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.

  • exussum@lemmy.world
    2236·
    1 year ago

    This is the dumbest take I’ve seen. What are you even getting on about. This is just rancid bigotry veiled as concern.

    What are you even basing this on? Are you afraid of black people? Or do you just hate the LGBTQIA+ community and women? Or are you still privileged as one of those two that you don’t use Uber and are just spreading shits because you can?

    • Abnorc@lemm.eeEnglish
      306·
      1 year ago

      Like it or not, Lyft is helping customers discriminate on the basis of gender. It may not have come from bad intentions, but it could have bad consequences. I’m not sure which genders will be less popular as a result of this, but they may have a harder time generating an income from Lyft. (If this feature takes off.)

      I’m not saying that this feature necessarily has no place. I can empathize with people wanting to pick the gender of their driver, but it may not end up being fair for everyone.

      • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
        76·
        1 year ago

        Well getting harassed is also not fair.

        Also this probably will have an unintended consequence of letting the popular gender choice(s) earn more, as there is less supply and more demand than if the whole driver pool was available.

        • transigence@kbin.social
          178·
          1 year ago

          So it’s reasonable to think that if your driver is a male, you will be harassed (and that if your driver is a female, you will not)? That doesn’t enable misandric bigotry in any way whatsoever. I mean, everybody knows that men are the ones who cause problems and women are the ones who suffer them.

          • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
            52·
            1 year ago

            My guess is that women don’t prefer to pay a higher price to get home safely but that’s just reality they live in. Also it’s an inconvenience to wait longer for a ride so why would they choose that just to spite men?

            Also they (women) can probably decide from experience if they usually get harassed by men or someone else and choose to opt in to this program based on that. If it’s nonsense then they won’t do it because why would they.

            Also only 23% of Lyft’s driver are women (based on a super fast search) so this actually happens to also help that issue as well indirectly as their demand grows.

      • exussum@lemmy.world
        1417·
        1 year ago

        If you could empathize, then you’d understand how shitty of a sentence, “WhAt abOUT BlAckS,” is. Or, “It’s okay to ignore the problem 'cause it’s not fair to men.”

        Really think about it. Guys have no choice but to not have the option. What is taken away? This is the same BS as, “Why do we need a lactation room? MEN can’t use it.” “How come women get days off for their PMS-related things, I don’t menstruate.”

        • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
          123·
          1 year ago

          I’m just calling out discrimination by comparing it to discrimination. Just because you think one is better than the other doesn’t mean other people do.

          • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
            37·
            1 year ago

            This is just getting butthurt for an absolutely silly reason and simultaneously showing no empathy at all.

            Let’s get the facts down:

            • For men nothing changes.

            • Women are disproportionately affected by sexual harassment and assault by male drivers.

            • Women and non-binary people get the option to use a probably paid feature to have drivers of their own gender because the companies want more customers and women and non-binary people don’t use their service since they are scared.

            The reaction here in the comments isn’t “omg I didn’t know it was so unsafe for some people to use these services” or “good for them to make more people feel safe”. No.

            The reaction is: “Why do THEY get a feature I don’t?? I demand to also get this, they shouldn’t have something I can’t have!! Sexist misandrists!”

            • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
              56·
              1 year ago

              No. The reaction isn’t “I want this service too” it’s “this service is morally wrong”.

              • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
                44·
                1 year ago

                How is that morally wrong? It does not hurt anybody and makes some people feel more safe.

                • exussum@lemmy.world
                  27·
                  1 year ago

                  That guy thinks affirmative action is discrimination. When you argue with a fool, you both look foolish. 😔

            • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
              65·
              1 year ago

              If they haven’t hurt anyone and they’re merely using their free speech then I would not defend assault and battery on them. Just because their ideas and speech are deplorable does not give you the right to assault them.

        • Abnorc@lemm.ee
          41·
          1 year ago

          Well, it is a valid argument. Since women are often uncomfortable around men they don’t know, it does seem fair to give them an option to avoid male Lyft drivers. What if someone is uncomfortable with a black driver? It is a similar situation.

          Honestly, if I were a woman I would possibly use this feature. Personal safety goes above any moral ideals that I may be tooting around. That’s why I’m kind of split about this. People should be able to feel as safe and comfortable as possible, but male drivers shouldn’t feel like they’re less preferred by a portion of Lyft’s users.

          • exussum@lemmy.world
            32·
            1 year ago

            You’re talking in circles. The problem is because men are the largest perpetrator, well also being the biggest benefactor of being a man. They are literally on both ends. Women on the other hand are largely targeted by men for crimes of various sorts, well also not benefiting from the patriarchy.

            Hell they have to have separate train cars for women in japan because men can’t keep their hands to themselves.

            There is nothing societal that benefits black drivers. That’s exactly the point. There is no equity here. If I’m a black driver, chances are I’m already on the back foot. People might cancel their rides once they see me, or bring cops into play and have other violence brought against me. Remember that one black dude in Central Park who was bird watching and had a woman start accusing him of stuff.

            Don’t put women further on the back foot. Don’t put persons of color on the back foot. Cis white men already have the advantage in so many ways.

            It’s not funny anymore.