Uber Claimed It'd Protect Sexual Assault Victims, Instead It Wants To Know What They Were Wearing And Their Medical Histories

Most victims of sexual assault are hesitant to report their encounters to anyone, especially authorities, because of the blanket nonchalant attitudes surrounding assaults that typically shift attention towards how the victim's behavior somehow caused the crime. What was supposed to be a way to advocate for a serious (and personal) traumatic incident turns into an interrogation questioning how much a victim drank, what they wore, and their character — a personal line of inquiry and tactic Uber has taken on in facing its own sexual assault cases. The approach has left its victims feeling like coming forward was a mistake, as one Uber assault victim told the New York Times.

It's a complete 180 for the ridesharing company, which was once a champion for victims of sexual assault, touting how its services would protect them from those kinds of circumstances ever occurring. Uber even created a video that instructed drivers that "sexual violence is never the survivor's fault." But the Times, which earlier this year revealed that Uber received a sexual assault or misconduct report every 8 minutes, found the company isn't advocating for its victims. A deep dive into its sexual assault problems uncovered the deeply disturbing antics Uber and its lawyers have instead employed against the survivors it said it'd protect.

In one of the cases a woman was asked by Uber's lawyers how much the victim had to drink that night, as well as inquired about the Adderall she had taken. They then asked what she was wearing and followed up on specifics like if she had been "wearing heels or boots or flats." The questioning got more personal as the lawyer asked if the victim had felt "abandoned by her father or degraded by her mother." They further questioned her about previous consensual sexual encounters, if she had been paid for sex, or was sexually abused in the past.

The same line of questioning was found to have been used throughout multiple litigations against the ride share company in the last two years. In each case the same sort of rhetoric that has surrounded sexual assaults for decades was used, inferring that the victims asked for it because of what they were wearing, or what they were drinking. But Uber has gotten far more personal as its lawyers delve into victim's medical histories to find instances of depression, anxiety, female health, what kind of birth control they take and past sexual encounters or abuse if it's been reported. In another case, Uber's lawyers ended up revealing to a father in the litigation that his daughter had been sexually abused as a child, and sought an abortion as a result.

Sexual assault is such a prevalent occurrence in society that statistically speaking you personally know at least one person in your inner circle who was sexually assaulted. Most won't divulge that information, and nor are they likely to as sexual assault victims fear they won't be taken seriously when they report their experience to a hospital or clinic, and police. 

There's also the notion or implication that reporting the assault would create more problems personally, or that court experiences would be too traumatizing as one faced the individual that assaulted them. Some authorities have even advised against litigation as it would depend too much on "he said, she said" testimony that might go nowhere. And anything said in court becomes a permanent record which could further haunt victims' futures.

And then there's Uber, where its survivors are not only set up to relive their own traumatic experience, but the company that advocated to protect them has furthered the traumatizing agenda — just to save a few dollars or its own reputation. To truly see just how vile Uber's defense has been to victims, you really should read the full New York Times story here.