Lyft's new feature lets women and non-binary riders request their driver's gender | CNN Business
www.cnn.com
Lyft is introducing a new feature that lets women and non-binary riders choose a preference to match with drivers of the same gender.

Lyft is introducing a new feature that lets women and non-binary riders choose a preference to match with drivers of the same gender.

The ride-hailing company said it was a “highly requested feature” in a blog post Tuesday, saying the new feature allows women and non-binary people to “feel that much more confident” in using Lyft and also hopefully encourage more women to sign up to be drivers to access its “flexible earning opportunities.”

The service, called “Women+ Connect,” is rolling out in the coming months. Riders can turn on the option in the Lyft app, however the company warns that it’s not a guarantee that they’ll be matched with a women or non-binary person if one of those people aren’t nearby. Both the riders and drivers will need to opt-in to the feature for it work and riders must chose a gender for it to work.

  • @smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
    -13•1 year ago

    Higher risk for woman of being abused does not mean that for man of being abused is 0.

    I don’t understand why if something bad is more propably to happed to woman we make special exception in the rules just to exclude man of this protection.

    • @ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      3•1 year ago

      Since most men are abused by other men, letting men choose to be matched with more male drivers would actually increase their risk of getting abused.

        • @ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
          2•1 year ago

          Can you at least tell me for what country you want to see a source, so I don’t have to look through and present to you the crime statistics of several countries?

              • @WhyDoesntThisThingWork@lemmy.world
                1•1 year ago

                Why is that providing statistics that show something like black people commit more crime is considered rascist, but if you want to do it for men it’s A-Ok? Also how come if we see something like black people committing more crime we want to know how society caused it, but if it’s men we just want to say men are shitbags. This really seems like it boils down to you and others justifying hatred.

                If a system is bad for women we blame the the system, if a system is bad for men we blame the men.

                • @ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
                  -1•1 year ago

                  No one here is saying men are shitbags. You are building a strawman.

                  There ist ample of research, articles, comments and posts on the issues that lead to men potentially committing more crime. Social Media like YouTube, Reddit and Lemmy even have more material about the issues men face.

                  And where exactly do you see hatred towards men here? I see a lot of people hating on a feature that could bring more safety to bunch of people. Simply out of spite.

                  If men were so interested in the option for men having more male drivers/passengers, why didn’t they advocate for it? More men use Lyft and Uber. If that’s so important for them why didn’t anyone even speak about it before? Why is this only now suddenly a giant problem when people try to make it more safe for women since previous attempts didn’t work?

                  • @WhyDoesntThisThingWork@lemmy.world
                    1•1 year ago

                    This thread absolutely is saying men are shitbags, both directly and indirectly. Men don’t advocate for things because they get called called shitbags for looking out for their own self-interest when they do. Men are in this thread advocating for mens interest by protesting this obviously discriminatory new policy and they’re getting shit on for it.

    • @Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      2•1 year ago

      Generally there is an underlying concept of “being more evenly matched”. On average women do face more risk of being physically outmatched by men. If another woman became aggressive then their chances of coming out of the altercation would be more “fair” when matching like with like. If you’ve ever been in a good natured but honest wrestling match with the opposite sex you can usually see the power difference and the results can be pretty sobering to a female participant. These dynamics apply to social situations. If you are afraid of the outsized potential of harm someone has towards you then you are more or less forced to behave in an oppressed fashion if they choose to be a jerk because sticking up for yourself comes with the potential of a threat you are not equipped to come out on top of.

      The chance of a woman being abused by another woman is also not zero but the level of threat is more on par with what they are physically and psychologically equipped to combat.

      • @smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
        -2•1 year ago

        You explained that woman are in higher risk. But you did not explain why because woman are in higher risk we should only protect them and not everyone, even if protecting everyone would be less costly.

        Creating UI to select driver’s sex is easier than verifing your sex and then if you’re woman showing an option. This is active work hours to disallow man from a protection.

        • @Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
          4•1 year ago

          Facilitating allowing the sex or gender selection of a service person at a company is generally illegal because it is a discriminatory work practice. There is however some flexibility to be made that keeps the company safe from greater liability when it is in the interest of safety for women because safety issues on a systemic scale are provable in a court of law.

          If anything you should probably be arguing for more services - maybe a safe driver selection based on years of safe driving and spotless customer record which would potentially benefit those with social anxiety or previous trauma. More than one service can exist at the same time after all.

          When you argue for a service to be removed from a vulnerable group because of personal spite usually the reaction isn’t favorable. You’d be better off directing that energy somewhere positive than spending on sour grapes.

        • @CaptFeather@lemm.ee
          1•1 year ago

          How many times have you been assaulted or abused by a woman? Because almost every single woman I know can count the multiple times they’ve been abused or sexually assaulted by a man. Just because everyone is capable doesn’t mean everyone is equally likely to commit these crimes.

          • @smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
            7•1 year ago
            1. Group A is far more likely to be abused.
            2. We develop a tool to prevent abuse.
            3. We deny the tool to group B that sometimes needs it, because group A needs it more.

            I’m not denying 1., stop assuming I do with cheap arguments like “How many times have you been abused?”. Yes, woman are more likely to be sexual victims.

            But my question is why doing 3.? For Lyft it costs basically the same if not less when allowing the feature generally to everyone.

            • @CaptFeather@lemm.ee
              -1•1 year ago

              I just don’t see the necessity of it considering the overwhelming majority of drivers are already male. This feature is trying to even out the odds of women getting picked up by other women which just isn’t very likely right now.

              To seriously answer your question though, this is a marketing tactic to get more business from women who they can see use the app less than men. They’re a business at the end of the day and it’s a way they’re predicting, whether correct or not, to increase sales.