A taxi company that needs to be boycotted
Daniel Greenfield looks at the chilling scandal of the Lyft taxi company having rapists for drivers, including transsexuals:
Also worth pondering is Bruce Bawer's commentary on Muslim cabbies refusing service to people with dogs:
And, since we're on the subject, there's also this disturbing item from Britain, where youngsters are being abused when it comes to breast milk:
Lyft, the ridesharing company, released information admitting to 4,158 sexual assaults from 2017 to 2019. And each year it got worse. Lyft ended up paying out a $25 million settlement to shareholders over disclosures involving, among other things, driver sexual assaults.When a cab company refuses to distance itself from anything that could perpetuate the damage, it's clear they're not serious about making their services safer, and even if women do drive the cabs, what if the tragedies keep coming vice versa, and this time, Lyft throws its female employees under the bus? That's why all concerned would do well to boycott Lyft, and seek another, more responsible taxi company instead. Above all, public transport safety is a vital issue indeed. Most stunning, of course, is how these companies don't even vet their employees to check if they have criminal records. That's one of the worst things about them.
And since then the lawsuits have kept right on coming.
Earlier this year, a Florida woman sued claiming that she had a baby as a result of being raped by a Lyft driver. Her lawsuit argues that “Lyft failed to take reasonable precautions to protect its vulnerable female passengers… from the foreseeable and known risk of assault.”
And so the company, known for its pink color scheme and progressive politics, is taking action by rolling out its Women+ Connect program offering “rides for women by women”.
But since Lyft’s politics are woke, the women aren’t actually women. Instead it’s a potluck of women, men who claim to be women and “nonbinary drivers”. Women requesting a female driver, in the hopes that they won’t be one of the 292 Lyft female riders and drivers subjected to rape in 2019, the 1,041 who fought off a rapist driver or the 573 otherwise molested will have the luck of the draw as to whether a woman pulls up or Roy who changed his name to Regina. [...]
For a measure that’s meant to let women pick female drivers, Lyft prioritizes its partnership with the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ lobbying group formerly backed by Harvey Weinstein who, if he gets out, will have few career options except as a Lyft driver. HRC’s former president was ousted for helping former Gov. Cuomo fight allegations that he sexually harassed women.
Partnering with HRC, an organization that’s been tied up with sexual predators, seems like an odd choice for Lyft, but so does emphasizing the companionability of women being around women, and then surprising them with HRC’s row of transgender and nonbinary men.
Also worth pondering is Bruce Bawer's commentary on Muslim cabbies refusing service to people with dogs:
Malmö, the third largest city in Sweden, has been notorious for years as a particularly dangerous place for people who don’t happen to be Muslim. Now comes the news that it’s not terribly safe for dogs, either. More on this in a moment. For now let’s just point out that this makes sense, given that the creatures who, in the Western world, are known as man’s best friend are, in Muslim societies, considered unclean.But who knows for how long? The day could come when Minnesota really falls to sharia, and then dogs could be in as much danger as women.
Those of us who’ve been attentively following the Islamization of the West, of course, have long been familiar with the Muslim disdain for canis familiaris. Years ago, when 9/11 was still a relatively recent atrocity and when we were all just starting to learn what it meant to have large numbers of Muslims living in the Western world, there were educational headlines like this one, in the Norwegian newspaper VG: “Cab drivers refuse to take dogs.” That particular story, which dates back to 2004, was about a blind woman in Oslo named Grethe Olsen who was turned away – for “religious reasons” – by no fewer than 21 cab drivers in a row because she was accompanied by her guide dog, Isak.
In 2007, Reuters reported on the same problem, which had begun to affect taxi passengers at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport: Muslim drivers belonging to the Twin Cities’ ever-burgeoning Somali community were refusing to take would-be customers “carrying liquor or accompanied by dogs” – including guide dogs. In response to these refusals, the Metropolitan Airports Commission issued new rules specifying that such drivers, after a first offense, would lose their cab licenses for 30 days and, after a second offense, would lose their licenses for two years. (As it happens, the requirement that cab drivers agree to transport guide dogs to and from that airport is still in effect.)
And, since we're on the subject, there's also this disturbing item from Britain, where youngsters are being abused when it comes to breast milk:
A British trust that supervises numerous hospitals issued a letter claiming that milk produced by biological men (with the aid of ingested hormones) is as good for babies as breast milk from their mothers.Whatever kind of chemicals are involved here, they're bound to be some of the most repellent a laboratory could produce. The UK's done it again with their own Orwellian schemes that only hurt actual women, and mothers.
Dr. Rachael James, the medical director of the University of Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust (USHT) trust — which was the first British trust to use terms such as “chestfeeding” and “birthing parent”¸ wrote a letter last August to an organization called Children of Transitioners in which she claimed that “the term human milk (which she called the ‘ideal food for infants’) is meant to be neutral and is not gender-biased.”
She also stated, “Medications are sometimes used to induce lactation, similar to the natural hormones which encourage lactation to develop when the baby is newly born although occasionally some people are able to induce lactation without hormonal treatment. The evidence which is available demonstrates that the milk is comparable to that produced following the birth of a baby.” She added that “staff further clarify that the term human milk is meant to be neutral and is not gender-biased.”
The USHT cited a 2022 study which measured “infant milk testosterone concentrations” and discovered “no observable infant side effects” on babies using milk from biological men, lactating transgender women. That study was reportedly rejected by experts, The Daily Mail reported.
Labels: anti-americanism, communications, dhimmitude, islam, lgbt cultism, misogyny, Moonbattery, political corruption, Scandanavia, sexual violence, terrorism, United States
