Slashdot Mirror


How Uber Is Changing Life For Women In Saudi Arabia

An anonymous reader writes: Being unable to legally drive is hard for many women in Saudi Arabia, especially working women. With notoriously poor mass transit options, and the stigma attached to women riding the bus alone, Uber has changed the life of many Saudi women by giving them greater mobility and independence. While there are no official statistics on how many women use the service, anecdotal evidence suggest that 70% to 90% of Saudi riders are women. "A lot of them, I would say, are young women," says Saudi Arabia general manager Majed Abukhater. "We have some data to show that these women are starting to rely on Uber a lot more for their daily commutes; the proportion of trips that we see in Saudi during the weekday is actually very high relative to other locations. That's just kind of one indicator to tell us that women are really starting to rely on Uber for their daily commutes to work, or to school, or to university."

38 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eradicating blatant sexism is.

    1. Re:Uber is not the answer by plopez · · Score: 2

      That would be bad as it would reduce private sector profitability.

      (of course I am being sarcastic)

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    2. Re:Uber is not the answer by sims+2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah but I am sure the next step will be to ban uber in Saudi Arabia.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    3. Re:Uber is not the answer by mykepredko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe it's the beginning of the answer.

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

    4. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      A technology which facilitates women in Saudi Arabia to be in the presence of men who are not relatives.

      What could possibly go wrong?

      Sorry, but for the same reasons they aren't allowed to drive (Sharia law), or travel without the permission of their husband/father ... it will only lead to cracking down on women using the service.

      Saudi Arabia has no interest in allowing women more freedom of movement, and it will be the women who are punished as much as the men.

      In Saudi Arabia, women are effectively property, and not meant to be out in public without an escort.

      This isn't an answer, or an increase in freedom ... it's a way in which when they crack down women will be the ones who bear the brunt of Sharia law and a society who treats them like property.

      A man and a woman who are not married alone in a car is recipe for someone being charged for adultery or other ridiculous things.

      And Uber will claim they're championing freedom, but they might get someone into a world of trouble. Defy the law and convention in Saudi Arabia at your own peril.

    5. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eradicating blatant sexism is.

      Why was this modded down ? It's the truth. Saudi Arabia is still in the 15th century when it comes to woman's rights.
      Want to improve woman's condition in that shitty hellhole of a country ? How about let woman legally drive instead of this "religious" nonsense. Man knows better, females know jack shit said good ol' mohamed.

    6. Re:Uber is not the answer by Zeio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agree here. Why is the headline stated like this ~ Uber makes things great for Saudi women. It should be ~ Women suffering under Islamic misogyny codified into a Islamofascist totalitarian state find respite and have a slight increase in quality of life with Uber.

      Nobody calls a spade a spade anymore.

      --
      Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
    7. Re:Uber is not the answer by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Treating women as property, denying them basic education, and encouraging their fathers to kill them if they misbehave is a protected cultural difference.

      I'm far from being an apologist for the mistreatments of women in Saudi Arabia, but I must point out that denying them basic education is not one of them. From TFA:

      While women comprise only 13% of the Saudi workforce, they make up a full 60% of the college student population

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    8. Re:Uber is not the answer by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unfortunately, this first step will likely be followed by the (easier to implement) second step of "Uber is violating Islam by letting women go outside without a male escort! Shut it down!!!!" instead of the (better, but harder to implement) second step of "Hey, maybe we should treat women like they are actual people instead of things that we own."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    9. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

    10. Re:Uber is not the answer by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody calls a spade a spade anymore.

      Uber is a taxi service but is trying to claim it's not a taxi service even though people use them as a taxi to go from one place to another which is not along the route of the driver. The reason they claim they're not a taxi service, even though they are, is because they would have to abide by the rules all the other taxi services have to abide by, including additional insurance for their drivers and associated fees.

      Calling a spade a spade.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    11. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And amazingly, the rest of the world managed to solve this problem too, WITHOUT such insane gender-based discrimination. Give me a break.

    12. Re:Uber is not the answer by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      Funny that you're at -1 for being right.

      There's nothing odd about it. They posted as AC, and AC comments are automatically -1 when thy are posted. And since many people browse above -1 to avoid trolls and spam it will take longer for people with mod points to see the message and rate it up.

    13. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      many actually treat them with great respect.

      ... like their cars? Getting washed every Sunday morning, serviced properly, never driven too hard even though it would be fun?

    14. Re:Uber is not the answer by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's the beginning of the answer.

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      Uber is not doing it. Taxis are doing it. Uber does not contract drivers in SA, they just use existing taxi services. Uber has nothing to do with liberation of women in SA other than making a claim to be responsible.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    15. Re:Uber is not the answer by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

      That is already a legal requirement, that is (apparently) not being enforced.

    16. Re:Uber is not the answer by mister_playboy · · Score: 2

      ACs post at 0. Clicking on the -1 would reveal that this comment was marked down for Flamebait.

      No mod description is shown when only one up/down vote has been applied, for unknown reasons.

      Why am I having to explain this to a 6-digit UID, anyway? :P

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    17. Re:Uber is not the answer by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Eradicating blatant sexism is.

      That's like saying that "encryption isn't the answer, eradicating computer misuse is."

      Please tell us how you plan to eradicate blatant sexism in Saudi Arabia. I'm really interested in how you think the culture there can be changed, and why women should sit at home and never travel until sexism has been eradicated, rather than just using Uber.

    18. Re:Uber is not the answer by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      No it's not. It's a 3rd-party kludgy band-aid on a problem that only makes it even easier for the Saudi government to put off ever addressing it.

      Consider the possibility of this headline from Montgomery, AL in 1954:

      "Frustrated at Riding in Back of the Bus, Negroes Establish Their Own (Possibly Illegal) Bus Service"

      Would you consider that a "first step" to fixing the underlying problem of racism?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  2. Uber is "ride sharing" ? by jbengt · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA: "for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own cars—all Uber rides go through existing companies"

    So Uber can follow local laws when they're forced to. Who would've guessed?

    1. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to be defending Saudi Arabia, Islam or anything in between, but let's be clear here...Saudi Arabia is a totalitarian feudalistic system. They use Wahabism, which is one of the strictest sects of puritan Islam, which gave us among other things: Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, etc. When you have a totalitarian system, you always need some sort of bullshit ideology to legitimize your total control. This has/is being used in many countries: Soviet Union, N-Koera, Nazi Germany, etc.

      The founder of the Saudi dynasty made a deal (about 100 years ago) with the Wahabi clerics to help him take over the place, and in exchange, they would split up the spoils. This is part of history (no conspiracy theory here). Today, the Saudi family is taking all the oil money it can and the clerics get to to enforce their bullshit puritanic beliefs. Saudi Arabia is just a product of an alliance where two parties get what they want and the people in the middle are paying for it. The beheading, flogging, hand cutting, etc...are a great tool for any totalitarian regime to keep people in-line (Hitler/Stalin got rid of a lot of people they didn't like because they were 'anti-regime', 'enemy of the state')...oh, but this came from the Koran, yeah sure...the Old Testament is full of craziness too but nobody's using for stoning people even through it's in there.

    2. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by myowntrueself · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The penalty for not following local laws in most countries would be a petty fine. In Saudi Arabia . . . it would be a couple hundred lashes with the whip.

      If the offense was considered to be an insult to Islam . . . say bye-bye to your head.

      Oh, and being left-handed is considered to be an insult to Islam. You don't need to try very hard to insult Islam.

      That is why Über folks decided to abide by Saudi Arabian laws.

      My experience in life has been that people who are easily offended are usually insecure and have low self esteem.

      So this would probably apply to MOST of the worlds Muslims...

      Fuckin sad bunch.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    3. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      My experience in life has been that people who are easily offended are usually insecure and have low self esteem.

      So this would probably apply to MOST of the worlds Muslims...

      Fuckin sad bunch.

      On the bright side, if you steal a bike, you can show off your "riding with no hands".

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  3. By the curly beard of Mohammed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We must repress this immediately. Women with freedom. Think of the Islam.

  4. Re:stopgap by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

    Many years ago, I worked with some Saudis who had brought their wives and kids over. They would be going to back when the work was done, but rather than spend a couple years away from the family, they brought them with them.

    At one point, I was talking to one of the wives and mentioned how they must be enjoying being able to drive themselves around. She replied that she was looking forward to having a driver (the husband could afford to hire a driver for his wife when in Saudi Arabia). LA Traffic is not all that much fun and she'd far rather have someone else deal with it.

    I wonder how well driverless cars will work over there? Of course, considering how badly they drive, a driverless car is definitely going to need some serious skills in accident avoidance...

  5. Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The shari-ah holds that women are not allowed to travel alone without a proper male relative acting as chaperone. It is known as maharam or honor law. Women caught in Saudi Arabia without a proper male relative in the company of an unrelated male can be prosecuted. Since all uber drivers are male, (women can't drive in Saudi Arabia) and likely to be unrelated, unless these women have a constant supply of "proper" male relatives, they would not have freedom of movement, uber or no uber. I am no islamic scholar, so not very sure of this: The relatives who can act as chaperones are husbands, brothers, fathers, sons. Not very sure who among the in-laws are allowed to be chaperones as per mahram.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by bsolar · · Score: 2

      The very article you cite is a dissertation about how Islamic law actually *doesn't* require such an escort in all cases.

