The Feminist Case for Transit-Oriented Development
April is here, and it is both Earth Month and Sexual Assault Awareness Month. I am known to be an urbanist — that is, I believe in transit-oriented development. That means I believe in things like an end to mandatory parking minima, upzoning, more investment in rail and public transportation, more investment in bicycle infrastructure, and congestion pricing.
It is obvious how these things help the Earth; transit-oriented development is about designing places in such a way that people do not need to make cars their primary mode of transportation. Even electric cars still promote poor patterns of land use, with more impervious surfaces for stormwater runoff that ends up poisoning major bodies of water and less space for trees and other greenery. More car use drives (pun intended) more land to be set aside for vehicles to drive on and park on, which leads to development patterns that are spread out farther, AKA sprawl. Denser housing that’s walking distance from the places people need to go, however, means more compact development, which leaves a lot more space for wildlife.
But where does Sexual Assault Awareness Month come in? In the United States, 1 in 3 women is expected to experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in her lifetime. The data are not quite clear to what extent IPV is more pervasive in rural areas than in urban areas, but it seems to be the case that IPV happens more often in rural areas than urban areas. Moreover, victims of IPV in rural areas are more likely to be killed by their abusive partner than are women in urban areas. Rural victims of IPV also report less social support and are less likely to seek out help.
Rural girls and young women are also more likely to deal with unintended pregnancy and more likely to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term. Moreover, those states with the most restrictive abortion laws are also the least likely to invest in robust public transportation. The lack of robust public transportation and the fact that many rural women facing unwanted pregnancies cannot afford a car makes transportation a significant barrier to accessing abortion. These phenomena stem from the isolation of rural areas, an isolation that seems to breed (pun intended) patriarchal attitudes towards gender roles and families and make it harder to access vital health and human services.
Much is made of “stranger danger” when talking about the safety of children, but the fact is that the vast majority of child victims know and trust their abuser. As well, one of the most important ways to combat child sexual assault is to minimize opportunities for perpetrators, who operate in isolated, 1-on-1 situations. A private motor vehicle is necessarily isolating! On the other hand, when children can walk, cycle, or take transit to where they need to go, besides the environmental and physical health benefits, there are safety benefits in the form of extra adult eyes — an extension of the “eyes on the street” theory.
With grown women too, much is made, wrongfully, of stranger danger. To the extent that stranger danger exists, as well, much is made of street harassment and harassment on the bus and metro. These concerns are certainly valid, but the fact of the matter is that I feel the most unsafe as a woman alone when I am walking to my car. I find it significantly scarier to be in a parking lot than I do to be on a busy street or on a bus or train. Isolation is a threat to women’s safety too, and it’s one that warrants much more discussion.
Transit-oriented development is an issue of gender and reproductive justice. It offers a literal safety net to women and children due to the improved access to people and services. I hope that the urbanist movement will continue this conversation.