Who are the worst drivers - men or women?

tailwindhome

Generalisations based on Occupation, Marital Status, Gender, Location and Age (among other factors*) are an excellent indicator of your capabilities as a driver.

Disagree?

Check your Insurance Premium.


*Not sure if Race or Nationality is a factor, would be interested if anyone knows?


EDIT Took far too long to type this, Sarajoy is correct

prawny

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

*Not sure if Race or Nationality is a factor, would be interested if anyone knows?

They aren't factors, I'm an underwriter and I wondered why they aren't if there are any stats to prove it either way but can you imagine the headlines in the sun if a company tried to use them?! :shock:

Slow Downcp

DDD - You need to chill. I stated an opinion that ethnic/asian drivers were worse. In my opinion/experience they are. I work in a mainly Asian area so have to contend with driving though it every day. I did start my post with "If I'm generalising" - which you then also did when you said minicab drivers were worse. I haven't taken great offence that many people have said men are worse drivers - If you don't like my opinion, which I have not said is correct, then ignore it.

It's a cycling forum - if you want to right the wrongs of the world, try Parliament (not Bikeradar), or at least visit Soapbox.

Sewinman

DonDaddyD wrote:

A generalisation that is true is fact. A generalisation of a derogative nature such as women are worse drivers than men because they have less spatial awareness are the weaker sex and cannot handle their emotions isn't fact at all. It's wrong and serves only to limit the people the generalisations are being made against.

By definition no generalisations are true, they are true in general.

I don't disagree that some generalisations can perpetuate prejudice, but its a big leap to accuse someone of racism. I have a generalisation that somalian people in Streatham are absolute nutters at crossing roads - maybe they didnt learn the green cross code. Does that make me racist? I hope not.

DonDaddyD

DonDaddyD - I accept that some generalisations should be avoided due to their derogatory nature - HOWEVER being supposedly a 'victim' of this thread (you seem to be defending the women, but you're certainly not arguing back about men being more aggressive) - I'm happy with most or all of the statements made so far.

Sarajoy, I don’t have to be female to find what others are saying is wrong. That’s like saying that a person doesn’t need to do or say anything if they see someone being racially abused because it’s not their race. In History if we buried our heads in the sand then most (not I and unless you have blond and blue eyes not you) would be speaking German, voting Nazi party, Biondino, Greg66, GregT et al would be working for the Gestapo and SCR would be part of Hitler’s SS.

I am a Man of my convictions and regardless of whether what is being said relates directly to me, I feel it is wrong I’ll say so, regardless of who is saying it.

Also Testosterone is a chemical that is linked to aggression. It can be clinically proven that Males can be more aggressive than Females.

Asian drivers - Hrrm, well mainly because cab drivers are predominantly Asian around here, and cab drivers tend to be reckless in their driving - I agree.

Whoa lets not be stereotyping by race. Back when I was younger the narrow-minded would claim Asians were all Doctors… what’s happened?

Well what you said is certainly more specific than “all ethnics are bad drivers” regardless of job, social stature or anything.

But:

Whether an 'Asian' driving mentality leads to being a cabbie, or it's the cabbie mentality rubbing off on the Asians, I know not.

How about the fact that they are mini cab drivers and the nature of their job and its pressures make them a bad driver? This has nothing to do with their race. Fact is mini cab drivers are bad drivers not Asians in general.

Drop the words 'generalisation' and 'stereotype' and replace them with 'trend' or similar - insurers indeed wouldn't offer different insurance premiums to different sexes, ages, demographic groups, if there wasn't some kind of trends evident in each of these groups, thoroughly analysed by a bunch of actuaries.

Changing the words is semantics at best. Fact is a trend without evidence is a generalisation. Attributing habit to people without research is stereotyping. Yes we do identify (naturally) by generalisation and type (yellow and black combination of colour such as a bee, wasp, tiger and some snakes is universally known in nature as danger) But we have to be mindful of the negativity applied to that generalisation and typecasting lest we limit and turn people into victims born out of our pre-judgements.

“Oh you’re Asian you must be a cab driver and a bad driver” Isn’t a fair judgement especially before you’ve even seen the guy drive. We should strive to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and everyone a chance.

It's not necessarily genetic - however the /trend/ in this country still hangs towards more men doing a 9-to-5, more women part-time or looking after home/children, the old-fashioned stereotypes - whether you like it or not.

