes gives rise to a conflict of interest between the desire to travel together and to seek the least crowded and most comfortable space at the same time. Most respondents felt that while they would like to travel together and even use reserved seats for women in the general compartment, in a crowded train, they would prefer it if the women travelled in the women’s coach. As already discussed above, many men claimed that it is legitimate to use the passage to remain near the women with whom they are travelling. One went further to state the following:

I would like them [women companions] to travel in the general compartment with me. If the general compartment is overcrowded and there is more space in the reserved coach, I would advise them to travel in comfort. If they are not in a condition to travel alone, I would accompany them in the women’s coach.

Concluding Remarks

We thus find that the liminal spaces between the reserved and unreserved coaches, the exit and entry doors as well as the women’s coach itself have lent themselves to both ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’ uses by men. The above discussions illustrate that overcrowding, old age, disability and presence of female companions are offered as somewhat legitimate pretexts for the presence of men in and near spaces reserved for women. Further, while other less ‘honourable’ motives are also consciously articulated by men themselves in this regard, women too see men’s presence in such spaces as legitimate under certain conditions. This is a clear indicator of ambiguity towards the gendered segregation of spaces on the Delhi Metro. It can be argued that such ambiguity somewhat reduces women’s potential for assertion of their right to public spaces, particularly those which are unreserved. This is further exacerbated by the hostility that may be directed at women travelling in general coaches and seeking seating in such compartments.

Moreover, the issue is seen in terms of need for seating and space rather than safety and security of women, which is otherwise felt to be the major justification for the reservation of a coach for women. We can argue that there is an unresolved tension between everyone’s need for some space in the Metro, some people’s greater need for space and physical comfort owing to their age and physical conditions and women’s need for space, which allows them to avoid undesirable and involuntary contact with men. Therefore, while a young woman may find a reserved seat in a general coach a means of avoiding excessive physical contact as well as some comfort, many men complain that women do not vacate seats for people who are needier than them. In this context, a young woman is seen as less needy than an older man. However, as is obvious there is no consensus regarding the category of need and there seem to be many different grounds for claiming ‘need’ and ‘neediness’. While these different constructions permit a certain amount of contestation around the use of women’s coaches by men, they also further compromise women’s capacity to unambiguously stake claim to public spaces. It is also not irrelevant that many women we interviewed felt that subsequent to the reservation of a coach for women, men’s behaviour towards women had become more hostile. Interestingly, though most women preferred to travel in the reserved coach, some felt that such a separation was ‘degrading’ for women.

Although there are no easy answers, we hope that this article has been able to make a case for the need for continuous engagement with the gendered implications of reservation policies in public spaces. Our research also indicated that DMRC seems to have done little more than paint conspicuous pink signs on platforms at Metro stations indicating where the ladies compartment will stop as well as carry out periodic crackdowns on men travelling in women’s compartments. A clear position on why reservation of a coach for women is important is conspicuous by its absence in the publicly available material produced by DMRC for the users of Metro services. It is left to women travellers and activists to deal with the misogyny and hostility arising as a by-product of the move. This most certainly is not the best of all possible scenarios.

As a final point, this study may also be seen as providing some indication of the kind of situations which can develop in the context of any reservation policies involving women. For instance, it might be interesting to look at the parallels this case has with men’s response to reservation for women in the parliament and other levels of the political machinery. Such an exercise is however beyond the scope of this article.