be more rational and tolerant of online car-hailing services that allow female passengers to choose female drivers | beijing news comments
2024-08-31
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
▲didi chuxing confirmed on weibo that the first phase of product development has been completed for features such as allowing female passengers to choose female drivers, pet express, didi chartered cars, and blacklisting cars with strange odors.
recently, a function optimization of didi has sparked heated discussions in the public opinion field.
on august 21, a netizen posted on social media that when using didi to hail a taxi, he found that the platform had launched an "optional female driver" function. the page showed that the function was currently only open to real-name female users.
on the same evening, didi chuxing confirmed on weibo that the first phase of product development has been completed for the functions of female passengers choosing female drivers, pet express, didi chartered cars, and blacklisting cars with bad odors, and that they have been tested on a small scale in a few cities. users will be invited to participate in the internal test and more cities will be launched in succession. among them, the function of female passengers choosing female drivers is only available to female users after real-name authentication.
didi's pilot launch of the "female passengers can choose female drivers" feature has stirred up public opinion, like a stone thrown into a pond. many female users regard it as good news, saying that taking a taxi will make them feel more at ease and relaxed when they are working overtime late at night or feeling unwell. however, many male voices believe that this is a privilege for women and "suspected of provoking gender conflict."
with both female drivers and female passengers, it is foreseeable that this new feature of didi will be introduced into gender issues in the current highly complex and sensitive public opinion field. when a product is subject to public opinion scrutiny, it is actually a necessary process for collecting opinions and iterating and optimizing. however, any discussion should be based on reality and conducted within a rational track, and should not be escalated into a group dispute or confrontation for the sake of confrontation.
first of all, let's ask: is it a real demand for female passengers to choose female drivers? is it a practical necessity? data can provide the answer.
the results of didi’s previous public review panel’s poll “what features do you want didi to provide?” showed that female passengers being able to choose female drivers, blacklisting cars with strange odors, and pet express were the top three options voted for by users.
the first-ranked option, “female passengers can choose female drivers”, received 24.2% of the votes. it can be seen that many female users have expectations for this product form. based on the desired functions voted by users, the platform formulates product optimization plans to form a market closed loop. this is truly user-centric and the most common business logic for enterprises. there is no need to over-interpret it.
feedback from users in some pilot cities shows that the platform app has given this function a very low-key "optional" entrance, which is actually a preference setting for segmented needs, matching the existing needs of female drivers and passengers more accurately and achieving partial optimization of the product. in other words, this function is an option parallel to other services, and will not squeeze the needs of other drivers and passengers, so there is no question of infringing on their interests.
in fact, this function can be regarded as a "value-added service" for women. because, relatively speaking, there are relatively few female drivers on the platform, and in late night or sparsely populated areas, female passengers have a strong demand for female drivers. when demand exceeds supply, female passengers have to pay a longer waiting cost. therefore, rather than saying this is a "privilege", it is better to say that it is a service matching based on market thinking, accepting advantages as well as disadvantages.
of course, this does not mean that the current debate around this feature is completely unnecessary and should not happen. apart from some extreme remarks, many debates on this matter can actually allow the platform and society to more comprehensively examine and evaluate this new product, so as to urge the platform to do a good job in subsequent iterations and optimizations to better meet market demand.
to some extent, the debate between men and women stems from what is often called a systemic bias. gender itself is a stance, and stances carry their own interests. for example, shops on food delivery platforms may think that "the commission is already too high", while the platform's opinion is definitely the opposite. this group-based cognitive gap based on self-interest is a systemic bias.
on online ride-hailing platforms, the demand for female drivers and the supply pool of female passengers have expanded. male drivers will naturally think that this will threaten their ability to take orders and affect their income, and male passengers will also think that they are at a disadvantage because they do not enjoy such equal treatment. this cognitive difference from different identity positions precisely reflects the complexity of real society. we should be wary of those extreme voices on men's and women's rights, and we might as well be tolerant of those opinions within the scope of reason.
but in any case, the goodwill of the platform in launching this service should be felt and taken seriously. on the one hand, in a general sense, due to physiological factors, women are still relatively disadvantaged in society. the platform actively meets the needs and preferences of female passengers, which in itself reflects a kind of humanistic care; on the other hand, it also helps more female drivers solve life and employment problems.
currently, more than 600,000 female drivers earn income through the didi platform. 79% of them are the only source of income for their families, and 56% have no violation records throughout the year. in the current severe employment situation, didi's move can theoretically increase the number of orders received by female drivers, allowing them to support and maintain their family life.
reality is always complex, and the formulation and implementation of functions cannot be achieved in a vacuum. there is always tension between theory and practice, between different groups and different values. before launching this improvement, didi also "interviewed drivers, passengers and experts from all walks of life, listened to their opinions extensively, and tried its best to balance the demands of all parties", which shows its highly cautious attitude.
the more this is the case, the more public opinion should be more rational and tolerant of this attempt with good intentions. ultimately, this function will have a full positive impact on society when it is implemented.
of course, there is still a long way to go between "wanting to do good things" and "being able to do good things", and there are too many variables. there are at least two risks that need to be faced at the implementation level of "female passengers can choose female drivers".
the first is identity recognition. if a female passenger places an order and a male passenger gets on the bus, or if a female passenger places an order and a man and a woman get on the bus together, how should they respond? should they refuse to take the passenger? this is the most direct test for the platform and the driver.
second, there is a structural shortage of transport capacity. during peak hours or in areas where supply and demand are unbalanced, there may be a shortage of female drivers, resulting in a long ride-hailing time or unsuccessful matching. can the platform fully coordinate? this requires the platform to optimize its intelligent dispatching capabilities, strive to match user needs, continuously improve the service environment for female drivers, and balance the interests of other drivers.
any new function or service innovation must involve multiple interests and value considerations. simple binary distinction and gender opposition are not only biased, but also bring unnecessary resistance to the implementation of functions. only by facing real data and objective facts, respecting the market and logic, not replacing technical analysis with value criticism, and not replacing factual argumentation with moral intuition, can a function be done well and its positive value be fully released.
regarding didi's exploration, on the one hand, the platform should have the attitude and magnanimity to face debate and accommodate different opinions. on the other hand, it also hopes that society will leave sufficient room for trial and error for this kind of exploration. only when all parties move towards each other and form a joint force can the "optimal solution" for product and service innovation be found.
written by jiang heng (media person)
editor/ chi daohua
proofreading/ liu jun