Not in my Household or that of my family and every single one of my friends. So in my eyes your ‘trend’ is wrong.

I do accepet that there are however, arguably more men on the road and in high paying jobs. So you do have a point.

I daresay if men and women were completely balanced - in work and leisure, more men at home during daytimes, time spent on the road fairly equal, and a 1:1 male:female ratio on the road at all times of the day, the types of incident experienced by the sexes would even out...

I agree, which is why I would say it’s not fair to claim women worse drivers than men when the ratio’s are disproportionate.

Now THAT is a long post.

DonDaddyD

prawny wrote:

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

*Not sure if Race or Nationality is a factor, would be interested if anyone knows?

They aren't factors, I'm an underwriter and I wondered why they aren't if there are any stats to prove it either way but can you imagine the headlines in the sun if a company tried to use them?! :shock:

If someone told me I was more likely to crash my car than a white person becasue I'm black I would be deeply offended and outraged.

Such a comment is racist and has no substance but to be racist. Which is what was basically said earlier.

DonDaddyD

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Generalisations based on Occupation, Marital Status, Gender, Location and Age (among other factors*) are an excellent indicator of your capabilities as a driver.

Why. What scientific evidence is there to substantiate this claim. I'm not saying you are wrong. In fact I can see some of those socio-economic demographics being an influence on a persons journey in the car. But driving ability? Even Lewis Hamilton would be a risk on road during a rush-hour school run.

DonDaddyD

Slow Downcp wrote:

DDD - You need to chill. I stated an opinion that ethnic/asian drivers were worse. In my opinion/experience they are. I work in a mainly Asian area so have to contend with driving though it every day. I did start my post with "If I'm generalising" - which you then also did when you said minicab drivers were worse. I haven't taken great offence that many people have said men are worse drivers - If you don't like my opinion, which I have not said is correct, then ignore it.

It's a cycling forum - if you want to right the wrongs of the world, try Parliament (not Bikeradar), or at least visit Soapbox.

Let me explain the nature of a forum.

A person writes a question or states an opinion.
A person answers said question or replies to said opinion.

Anyway let me try to understand this:

Because you live in a mainly Asain dominated area it means that all Asians (you actually said all ethnics) are the worst drivers. Can you not see how narrow-minded this is considering there is an entire country full of drivers around you?

Yes you can only speak from you experience. Add clarity to your posts as not to offend others.

_Brun_

DDD, you don't seem to have quite grasped the concept of generalisation. For example, the statement...

"Black people can run faster than white people."

...is quite obvisouly a generalisation. It is also, if you consider the evidence, a fact.

It is empahtically not racist.

Sewinman

This is from the Sheilia wheels website:

"esure has always recognised the importance of ensuring that women get a great deal when buying insurance. In 2004, esure strongly opposed an EU directive that would have seen women forced to subsidise men through their car insurance premiums.

The idea for Sheilas' Wheels grew from research we carried out at that time. We found that women claim less, are responsible for far fewer driving convictions and have attitudes towards cars, driving and other road users that are often more considered than those of their male counterparts. We wanted to reward these differences and decided that we needed a new brand and a whole new look for car insurance for women to make it happen."

DDD - i hope you are suitably outraged. I am!

tailwindhome

DonDaddyD wrote:

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Generalisations based on Occupation, Marital Status, Gender, Location and Age (among other factors*) are an excellent indicator of your capabilities as a driver.

Why. What scientific evidence is there to substantiate this claim. I'm not saying you are wrong. In fact I can see some of those socio-economic demographics being an influence on a persons journey in the car. But driving ability? Even Lewis Hamilton would be a risk on road during a rush-hour school run.

They are used by insurance companies to assess risk of accident claims.

Young, Male, Single, Inexperienced drivers are at fault in more accidents than Older Female Married Experienced Drivers

Try checking for insurance quotes and playing around with these variables

Also Lewis Hamilton isnt your typical young male driver, I bet if LH and I were quoted insurance on the same car mine would be lower even though he is the better driver.

Slow Downcp

DonDaddyD wrote:

Slow Downcp wrote:

DDD - You need to chill. I stated an opinion that ethnic/asian drivers were worse. In my opinion/experience they are. I work in a mainly Asian area so have to contend with driving though it every day. I did start my post with "If I'm generalising" - which you then also did when you said minicab drivers were worse. I haven't taken great offence that many people have said men are worse drivers - If you don't like my opinion, which I have not said is correct, then ignore it.

