Uber is expanding a pilot program aimed at addressing concerns about the safety of its ride-hailing platform

Archived version: https://archive.is/newest/https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/09/uber-women-only-option


Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 8 months ago* (20 children)

Seems sexist and discriminatory.

When do we get the 'whites only' option for people who don't feel safe around people of color?

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago*

    I can see both sides

    On the one hand I can understand why some women don't trust strange men to drive them around. On the other hand this isn't really fair. This policy is punishing men who have done nothing wrong except be male.

    Honesty this policy is problematic since it doesn't prevent crazy women from harming women nor does it stop people from harming male drivers. A better plan would be to have a vetted driver program where drivers can agree to have a background check verification done in exchange for higher pay.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (17 children)

    Are you upset she chose the bear?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (16 children)

    I'm not upset, but this policy is sexist and discriminatory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (15 children)

    Not sexist, but sure discriminatory, but not in a bad way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    Discrimination is always bad when it based on something you are born with

    However, you could argue that it is worth it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Which is what I was arguing essentially. Its not bad in this circumstance. In fact its good, for the safety of some of the Uber clientele. Its in no way mandatory, but its an option for some people, who for whatever reason dont feel comfortable with a male driver, as unfortunately men are far more likely to harm women. This in no way belittles violence against men.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah I hard disagree about this being good. You can't just discriminate against someone on the very low chance they will do something wrong. There needs to be a non discriminatory way of doing this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago

    Very low chance? Every woman i have ever met has had a sexually negative interaction with a man. Yes individually the risk is low, but when looked at through the lense of power dynamics it just makes sense. Do you have issues with women only gyms? Safe spaces for women to work out without being oogled? Or women only sports clubs where they won't have someone try and "show them proper technique"? I used to think like you too, I would never do these things, so why are women complaining about this, its not fair to me. But then I matured, and I realized how that even if I wouldn't there are far far far too many men who would, and who have, and from that perspective, women only ride share is good. No one is saying that all women have to use this option, its available for those who dont feel comfortable, maybe they were recently sexually assaulted, and they dont want to be alone in a car with a man, you cant blame them for that, even if the guy was the nicest person in the world. If you cant see why that woman would be uncomfortable or even afraid in that situation, I dont know what to say, except that I hope you take a step back and look at the wider world.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    Who is it discriminating against?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Its discriminating who is allowed to drive certain customers around, if they so choose, because men are statistically more violent towards women. No matter how you want to paint it, that is the case. If youre so gung ho about women not wanting to feel safe, that's entirely on you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    Its discriminating who is allowed to drive certain customers around

    Based on what?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    Their customers feelings of safety

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Wrong. It's based on sex.

    I'll take your willful ignorance as admittance of defeat. Kinda pathetic how ashamed you are of your own argument.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Wrong. The discrimination is based on their customers feeling of safety. Kinda pathetic how ashamed you are of women wanting to feel safe.

    Also I did agree its sexist, but your reading comprehension needs work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    your reading comprehension needs work.

    But you're the one who thinks discrimination based on sex isn't discrimination based on sex.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Whoa! OK we're now just gonna make up stuff that the other person said? I didn't realize that we could just put words in each other's mouths like that. Fucking game changer bud.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments