Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

News Female Uber Drivers Will Now Be Able To Refuse Male Passengers In Australia

Incel Constantine

Incel Constantine

Banned
-
Joined
May 20, 2022
Posts
429

Female and non-binary Uber drivers are now able to refuse trips from male passengers in Australia under the launch of the new Women Rider Preference.
Sound familiar to other forms of gender segregated travel arrangements.


BTW the 'non-binary' designation thrown in there isn't where the real emphasis is, it's on women (even despite the continued lumping in of 'non-binary' people with women), as we'll see shortly. The focus is clearly gendered around male versus female, with men being the antagonists to women that need to step aside and be at the mercy of whatever women want, lest they be considered a danger to women.

Female and non-binary Uber drivers are now able to refuse trips from male passengers in Australia under the launch of the new Women Rider Preference.Western Weekender reports that the new feature will enable female and non-binary drivers to only accept rides from women, however, they can turn the preference on and off.
This is basically saying that anytime women want to, they can decline to give rides to men, even though they signed up for a job to give rides to anyone that is willing to pay. Imagine if this same reasoning was applied to men refusing women passengers or people of color being denied rides by white drivers, for at any time and for any reason they choose. There would be civil rights lawsuits and government investigations into the practices of that company and its employees.

Director of Driver and Marketplace for Uber Australia Emma Foley said the new feature is intended to make female and non-binary drivers feel safe, especially when working in the evening.
“Women that earn with the Uber app do so because it enables them to be their own boss, earn flexibly around their lifestyle and in some cases, support a side hustle,” she said.
This isn't about safety. This is about giving women that signed up to drive paying customers the freedom of choice to discriminate against passengers because they are male, and is a step towards more gender segregated travel arrangements where women are treated as the 'betters' and men literally have to go to the back and wait because otherwise it might inconvenience women. 'Non-binary' is just tossed in as a classification to make this policy seem inclusive and to at the same time possibly falsely portray people opposed to this policy as homophobic, hence the grouping in of non-binary people with women.

“By providing greater peace of mind with Women Rider Preference, we hope to support women and non-binary driver-partners in amplifying their current earning hours, while unlocking barriers preventing Australian women and non-binary individuals from accessing flexible earnings that support their ambitions.”
Again, this isn't about supporting women or non binary people, but to allow for drivers to more easily discriminate against male passengers while they can simultaneously be praised for keeping women safe. They want to portray this discrimination, exclusion and removal of freedom of movement and choice for male passengers as a good thing and justified by fake appeals to safety.

The adjustment to the popular app follows research commissioned by Uber, which surveyed 1,037 Australian women aged 18-60 years, who said they were exploring other money-making options to keep themselves afloat, according to SmartCompany.
Research also revealed eight in ten women were considering new ways to earn money, while 74 per cent of surveyed women said they wanted to pick up a side hustle to better support themselves.However, despite these findings, 83 per cent of women said they needed more flexibility to do this, and 88 per cent expressed there were barriers in the way, preventing them from starting a side job.
The research concluded that 70 per cent of women would like to see more female Uber drivers in the front seat.
What this is basically saying is that somehow it's men's fault, it's men's existence that causes women not want to be Uber drivers, therefore male passengers are part of the problem and have to go. This is the same rationale used for affirmative action hiring preferences given to women, keeping men out of career fields so that there is more "female representation" in those fields, providing women more priority and conveniences for basic necessities such as food and also for giving better overall living arrangements (housing, transportation) to women. That's where this is leading. Not just the government but the private sector, in ways that if this was any other group this level of favoritism and was shown to, and for the justifications of "safety" and "convenience", it would not be accepted even as a hypothetical.

Foley also said the new move hopes to establish more of an equal gender representation of those working under the app while encouraging more women and non-binary people to apply as drivers.
And again, this isn't about equality, they are making a mockery of this word in the process. This concept about making it easier for Uber riders to deny male passengers. For what specific reason really? Most likely to appeal to feminists (and they are all on board, as there don't seem to be any complaints from them about this or the possibility of "harmful division between the sexes" that they sometimes go on about when men try not to closely associate with women).

Foley said: “The Uber platform should reflect the diversity of the communities we operate in, including equitable gender representation among the driver-partner base."Women currently represent a small portion of driver-partners, but we hope, by supporting women and non-binary individuals in unlocking more earning opportunities, that this will increase over time.”
Again says it all. They want more women drivers and more women passengers, and if it means denying men rides even if they are willing to pay, so be it.
This isn't the only incident this year where transportation services in western countries have discriminated against men while painting it as a virtue and a boon to women's safety

Do other ride sharing apps like Lyft not have this policy? Are there are any companies that don't have this policy that males would be better off if using their services instead? These are all questions any Australian male reading this should now be asking themselves. While protesting Uber's decision to do this, Australian males should only be using other ride sharing apps if those companies don't have this same policy.
 
Uber cannot refuse service to people due to race, sexual orientation, disability, AND sexual identity. Allowing female drivers to refuse male drivers on basis of biological sex warrants lawsuits.
 
Last edited:
Right now men are the last group where discrimination and segregation are seen as acceptable.
 
