discrimination

weeder

this isnt your usual paki thread this is about discrimination in the highest and its been going on for decades!

was online getting an insurance quote and it was 2200 euro a little disgruntled i went through the whole process againonly telling them i was female, 1100 cheaper!
this is an outrage thats been plagueing the world for decades in fairness how does havin boobs and a snatch make your more insurable?
well it doesnt
argh rabble rabble rabble

Jesus Wept

Sexism is ok, as long as it against men tbh.

utick

The-Rigger wrote: »

Sexism is ok, as long as it against msn tbh.

racism is also good, as long as it is against whites

Sir Gallagher

utick wrote: »

racism is also good, as long as it is against whites

Yeah damn all those other races who are being racist against us whites, i hate them!

phantom_lord

they crash less.

dr.bollocko

Dont accept that ****. Get a better quote elsewhere. thats what I did. Feckin wimmin.

r3nu4l

Wait a minute lads!!!

He's white, male and I bet he's one o' them heterosexuals too!!

Therefore, it's his fault and it's entirely okay to blame him and discriminate against him because he was born that way... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

darkman2

weeder wrote: »

this isnt your usual paki thread this is about discrimination in the highest and its been going on for decades!

was online getting an insurance quote and it was 2200 euro a little disgruntled i went through the whole process againonly telling them i was female, 1100 cheaper!
this is an outrage thats been plagueing the world for decades in fairness how does havin boobs and a snatch make your more insurable?
well it doesnt
argh rabble rabble rabble

It does not. Women are more likely to be involved in a crash because of thier slow nature.........i.e on motorways women are far more likely to drive too slow and this is a big issue with those merging and the reason is obvious.

Jesus Wept

phantom_lord wrote: »

they crash less.

The reason wimmin get cheaper insurance is:

They drive less.
<cue random posting of examples of women that drive a lot/more than their male counterparts etc>.
Regardless, on average women drive considerably less than men do - on average

phantom_lord

The-Rigger wrote: »

The reason wimmin get cheaper insurance is:

They drive less.
<cue random posting of examples of women that drive a lot/more than their male counterparts etc>.
Regardless, on average women drive considerably less than men do - on average

it's also due to blowjobs in the car.

dr.bollocko

And they have teeny cars that they drive slowly to accommodate all the make-up putting on and phoning people. And they have cute girl accidents. Like when they cant get into a parking place without dinging someone for example.

tallaght01

"women" may be safer drivers than "men". But it;s bull**** to lumo us in with the 50% of the population who are the same sex as us, and make any judgment based on that.

It's also "permissible discrimination" because you can dsciminate against "men". But what if the stats show that black men were less safe overall. Could they charge more to insure them? Or Asian men?

I mean, if they're going to discriminate based on our sex, why stop there. Why not go the whole hog and profile us properly?

It's total crap.

TheBigLebowski

phantom_lord wrote: »

they crash less.

They don't crash less than me. I've never crashed.

And to say women in general crash less than men may be true but that doesn't give insurance companies the right to discriminate against all men.

Also why do I get screwed on car insurance, but everybody pays the same health insurance by law? Even the obese smokers pay the same as me.

phantom_lord

do u guys have any idea of how they work out the premium? they don't just pick numbers out of the air fwiw

Tigger

phantom_lord wrote: »

do u guys have any idea of how they work out the premium? they don't just pick numbers out of the air fwiw

the suffragetts once finished blowing up eary 20th centruary london turned their had to insurance underwriting

need i say more

phantom_lord

tallaght01 wrote: »

"women" may be safer drivers than "men". But it;s bull**** to lumo us in with the 50% of the population who are the same sex as us, and make any judgment based on that.

you're not, you're just lumped in with other young men your age, who happen to suck at driving. boo urns.

I mean, if they're going to discriminate based on our sex, why stop there. Why not go the whole hog and profile us properly?

lol they do.

