5 ms·

I think the direction we should go in is not to separate genders, but unify them. For example, there shouldn't be separate bathrooms or parking spaces. The more

by shafyy 1y ago

I think the direction we should go in is not to separate genders, but unify them. For example, there shouldn't be separate bathrooms or parking spaces. The more you make the separation, the more divided a society becomes. Just look at many muslim socities like Arabic countries where almost everything is separated. Now, I am a male, but many females, including my partner, actually advance this point of view. Also look at more equal socities like in Nordic countries, and you'll see that there's much less separation than in countries with more gender inequality. Of course, we can argue cause and effect and what not, but I still stand by the opinion that separation also has an effect on gender equality, not only the other way round.

ryandv 1y ago
I disagree. Sex segregation is the only way to ensure positive, safe, and inclusive women-only spaces that are free from patriarchal and toxic male influence. Any comparisons between this policy and puritanical religious societies are purely coincidental.
- raxxorraxor 1y ago
  I think the qualifiers you use hint at are sourced from a puritanical religous belief itself for that matter. There are respective shelters for edge cases, but this should not be generalized towards most public spaces.
  - ryandv 1y ago
    You are implying that public space should not be safe and inclusive?
    - AlexandrB 1y ago
      Safety and inclusion are often in conflict with each other. The feature being discussed, for example, is meant to improve safety for one group (women) by excluding another group (men). At the extreme end, we exclude convicted criminals from participating in society for the safety of others.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        I hope it's clear that the status quo excludes women. I guess it gets into the difference between equity and equality.
  - gchamonlive 1y ago
    > I think the qualifiers you use hint at are sourced from a puritanical religous belief itself for that matter. It's not, it's self preservation. > this should not be generalized towards most public spaces. It's also not. It's an option for people that want the segregation. It's not imposed on people to be separated.
- erdeibit 1y ago
  Education is the only way. Segregation or annihilation of one gender is a impractical idea that some european country did in the past and the outcome wasn't good in any way.
- cryptonym 1y ago
  > Sex segregation is the only way to ensure [...] women-only spaces I know you can't be serious but still...
thinkingtoilet 1y ago
This is so typical. "As a man..." There are countless stories of women being harassed from uber drivers, lyft drivers, door dash delivery people, etc... This is the sad reality we live in. I'm glad the women in your life haven't experienced this or if they have they are able to manage it and not have it effect them. That is legit a great thing. However, to force the women who have trauma from this to experience it again seems cruel. I don't know what the word is for this, but it's a very common view online. It seems like a deliberate dismissal of reality in favor of some ideal world that doesn't exist.
- shafyy 1y ago
  Are you a female? Have you talked to females about this? I have, and what I wrote above is their point of view. I used to think like you before I had many conversations with women in my life about this very topic.
  - gchamonlive 1y ago
    I'm sorry but that experience is still anectodal and doesn't invalidate whatsoever the negative experiences of others. Or you mean to say that just because you talked to females in your close proximity that the reality must be like that for everyone?
    - shafyy 1y ago
      Of course it's anectodal. And no, I am not saying that reality is like this for everyone. I am saying that many men, who have not talked to women about these topics, have a false assumption. That there are many women who do not want separate bathrooms or separate taxi drivers, even though they might sometimes feel unsafe with men. Obviously, there are women who will argue for and against.
      - gchamonlive 1y ago
        Which is why giving the option for those who want and need this separation is important. It's also important to take culture into account. In Japan there are separate metro wagons just for women because sexual abuse there is rampant.
colechristensen 1y ago
I think that's a good goal and in general we should be deemphasizing our differences instead of strengthening them (not in the sense that everyone has to be the same but that how you are different shouldn't matter). However there are some changes that need to happen and some major issues that need to be improved. Some of those include the reasons why women feel uncomfortable in Ubers. Incidents of very inappropriate comments are extraordinarily common much less the worse things which also happen.
tartoran 1y ago
Men's use of urinals is quite efficient and timely. By un-separating bathrooms it would mean removing them as I see no other way around it and this would not benefit anyone. Unseparating the washing area is okay by me though again, men and women have different habits and comfort zones. I'd say the least disruptive option is to add gender neutral bathrooms.
- nerdjon 1y ago
  Out of curiosity, why would a combined bathroom require removing urinals? They could still exist, and have the added benefit of anyone regardless of their presenting gender being able to use them.
- MITSardine 1y ago
  Not to defend the other person's point of view (I don't have a horse in this race) but there are already open air urinals in festivals or even in Paris: https://parishistoryofourstreets.com/2021/03/22/the-last-public-pisser/ https://parishistoryofourstreets.com/2021/03/22/the-last-pub...
  - n4r9 1y ago
    There's actually one by Vauxhall station in London: https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/disgusting-public-urinal-outside-vauxhall-19590669 https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/disgusting-... I've personally been extremely grateful for it on multiple occasions, coming back from a night out.
    - MITSardine 1y ago
      In cities where no such facilities exist (public toilets of any kind), you better not walk in quiet alleys off the busy streets if you have a sensitive nose...
  - staticman2 1y ago
    I know open air urinals used to exist in Amsterdam in my lifetime- I don't know if they still exist or not. I'm pretty sure the idea was drunk men were going to urinate in public on the street no matter what the authorities did so they might as well be directed to a urinal.
jasode 1y ago
>I think the direction we should go in is not to separate genders, but unify them. For example, there shouldn't be separate bathrooms This Uber gender option is about safety for women. Some women are afraid of male Uber drivers stalking them and learning of their home address. To avoid that, they have to follow "best practice" hacks such as entering a decoy address of a nearby intersection for pickup and dropoff. This makes it more inconvenient but a little harder for Uber drivers to figure out exactly where they live. Allowing for "female-only" drivers may help passengers avoid the cloak-and-dagger workarounds.
- shafyy 1y ago
  > This Uber gender segregation is about safety for women. It's always about "safety for women". Or so they say. The argument for disallowing trans women in female bathrooms is also "safety for women". Complete bullshit. Similar argument with end-to-end encryption and safety for children. However, often times these separations make society more unequal und unsafer for women. It's a sad world if you think this to it's conclusion: Should females only ride with female taxi drivers? What about trains? Should we have separate train cars for females? Should we disallow females going out on the street alone without a male companion because they might get raped? It's about the safety for women, after all. No, let's not start down this road. Are there men that harass and rape women? Of course! Will it happen a bit less if there's separation? Maybe. But it has many second-order effects that are not desirable. Instead, as others have said, we need to think as a society why men are harassing women in the first place, and what we can attack this problem at the root.
  - n4r9 1y ago
    You keep confusing "giving women the option to X" with "forcing women to X". > It's always about "safety for women" ... Complete bullshit. It's not bullshit. What underhand motivation do you think is at work here? Uber famously had a terrible track record on sexual assault (overwhelmingly by men against women), but through policies like this have gradually been working it down. > Should we have separate train cars for females? It's not a terrible idea. From talking to women, there is a lot of fear of getting on trains alone at night. If they felt safer about it then it could be a net positive both for public safety and the economy. It has actually been floated in UK politics recently: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/women-only-train-carriages-chris-williamson-jeremy-corbyn_uk_599c5171e4b04c532f449df9 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/women-only-train-carr...
n4r9 1y ago
> separation also has an effect on gender equality, not only the other way round Possibly. I'd argue that it's good to give women the freedom to choose separation in specific scenarios where there's a relatively higher risk of sexual violence. Uber rides have historically proven to be such a scenario.

