Apparently drunk women at night ask for female taxi drivers, because they feel unsafe.
Hey you dumb bitch. How about you just don't get fucking drunk.
@matrix https://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/04/10/chariot-women-female-uber-get-shut-takes-off/
The biggest tragedy is that they didn't call it "Boober"
@r000t Oh yeah. That's a huge missed opportunity
@r000t @matrix I’m not seeing the big deal here.
Its just the market attempting to respond to a customer demand — and the government getting in the way, as usual.
Ok, drunk girls make bad decisions — same as drunk everyone. Ok well, if this exists then they have a (probably?) safer option to get home. So what? Whats the skin off your nose here?
@promethea @matrix @r000t @shebang
I'm stopping short there, but i'm tired of hearing about drunk people getting hurt and society getting upset. fuck them, they're drunk - it's the way things should be.
@JackMeinoff @promethea @matrix @shebang
^^^^^^
Also look how many people have gotten sick and died because god forbid we close the fucking bars
Ok I agree. So?
How is the market attempting to offer a safer alternative for women to get home a bad thing?
OK sometimes people get waaaaay to drunk — both sexes. I’m failing to see the harm in mitigating it or why its anyone’s business in the first place.
They are drunk, but instead of driving home dangerously, they get a ride — and want a safer option for that ride home. Which someone is willing to provide.
Cue the angry guys.
The market shouldn't be saving anyone - isn't that the point/the problem? Not sure which thing we want out of society, the freedom to fail and self responsibility or this?
My issue with ride shares is that it's not economy of scale it's depression era economics. My rant about drunks dying off is just an aside to this.
the ancap position is generally that people can do whatever the fuck they want and the consequences are their own responsibility, good or bad
no moral or consequentialist argument really, no concern about responsibility or failure (or success)
@promethea @matrix @r000t @shebang So there's my problem with drunk women ... I don't want them to be raped but at some point it's their fault for being drunk and taking the chance no?
@promethea @JackMeinoff @matrix @r000t @shebang It’s all well and fine to be required to look out for people you don’t know because they are weak and we want everyone to be safe.
It comes off as very much an asshole move when people you are looking out for deliberately put themselves in dangerous situations.
If a dude puts on a $2000 suit, get super drunks, and then goes for a walk in the worst part of town at two in the morning is it really not his fault?
We live in a society after all.
@fluffy @promethea @r000t @matrix @shebang This is my point too, which is it really? Because it's sometimes cool that this exists and sometimes not. But I didn't get to force that point it's lost.
@fluffy @promethea @JackMeinoff @matrix @r000t
Most of you seem to be ignoring the fact that they potentially have a safer alternative.
OK, dude puts on his $2000 suit, gets super drunk, and instead of walking through a bad neighbourhood calls a Taxi. Now he’s fine.
Drunk girls however, have complained their drivers are inappropriate — ok well here is a potential service that gets them home safely and people are against it.
Sorry I’m not getting it.
@shebang @promethea @matrix @r000t @fluffy What about those who can't afford the service? Rape?
@JackMeinoff @promethea @matrix @r000t
And here you go again. You don’t want them to be raped, but you are against an idea that could potentially reduce that.
@shebang @promethea @matrix @r000t I didn't say I was against it anywhere - it's just sad it exists for two reasons
@JackMeinoff @promethea @matrix @r000t Whether its sad or not is irrelevant. I think its sad that rehab centres need to exist, but well, they need to exist.
@shebang @promethea @matrix @r000t it's entirely relevant, but you're also now down to deciding when to reward bad behavior which is fine i guess too. the market's working great when people are so poor they have to provide this service and the people are so drunk and irresponsible there's a demand for it.
that's great shit.
>The market shouldn’t be saving anyone - isn’t that the point/the problem?
No. That makes no sense. The Market should do whatever there is a demand for it to do. If there is a demand for safer rides home for drunk chicks, then it should provide that.
An ambulance (usually a market service, btw, although heavily regulated: another bad thing) is a ride service for people too unwell to drive safety to the hospital. Uber is based a ride server for people to drunk to drive home.
This sounds like you making a moral judgement on a market service based on your dislike of people who drink too much. Its basically pearl clutching.
@shebang @matrix @JackMeinoff Nothing wrong with any of that.
The following two things are illegal, and in my opinion, should be:
- Refusing service based on immutable attributes (sex, year of birth, race, etc.)
- Refusing to hire based on immutable attributes
If all that's wanted is to provide a safer ride home with better assurances of security, it seems trivial to keep professional, interviewed, background checked, maybe even CCL'd if it's about physical safety, drivers. You simply cannot say "only women drivers".
And, if women are willing to pay for such a service, surely there's quite a few men who would find that useful too, no? You'd *have* to charge quite a bit to make a profit on something like that.
I disagree, I think that people should be able to do whatever they want even if its sometimes crappy.
That’s freedom, baby. I’m not interested in a moral nanny state, I’ve enough experience with it by now to reject it outright.
If there is enough of a demand for it there will be a profit. If there isn’t, then the business fails and that’s the way it goes.
Gov’t involvement is always just more bullshit and nannyism.
No I didn’t you misread and left the thread too early.
My grammar was probably unclear. I posited that it was one of two dystopian outcomes, “Cyberpunk” style corporatism, OR communist style surveillance state.
@shebang @matrix I think there's gotta be a minimum level of intervention to keep people from actively being harmed. See also: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/22/us/green-slime-detroit-.html
@promethea @matrix @shebang Also not okay.
The legal way to keep dudes out of your rideshare is to tweak the environment such that no man will want to be seen inside it.
@matrix what if the women uber driver has a penis, will the drunk rider be ok or not??
@matrix Did you hear about the women-only Uber?