Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

dexerto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 277 posts

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#251

Post by eudamoniac »

lelanthran wrote: post #220
irl_zebra wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This incident is creepy enough that I would also not agree to a give a random stranger a ride home, absent any additional context or mitigations. Maybe to avoid waking up in an ice bath with my liver gone. But, to not give a ride because of some perceived idea that they would claim you assaulted them or something is a bit "this person should go touch some grass" or whatever.

> But, to not give a ride because of some perceived idea that they would claim you assaulted them or something is a bit "this person should go touch some grass" or whatever. Pretty much the same advice any normal person gives their son; a single baseless claim from a woman is enough to ruin a man's life. "Unless you already know the woman, don't spend time alone with her" is pretty good advice.

I am pretty sure "any normal person" does the exact opposite of this advice. This advice to a son seems constrained to the terminally online. It's a really good way to ensure your son doesn't have success with women, especially.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#252

Post by RajT88 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #223
RajT88 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The suggestion I was "forcing" someone to accept a risk is reading what they want to read into my comment. I cannot force anyone to do anything, I am mere lines of text on a screen. Whether I was rebutting their comment depends on the subtext you think their comment had. There could very well be a subtext for such a well worn talking point.

> The suggestion I was "forcing" someone to accept a risk is reading what they want to read into my comment. I cannot force anyone to do anything, I am mere lines of text on a screen. That meaning of "forced" is very unreasonably literal. The meaning of "forced" here is that it's the only socially acceptable option, not that there's a gun pointed at them. > Whether I was rebutting their comment depends on the subtext…

You can refuse a stranger a ride if it feels off to you.

If you are telling a personal anecdote to threadjack a topic, there are several potential reasons why - if that is what you are trying to do. It is open to interpretation as to that poster's intent.

I have my own opinion having read dozens of discussions like this. YMMV.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#253

Post by eudamoniac »

I think there is nothing wrong with this change. Customers should be able to patronize, with great granularity, the sort of businesses, employees, and people that they wish to. The push to advertise "black owned" or "women owned" businesses is similar to this. Letting people choose who to patronize is generally good.

It would be better to have more filtering options for everyone, though. One might prefer a male driver, for example, or a black driver, and if one wishes to wait longer for the driver to arrive because of their narrow preferences, that should be their right.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#254

Post by leptons »

mmooss wrote: post #246
leptons wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You seem afraid of non-hetero sexuality at every turn. You don't know me well enough to form that opinion, and you're completely, absolutely wrong. All I did was state that this "solution" isn't quite as clear-cut as it seems, and that it will likely backfire. I'm not sure what kind of dysfunction happened in your head for you to arrive at "afraid of non-hetero sexuality"??? Maybe don't imagine things that simply ar…

The GGP comment talks about how all these non-hetero people are somehow more dangerous. It's hard to escape the implications or the responsbility for implying what is a long-time trope of hate - constructing a reality where non-hetero people are somehow actually dangerous despite doing nothing that affects anyone else or is anyone else's business, realizing and rationalizing fears. Fear and hate are two sides of the…

>The GGP comment talks about how all these non-hetero people are somehow more dangerous

That's nonsense. More scary? Where the fuck are you getting this bullshit?

Stop. Just go outside and touch grass instead of making up shit just to start pointless internet interactions.

This pointless internet interaction is over.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#255

Post by scoofy »

frm88 wrote: post #231
kelseyfrog wrote: post #61

Absolutely wild that none of the dissenting comments suggest a means of lowering or eliminating sexual harassment of women passengers. Why not start there? Get creative.

Separate the services. There are women-only gyms, why not women-only Uber? Give it another brand name or make it a separate company and offer services for women drivers only, women riders only. Edit: Germany has such a service https://www.femride.de/

This would be illegal in the United States if it were a for-profit company. The US has pretty serious civil rights laws regarding employment and housing.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#256

Post by kelseyfrog »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #245
kelseyfrog wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bro, your argument is a joke. What should a woman in this position do? Look at the options and think to herself, "I could choose a woman driver, but I won't because that is discriminatory to men and I should accept the risk"? Put yourself in her shoes. I don't mean this metaphorically. Put on women's clothes, makeup, and order an uber. In the time it takes for it to arrive, notice the thoughts that appear in your min…

Rather than their argument being a joke, you are misunderstanding the argument. > What should a woman in this position do? Look at the options and think to herself, "I could choose a woman driver, but I won't because that is discriminatory to men and I should accept the risk"? Nobody has argued this. This is a straw man you constructed so you can knock it over and claim victory.