Krieg

Wimmins crash more then men, its just that when a women crashes, its usually a shopping trolley in a car park or a bollard cone.
When men crash they do it properly and completely destroy the car

star-pants

phantom_lord wrote: »

do u guys have any idea of how they work out the premium? they don't just pick numbers out of the air fwiw

This is true, there are some factors people don't always think about.
obviously age of you/ your sex, year of the car,make, what litre the engine is, where you live / park your car, what your occupation is, how far you drive on average, your NCB, when you got your license - all come into it.
Granted on average there are 'deals' for women - which isn't always fair because there can be godawful drivers in both sexes but there probably are statistics which back some of it up. *shrug*

connundrum

weeder wrote: »

this isnt your usual paki thread this is about discrimination in the highest and its been going on for decades!

I can't remember a the last time I saw a usual paki thread.

Oh and wimmins have boobehs. Therefore they wins

The_B_Man

if u have a name like adrian or sam you should get urself insured under the lay-deez thingy. they'll never know!!!

Terry

Here's the deal;
Women put on make-up while driving, almost crash into cars driven by men, the men then swerve to avoid the women and hit a wall or something.
Result: Men get screwed over on car insurance because they don't want to crash into careless women drivers.
Scientific fact.

faceman

weeder wrote: »

this isnt your usual paki thread

Dont mean to sound pedantic, but that its considered a racial slur against people from pakistan.
(I learnt that lesson the hard way!!!)

WindSock

faceman wrote: »

Dont mean to sound pedantic, but that its considered a racial slur against people from pakistan.
(I learnt that lesson the hard way!!!)

It's only offensive if you are from India

Or Paki Bonner.

Degsy

I find the word "Dubs" deeply offensive to describe people from Dublin.I much prefer the term "jackeens".

thefinalstage

Women are not better drivers. They get lower insurance cost because on average women drive a lot less per year then men. Simple.

tallaght01

phantom_lord wrote: »

you're not, you're just lumped in with other young men your age, who happen to suck at driving. boo urns.



lol they do.

A) I'm lumped in with my sex. My age is another factor. There are older men paying more than younger women.

So is there a policy of charging different insurance rates based on race?

phantom_lord

tallaght01 wrote: »

A) I'm lumped in with my sex. My age is another factor. There are older men paying more than younger women.

So is there a policy of charging different insurance rates based on race?

probably, i dunno.

tallaght01

phantom_lord wrote: »

probably, i dunno.

lol, so when I made the point about going the whole hog and profiling us fully, and you said that they do...what you meant is they probably do?

I don't know the answer myself. But the point I'm making is that it's easy to discriminate against males on the basis that we're "worse drivers", but would they have the balls to discriminate against blacks, or asians if say they were found to be worse drivers.

I doubt they'd have the cajones, but maybe fear of the PC brigade hasn't penetrated the inner sanctum of the insurance world.

phantom_lord

tallaght01 wrote: »

lol, so when I made the point about going the whole hog and profiling us fully, and you said that they do...what you meant is they probably do?

no, they do. But i doubt they do racial profiling, i can't remember seeing that question on the form.

phantom_lord

tallaght01 wrote: »

I don't know the answer myself. But the point I'm making is that it's easy to discriminate against males on the basis that we're "worse drivers", but would they have the balls to discriminate against blacks, or asians if say they were found to be worse drivers.

they're not discriminating ffs. they're appropriating risk.

tallaght01

phantom_lord wrote: »

no, they do. But i doubt they do racial profiling, i can't remember seeing that question on the form.

Yea, you're not getting my point.

I'm aware that they ask about other safe factors, such as job etc.

But I wanna know if they have the balls to fully profile people. To complete the full risk assessment task that they claim is so important.

Voodu Child

If a guy pays more insurance because he's 'more likely' to crash, well....if we're going to talk statistics, im never going to get pregnant and cause grief for my employer, it's only fair that i should be paid more than a women. But say that out loud and the feminists will crucify you.

Women wan't to have their cake and eat it. FACT

Dragan

r3nu4l wrote: »

Wait a minute lads!!!

He's white, male and I bet he's one o' them heterosexuals too!!