  6. Isn't this illegal? by undefinedreference · · Score: 3, Informative

    I haven't been in The Kingdom (KSA) in about 7 years, but back then women couldn't go anywhere without an adult male relative (father, brother, or husband) to protect them unless there were no men there. They had massive malls that were staffed and accessible only to women, where they could freely walk and talk with other women wearing western-style clothing if they so wished.

    Since only men can legally drive on public roads, how does this work?! Wouldn't they still need to bring an adult male guardian along?

    1. Re:Isn't this illegal? by cdrudge · · Score: 2

      It's largely unenforced. How does a Uber driver driving a woman in the back seat look different than a guardian brother/husband/father driving the same woman?

      It's like speeding 5 MPH over the speed limit. Everyone does it. Everyone gets away with it. And sometimes you have to lest you get run over by all the other traffic. But it's still illegal. And if a police officer wanted to pull you over he could and there's not much you could do if they really wanted to enforce the speed limit strictly.

  7. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Informative

    Government Licensing does one thing, and one thing only. It increases barrier to entry by raising the cost of doing business.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  8. Re:s/uber/taxi. by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

    If they enjoy Uber then perhaps theyd really enjoy a taxi service. Taxis, offer all the benefits of Uber with the convenience of government controls like licensing, inspection, background checks, and safety standards for vehicles as well as passengers.

    From TFA; Before Uber came to the countryâ"it currently operates in Jeddah and Dammam, in addition to Riyadhâ"women relied on private drivers (if they could afford them) or the limo companies that Uber now works with (for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own carsâ"all Uber rides go through existing companies).

    So that's exactly what they are getting - existing taxi services, only with Uber acting as a middleman and skimming of their cut.

  9. Re:stopgap by undefinedreference · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can only imagine that the autonomous cars will be a hit, but the driving there is truly frighteningly-atrocious. I was very glad to have ex-military drivers with special training and armor-plated SUVs, not for fear of some attack (honestly, they like us more than you might imagine), but because going out on those roads is taking your life into your hands.

  10. Re:stopgap by undefinedreference · · Score: 2

    I can't imagine it being any worse than it already is. Drivers there are unbelievably scary.

  11. Re:s/uber/taxi. by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where I live, they mandated that taxis have an on-board camera with a circular buffer of 24 hours. It had been done in response to allegations a cab driver had assaulted a women ... they later found other evidence for it from another source.

    They pushed through the law requiring this, against the objections of the cab drivers who though they were being spied on.

    When a cab driver was subsequently robbed, and the suspect caught on camera, the cab drivers were all in praise of it.

    It turns out, the mandated cameras made it safer for everybody.

    Imposing regulations on cab drivers can work, and despite claims to the contrary, isn't always about protecting the interests of cab drivers.

    The licensing, inspection, background checks and safety inspections aren't the only benefits to be had.

    Stop listening to Uber who keeps saying the lie that regulations the cab drivers have to follow are something the Uber drivers shouldn't be subjected to ... claims that cities are defending the interests of cab companies in enforcing their laws are complete bullshit.

    Uber never has been, and never will be the underdogs ... and this never has been, and never will be, about protecting entrenched players.

    It's about cities being able to regulate industry players to a minimum standard.

    So, if in my city Uber drivers are willing to get commercial licenses, hold the proper insurance and drivers license, and have the same video devices installed for the safety of everybody (you know, like an actual legal cab company) ... I'm sure people would say they're welcome. But Uber claiming they shouldn't have to is bullshit.

    As long as Uber insists that they aren't subject to laws, they continue to be lying bastards in my book. They're just a company whose business model is in trying to insist laws regarding taxi companies don't apply to them.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  12. How come we've never "liberated" SA? by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    19 of the hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi. Osama Bin Laden was Saudi. We claimed to have "liberated" Iraq because Saddam's people were oppressed (after the WMD argument fell apart); so, why have we never "exported freedom" to Saudi Arabia?

    Exactly what stranglehold do they they have on us (other than having gobs of oil)? And not like that's never stopped us before... I assume they must have Child-Porn pictures with Bush and Cheney. I can't quite understand the thinking of Dubya, assuming he was thinking at all....

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:How come we've never "liberated" SA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      A. The Saudis were friends with the Bushes.

    2. Re:How come we've never "liberated" SA? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

      Because the Bushes are cowards.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  13. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Burz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Uber was supposed to be a way to do IGT (intelligent grouping transportation) where the trips of different customers are automatically combined to save money/resources.

    Instead, it turned into another war over cheap labor and skirting regulation with no actual ride sharing. Uber are liars and cheats who conduct 99% of their business on public streets.