Then create a better man. What are those claiming "sex discrimination" suggesting women do? Clarify. I'm happy to accept a better model. Correct me, please.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#257

Post by Dylan16807 »

RajT88 wrote: post #252
Dylan16807 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The suggestion I was "forcing" someone to accept a risk is reading what they want to read into my comment. I cannot force anyone to do anything, I am mere lines of text on a screen. That meaning of "forced" is very unreasonably literal. The meaning of "forced" here is that it's the only socially acceptable option, not that there's a gun pointed at them. > Whether I was rebutting their comment depends on the subtext…

You can refuse a stranger a ride if it feels off to you. If you are telling a personal anecdote to threadjack a topic, there are several potential reasons why - if that is what you are trying to do. It is open to interpretation as to that poster's intent. I have my own opinion having read dozens of discussions like this. YMMV.

> If you are telling a personal anecdote to threadjack a topic, there are several potential reasons why - if that is what you are trying to do. It is open to interpretation as to that poster's intent.

So whether you were rebutting their comment is based on the reason they "threadjacked", and not the contents of their post? That means no rebuttal for what they explicitly said. And what they explicitly said was refusing a ride because of gender. Okay, that clarifies things. But it would make everyone's lives easier if you made your implications more direct from the start.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#258

Post by Gunax »

lordfrito wrote: post #100

Sex is a protected class under Title VII of the civil rights act. And the supreme court recently said that even majority classes (men) are protected by this. Since Uber involved in the decision to send more business to female drivers than male drivers, this would seem to me to run afoul of employment discrimination (sorry we don't need as many men workers today, too many of you competing so market forces mean we're g…

I am not sure about the legal implications. But, I do see the concern.

Someone else mentioned the analogy of patients preferring physicians of a given sex.

I would not be surprised if they find a way around this by just having riders 'select which driver you want'. Effectively putting the onus on the customer to do the discrimination.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#259

Post by xiphias2 »

tavavex wrote: post #164
kelseyfrog wrote: post #61

Absolutely wild that none of the dissenting comments suggest a means of lowering or eliminating sexual harassment of women passengers. Why not start there? Get creative.

The most effective way of combating this for Uber would be to start doing deeper background checks, live interviews, in-depth assessments, customized testing on their drivers. Mandate video and audio recordings in the car that's streamed to them. Impose harsh penalties on harassment, including immediate dismissal and mandatory police reporting. You know, act like a real employer. Right now they have all the reasons i…

There are even simpler things: the rating system. There's no guarantee that the driver won't see what I rated him, so I won't report them.

There are ways to report if a man has been sexual with a woman, but they somehow just don't get kicked out of the driver network.

Also just a simple example: Uber engineering blog is full of examples of how they rewrote their app in native Android then web then native again, but nothing about how to solve the real problems humans experience when driving with them.

It just feels that they view Uber as a simple logistic problem where drivers / riders are interchangeable and less like Tinder that tries to match people with similar scores abd kicks out the worst.

Re: Uber is letting women avoid male drivers and riders in the US

#260

Post by traderj0e »

lordfrito wrote: post #100

Sex is a protected class under Title VII of the civil rights act. And the supreme court recently said that even majority classes (men) are protected by this. Since Uber involved in the decision to send more business to female drivers than male drivers, this would seem to me to run afoul of employment discrimination (sorry we don't need as many men workers today, too many of you competing so market forces mean we're g…

Isn't there a way for Uber to do this in a way that doesn't give preferential treatment to female drivers, even if higher demand/supply? One of:

1. Force the same market rate for female-only vs regular mode. This means a shortage of female drivers and higher wait times for users in that mode, but anyone who really wants it can use it.

2. Charge more for female-only mode to account for the lower supply, but pay the driver the same rate either way.

Post reply on HN