Therefore, it's his fault and it's entirely okay to blame him and discriminate against him because he was born that way... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Pretty much the way of it!

voodoo_child wrote: »

Women wan't to have their cake and eat it. FACT

Well, no real point in looking at it!

The last time any talk was made of balancing out insurance prices it was hardly unsuprising that talk was about taking the prices for women UP.

No victory to be had with the financial services folks, just accept that fact that as the individual you will always been the small spoon in that one.

Krieg

I just realised as well, Most if not all the of those "drive safe" campaign ad's that show horrific car crash's.
Guess who's behind the wheel all the time? Yep, always a guy.

When are we going to see ad's where the wimmin driver drinks half a pint of lager and takes out an entire motor way?

kelle

weeder wrote: »

this isnt your usual paki thread this is about discrimination in the highest and its been going on for decades!

was online getting an insurance quote and it was 2200 euro a little disgruntled i went through the whole process againonly telling them i was female, 1100 cheaper!
this is an outrage thats been plagueing the world for decades in fairness how does havin boobs and a snatch make your more insurable?
well it doesnt
argh rabble rabble rabble

My brother did an online quote and was amazed to be quoted e250. But an investigation of his details revealed he had selected "Sr" instead of "Mr", the latter raising the quote to a whopping e1800!
So you should change your sex and wear a veil.

pickarooney

he had selected "Sr" instead of "Mr"

So Spanish people get cheap deals on insurance?

Any transexuals here got any motor-insurance anecdotes?

L1011

voodoo_child wrote: »

If a guy pays more insurance because he's 'more likely' to crash, well....if we're going to talk statistics, im never going to get pregnant and cause grief for my employer, it's only fair that i should be paid more than a women. But say that out loud and the feminists will crucify you.

Was there not a court judgement in the UK recently that protected an employer saying and acting on something much the same, along the lines of "we're giving the blokes a payrise as they've never taken maternity leave" or something?

faceman

phantom_lord wrote: »

they're not discriminating ffs. they're appropriating risk.

i cant go into details on this so i have to make generalised comments. I wanted to include nationality as part of risk profiling project for something similar and i approached the relevent body in ireland. In summary they said that without financial proof that nationality plays a significant part in risk determination for what I wanted to do, i couldnt ask the question. So i argued that I cant profile without asking the question in the first place. Wasnt good enough for them.

It seems that because companies have been asking for your age for example for years before the relevent equality act was introduced, they had built up a substanial profile prior which demonstrated the risk.

the GALL

phantom_lord wrote: »

it's also due to blowjobs in the car.

Now that is dangerous,
driving a car while signing into the kareoke machine:D:D
them feckin wimmin with their multi taskin

Ross_Mahon

We should all be treated the same, all this "men show off in cars" and "Women are slow drivers" crap gets to me, its not the gender, its the person driving the car. I dont think its right that i have to pay and extra thousand or two because im male, they should do something about this.

Spyral

some facts

women drive less
women are poorer drivers on average
men speed more
most accidents are caused by poor driving
insurance companies dont give a toss they just want money

WindSock

Instead of blaming Women, why don't Men do something like protest or write thousands and thousands of letters to insurance companies. They are the ones you should be angry at, not us. I certainly don't agree with there being different premiums. I am a regular driver and see terrible driving from both sexes.

AckwelFoley

weeder wrote: »

in fairness how does havin boobs and a snatch make your more insurable?
well it doesnt

Boobs and a snatch... nice.


Fact is women are involved in less accidents than men.

End of.

kthanxbi

Sam Vimes

snyper wrote: »

Boobs and a snatch... nice.


Fact is women are involved in less accidents than men.

End of.

kthanxbi

but sexual discrimination is illegal in this country. i always wondered why insurance companies are allowed discriminate against people because of age and sex when no other industry is allowed.

as i think someone else said, if statistics showed that black men crashed more than white men, do you think they'd be allowed charge black men more? and if not why not?

Davidius

You know what guys, this is the Government's fault. Let's blame them!