It's a cycling forum - if you want to right the wrongs of the world, try Parliament (not Bikeradar), or at least visit Soapbox.

Let me explain the nature of a forum.

A person writes a question or states an opinion.
A person answers said question or replies to said opinion.

Anyway let me try to understand this:

Because you live in a mainly Asain dominated area it means that all Asians (you actually said all ethnics) are the worst drivers. Can you not see how narrow-minded this is considering there is an entire country full of drivers around you?

Yes you can only speak from you experience. Add clarity to your posts as not to offend others.

I work in a mainly Asian area, not live, but that's being pedantic.

DonDaddyD

Sewinman wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

A generalisation that is true is fact. A generalisation of a derogative nature such as women are worse drivers than men because they have less spatial awareness are the weaker sex and cannot handle their emotions isn't fact at all. It's wrong and serves only to limit the people the generalisations are being made against.

By definition no generalisations are true, they are true in general.

I don't disagree that some generalisations can perpetuate prejudice, but its a big leap to accuse someone of racism.

If someone is basically saying all <<insert ethnicity>> are the worst drivers for no other reason other than the fact that they are of said ethnicity. Then yes it is racism.

I have a generalisation that somalian people in Streatham are absolute nutters at crossing roads - maybe they didnt learn the green cross code. Does that make me racist? I hope not.

Nope they are nutters. The social culture in Streatham (Tooting, Balham, Clapham, Brixton - especially Brixton) is such that people just step out in the road, around where you live there is a high number of Somalians so I can understand your claim given your experience. The other dude wasn't saying that though, he just claimed that "ethnics are the worst drivers".

Slow Downcp

Okay so my post should have said "in my opinion the worst drivers are old people and Asians". Happy now that I'm not the leader of the BNP? However you didn't also slate me for being ageist (I realise probably not a word, but it's a cycling forum, not an English exam paper)

But if someone asked "what wheels for £250", people would reply "Mavic XYZ" or "Shimano ABC" or whatever - not "in my opinion I find these wheels better".

DonDaddyD

_Brun_ wrote:

DDD, you don't seem to have quite grasped the concept of generalisation. For example, the statement...

"Black people can run faster than white people."

...is quite obvisouly a generalisation. It is also, if you consider the evidence, a fact.

It is empahtically not racist.

How about,

"your more likely to be mugged by a black person than a white person"

Like I previously said its how the generalisation is used. And no, not all black people cannot run faster than white people. That was a generalisation used for one type of race, which has been co-opted many times and used for racist means. Such as "Black people are good for sports and nothing else".

DonDaddyD

Slow Downcp wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Slow Downcp wrote:

DDD - You need to chill. I stated an opinion that ethnic/asian drivers were worse. In my opinion/experience they are. I work in a mainly Asian area so have to contend with driving though it every day. I did start my post with "If I'm generalising" - which you then also did when you said minicab drivers were worse. I haven't taken great offence that many people have said men are worse drivers - If you don't like my opinion, which I have not said is correct, then ignore it.

It's a cycling forum - if you want to right the wrongs of the world, try Parliament (not Bikeradar), or at least visit Soapbox.

Let me explain the nature of a forum.

A person writes a question or states an opinion.
A person answers said question or replies to said opinion.

Anyway let me try to understand this:

Because you live in a mainly Asain dominated area it means that all Asians (you actually said all ethnics) are the worst drivers. Can you not see how narrow-minded this is considering there is an entire country full of drivers around you?

Yes you can only speak from you experience. Add clarity to your posts as not to offend others.

I work in a mainly Asian area, not live, but that's being pedantic.

My point still stands.

What you said

I think ethnics are the worst drivers

Was offensive to me. I've expressed that, explained why. I'm done.

DonDaddyD

The idea for Sheilas' Wheels grew from research we carried out at that time. We found that women claim less, are responsible for far fewer driving convictions and have attitudes towards cars, driving and other road users that are often more considered than those of their male counterparts. We wanted to reward these differences and decided that we needed a new brand and a whole new look for car insurance for women to make it happen."

Yes, but we are not looking at the reasons why. For every person who has said Women are worse drivers (something I haven’t claimed) the above claims that they are mistaken.

