this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
289 points (88.7% liked)

News

23259 readers
3016 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (40 children)

Lately we seem to be going backwards in equality. Men are getting shat on, especially those that haven't even committed the atrocities they are being punished for.

Why pick and choose who can use the feature to request gender. Make it fair and allow everyone or none.

[–] cbarrick@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

There's a lot to unpack here...

But mostly I suggest you learn about the difference in equity and equality.

Equality (what you are arguing for) is treating people the same.

Equity (what this feature promotes) is giving people what they need to be successful.

Equality aims to promote fairness, but it can only work if everyone starts from the same place and needs the same help. Equity appears unfair, but it actively moves everyone closer to success by "leveling the playing field."

Equity involves trying to understand and give people what they need to enjoy full, successful lives. Equality, in contrast, aims to give everyone the same thing, which does not work to create a more equal society, only to preserve the status quo, in the presence of systemic inequalities.

Given that violent crime in the ride share industry is committed almost universally by men and disproportionately against women, this feature aims to provide equity to support more women as both riders and drivers.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now, I dare you to apply the same logic to black driver vs. white.

[–] cbarrick@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sure.

Are black drivers disproportionately affected by problems in the ride share industry? Yes. Let's fix that!

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

this feature aims to provide equity to support more women as both riders and drivers.

it aims to provide equity, but through a really shitty and half-assed method that results in systemic discrimination

Lyft could be vetting their drivers, taking a hardline approach on drivers which are reported, a trusted driver program, etc, anything that would actually be protecting vulnerable people from abusers, but instead went with the easiest most simple minded approach (which also doesn't protect any vulnerable men) because they have no problem treating their drivers like shit

[–] JasSmith@kbin.social -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Equity is antithetical to equality. They are oppositional ideals. Either you aim to provide equal opportunity for everyone, or you intentionally limit opportunity to ensure equal outcomes. Democracy and multiculturalism is premised on equality. It seeks to ensure the right of different groups to behave differently and arrive at different outcomes. For example, Asian high-school students spend significantly more time studying and doing homework than any other ethnic or racial group. You can verify these stats yourself by going to the cited source. Unsurprisingly, this group earns more, has higher employment, and lower crime.

Equity, on the other hand, is authoritarian. To use the example above, it means either forcing Asian children to study less, or forcing children of other ethnicities to study more. There is no room for cultural differences or free expression. Equity is only achievable under an authoritarian system, because in order to achieve it, it requires ensuring every child has exactly the same experience in life. The same amount of homework. The same schools. The same friends and family. The same sports and extracurricular activities. The same hobbies. They must study the same subjects in school and universities. It requires complete homogeneity. No modern society wants this, and the use of the term "equity" is deeply alarming to anyone who considers themselves democratic or liberal in the classical sense.

[–] transigence@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Right. And don't forget to address the issue of them all being differently situated as a starting condition. You'll have to kneecap some and put others on wheels.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] cbarrick@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Lol no.

Equity in this case is providing additional opportunities for education to those who need it.

[–] JasSmith@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Equity in this case is providing additional opportunities for education to those who need it.

That would be equality. Everyone given the same opportunity to benefit from resources on the basis of need. Equity would be providing additional resources to people on the basis of race, for example, irrespective of their need. The purpose of which to ensure outcomes are equitable.

[–] cbarrick@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Again, no.

Equity is explicitly about need. Equality is irrespective of need. This is literally the definition I gave at the start of this discussion.

Obviously to enact equitable policies, you can't handle things on a case-by-case basis, because that doesn't scale. You have to find metrics that correlate with need. The only policies that scale are those that target cohorts rather than individuals.

In the example of school funding, reasonable cohorts can be derived from income level and relatedly (for historical reasons in the US) race.

  • An equitable policy would be to provide additional school funding to impoverished communities.
  • An equal policy would be to provide the same funding to all communities.
  • An unequal policy would be to provide funding in accordance with something inversely proportional to need, like property value.
  • An oblivious policy would be to provide funding in accordance with something orthogonal to need, like the day of the week.

In the case of ride-share safety for both riders and drivers, gender is a decent axis for defining cohorts.

[–] darq@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe I am missing this in the article but which education is being provided by Lyft?

You gave an example of a school. It's really obvious that the above poster was addressing the example that you gave.

[–] JasSmith@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

That wasn't clear to me but thanks for clarifying. I'll edit my comment above.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you are providing additional X to a subset of people it is by definition not equality. The two are jot compatible.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If the two people didnt start in the exact same place then they were already unequal though. So the equity option just makes them closer to equal, equality is not measured in simply 'how much you get for free'. I work with people with disabilities getting more 'free' support than you or I will ever see, are they more equal than the rest of us for it?

[–] kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is literally the distinction between equality and equity. There are different words that mean close to similar things.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Because the goal is equality of outcome. Like I said equality between people is not measured in "how much stuff you are given"

[–] transigence@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago

Why not just not allow men to be drivers? Problem solved, equity maximized.
Neither "equality" nor "equity" involve any amount of equality, equity, fairness, nor justice of any kind. They're all hot garbage.
What people need is freedom and liberty maximized, and artificial barriers removed. And don't expect equal outcomes.

load more comments (39 replies)