EPTMarried people pay less insurance, even if you're married to someone without a license. Curves for women (A chain of gyms) only allows female members. Convicted felons can't vote in many states. Kid's don't have freedom of speech while in school. VFWs obviously are for veterans. Senior Citizens and Children often can pay less for anything from a bus/movie ticket to getting additional menu options at restaurants.
Sexism... Against Men - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Cauld
United States350 Posts
Married people pay less insurance, even if you're married to someone without a license. Curves for women (A chain of gyms) only allows female members. Convicted felons can't vote in many states. Kid's don't have freedom of speech while in school. VFWs obviously are for veterans. Senior Citizens and Children often can pay less for anything from a bus/movie ticket to getting additional menu options at restaurants. | ||
|
Vanished131
France311 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:14 Servolisk wrote: On a side-note, does it make sense to use sex/race/age as determining factors over other available data, such as driving record? I know driving record is taken into account, but my personal experience is less so than age is... which does not seem very "scientific". It would make sense that someone's driving record would take precedence over sex, race, or age [age is controversial]. | ||
|
cz
United States3249 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:17 nozh wrote: Gender equality is women getting paid the same as men. Gender equality is not being questioned or ignored or humiliated when coming forward about being raped or sexually assaulted. Gender equality is not having domestic violence be the number one cause of injury to women. You make me sick. Don't compare your bullshit hardships to what women have gone through and still go through. And those are genuine issues which people are working to ameliorate. Men and women. But to go and say that because women have historically (and still do) have certain gendered discriminator situations doesn't mean that's it's okay for men to be in the same situations. Women being discriminated as a result of gender? Problem, everyone agrees. Men being discriminated against as a result of gender? Apparently you think this is "okay" because women have problems. But we are working at those problems; shouldn't we be working at the male problems too? | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:18 cz wrote: You don't get it. Saying that actuarial science or statistics or whatever means that it would make sense for insurance companies to charge higher rates for men (because they statistically cost more $ in claims) doesn't mean it's justified to do so as a result of discrimination based on sex (sexism). There's a difference between wanting to and being allowed to (and being justified in). They're justified in doing it because of things called adverse selection and moral hazard. Also, it would be unfair to charge women the same as men, because in reality, women would be paying more than men (since men receive more insurance payouts). | ||
|
AAtwelve
57 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actuarial_science However, it's still sexist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexism | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:18 cz wrote: You don't get it. Saying that actuarial science or statistics or whatever means that it would make sense for insurance companies to charge higher rates for men (because they statistically cost more $ in claims) doesn't mean it's justified to do so as a result of discrimination based on sex (sexism). There's a difference between wanting to and being allowed to (and being justified in). They're completely justified in doing so, though. | ||
|
Z3kk
4099 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:16 cz wrote: It is sexist BY DEFINITION. I understand actuarial science and how it determines rates based on risk, but that doesn't mean it isn't sexist. Or that it's not wrong. Okay, I was under the impression that we were discussing the social issues: i.e. whether or not there is a "reverse sexism" going on here...I'm not being (or trying to be, at least) inflammatory, but at this point you're discussing semantics. Definition is somewhat subjective--not all of us will agree on an exact definition--but if your definition is accepted (any form of bias towards a race), then sure: it's sexist. However, this "sexism" isn't what I'm referring to, and has little to no impact on the social issue of sexism (which, in this case, I believe is ludicrous because companies are merely trying to determine the best course of action to reap a profit). Actuarial science may or may not be incorrect sometimes, but it's something with which companies can work, and they're definitely going to do that if they want any hope of earning money. | ||
|
Vanished131
France311 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:20 Cauld wrote: There's plenty of examples of legalized discrimination. It's not illegal. Married people pay less insurance, even if you're married to someone without a license. Curves for women (A chain of gyms) only allows female members. Convicted felons can't vote in many states. Kid's don't have freedom of speech while in school. VFWs obviously are for veterans. Senior Citizens and Children often can pay less for anything from a bus/movie ticket to getting additional menu options at restaurants. Private organizations such as curves are a little different than car insurance companies in that you are not REQUIRED to go to a gym. We are required to get insurance for our vehicles. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:21 AAtwelve wrote: I must apologize, as I stand corrected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actuarial_science However, it's still sexist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexism That uses "prejudice" in the definition. It's not prejudiced if there's valid statistics backing it up. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
Actuarial science shows that men receive more insurance payouts than women, so why should women pay more for receiving less? | ||
|
howerpower
United States619 Posts
| ||
|
Impervious
Canada4217 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:17 nozh wrote: Gender equality is women getting paid the same as men. Gender equality is not being questioned or ignored or humiliated when coming forward about being raped or sexually assaulted. Gender equality is not having domestic violence be the number one cause of injury to women. You make me sick. Don't compare your bullshit hardships to what women have gone through and still go through. Believe it or not, there are actually two sides to this coin..... | ||
|
chevron
United States9 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:22 Vanished131 wrote: Private organizations such as curves are a little different than car insurance companies in that you are not REQUIRED to go to a gym. We are required to get insurance for our vehicles. No one is REQUIRING you to drive. | ||
|
divertiti
Canada106 Posts
On November 23 2010 10:57 Vanished131 wrote: Heresay. Please post sources or refrain from posting in this thread. It's common knowledge, please have some common sense or refrain from posting in this thread. | ||
|
Vanished131
France311 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:20 domovoi wrote: They're justified in doing it because of things called adverse selection and moral hazard. Also, it would be unfair to charge women the same as men, because in reality, women would be paying more than men (since men receive more insurance payouts). Trivial argument, as when someone files a claim with an insurance company, their rates increase. | ||
|
nozh
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
Cauld
United States350 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:22 Vanished131 wrote: Private organizations such as curves are a little different than car insurance companies in that you are not REQUIRED to go to a gym. We are required to get insurance for our vehicles. A private company is a private company. You aren't required to drive. If you want nationalized car insurance go for it. Or you can try to find a car insurance company that doesn't charge different rates for different genders. That's how our system works. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:23 Impervious wrote: Believe it or not, there are actually two sides to this coin..... Not in this issue about auto insurance rates. There are real issues of gender inequality when it comes to parental rights, abortion rights, alimony, societal acceptance of being a victim of rape/domestic violence, etc. Auto insurance rates is a stupid issue to hang your hat on. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:23 howerpower wrote: do gay men get a discount? Dunno, but according to some people here it would be homophobia if gay men's rates went up/down as a result of that group having more/fewer accidents. It's ridiculous. | ||
|
zeppelin
United States565 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:23 nozh wrote: i'm sorry but your insurance rates are not nearly as important as women's issues and no amount of rationalizing will ever make them as important. yeah but if you watch tv commercials the wife is always smart and savvy and the husband is a bumbling fat guy whats up with that this world is so unfair sometimes | ||
| ||
