Brentwood Council in Essex are considering a move to see females on a night out receive cheaper taxi fares if they are wearing revealing or short clothing, this is due to being more at risk if they cannot safely get home or afford the current taxi fare. The move is considered to come after individuals are inspired by the programme Towie, personally I have never seen this programme so aren’t familiar with what it is inspiring, a assume it is something to do with an active nightlife…. Amy Childs has also been named for blame but she has hit back claiming it’s unfair that individuals could be more at risk for wanting to look ‘glamorous’.
This kind of thing subjects females into a ‘victim’ category based on what they are wearing, it shouldn’t be assumed that women who wear little clothing are automatically going to be a victim of a rape crime, not all men are going to rape someone on a night out.
Its a strange thing for the council to consider but if it becomes possible then could it not mean that girls will purposely wear little clothing so that they to can have their fare cut? It wouldn’t be fair otherwise if someone has to pay full price because they are deemed to be wearing more clothing that doesn’t see them at risk if alone at night.
Surely ladies going out think ahead to ensure that they can get back home, it could also be seen as sexist, why should it just be females that get taxi fares cut? It would cost £3000 to put the scheme into action and local people believe that if people can afford to go out drinking then they can afford to get their selves home, they do make a far point
Would it not be better to put a policy into practise that meant ladies had to wear a certain length of dress or skirt when clubbing? im not saying it has to be below knee length so legs are completely covered but maybe not short enough that the whole world can see up it if you were to bend down as this could give off an ‘easy’ impression, or maybe taxi ranks could be closer to the nightclubs so people aren’t walking alone in the dark, either way I think another solution could be put into action rather than costing the taxpayers £3000 for a scheme that seems over the top.