by shafyy 1y ago

ryandv 1y ago

I disagree. Sex segregation is the only way to ensure positive, safe, and inclusive women-only spaces that are free from patriarchal and toxic male influence. Any comparisons between this policy and puritanical religious societies are purely coincidental.

raxxorraxor 1y ago
I think the qualifiers you use hint at are sourced from a puritanical religous belief itself for that matter. There are respective shelters for edge cases, but this should not be generalized towards most public spaces.
- ryandv 1y ago
  You are implying that public space should not be safe and inclusive?
  - AlexandrB 1y ago
    Safety and inclusion are often in conflict with each other. The feature being discussed, for example, is meant to improve safety for one group (women) by excluding another group (men). At the extreme end, we exclude convicted criminals from participating in society for the safety of others.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      I hope it's clear that the status quo excludes women. I guess it gets into the difference between equity and equality.
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  > I think the qualifiers you use hint at are sourced from a puritanical religous belief itself for that matter. It's not, it's self preservation. > this should not be generalized towards most public spaces. It's also not. It's an option for people that want the segregation. It's not imposed on people to be separated.
erdeibit 1y ago
Education is the only way. Segregation or annihilation of one gender is a impractical idea that some european country did in the past and the outcome wasn't good in any way.
cryptonym 1y ago
> Sex segregation is the only way to ensure [...] women-only spaces I know you can't be serious but still...

thinkingtoilet 1y ago

This is so typical. "As a man..." There are countless stories of women being harassed from uber drivers, lyft drivers, door dash delivery people, etc... This is the sad reality we live in. I'm glad the women in your life haven't experienced this or if they have they are able to manage it and not have it effect them. That is legit a great thing. However, to force the women who have trauma from this to experience it again seems cruel. I don't know what the word is for this, but it's a very common view online. It seems like a deliberate dismissal of reality in favor of some ideal world that doesn't exist.

