TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

      • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead

      • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Because Uber was built by misogynists...

[deleted]

September 10, 2014
24 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Because Uber was built by misogynists...
Author

[deleted]
Upvotes 24
Comments 31
Date September 10, 2014 7:03 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2g14oo/because_uber_was_built_by_misogynists/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/because-uber-was-built-by-misogynists.228204
https://theredarchive.com/post/228204
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill

Comments

[–]Adolf_ghandi22 points23 points24 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

When I read brain farts like

male drivers rape customers

I always think there is something in the water or the food in murica that makes ppl stupid.

[–]AnotherLostCause6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I had a co-worker who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by a cab driver. Later found out from one of her friends she was at home drunk. She didnt want to be docked a days pay for missing work so she made up a story.

[–][deleted] 17 points17 points17 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]2mbillion-10 points-9 points-8 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

its not segregation. What was really illegal about segregation was the fact that black people paid taxes and government services like public schools and buses did not provide them the same return on their taxation.

Privately run businesses do not share the same burden. In fact businesses reserve the right to deny their services to any potential customer they do not want to serve. If this goes away, it would mean a fundamental shift in the entire business community - something that frankly is not going to happen.

Nobody wants to watch women get special privilege, but in this case its nothing of the sort

[–]AGiftToAfterthought12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That is quite right. It is not segregation.

It is gender based discrimination. Which IS illegal for privately owned companies to partake in and/or endorse/condone.

[+]2mbillion-9 points-8 points-7 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

no its not - so how does curves gym legally operate then?

It is illegal for a business to discriminate on gender in the hiring process but its not illegal for a business to refuse service.

[–]TheJewmonsta1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As the article stated, legally a man can join curves. Curves is just heavily marketed towards women.

[–]trplurker2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

no its not - so how does curves gym legally operate then?

Because they don't discriminate. You, as a man, can not be refused membership if you apply. They can not refuse to serve you based on your gender. Instead they skirt into a grey area where they simply don't market to you and instead market it as a "female only" gym, though technically it's not. They don't build a male locker room / ect.

http://fitnessmarketing.com/2011/04/are-women-only-gyms-guilty-of-discrimination/

Some states have allows a limit form of this, provided the same gym also provides a male version with identical amenities and furnishings. This is technically a form of limited segregation which is bordering on some very grey area.

Remember the laws do not specify that it's illegal to discrimination against women, they say it's illegal to discriminate based on gender.

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]2mbillion-5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

and if the business can prove its in their best interest to deny service its completely legal

[–]pl231 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

how are you going to prove its in your best interest for men not to patronize your business.

What you're saying about private businesses isn't true. They can refuse service if they have a reason that is actually concrete. They can't just willy nilly say they want you out of there.

[–]trplurker1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Dude....

You really should read up on anti-discrimination laws, especially the results of court cases and precedents set. A public business can not discriminate, in either customers or employees, based on age, sex, religion, race or disability. It is illegal for a business to refuse to hire women as it is illegal for a business to refuse to hire men. It is illegal for a business to refuse female customers, as it is illegal for a business to refuse male customers.

Recent sexuality has been added to that list with the courts finding that business's must serve homosexuals the same as they serve heterosexuals.

Systematic discrimination is illegal in the USA, it's not always easy to prove or enforce, but it's definitely illegal. A business making a rule of not servicing men is running afoul of not just municipal and state regulations but of federal laws. And if systematic discrimination can be demonstrated in a court, usually though a set of testimonies from customers and past employees along with business records, the business will be found liable for damages and be forced to change it's policy.

[–][deleted] 13 points13 points13 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]1Dis_mah_mobile_one5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So men should be jerks about it. It would shut it down quite quickly.

[–]widec1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's not to say that the TLC is definitely going to prevent the service from launching (the spokesperson wouldn't comment further), and it doesn't mean the service won't be successful.

Oh this idea will fail so hard. Not only are they trying to start a business in an industry with multiple competitors, they're trying to break a law doing it and expecting it will ALL go off without a hitch? What a fucking joke. Every new business has problems, it's just a matter of being able to predict them and take care of them as they arise. They're so screwed, I hope they didn't put much money into it.

