On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 17:42:37 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

On 27 Jan 2019 14:23:46 GMT
Marland wrote:
wrote:
Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose
different plumbing ,menstrual
cycles and smaller bladder capacity when pregnant often means they need
toilet facilities more often than men.

How did they cope in the past?

Stayed at home in the absence of suitable facilities or supplies? It
still happens now - Google for "period poverty".

How far back is your past, we have had toilets on most long distance
trains since the early 20th century,and public toilets for women began to

I'm not talking about long distance, I'm talking about commuter trains.
Anyway, femninists are always telling us there's no difference between men
and women bar the obvious so...

Peeing out of train windows ? We're both equal on that now.

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 22:29:48 +0000, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

On 26/01/2019 23:10, Marland wrote:

I would agree you don’t need toilets on commuter trains where such as
crossrail where off train facilities can not be too far away and frequent
services make journey interruptions not the end of the world

Unless something unpredictable happens, like it gets cold at Lewisham in
winter.

You want to try South Bermondsey. :-(

IIRC the Dutch decided trains didn't need tiolets - the (European bit
of) The Netherlands is quite compact - but they soon changed their mind
and it is now a requirement.

Yes, at least there are lavatories on the island platform
at Lewisham. South Bermondsey, on an embankment
which must be cold in winter, is less accommodating.

On 27 Jan 2019 21:42:28 GMT
Marland wrote:
wrote:
On 27 Jan 2019 14:23:46 GMT
Marland wrote:
wrote:
Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose
different plumbing ,menstrual
cycles and smaller bladder capacity when pregnant often means they need
toilet facilities more often than men.

How did they cope in the past?

How far back is your past, we have had toilets on most long distance
trains since the early 20th century,and public toilets for women began to

I'm not talking about long distance, I'm talking about commuter trains.
Anyway, femninists are always telling us there's no difference between men
and women bar the obvious so...




You followed up my mentioning of longer trips like Waterloo-Exeter to tell
us that for such journeys you take your family in the car so you were
already aware that I was not talking about short commuter journeys when you
replied as my post said said “
Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose
different plumbing ,menstrual cycles and smaller bladder capacity when
pregnant often means they need toilet facilities more often than men. I
would agree you don’t need toilets on commuter trains where “, so it was
fairly obvious we had moved onto longer distance services prompted by your
absurd statement upthread
“Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough
to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland�.

It was after that you asked “ How did they cope in the past?�

Now you trying to claim that you were talking solely about commuter trains
again in attempt to bolster your weak proposal. Won’t wash Pal, others can
follow a thread that shows your arguments descending into impracticality

Not you though since you obviously missed the bit where I spoke about
thamelinks. Or did you think that was a long distance service?

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 22:16:57 -0000 (UTC)
Billy No Mates wrote:
Marland wrote:
wrote:
It was after that you asked “ How did they cope in the past?�

Now you trying to claim that you were talking solely about commuter trains
again in attempt to bolster your weak proposal. Won’t wash Pal, others can
follow a thread that shows your arguments descending into impracticality
even if you can’t keep track of what you read and write.

Welcome to Neil Robertson's world.

It simply isn't worth having a discussion with him. Most of us no longer
bother.

You don't bother because you always end up painted in a corner. Still, you're
used to being on your own arn't you Billy.

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 23:51:26 +0000
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 17:42:37 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

On 27 Jan 2019 14:23:46 GMT
Marland wrote:
wrote:
Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose
different plumbing ,menstrual
cycles and smaller bladder capacity when pregnant often means they need
toilet facilities more often than men.

How did they cope in the past?

Stayed at home in the absence of suitable facilities or supplies? It
still happens now - Google for "period poverty".

Google tampons and sanitary towels.

How far back is your past, we have had toilets on most long distance
trains since the early 20th century,and public toilets for women began to

I'm not talking about long distance, I'm talking about commuter trains.
Anyway, femninists are always telling us there's no difference between men
and women bar the obvious so...

Peeing out of train windows ? We're both equal on that now.

If youve got the ****s don't travel otherwise take a dump before you do. Its
not complicated and if you keep getting caught short then see a doctor.

In article , wrote:
This is the UK, not the outback. There are pubs and service stations along
almost all roads. Finding somewhere to stop is usually a 15 min job at most
plus service station toilets are a damn site nicer than some stinking cramped
cupboard on a train.

You must go to some fairly boring places for holiday. We would
frequently travel the last hour entirely on B roads or worse and in
those days rural pubs wouldn't let children in even just to use the
toilets; I have no idea if that's improved since I don't have any of
my own.

For that matter the few motorway services I have the misfortune to
encounter are rarely even as clean as railway toilets.


--
Jonathan Amery. O who am I,
##### That for my sake
#######__o My Lord should take
#######'/ Frail flesh and die? - Samuel Crossman

In article ,
wrote:
Not you though since you obviously missed the bit where I spoke about
thamelinks. Or did you think that was a long distance service?

Cambridge to Brighton is 2h25m as timetabled. I'm usually on mine
for over half of that and the toilets appear to get a fair amount of
use particularly on the approach to the Canal Tunnels.

I will occasionally use them myself on the approach to London Bridge
if I need to since however foul they are they can't possibly be worse
than the toilets in London Bridge station and if not then I'm stuck
until I get off at Sidcup.

--
Jonathan Amery. There's a light that is shining in the heart of a man,
##### There's a light that was shining when the world began.
#######__o There's a light that is shining in the Turk and the Jew
#######'/ And a light that is shining, friend in me and in you.

wrote:

“Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough
to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland�.

It was after that you asked “ How did they cope in the past?�

Now you trying to claim that you were talking solely about commuter trains
again in attempt to bolster your weak proposal. Won’t wash Pal, others can
follow a thread that shows your arguments descending into impracticality

Not you though since you obviously missed the bit where I spoke about
thamelinks. Or did you think that was a long distance service?



You asked the question “How did they cope in the past� when it was quite
clear the thread had moved onto the problems your silly proposal to remove
all train toilets except sleepers would create.
That you spoke about about Thameslink as well doesn’t camouflage that no
matter how much you try and convince that you only meant services like
theirs all along because you realised how stupid your initiall extreme
stance was.
You can resort to Boltar bluster as much as you like but what you wrote is
out there.

GH

On 28 Jan 2019 10:19:40 +0000 (GMT)
Jonathan Amery wrote:
In article , wrote:

This is the UK, not the outback. There are pubs and service stations along
almost all roads. Finding somewhere to stop is usually a 15 min job at most
plus service station toilets are a damn site nicer than some stinking cramped
cupboard on a train.

You must go to some fairly boring places for holiday. We would

Nothing boring about Europe.

frequently travel the last hour entirely on B roads or worse and in

Where are you going where you need to travel for an hour on B roads? Northern
Scotland?

those days rural pubs wouldn't let children in even just to use the
toilets; I have no idea if that's improved since I don't have any of
my own.

These days most "pubs" are just family restaurants in disguise. Whether thats
a good thing or not probably depends on whether you have kids.

For that matter the few motorway services I have the misfortune to
encounter are rarely even as clean as railway toilets.

Its probably a toss up with station toilets vs service station toilets for
cleanliness. But most *train* toilets are usually fairly disgusting in the
few times I've seen in.