shafyy 1y ago
Are you a female? Have you talked to females about this? I have, and what I wrote above is their point of view. I used to think like you before I had many conversations with women in my life about this very topic.
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  I'm sorry but that experience is still anectodal and doesn't invalidate whatsoever the negative experiences of others. Or you mean to say that just because you talked to females in your close proximity that the reality must be like that for everyone?
  - shafyy 1y ago
    Of course it's anectodal. And no, I am not saying that reality is like this for everyone. I am saying that many men, who have not talked to women about these topics, have a false assumption. That there are many women who do not want separate bathrooms or separate taxi drivers, even though they might sometimes feel unsafe with men. Obviously, there are women who will argue for and against.
    - gchamonlive 1y ago
      Which is why giving the option for those who want and need this separation is important. It's also important to take culture into account. In Japan there are separate metro wagons just for women because sexual abuse there is rampant.

colechristensen 1y ago

I think that's a good goal and in general we should be deemphasizing our differences instead of strengthening them (not in the sense that everyone has to be the same but that how you are different shouldn't matter). However there are some changes that need to happen and some major issues that need to be improved. Some of those include the reasons why women feel uncomfortable in Ubers. Incidents of very inappropriate comments are extraordinarily common much less the worse things which also happen.

tartoran 1y ago

Men's use of urinals is quite efficient and timely. By un-separating bathrooms it would mean removing them as I see no other way around it and this would not benefit anyone. Unseparating the washing area is okay by me though again, men and women have different habits and comfort zones. I'd say the least disruptive option is to add gender neutral bathrooms.

nerdjon 1y ago
Out of curiosity, why would a combined bathroom require removing urinals? They could still exist, and have the added benefit of anyone regardless of their presenting gender being able to use them.
MITSardine 1y ago
Not to defend the other person's point of view (I don't have a horse in this race) but there are already open air urinals in festivals or even in Paris: https://parishistoryofourstreets.com/2021/03/22/the-last-public-pisser/ https://parishistoryofourstreets.com/2021/03/22/the-last-pub...
- n4r9 1y ago
  There's actually one by Vauxhall station in London: https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/disgusting-public-urinal-outside-vauxhall-19590669 https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/disgusting-... I've personally been extremely grateful for it on multiple occasions, coming back from a night out.
  - MITSardine 1y ago
    In cities where no such facilities exist (public toilets of any kind), you better not walk in quiet alleys off the busy streets if you have a sensitive nose...
- staticman2 1y ago
  I know open air urinals used to exist in Amsterdam in my lifetime- I don't know if they still exist or not. I'm pretty sure the idea was drunk men were going to urinate in public on the street no matter what the authorities did so they might as well be directed to a urinal.

jasode 1y ago

>I think the direction we should go in is not to separate genders, but unify them. For example, there shouldn't be separate bathrooms This Uber gender option is about safety for women. Some women are afraid of male Uber drivers stalking them and learning of their home address. To avoid that, they have to follow "best practice" hacks such as entering a decoy address of a nearby intersection for pickup and dropoff. This makes it more inconvenient but a little harder for Uber drivers to figure out exactly where they live. Allowing for "female-only" drivers may help passengers avoid the cloak-and-dagger workarounds.

shafyy 1y ago
> This Uber gender segregation is about safety for women. It's always about "safety for women". Or so they say. The argument for disallowing trans women in female bathrooms is also "safety for women". Complete bullshit. Similar argument with end-to-end encryption and safety for children. However, often times these separations make society more unequal und unsafer for women. It's a sad world if you think this to it's conclusion: Should females only ride with female taxi drivers? What about trains? Should we have separate train cars for females? Should we disallow females going out on the street alone without a male companion because they might get raped? It's about the safety for women, after all. No, let's not start down this road. Are there men that harass and rape women? Of course! Will it happen a bit less if there's separation? Maybe. But it has many second-order effects that are not desirable. Instead, as others have said, we need to think as a society why men are harassing women in the first place, and what we can attack this problem at the root.
- n4r9 1y ago
  You keep confusing "giving women the option to X" with "forcing women to X". > It's always about "safety for women" ... Complete bullshit. It's not bullshit. What underhand motivation do you think is at work here? Uber famously had a terrible track record on sexual assault (overwhelmingly by men against women), but through policies like this have gradually been working it down. > Should we have separate train cars for females? It's not a terrible idea. From talking to women, there is a lot of fear of getting on trains alone at night. If they felt safer about it then it could be a net positive both for public safety and the economy. It has actually been floated in UK politics recently: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/women-only-train-carriages-chris-williamson-jeremy-corbyn_uk_599c5171e4b04c532f449df9 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/women-only-train-carr...

n4r9 1y ago

> separation also has an effect on gender equality, not only the other way round Possibly. I'd argue that it's good to give women the freedom to choose separation in specific scenarios where there's a relatively higher risk of sexual violence. Uber rides have historically proven to be such a scenario.