Lockstep

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RMLt28n0-M

echosound

Sam Vimes wrote: »

but sexual discrimination is illegal in this country. i always wondered why insurance companies are allowed discriminate against people because of age and sex when no other industry is allowed.

as i think someone else said, if statistics showed that black men crashed more than white men, do you think they'd be allowed charge black men more? and if not why not?

It's risk assessment, same as some health insurance takes into account factors like age and previous illnesses etc. They can get around the discrimination thing by calling it risk assessment.

They can take into account where you live, inner city with no offstreet parking versus country with a garage or drive to house your car in/on, so I guess that could be construed as discrimination favouring people who are better off - you will get cheaper insurance if you have a house with a drive to park your car on vs living in a flat and parking up on the street.


the reason for women's insurance being cheaper on average than males is due to statistics which point to women having more "small" accidents, such as reversing into another car while parking or dinging a bumper, whereas men tend to have more spectacular accidents, writing off cars and possibly people. Women's accidents on the whole cost less to pay out on than men's, hence the lower premium.

Also - your premium as a male will be slightly affected (positively, ie it tends to be lower) by having a spouse - I think the theory is that a married man as opposed to a single man will have more responsibilities - kids, wife, mortgage etc - and will be less likely to endanger his life as he has others to think of - either that or they reckon the wife is sitting in the passenger seat nagging at him to slow down! how's that strike you for discrimination between singles and marrieds...

If anything is to be done about it, premiums for women will go up to match that of males, rather than premiums for males coming down to match women.

utick

echosound wrote: »

It's risk assessment, same as some health insurance takes into account factors like age and previous illnesses etc. They can get around the discrimination thing by calling it risk assessment.
.

why not include race, religious background and sexual orientation in this 'risk assesment', im sure some of the sub groups i mentioned are more riskier than others

javaboy

utick wrote: »

why not include race, religious background and sexual orientation in this 'risk assesment', im sure some of the sub groups i mentioned are more riskier than others

People who are exactly 1.734657481 metres tall are statistically more dangerous than anyone else on our roads. About time this was sorted!

dlofnep

The OP makes a good and valid point.

rubadub

voodoo_child wrote: »

If a guy pays more insurance because he's 'more likely' to crash,

Thats not how insurance works. The insurance company doesn't give a damn how good or bad a driver you are. They do not care how many accidents you have a year, or whose fault it was. They do not care how many miles you drive a year. All the insurance company is interested in is how much you are likely to claim from them. I could destroy my car but if I put no claims in. Women put less claims in than men, simple as that. Several years ago some insurer was on, possibly AA, saying that it was slowly going the other way. i.e. women were starting to put more claims in than previous years. They put this down to them spending more time on the road. Insurance is done by the year, there should be more options on how to cost it.

A firefighter is probably "better" at dealing with fires than me, if we both went in to get insured for a year against getting a burn my insurance would probably be less. I could probably get cheaper insurance about being electrocuted than a qualified electrician.

Davidius wrote: »

You know what guys, this is the Government's fault. Let's blame them!

They should really step in, it is sexual discrimination and if it does eventually turn the other way, and men get cheaper quotes as women drive more and put more claims in, THEN I imagine you will see it outlawed. The insurers should be forced to get some other way of calculating the costs, if you drive you are legally forced to use them after all.

utick wrote: »

why not include race, religious background and sexual orientation in this 'risk assesment', im sure some of the sub groups i mentioned are more riskier than others

Exactly, I see no difference. There are already groups that are sectioned out, being straight out racist or sexist is not really acceptable. I have heard women have more claims per mile than men. If I was a man doing 50miles a year there should be a company that would take me on like that. I think some "classic car" insurance works like that.

As an engineer I get cheaper quotes, when I ring up they always ask if I mean a mechanic. I have heard a mechanic will be quoted highly, since they tend to mess with their cars, resulting in larger claims per year for stuff, or they might realise it is broken and claim. Some other weird ones exist, like sports professionals, if they give a person a lift they might also be a pros with high insurance on their bodies. Barmen get more not because of drink driving, but because their cars are often in pub carparks and are more likely to be robbed- nothing to do with driving ability.