this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
467 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

82518 readers
5678 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When women riders and drivers told us they wanted more control over how they ride and earn, we listened. That feedback led to Women Preferences, features designed to give women the choice to ride with other women. Since our first pilots last summer, we’ve heard just how much that choice matters—from feeling more comfortable in the back seat to more confident behind the wheel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

I understand why women feel this is necessary, but I also understands that a policy like this paints all men with the same brush. It's like they are saying "Since a small number of men are creeps, we give you the option to avoid all men". Which seems to be counterproductive.

Meanwhile, Uber has invasive tracking, where they know everyone's history. They know how many drives a customer has provisioned without incident. And I have always considered these rideshare things to be particularly safe, because all parties are consenting to the tracking. That's not guarantee nothing will happen, of course, but it is more unlikely when all parties know Big Uber is watching you.

If Uber had rolled this out and said "you have the option to avoid rides with the opposite gender without an established history in our files", then I think I would have less of a problem with it. But it seems like I can do everything right, and be respectful of everyone, and give Uber shitloads of money, and still be potentially waiting longer for a ride, just because of my parts. How is that OK?

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not about you. Repeat after me: It's not about you. It's about women who feel unsafe.

Most sexual assault is not reported.

And you will not be waiting longer, women who choose this service will be. So cut the pity party. You lose absolutely nothing.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The more I think about it, though, the more I think this is a genuine discrimination case. If Uber had rolled this out and said "White drivers can choose to pick up only white passengers", would that be OK? Or even "Male drivers can choose to only pick up male passengers"?

Heck, I even think if they rolled this out and said "female users can choose a preference for only female drivers", that might be able to fly, because it's the buyer of the service expressing that view.

But to me, for the people offering the service, there is no difference between this and someone who doesn't want to make a cake for a gay wedding. When you are offering a service to the general public, you can't really discriminate like that. Yes, I understand the safety thing. But a store that catered to women wouldn't be able to bar men from entering at all. Why is a car service any different? Yes, drivers are using their own cars, but it is still a car service.

You know what sucks the most about this? They're probably gonna get sued over it, either by the Trump DOJ or some shitty Red State AG, who is probably gonna win.

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

An estimated 20% of women will be sexually assaulted in their life. Half of those will happen by the time that they're 16. 40% of trans women will be sexually assaulted.

This isn't about your feelings being hurt.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago

Sorry, but discrimination is discrimination, even if the people doing the discriminating are doing it for reasons they think are just. If stuff like this gets normalized, it's only a matter of time before it's weaponized against others, and the trans community in particular.

There's a direct line between things like anti-trans bathroom bills and this. Surely I can't be the only one that sees it this way?

[–] ButteryMonkey@piefed.social 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

If you, as a passenger, notice no difference in service, because they still find someone to cover the ride in the big pool of potential drivers who aren’t women who only drive for women, does it actually matter if some of the drivers are personally refusing to serve you? Have you actually been discriminated against by the service? Would you even know it happened? I doubt it.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Large numbers of men are creeps, and I say that as a man. That's the issue, that's why they're doing this.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Is there a technical definition of "large" that justifies this? If not, then this is all based on feelings.

I think it's bad news to generalize entire large groups like this, no matter how good the intentions are.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

There have been a few studies. Most estimates put it at around 20% of men engage in actively degrading behaviour, sexual harassment, or have had a history of sexual assault, with between 5-8% actually engaging in violence. It isn't everyone, but it is around 1 in 5 which is not a small group that could be classified as "Creeps." It's a lot higher percentage of the population than, for example, the percentage of violent extremists among Muslims.

[–] Pudutr0n@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Well yeah it's based on feelings and it definitely just mindlessly repeating the extremely popular male bashing perspective the majority of fediverse users blindly accept as dogma, but it's also undeniably true. A very large number of us are creeps. If you'd like to get technical, we can pull sexual crimes stats of men vs women and see which number is larger... But, do we really have to?

And it's not that we're inherently evil or perverse by nature. It's that, more often than not, in one on one interactions we are the ones with the potential ability to physically dominate and coerce the human of the other sex. Every once in a while a man will delude himself, snap, explode or give in to whatever dark urge was brooding in him and use that ability in some horrible way.

The probability of an individual of whatever demographic doing something horrible is = (the probability they have the urge to attempt the horrible thing) x (the probability they have the capacity to carry out the horrible thing). It's really not that complicated.

And If you think women would never do this if they had, on average, larger body frames, more strength and were brainwashed into seeking validation through dominance from an early age, please allow me to introduce you to the fascinating matriarchal pack dynamics of the spotted hyena, where females are larger and stronger than males. Guess which sex is more aggressive and socially dominant?

It's not that us men are evil. It's that on average, we have physical power that more often than not, woman do not. Any form of power has the potential to corrupt, cause it can be used for evil and therefore, every once in a while, given a large enough time frame or population, it will.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the extremely popular male bashing perspective the majority of fediverse users blindly accept as dogma, but it’s also undeniably true.

It's just true, we believe this stuff because it's true.

[–] Pudutr0n@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A very large number of us are creeps.

[–] Pudutr0n@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Oh yeah, definitely true.

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Anecdotally, large by the fact that every single woman I know has experienced some form of sexual harassment. And that's not hyperbolic.

More abstract, large by the fact that it is even a discussion. If a not inconsequential amount of men have harassed women enough that this is just brought up at all, then it's an issue that needs to be addressed in some form or fashion.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Right, but is this the best way to address this, by telling women "All men are the same, they will harass you, they can't help themselves. So here, click this button and you will never have to pick one up?"

Best? Maybe not.

But until the underlying social issue gets resolved, it's a solution to address it.

It's also one that could be utilized alongside other protections for women, or as a stop gap to get to a better solution.

They still will need to work out other ways to empower women to terminate a ride (both as driver and passenger) without penalty AND to ensure the passenger is let out of the vehicle in a safe place. Along with better reporting, investigations, and consequences for those who do harass.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You said "small numbers" first as the entire basis of your argument and now you pull the "feelings" card on me??!

[–] dhork@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, yeah, this is the same type of shit that is used to denigrate Muslims, or trans people, or any other marginalized group. "Some of them are violent, so we won't trust all of them!". I don't think we really want to go there, much less with half the human race.

You dont think that or you dont feel that?

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Since a small number of men are creeps, we give you the option to avoid all men". Which seems to be counterproductive.

Speaking as a man, the majority of men are creeps, but even if they weren't, it wouldn't be counterproductive. If it was, say, a 5% chance, one in twenty, that would be far and away high enough of a risk to make a move like this worthwhile. Hell even 1%. And we know the proportion is far greater than that.

They know how many drives a customer has provisioned without incident.

No they don't, single digit percentages of sexual harassment are ever even reported let alone followed up because almost nobody gives a shit about it. Someone's squeaky clean history is basically indistinguishable from that of a serial creep.

How is that OK?

Sadly, lots of things in the world aren't ok. It's tough out there.

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 0 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I wouldn't mind if they'd implemented this the opposite way: if a woman, driver or passenger, encounters a creep, they could report that in the app and then the creep would automatically be banned from riding with women. That way decent men aren't affected and women keep more choice in drivers/passengers, and only the creeps are singled out.

[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

You’d prefer that women are assaulted or harassed first?

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

How else do you think women would be identifying creeps in your scenario?

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 1 points 49 minutes ago (1 children)

I think this rule a massive improvement, but I also think it's very restrictive. Women can only choose to avoid all men, rather than just the creeps. So female drivers who need more passengers might feel forced to accept all men, and female passengers who can't find a ride, might be forced to accept a ride from any male driver. Which might still be a creep.

I think it's better to weed out the creeps. I think that's ultimately better for everybody. Make it harder for creeps to get a ride or passenger, instead of making it harder for women.

Maybe both should be an option.

[–] sneakypersimmon@lemmy.today 1 points 44 minutes ago* (last edited 43 minutes ago)

Women riders are already forced to accept a ride from any male or female driver.

How do women riders label male drivers as creeps? After they sexually assault or harass them? That’s what my question to you was - how does putting the onus on individual women riders to report creeps after they’ve done something creepy help those riders?

I agree that there should be a way to report drivers. But you realize that already exists, right? So maybe we could just support more options for women to feel safer?