All-Female Ridesharing To Debut In Boston (qz.com)
HughPickens.com writes: Scores of women have reported assaults by Uber drivers... Now Jenni Avins reports at Quartz that a ride-sharing service that only uses women as drivers, Chariot for Women, is set to launch April 19 in Boston, featuring more stringent background checks and additional steps to ensure riders correctly match with their drivers.... "[U]nlike other services, Chariot for Women features a patent-pending technology that will provide both users and drivers with a code after a request is made that will need to be verified upon starting the ride," reports Glamour. But "whether it's legal or not is a different question," says Joseph L. Sulman. Quartz reports that "According to civil rights lawyers, Chariot for Women's female-only policies could put it squarely in the crosshairs of gender discrimination lawsuits, which would be difficult to win." Founder Michael Pelletz says he welcomes the legal challenge. "We want to show there's inequality in safety in our industry," says Pelletz. "We hope to go to the US Supreme Court to say that if there's safety involved, there's nothing wrong with providing a service for women."
You're kidding, right? There are plenty of women only businesses. Isn't there even a chain of gyms called Curves? That's women only, but I don't think too many women get molested at gyms.
By the same token, female police officers are 5 times more likely to resort to using their firearm, and their partner is twice as likely to be hurt on the job.
Source?
A quick Google search will bring up several citations that female cops are less likely to shoot. But I could only find one citation from Ann Coulter that women are "vastly more likely" to shoot. I suppose that counts as a negative citation, since if Ann Coulter claims something is true, it usually isn't.
Because women are valuable, men are expendable. Didn't you get the memo?
Because an equal amenity is made for men. There are no places where you can legally have a bathroom for women and not provide facilities for men.
As a "trans woman", you sir are the dude, and also the one who is fucked up.
"I'll have those niggers voting democrat for the next hundred years" -LBJ
You seem to believe that transsexualism is a mental disorder.
It is, and it shares a number of characteristics with Body Dysmorphic Disorder. It tends to describe symptoms (rather than a specific underlying etiology), though there is a reasonable amount of information that suggests that in some of the cases it's related to disruption of the prenatal testosterone washes in the womb, leading to desires for behaviour (and identification) often seen in the other sex. In animal models, this tends to manifest as behaviour such as male rats exhibiting female mating and nesting patterns.
A conflict between one's brain and body will cause problems (something seen even in individuals in supportive environments), which makes it a disorder. Likewise, it's situated in the brain (as the body itself is generally in line with the chromosomes) - the brain improperly rejects the body in which it's housed. That's a mental disorder.
The American Psychiatric Association
Rather than pointing out that your argument is an argument from authority, I would point out that the APA does not get to define whether or not something is a disorder. Homosexuality (for example) didn't magically become "not a disorder" in 1973. There was a lot of behind-the-scenes political lobbying, and despite being a professional body, there is a lot of politics in play.
There are a significant number of individuals pushed into transition unnecessarily (particularly in the butch lesbian community), and there are plenty of cases where people would have been better off without transitioning. It's a very high price to pay for many people, and while it may be worth it for some, that is not always the case. Rushing people into it with "it's not a disorder, it's all normal, and healthy, and right" is not a good thing. It's a serious process to be undertaken when the alternative is worse.