Silmaril39
Active Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
As it says, car insurance well... pisses me off. I was recently confronted by a fact that bothers has bothered me for a long time. I'm sure everyone here knows that having a new driver on your car insurance policy spikes the price; however, if this new driver is male, the price goes up DRASTICALLY more than if the driver is female.
Why is this legal?
I live in California and here to drive you must have your car insured (I'm sure it's like this in every state but I don't actually know so I can't quite claim it to be true). Based upon statistics, which I admit are valid, the insurance idustry figures that new male drivers have a much higher accident rate than your female drivers (or any other group). However, the rate is not calculated based upon how many times it took the new driver to pass the test, or how well they did on the DMV test, but soley upon their gender. This is ridicolous. This is state-sponsored sexism. You have to get insurance, but the insurance companies are inherently sexist. If there was no other feasible way to derive insurance costs I could understand why gender would work, but seeing as there are plenty of other viable systems (such as the test based one I mentioned earlier) this is sexism plain and simple!
If a company were to pay women less because they are required to give them paid maternity leave and statistics show that many women will take this leave that company would be ripped apart, comdemed by the government and demonized by feminists faster than you could imagine. Why then are state governments continuing to uphold and mandate participation in an inherently sexist system, and why are men continuing to lie down and take this outrageous and blatant sexism?
Many suits with more tenuous claims have sailed through the courts, why not a solid case like this?
Why is this legal?
I live in California and here to drive you must have your car insured (I'm sure it's like this in every state but I don't actually know so I can't quite claim it to be true). Based upon statistics, which I admit are valid, the insurance idustry figures that new male drivers have a much higher accident rate than your female drivers (or any other group). However, the rate is not calculated based upon how many times it took the new driver to pass the test, or how well they did on the DMV test, but soley upon their gender. This is ridicolous. This is state-sponsored sexism. You have to get insurance, but the insurance companies are inherently sexist. If there was no other feasible way to derive insurance costs I could understand why gender would work, but seeing as there are plenty of other viable systems (such as the test based one I mentioned earlier) this is sexism plain and simple!
If a company were to pay women less because they are required to give them paid maternity leave and statistics show that many women will take this leave that company would be ripped apart, comdemed by the government and demonized by feminists faster than you could imagine. Why then are state governments continuing to uphold and mandate participation in an inherently sexist system, and why are men continuing to lie down and take this outrageous and blatant sexism?
Many suits with more tenuous claims have sailed through the courts, why not a solid case like this?