Sexism... Against Men - Page 20

On November 23 2010 16:31 Risen wrote:
You might argue, "Well that's taking away my liberty by forcing me to have insurance" you'd be somewhat correct on that point, but the classical counter-argument (and it's held up since the advent of forced insurance so don't try to argue it in this thread) is that driving is a privilege being granted, you're free to walk anywhere you want to. (or ride a bike, or a horse, or public transport, etcetcetc)

On November 23 2010 22:01 Sabu113 wrote:
... How is gender or race arcane? Given a large enough data sample I could run an OLS and tell you how much more likely X group is to be a crash than X group due to the general behaviors of members of X group...

On November 23 2010 22:20 Nihilnovi wrote:
I don't get it, OP gets more cos he's a man and feels discriminated because of it? :S

On November 23 2010 22:15 bonifaceviii wrote:

Yep.

An interesting recent example from Canada is that it's recently come to light that a person's credit score affects their home insurance rates. Using credit score to determine someone's car insurance has been illegal for 5 years, but there is no similar policy for home insurance. There are calls to change the law.

I'm sure there is definitely a correlation between bad credit and home insurance claims, but the government decided to draw an arguably arbitrary line beyond which insurance companies could not extend their actuarial calculations.

Again, anyone who doesn't think insurance companies are limited enough in their ability to discriminate should write their local representative and express their concern. Government regulates business, and you have to let the government know how much regulation you want.

On November 23 2010 22:30 Ryhn wrote:
I find it interesting that insurance companies lobbied to push legislation which would make the purchase of insurance mandatory.

They then realize that insuring everyone equally might make their business less profitable.

On November 23 2010 22:05 kojinshugi wrote:
If insurance is to be fair to every policy holder, it needs to operate by statistics and not political correctness.

You may be the safest driver in the world but if you're in a demographically more risky group it's only fair that you pay a higher premium.

If you don't like to be treated as part of a collective, then don't take part in collective financial endeavors like insurance. Make your own money and pay for all damages yourself.

On November 23 2010 23:27 nttea wrote:
I've always been told i drive like a woman, why do i have to pay more?

On November 23 2010 21:50 Sindri wrote:


If a restaurant makes a decision to charge a person more because of their weight, they're making a decision based upon them as an individual, not their gender.

I'm male. I'm probably the safest driver you will ever meet. I hate cars and drive as little as possible and would never do anything reckless. I'm a good driver, but have no interest in showing off and other behaviour some people are prone to. I can't parallel park to save my life, but I would never attempt to. I'm well aware of what I can and can not do. Why should I pay more just because some reckless idiots I've never met and have nothing in common with except sharing similar chromosomes? There are some pretty reckless female drivers out there, just not as many. These are generalisations. The idea that every male or female driver is the same based on their sex is of course ridiculous.

When younger, I actually had long hair and cutting it would take more time and effort than it would for most men. I had a female friend at the time who liked her hair short and wasn't very vain. Her hair required less time and effort to cut than mine. So how is it fair that I would be charged less than her based simply upon the fact she has breasts and I don't?

Of course, it's difficult to make a decision on someone's driving ability as an individual, but making generalisations against 50% of the population just because they all share a penis is still discrimination in my opinion.

On November 23 2010 22:05 kojinshugi wrote:
If insurance is to be fair to every policy holder, it needs to operate by statistics and not political correctness.

You may be the safest driver in the world but if you're in a demographically more risky group it's only fair that you pay a higher premium.

On November 23 2010 22:05 kojinshugi wrote:
If you don't like to be treated as part of a collective, then don't take part in collective financial endeavors like insurance. Make your own money and pay for all damages yourself.

KK, let's start racially profiling, then. As long as it's statistically backed up, it's cool, right?

On November 24 2010 01:44 Wr3k wrote:
Honestly the way I see it, they should discriminate more. The matter of fact is that women get in less accidents, so they get cheaper insurance. That is just how the industry works. The insurance industry even pushed to be able to change your rate based on your race (My ex's mom works for an insurance company, and if you are Asian you are significantly more likely to get in an accident according to the stats, yup the stereotype is true), but that was shot down. I think that factors such as how long you have lived in the country you are currently in, race, quality of vision, driving experience. (i.e. If you are from hongkong and you move to Canada, you should be charged more for insurance since you likely suck at winter driving and aren't used to the different style of traffic flow, but that would never fly because "its racist"). Additionally id like to see a discount/penalty based on whether or not you have winter tires if you live in an area that gets show. I am so fucking tired of waiting in traffic because of accidents caused by idiots who can't drive in shitty weather. I would also like to see a driver education /licensing program where your driving skill is evaluated and your skill/judgment scores give you a driver skill rating which used to determine which rates you are eligible for. Canadian driver tests are too easy. Any half-coordinated idiot can pass after a few tries.

On November 23 2010 23:27 Amber[LighT] wrote:


I agree with the bolded part.

The italicized part I would agree with, but in our wonderful backwards country it is required by law that your car is insured, despite the fact that you are not required by law to have health insurance. Go figure...