The reason could be there are less women drivers on the road and in stead of doing a like for like analysis they could have reviewed the total number of female claims against the total number of male claims. With less drivers of course females would come up with less claims.

BoardinBob

DonDaddyD wrote:

Racist and sexist generalisations. This thread is pathetic.

Calm yourself.

It's supposed to be a light hearted debate. I bet you're the type of person that writes to Points of View.

Irate from Wimbledon. 8)

biondino

DDD, I am going to attemtp to explain what a generalisation is because you're repeatedly not getting it.

Let's say poster X thought 20% of men and 30% of women were bad drivers, in their own personal, limited and anecdotal experience, and taking into account any conscious and unconscious prejudices they may have. This person is NOT saying all women are bad drivers - indeed he's saying 70% of women AREN'T bad drivers - but he is generalising that women are worse drivers than men.

Let's say poster Y, who lives in a primarily Asian area, thinks exactly the same but substituting whites and asians for men and women. The same applies.

In both instances there might be very specific factors that differentiate men and women, and whites and asians. In the former case, there might be lots of school run driving, stressed out mums in enormous cars who skew the figures; in the latter there might be a large number of minicab drivers who are predominantly asian (NB I *don't* live in an asian area but most of the cab drivers I use are asian, for what it's worth). And we all agree that there are reasons why cab drivers might be perceived as worse drivers.

So, in the case of asians being "worse" drivers, poster Y may well have a specific and empirically justifiable reason for making this assumption, without there being any racism involved (yes, it's possible poster Y IS consciously or unconsciously racist AS WELL, but that's a separate argument).

So in conclusion, it's quite possible to generalise (with all the vagueness, lack of strict testing, and personal bias that word entails) with genuine justifications behind the generalisations which AREN'T prejudiced. I choose to give slowdowncp the benefit of the doubt here because, in his individual, anecdotal etc. experience he finds a higher proportion of asian drivers to be poor drivers. Assuming racism here is a much more a) unjustifiable and b) offensive generalisation (that word again) than the ones people on this thread are making.

biondino

Also, I'd love to hear you're argument that black people aren't faster runners than white people - by which, of course, we mean that evidence suggests the fastest runners have a much higher likelihood of being black than white, both long distance and short distance, especially bearing in mind the relative proportions of black and white people in the country/the world.

sarajoy

DonDaddyD wrote:

Sarajoy, I don’t have to be female to find what others are saying is wrong. That’s like saying that a person doesn’t need to do or say anything if they see someone being racially abused because it’s not their race. In History if we buried our heads in the sand then most (not I and unless you have blond and blue eyes not you) would be speaking German, voting Nazi party, Biondino, Greg66, GregT et al would be working for the Gestapo and SCR would be part of Hitler’s SS.

What a wonderful example of Godwin's Law! Thank you!

DonDaddyD wrote:

How about the fact that they are mini cab drivers and the nature of their job and its pressures make them a bad driver? This has nothing to do with their race. Fact is mini cab drivers are bad drivers not Asians in general.

Well that's exactly what I said, isn't it? I don't know which way round it is. Just the majority of times I've been in a cab in Bristol, the driver has been of Asian descent. It is true though, that I may have passed unending numbers of Asian commuters driving beautifully and never noticed. So I concede that my reasoning here is flawed.

DonDaddyD wrote:

It's not necessarily genetic - however the /trend/ in this country still hangs towards more men doing a 9-to-5, more women part-time or looking after home/children, the old-fashioned stereotypes - whether you like it or not.

Not in my Household or that of my family and every single one of my friends. So in my eyes your ‘trend’ is wrong.

I do accepet that there are however, arguably more men on the road and in high paying jobs. So you do have a point.

Indeed. It seems you live in a wonderful bubble of equality! Must be lovely. But the rest of us experience a lot of stereotypes. I don't know ANY men who have stayed home to raise a family while the mother works. I know some families (including my own) where dad does the usual 9-5, as does mum, but it is still she doing most of the child-duties. One or two families appear a little more balanced - but still more like the dad 'helps out' where the mum is just too stretched. Not that dad takes an equal slice of responsibility with kids/home. I hope my generation and younger will begin to level it off further.

DonDaddyD wrote:

I daresay if men and women were completely balanced - in work and leisure, more men at home during daytimes, time spent on the road fairly equal, and a 1:1 male:female ratio on the road at all times of the day, the types of incident experienced by the sexes would even out...

I agree, which is why I would say it’s not fair to claim women worse drivers than men when the ratio’s are disproportionate.

Now THAT is a long post.

Wow, we agree somewhere!

BUT while not being "fair" to claim these things, because things /aren't/ equal - we still /can/ claim them and not be wrong. They might not be nice things to say, but they aren't wrong.

ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, we should not generalise.
But things AREN'T equal, so we do.

I'm not saying anything about race, genetics, physical make-up, I think nigh on all the differences are of social construction. But they're still there, and the social constructs are pretty strong.

biondino

fave new poster sarajoy!

sarajoy

DonDaddyD wrote:

The reason could be there are less women drivers on the road and in stead of doing a like for like analysis they could have reviewed the total number of female claims against the total number of male claims. With less drivers of course females would come up with less claims.

Actuaries are much smarter than that. The first thing to do would of course be to divide claims by number of claimants!

sarajoy

biondino wrote:

fave new poster sarajoy!

Very kind!

Just had to fix all those quotes though - argh what a mess it was!

BoardinBob

DonDaddyD wrote:

_Brun_ wrote:

Such as "Black people are good for sports and nothing else".

They're not bad at dancing either.

Dog Breath

Have not read through every single post, but what ChrisInBicester said...

Women get my vote. In these dank grey wet mornings with misty rain and patches of fog and rear-view mirrors generally carrying rain drops to obscure the view a little more, the number of cars that loom out of the fog / mist / rain displaying no lights, or worse only sidelights (they've not forgotten, made the effort, but got it entirely wrong) that are being driven by women far outnumbers blokes. Plod could have a field day, rather than waiting for drivers not wearing seat-belts and picking them off one at a time for £60 a pop, they should pull in every driver not showing dipped headlights when visibility is reduced and hand out a ticket for that.

.... is sooo true.

I have noticed this over the years and commented to my better half who agrees. On several commutes, I would say the proporation was as much as 9 out of 10 drivers that had no lights on dark mornings were women.

DB

DonDaddyD

The worst drivers are old people and those of ethnic origin.

Right, before I get started the above in bold is what I found offensive. At least the claims of old people can be supported with an explanation of diminished physical prowess. There is justifiable reasoning to consider an old person (60yrs and above) as being the worst you’ve encountered. Nothing, no justifiable rationale can support ‘those of ethnic origin’.

I have every right to be offended by it and to express this fact.

Also, some of the posts have been written in a way which only serves to marginalise and express a generalisation of negative stereotypes attributed to women. Unsubstantiated, these I disagree with.

But the above in bold is what I found most offensive.

Sewinman

DonDaddyD wrote:

The worst drivers are old people and those of ethnic origin.

Right, before I get started the above in bold is what I found offensive. At least the claims of old people can be supported with an explanation of diminished physical prowess. There is justifiable reasoning to consider an old person (60yrs and above) as being the worst you’ve encountered. Nothing, no justifiable rationale can support ‘those of ethnic origin’.

I have every right to be offended by it and to express this fact.

Also, some of the posts have been written in a way which only serves to marginalise and express a generalisation of negative stereotypes attributed to women. Unsubstantiated, these I disagree with.

But the above in bold is what I found most offensive.

I suppose you could speculate that some of the said ethnic people may be foriegn and not passed a UK driving test, instead driving on a foriegn one, which can be done for a year I think.

stage_fright

I'm not even getting drawn into the gender / ethnicity / locality etc debate..but....the thing that scares me with ALL drivers is how little attention most seem to be giving to the one regular activity they carry out that is most likely to kill them or other road users.

With some you get the impression that driving safely is not their highest priority at any given time as you see them on the phone, ligting up, eating etc...

biondino

You can make all sorts of arguments as to why people of ethnic origin might be worse drivers (poverty, lack of access to education and training, cars in worse nick, the minicab driver argument, road habits in other countries being different, etc.), but what DDD found offensive was the way slowdowncp put it, I think.

I would argue that slowdowncp only made that specific comment in the context of the thread where the implicit question was "do you find any sectors of society to be generally (see my definition above) less competent than others". When challenged for the use of the phrase, slowdowncp made it perfectly clear that he had reasons for believing this to be the case, in his own experience, and explained what these reasons are.

So while the bald statement, taken out of context, could be seen as bigoted, in context I think it's absolutely fine as long as it comes with an explanation. Which it did.