Misandry and sexism against men is always okay. Of course we know women are still going to take a Chad for a ride though.
 
Any lawsuits brought against this won't succeed. We live in clown world now. :feelsclown: The perverted ideas of the (((left))) have taken hold and cemented themselves in all the important areas of soyciety and academia, and it's a battle that's already lost. I'm just going to be glad that I don't live in Australia.
 
Of course this will be used solely against "creepy" (read: single, lonely, non NT, sub5) males. Foids will gladly ferry Chad around. Or normies who have been preselected by another female/are riding with their social circle.

Sub5 discrimination officially making it into the books I see. Soon we will have segregated parks, benches, water fountains, sections on public transport, etc.
 
Of course they will refuse services to ugly men.
 
i will just say i am a woman and then rape them with my tranny cock:dafuckfeels::feelsLSD::feelsohh:
 
WHAT THE FUCK :lasereyes::lasereyes::lasereyes:
 
I know you niggers want me to feel bad but I genuinely enjoy how australians continue to cuck themselves in ways I couldn't even imagine:feelskek:
 
Of course they will refuse services to ugly men.
This. Incels are the most discriminated against. They will happily drive with chad but will refuse to drive an ugly man :fuk:
 
This should be illegal due to sexual discrimination but knowing the laws of Australia, it probably isn’t
 
Thats like being able to refuse a black passenger because as a people they are more violent statistically. Damn @CCPcel thoughts?
 
I once got kicked out of the metro wagon by screaming women and security guard. I entered without noticing on the women's only wagon. I guess Chad's presence would be alright
 
Last edited:
Soon they will implement technology where you have to scan your face and display your height when calling up an uber so that foids can determine whether you are "creepy and dangerous" :feelshaha::feelshaha::society:


we ae successfully moving towards absolute slavery hell for sub- chad men and this is all thanks to the jews and leftist retards who appeal to their politics :reeeeee:

1655108456615
 
Clown world at it once again :feelsclown:
 


Sound familiar to other forms of gender segregated travel arrangements.


BTW the 'non-binary' designation thrown in there isn't where the real emphasis is, it's on women (even despite the continued lumping in of 'non-binary' people with women), as we'll see shortly. The focus is clearly gendered around male versus female, with men being the antagonists to women that need to step aside and be at the mercy of whatever women want, lest they be considered a danger to women.


This is basically saying that anytime women want to, they can decline to give rides to men, even though they signed up for a job to give rides to anyone that is willing to pay. Imagine if this same reasoning was applied to men refusing women passengers or people of color being denied rides by white drivers, for at any time and for any reason they choose. There would be civil rights lawsuits and government investigations into the practices of that company and its employees.


This isn't about safety. This is about giving women that signed up to drive paying customers the freedom of choice to discriminate against passengers because they are male, and is a step towards more gender segregated travel arrangements where women are treated as the 'betters' and men literally have to go to the back and wait because otherwise it might inconvenience women. 'Non-binary' is just tossed in as a classification to make this policy seem inclusive and to at the same time possibly falsely portray people opposed to this policy as homophobic, hence the grouping in of non-binary people with women.


Again, this isn't about supporting women or non binary people, but to allow for drivers to more easily discriminate against male passengers while they can simultaneously be praised for keeping women safe. They want to portray this discrimination, exclusion and removal of freedom of movement and choice for male passengers as a good thing and justified by fake appeals to safety.


What this is basically saying is that somehow it's men's fault, it's men's existence that causes women not want to be Uber drivers, therefore male passengers are part of the problem and have to go. This is the same rationale used for affirmative action hiring preferences given to women, keeping men out of career fields so that there is more "female representation" in those fields, providing women more priority and conveniences for basic necessities such as food and also for giving better overall living arrangements (housing, transportation) to women. That's where this is leading. Not just the government but the private sector, in ways that if this was any other group this level of favoritism and was shown to, and for the justifications of "safety" and "convenience", it would not be accepted even as a hypothetical.


And again, this isn't about equality, they are making a mockery of this word in the process. This concept about making it easier for Uber riders to deny male passengers. For what specific reason really? Most likely to appeal to feminists (and they are all on board, as there don't seem to be any complaints from them about this or the possibility of "harmful division between the sexes" that they sometimes go on about when men try not to closely associate with women).


Again says it all. They want more women drivers and more women passengers, and if it means denying men rides even if they are willing to pay, so be it.
This isn't the only incident this year where transportation services in western countries have discriminated against men while painting it as a virtue and a boon to women's safety

Do other ride sharing apps like Lyft not have this policy? Are there are any companies that don't have this policy that males would be better off if using their services instead? These are all questions any Australian male reading this should now be asking themselves. While protesting Uber's decision to do this, Australian males should only be using other ride sharing apps if those companies don't have this same policy.
Cucked west again :feelsjuice:
 

Similar threads

Logic55
Replies
4
Views
178
Logic55
Logic55
SlayerSlayer
Replies
15
Views
908
Namtriz912
Namtriz912
Freixel
Replies
10
Views
421
WorthlessSlavicShit
WorthlessSlavicShit
sultryloser
Replies
44
Views
2K
Nagger
Nagger

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top