[–]DirtyNamesGetBlocked0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The only thing you can run as an "all women" anything is a clothing store. Everything else will ultimately fail. Remember, women don't pay for shit. they just spend money.

[–]widec0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wouldn't say clothing stores exclusively. Female only gyms can do well in the right areas, maybe some other businesses as well.

[–]HardPillToSwallow8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'd love to see the actual % of drivers who are doing all this rapin'. Just because there are a 1000 crimes doesn't mean there are 1000 criminals.

[–]2niczar1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

On top of that it's even less likely with Uber driver since you know who they are (you can rate their service); it's only a problem with cabs you hail in the street, and whom a drunk woman might not think of writing down the number.

[–]AnotherLostCause0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Let's see cab drivers have the name picture and cab drivers licience number plastered all over their cab. The dispatcher basically knows where they are all the time. Not a great start for a crime spree.

[–]jurtis10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Think of how unsafe NYC would be with all of those female drivers

[–]pl2314 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

this shows the lack of common sense on the part of the typical female. When you consider how terrible at driving the average one is and then you make them drive for a living, yeah you're asking for trouble. I'd wager a guess that many more females would be hurt by female cab drivers due to lack of skill than by male drivers who want to assault them.

[–]LAMFF 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Settle down fellas and remember your abundance mentality. There will be more cabs for us and less bitching about sexual assault from skeevy cab drivers.

[–]pl2312 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

so there's one confirmed case and 3 accusations and this is big news? So you get a service that is for the most part drunk people and 1 case and 3 accusations are suddenly a problem?

Also I'd love to see the reaction if men tried to create a man only gym. Oh wait I know what it would be. Women at country clubs flip shit when there's a men's grill or something like that. Because god forbid the dudes that pay tons of money to golf would ever just want to get away from all their bullshit for an hour and have break/lunch/dinner with their buddies.

[–]aa223 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In all honesty, I am fine with it. I mean that will mean more uber cars for us.

[–]gstvtrp0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What's stopping them from putting a feature where the client can view the driver's profile and then accept or deny?

I think this story is more about promoting the app than anything.

[–]BecomingReborn-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What about female customers harassing male cab drivers?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8AMrdB5f2vY

[–]2mbillion-4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

While I regard most of the stuff on TRP as pretty spot on, this to me is an example of where the community is off focus.

Is one of the things this community seeks is autonomy to do whatever you really want?

If we are to be fulfilled is it not important that we do not stop others from doing the same thing?

This does not jump out at me as a sign of females getting yet another privilege not afforded to men, or somehow having some agency men do not have. To me this seems like a business decision on the part of the founders. I do not think that the business is going to work. For multiple reasons: having a bunch of drivers without spatial awareness is a recipe for bad taxi service, excluding 50% of population immediately is not the best of ideas, traditionally women run businesses are plagued with leadership problems bottom to top etc.

In any event in america businesses reserve the right to refuse service to anybody they choose. This does not mean its a good idea, but its a fundamental tenant of doing business in america that I do not want to see erased

[–]2insickness1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This does not jump out at me as a sign of females getting yet another privilege not afforded to men, or somehow having some agency men do not have.

Can you imagine if men started their own cab company that would only pick up men? Not in your wildest dreams.

In any event in america businesses reserve the right to refuse service to anybody they choose.

Not true. Take a look at the famous civil-rights era photos of the diner not wanting to serve black people. You as a business can't discriminate for certain things. At least not explicitly.

[+]2mbillion-6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

all a taxi cab company would have to do is prove that it is in their best interest and its competely legal.

[–]trplurker3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Umm no, not even close

All that needs to happen is one man attempt to take a taxi and they decline him, or most likely a pattern emerges of them not accepting or ignoring calls from men. Then it's law suit time and a civil rights case.

The laws governing discrimination are gender neutral, we merely tend to interpret them as meaning "for women only" because everyone's been trained to think that way. It only takes one court case and that shit starts to change quick as our entire legal system is built on precedent.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter