yo dawg, tel me how e-z dis is 2 reed n’ how typing dis way aff-x my cool lvl
Compared to simply typing like a normal human being. You have a full QWERTY keyboard in front of you, and people are more likely to understand your words when they’re actually words. Save the ebonics for actual speaking. It’s annoying to have to sit in front of a comment for 30 seconds trying to decipher a bunch of pointless abbreviations and decorations when the sentence should really take about two-and-a-half seconds to read.
And he’s either ignorant of or ignoring the fact that men get into more accidents than women. Which is why car insurance is a lot less if you’re female.
Satirically mocking sexism isn’t itself sexist, especially when the point is that it’s ridiculous (and even blatantly stated that it’s made up). Blue isn’t being sexist here.
However, what Blue doesn’t appear to realise is that 43.56% of all statistics are invented by people who simply wish their point to appear more impressive and believable.
Also, it is a proven fact that only 67.20% of people will get this joke.
Even though she was quoting a statistic (whether it’s true or not) she’d read somewhere and he made it up himself?
Mind you, I suppose it’s true that men drive more than women, so it would follow that altogether they’d drive more miles getting lost. Nowt to do with male/female, all to do with how much you drive.
It’s only bad if men do it to women. If women say things like this or that, it’s their right as permavictims dude. Gross up and grab the scissors and noose.
That’s pretty true, but at least at some point there was a major issue of women lacking rights and feminism had a role. People in favor of genuine equality would call themselves feminists. That’s no longer the case, and hasn’t been for quite some time. ‘Feminists’ these days are just people who think women should have more rights, or are using it as a label to try to excuse shameless sexism.
Beg your pardon, but that isn’t the case at all. I suspect you haven’t looked up any of the many, many feminism sites online for information on what feminism is. It’s still a very current, necessary issue, and it never became about hating men.
I understand the current stereotype of the feminist to be a foul-tempered, man-hating lesbian(or potential lesbian). Or any woman who watches Lifetime(which has been dubbed the “man-hater” channel).
Unfortunately, I have encountered plenty of people that follow this template.
I actually feel for true feminists and such equal rights activists. The sad fact is that extremists who would have their side receive special treatment, are a lot louder and more noticeable than people who sincerely want equality. Its not surprising that generalizations like the one above would come up.
Indeed, personally i do believe that (atleast in my country) there are some hypocrisies(?). Women can vote, and in the law (that i know of) women and men are equal.
However women do get payed less than men, however, i don’t think that it is such a big deal, the diferences aren’t usually that big, and the amount of phisicall work that the average men does in comparison to the (average) woman compensates the slightly lower wages. After all a farmer (or other physically demanding work) has to do lots of very physically harsh work, and you can’t say that the average man does the same, or less work than the average women on that type of job, it’s impossible (i know, i tried, i came to that conclusion through observation).
However people contiue to persist that they should receive the same pay, even when the amount of work done is clearly diferent, because they are conditioned to do so. But that is wrong, people are diferent, they do diferent things in diferent manners, and as such should be treated diferently, not better or worse, but in a way that awards those who do the best work.
Not unreasonable exactly, simply asking for something that we pretty much already have. This notion that someone won’t get a job or will get paid less because of sexist employers is one that comes from statistics, of which there are many conclusions that could be drawn. There’s a relationship (although a somewhat weak one) between gender and the kind of job you’re interested in, so a difference in pay is to be expected unless you think all jobs pay the exact same amount. Then there’s the fact that if there’s a couple then society insists that the man must work; the woman can too of course (but she doesn’t have to), but if she does and the man doesn’t then he’s a sponge. I’m not saying that’s your position, of course, just one a large portion of society holds.
Actually, but Canaduck and Brolin are right. X clearly is taking informations out his arse, without bothering to actually look it up. Misandry (hate towards men) and feminism are two totally different things.
Two different things, but fields that constantly intersect enough to taint the more positive and generate an unfortunate stereotype that undermines the entire cause.
How, exactly? (This is to Canaduck as well – I’m not entirely sure why you’re referencing Brolin, lololo, as he’s said precisely the same thing as I did – in fact, his post was all about explaining my own.)
As I said in one of my earlier posts, feminism isn’t in itself sexist and has played a hugely important role over time. Now it’s (or, to make it clearer, the label ‘feminist’, not exactly true feminism itself) being used for people to be sexist against men and then say they’re just being feminists. If you honestly don’t think that there’s a significant amount of people doing that then I don’t see what else there is to say. My first post before elaborating on it was criticism of people who do that, so if you don’t believe they exist then the worst I can be accused of is complaining about a non-existent problem.
There ARE true feminists still around but the people I call feminazis are what completely bring the rest of us down. Those are the types of women you’re talking about so please do not generalize all feminists.
I count myself as a feminist but what I mean is I’m an advocate of equal rights. And I’m a man.
It’s radical feminists who are the man hating ones, it’s annoying because they give people something to attack.
It’s not ‘when’, it’s to whom. Feminist means ‘man-hater’ to people who are either afraid of feminism or ignorant of it. This accusation has been around since at least the 1860s, and it waxes and wanes in popularity. Rush Limbaugh made a lot of money by attacking ‘feminazis’ in the 80s and 90s.
For real feminists, it’s about equality and partnership, not hating.
Source: my mom and dad, happily married feminists, approaching their 45th wedding anniversary.
It’s all well and good to create a divide between ‘real’ feminists and ones you don’t approve of, but that’s precisely what I’m saying just worded differently. I’m asking when these people suddenly appeared in such large numbers instead of the ‘old’ feminists, and you’re saying they’re not ‘real’ feminists.
That’s easy. They haven’t. People just see equal rights nowadays a zero-sum game and think women gaining rights means men losing rights. People say feminism is “man-hate” in order to discredit it.
I’m curious to know what rights these new feminists think women deserve and men don’t. I read a lot of feminist blogs and a lot of feminist works, and took a lot of gender and women’s studies classes. There are crazy feminists who think that men tricked women into thinking they were needed to reproduce but actually women reproduce asexually and the like, but these are far in the minority. Almost half of the books that I read in my classes were written by men.
yes, but does A imply B? men may drive twice as much, but does driving twice as much double the chances of getting in an accident? this is why stats end up “lying” – percentages and numbers actually tell very little about most problems and need to be set in context in order to be meaningful.
You may be a bad driver, however please leave the rest of us women out of your blanket asumption. I am an adept driver and know plenty of women that have excellent reflexes and instincts on the road.
Heh, it does seem like women are inferior drivers to men in my area(Kentuckiana). But in contrast, everyone’s driving skills around here are so ridiculously pathetic, its pointless to look at one person as a better driver than the other. They’re all out to kill you.
Agree. I’ve seen one drive in wrong way in highway tunnel. (Well, just security cam video)… I think he was 78 years old. (And then almost everyone was violating the red light).
While we may be the most dangerous, that doesn’t make us the worst.
Going too fast and not making a corner is stupidity, going too slow around a corner and still not making it is bad driving, which seems most common for older people.
Sorry, I’m a bit biased, as I’ve actually had family members killed by an older driver (80+) doing stupidity, and I’ve seen a lot more bad driving from old drivers over teenagers.
Statistics of dangerous driving don’t necessarily show whether a group are good or bad drivers. Crashes involving teenagers are quite likely to be heavily influenced by a small amount of ‘boy racers’, and doesn’t show the quality of other drivers the same age without that urge. It would also stand to reason that perfectly competent but inexperienced drivers won’t be able to avoid accidents so easily even if that accident isn’t of their own making.
Of course, the same applies to pretty much any group; there’s always going to be a range of quality in any group you pinpoint (unless that group is based upon quality), and so a minority can heavily influence the results. All that means though is that crash statistics aren’t the be all and end all of the matter. In my experience, bad drivers are more likely to cause an accident for those around them instead of themselves.
That’s not just you, X. I mean to include BlackDragon too.
You kids need to understand something. Making a conscious decision to drive dangerously IS bad driving and when you do it, it makes you a bad driver. It only takes once.
I sympathize with GE’s loss, but the fact is that many more people are killed by teenage drivers, both because there are more of them and because they’re proportionately in more accidents. Not that there aren’t plenty of bad older drivers out there — there certainly are — there are just fewer of them, and despite some of the obvious examples, fewer of them get into accidents than teens.
It’s true that male teenage drivers are about half again more dangerous than female teenage drivers — but BOTH are more dangerous than any other age group.
Wut? Nothing you said there had any relevance to anything I said whatsoever, and Blackdragon wasn’t saying anything even remotely similar to me. If you’re going to accuse someone of idiocy at least formulate a response to their argument instead of skimming over it and trying to guess at what they’re saying, otherwise you just waste your own time (and mine for typing out this response, but I don’t really mind).
I never said teenagers weren’t bad drivers, I’m sure they’re among the worst quite easily, and I very clearly said they were inexperienced and that boy racers would be crashing left right and center. I simply said crash statistics aren’t a very good indicator of how good particular groups are at driving, which is completely reasonable since being a bad driver won’t have much effect one whether you crash or not unless you’re appalling.
Of course, if you still want to call me an idiot then that’s perfectly fine, so long as you provide some kind of reasoning as to why everything I’ve said is not only wrong but so obviously wrong that it can be justifiably called idiocy.
“I simply said crash statistics aren’t a very good indicator of how good particular groups are at driving, which is completely reasonable since being a bad driver won’t have much effect one whether you crash or not unless you’re appalling.”
This is the part that’s wrong. When you say things like this, you’re making excuses for people who get into lots of accidents. Getting into lots of accidents is something good drivers don’t do, regardless of age. Those who do, when they’re consistently responsible (even if only in part) are BAD DRIVERS. You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference. We’re talking about statistics taken over populations here, not individuals. If a group tends to engage in more dangerous driving habits, where accidents are more likely, then that increased likelihood will show when considering large numbers EVEN IF many individuals are lucky and never personally suffer the consequences of the risks they’re taking.
Who cares about how “boy racers” might skew the results? As I pointed out, even if you consider girls alone teens are STILL the most dangerous drivers on the road. They’re more likely to speed, they’re more likely to allow themselves to be distracted, they’re more likely to drive drunk, and they’re more likely to over-estimate their own skills.
Clearly you’ve never done much work on studies, have you?
Again, nothing you said there had any slight shred of relevance to anything I said. I don’t know if you simply don’t understand or are wilfully ignorant, but I’ll try to go over it again:
“You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference.”
Wrong. Do you seriously think drivers who just aren’t very good go about writing off cars? Have you ever driven in your life?
“You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference.”
Yes, people who crash are quite likely to be bad drivers. We’re not talking about them though, are we? We’re talking about all members of the group they belong to. Some members of the group are appalling drivers (since yes, being a slightly bad driver is highly unlikely to make you crash, as everyone who’s even cast a casual glance at a car will know – if that weren’t the case and you’d need to be an expert, you wouldn’t be able to leave the house for wreckages).
As for “Who cares about how “boy racers” might skew the results?”, everyone who’s trying to analyse the results cares.
I’m not entirely sure you understand how statistics work. It’s not a case of finding statistics which you think support your argument and then insisting that there’s no other way to interpret them, and the only explanation is a very simplistic answer of “They’re all bad drivers!”. The fact of the matter is that crash statistics alone aren’t enough, and other evidence is required (something you apparently agree with, since you just listed off a string offences teen girls commit). Yes, it suggests that teens are the worst drivers, but that alone isn’t even close to enough for that net statement.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to argue against, here. The value of one set of data? Relax. It’s really not that important. Your conclusion and mine is the same so why get so upset over my opinion of the worth of one single set of statistics involved in coming to that conclusion? It can’t be healthy.
He forgot to say women make twice as more miles because they get lost.
Anyway. My dad is a good driver. He can drive on any road, without having 4×4. It happened few times because bad maps of Croatia, marking little more than a foot trail like a main road.
My mom is also a good driver, just she thinks which road is too difficult for our car, so she rather goes around when she sees that road is for 4×4 and not what map promises.
My problem with this one is that what she said it’s true. It was a study done in I think the UK. Had she been making it up, then his comment would be warranted. She’s just pointing out the study results and her astonishment at them. I’m assuming she pointed this out to him after his comment was made.
A “study” done by an insurance company, that only offers it services to women, coincidentally produces a result that panders to its target audiences stereotypical expectations. There are no sources cited, and not even any information about how many men were included in the study.
Its about as valid as a survey on women’s sexual interests done by GQ or Playboy.
How can you be sure that the person you ask is as good a navigator as you are? Will they provide directions using landmarks such as “a house with the blue shutters” as if it’s a given that you’d be able to see it at night? Some people will provide directions even when they have no real idea how to get where you want to go; they think they might know, which is just enough to allow them to sound confident. Making a wrong turn because of bad directions can cause just as much of a delay as any other wrong turn, and it is certainly more infuriating.
In my household, I do the lion’s share of the driving when we venture into new areas. My wife’s driving is predominantly in places we’ve been before. Given this pattern, it would be very surprising for her to be lost for anywhere near 256 miles, but I’m sure I’m well below the 276 mile average myself.
The most likely reason for me to be lost is that I missed a turn in unfamiliar surroundings, or construction/accident forced an unplanned/unfamiliar detour. Either way, I am likely to find signs or other indicators of where I am, thus I’ll soon be able to to use the map to get me back on route. If it’s a good time for a break anyway, I might stop and confirm with a “local”, otherwise experience has taught me that pressing on is quite reasonable.
Everyone knows that women are terrible drivers. Case in point – a woman driver is trying to overtake me at 125 mph even as I type this out on my laptop. Daft cow almost made me spill my beer all over my pizza…
How can you be so irresponsible!? Use the cupholders– they’re there so we don’t have to worry about spilling. Don’t put your beer and pizza at risk like that. Be more careful!
There are more males involved in accidents or violations just because there are more males driving than females. Look around and youll see.
Making proportions between accidents caused by men and womens without taking into account how much of them are on the road is like saying china has more crime that other countrys just because there are more criminals.
To put it simply, if there 1000 guys and 200 women drivers. 5 guys and 2 women crash in different times of the day, the crash proportion would 5 to 2 and people would say “male drivers are worst” but 5 is a measly 0.5% of male drivers while 2 womens makes up a 1% of female, twice as much as the men. If there are more men driving, there will be more men involved in accidents.
seriously, can you lot quit it already with the gender bashing? I don’t care if you think it’s funny – you know it hurts and inflames. why does every damn post on sexim turn into a sexist slugfest. Seriously, I wish the Battle of the Sexes would burn and die; it is the most stupid war on the face of planet earth, and does absolutely no good to either side – both sides lose.
NoseMocking, I couldn’t agree with your argument more but this really isn’t the place to say it. Put it in its own comment, not as a reply to a simple joke.
Sitting in the passenger seat of a car being driven by a clergyman, my father asked him to pull over. When the car stopped, he said ‘we’ve got the division of labour wrong here, y’know – much better if I drive and you pray’.
Statistically, jokes about women in the kitchen are %50 as funny as jokes about doorsknobs, and 100% of people who tell them are unoriginal and think it’s funny because “I like to stare at women they deem “hot”" or “I am a woman” so how can they be sexist?
82% of replies will call me a feminazi, demonstrating that they think women wanting equal rights is not a crazy comparison to white christian heterosexual Germans wanting to kill everyone not like them.
This may be true. So what? Women take 4 times as long to shop as men.
The standard excuse is that men are embarrassed to ask directions. I’ve only rarely heard a man say this himself: it’s usually women making guesses as to men’s motivations. They’re wrong. It’s not embarrassing to ask for directions. It’s ANNOYING.
I’ve long suspected that this has to do with the ancient roles we adapted to back in the stone ages, when we were all hunter/gatherers. My guess is that women, burdened with the bulk of child care and so unable to assist in the hunt, tended to be the gatherers, leaving the hunting to the men. We lived like this for tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, and it left its imprint on us.
Modern women, in consequence, get a kind of visceral pleasure from the modern analogue, shopping, that is totally foreign to most men, while men derive a similar pleasure from navigating without directions — the closest thing many of us do to hunting nowadays — which is equally incomprehensible to women.
It’s a hypothesis, and may or may not be true or testable. But it makes a whole lot more sense to me than the “embarrassed” thing, which in my experience is flatly untrue.
Your hypothesis actually has some merit.
Sometimes when I’m very bored, I go for a drive and intentionally try to get lost. Then I try to find my way back without using a map.
I get the impression that when women become lost, they feel panic, for me being lost is an exciting intellectual challenge.
Some people pay to get lost in a giant corn maze, you have just as much fun in your car.
Almost like the guy who posted this made the comment.
Another sexist joke. *sigh* Well I guess both of them are being sexists. I think.
Homie quit actin up
aight playa?,?
Quit spelling like that, ok?
I agree with cheese, it makes me have to concentrate to read and I don’t like t one bit.
How do you feel about r, s, u and v?
Sorry man i was in a rush b4, I dont see why its such a big deal tho???
yo dawg, tel me how e-z dis is 2 reed n’ how typing dis way aff-x my cool lvl
Compared to simply typing like a normal human being. You have a full QWERTY keyboard in front of you, and people are more likely to understand your words when they’re actually words. Save the ebonics for actual speaking. It’s annoying to have to sit in front of a comment for 30 seconds trying to decipher a bunch of pointless abbreviations and decorations when the sentence should really take about two-and-a-half seconds to read.
blah blah blah, it’s Tony time
Obvious troll is obvious.
And he’s either ignorant of or ignoring the fact that men get into more accidents than women. Which is why car insurance is a lot less if you’re female.
He’s shooting obvious BS down with more obvious BS.
^^^Guess who’s a woman haha
Also, men don’t get in more accidents than women, they merely tend to get in bigger/more costly accidents.
Statistically, who drives more often and/or longer distances, men or women?
there was a report on it a few days ago, which is what i’m guessing is what she was referring too.
men do drive more miles in a year then a women on average because they are lost and don’t stop and ask.
Satirically mocking sexism isn’t itself sexist, especially when the point is that it’s ridiculous (and even blatantly stated that it’s made up). Blue isn’t being sexist here.
However, what Blue doesn’t appear to realise is that 43.56% of all statistics are invented by people who simply wish their point to appear more impressive and believable.
Also, it is a proven fact that only 67.20% of people will get this joke.
There are three kinds of lies.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
That’s awesome. I wish to use it in the future
actually he acknowledges that
what a tired old joke, btw
35% won’t realize its a joke, even though you said it. 21% of the comments on here are about the sexism and not the made up statistics.
I’m sick of the sexist jokes too, but let’s be realistic: she deserved that.
Even though she was quoting a statistic (whether it’s true or not) she’d read somewhere and he made it up himself?
Mind you, I suppose it’s true that men drive more than women, so it would follow that altogether they’d drive more miles getting lost. Nowt to do with male/female, all to do with how much you drive.
It’s only bad if men do it to women. If women say things like this or that, it’s their right as permavictims dude. Gross up and grab the scissors and noose.
SEE! Right there! More sexism! We said, ‘cowbell’, not, ‘sexism!’
Failbookers have lost THE GAME due to this post.
Dude, what game? I’m not playing any, you?
people have lost my name due to this post. previous comment waiting moderatiion
yeah, that would happen to my Dad when traveling abroad. My Mom was holding the map and was supposed to give directions…
I thought women got in less car accidents / year…
Bahahaha
they get into more accidents, but they kill less people in those accidents than men do in theirs.
If you’re gonna fu*k up, do it right I suppose.
We certainly have lower insurance premiums.
Just because they stay in the kitchen almost all day.
I believe he is saying that it is made up statistics
read to the end man!
Women get in far more, but the few that men get into are far more serious due to DUI’s/reckless (fun) driving.
Oh, I see. DUIs are fun…
and people have lost my name due to this comment
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/worse-drivers-males-or-females.aspx
When did feminist start meaning ‘man-hater’ anyway?
Hasn’t it always? It’s always seemed so.
That’s pretty true, but at least at some point there was a major issue of women lacking rights and feminism had a role. People in favor of genuine equality would call themselves feminists. That’s no longer the case, and hasn’t been for quite some time. ‘Feminists’ these days are just people who think women should have more rights, or are using it as a label to try to excuse shameless sexism.
Beg your pardon, but that isn’t the case at all. I suspect you haven’t looked up any of the many, many feminism sites online for information on what feminism is. It’s still a very current, necessary issue, and it never became about hating men.
I don’t think he’s saying feminism itself is, but a lot of the so called “feminists” act like that
I understand the current stereotype of the feminist to be a foul-tempered, man-hating lesbian(or potential lesbian). Or any woman who watches Lifetime(which has been dubbed the “man-hater” channel).
Unfortunately, I have encountered plenty of people that follow this template.
I actually feel for true feminists and such equal rights activists. The sad fact is that extremists who would have their side receive special treatment, are a lot louder and more noticeable than people who sincerely want equality. Its not surprising that generalizations like the one above would come up.
Indeed, personally i do believe that (atleast in my country) there are some hypocrisies(?). Women can vote, and in the law (that i know of) women and men are equal.
However women do get payed less than men, however, i don’t think that it is such a big deal, the diferences aren’t usually that big, and the amount of phisicall work that the average men does in comparison to the (average) woman compensates the slightly lower wages. After all a farmer (or other physically demanding work) has to do lots of very physically harsh work, and you can’t say that the average man does the same, or less work than the average women on that type of job, it’s impossible (i know, i tried, i came to that conclusion through observation).
However people contiue to persist that they should receive the same pay, even when the amount of work done is clearly diferent, because they are conditioned to do so. But that is wrong, people are diferent, they do diferent things in diferent manners, and as such should be treated diferently, not better or worse, but in a way that awards those who do the best work.
So women seeking equal rights in the employment field and a cessation of double standards in society are unreasonable and it’s no longer viable?
Hmm.
Not unreasonable exactly, simply asking for something that we pretty much already have. This notion that someone won’t get a job or will get paid less because of sexist employers is one that comes from statistics, of which there are many conclusions that could be drawn. There’s a relationship (although a somewhat weak one) between gender and the kind of job you’re interested in, so a difference in pay is to be expected unless you think all jobs pay the exact same amount. Then there’s the fact that if there’s a couple then society insists that the man must work; the woman can too of course (but she doesn’t have to), but if she does and the man doesn’t then he’s a sponge. I’m not saying that’s your position, of course, just one a large portion of society holds.
Actually, but Canaduck and Brolin are right. X clearly is taking informations out his arse, without bothering to actually look it up. Misandry (hate towards men) and feminism are two totally different things.
both* not but
Two different things, but fields that constantly intersect enough to taint the more positive and generate an unfortunate stereotype that undermines the entire cause.
How, exactly? (This is to Canaduck as well – I’m not entirely sure why you’re referencing Brolin, lololo, as he’s said precisely the same thing as I did – in fact, his post was all about explaining my own.)
As I said in one of my earlier posts, feminism isn’t in itself sexist and has played a hugely important role over time. Now it’s (or, to make it clearer, the label ‘feminist’, not exactly true feminism itself) being used for people to be sexist against men and then say they’re just being feminists. If you honestly don’t think that there’s a significant amount of people doing that then I don’t see what else there is to say. My first post before elaborating on it was criticism of people who do that, so if you don’t believe they exist then the worst I can be accused of is complaining about a non-existent problem.
There ARE true feminists still around but the people I call feminazis are what completely bring the rest of us down. Those are the types of women you’re talking about so please do not generalize all feminists.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear, it’s specifically those Feminazis I’m talking about hijacking Feminism.
I count myself as a feminist but what I mean is I’m an advocate of equal rights. And I’m a man.
It’s radical feminists who are the man hating ones, it’s annoying because they give people something to attack.
It’s not ‘when’, it’s to whom. Feminist means ‘man-hater’ to people who are either afraid of feminism or ignorant of it. This accusation has been around since at least the 1860s, and it waxes and wanes in popularity. Rush Limbaugh made a lot of money by attacking ‘feminazis’ in the 80s and 90s.
For real feminists, it’s about equality and partnership, not hating.
Source: my mom and dad, happily married feminists, approaching their 45th wedding anniversary.
It’s all well and good to create a divide between ‘real’ feminists and ones you don’t approve of, but that’s precisely what I’m saying just worded differently. I’m asking when these people suddenly appeared in such large numbers instead of the ‘old’ feminists, and you’re saying they’re not ‘real’ feminists.
That’s easy. They haven’t. People just see equal rights nowadays a zero-sum game and think women gaining rights means men losing rights. People say feminism is “man-hate” in order to discredit it.
I’m curious to know what rights these new feminists think women deserve and men don’t. I read a lot of feminist blogs and a lot of feminist works, and took a lot of gender and women’s studies classes. There are crazy feminists who think that men tricked women into thinking they were needed to reproduce but actually women reproduce asexually and the like, but these are far in the minority. Almost half of the books that I read in my classes were written by men.
You seem to be confusing professionals with people spouting nonsense claiming to be feminists.
This is a true statistic-
Men are involved in twice as many car accidents as women.
They also drive twice as much.
yes, but does A imply B? men may drive twice as much, but does driving twice as much double the chances of getting in an accident? this is why stats end up “lying” – percentages and numbers actually tell very little about most problems and need to be set in context in order to be meaningful.
I’m a woman and I know we’re bad at driving. But guys are, too. You just see more females fail epically at driving than men…
They shame us by knowing nothing about cars. How annoying. /sigh
Awww, there there. Come here, I’ll comfort you …
mmm to find comfort in uncle creepy’s arms
You may be a bad driver, however please leave the rest of us women out of your blanket asumption. I am an adept driver and know plenty of women that have excellent reflexes and instincts on the road.
Heh, it does seem like women are inferior drivers to men in my area(Kentuckiana). But in contrast, everyone’s driving skills around here are so ridiculously pathetic, its pointless to look at one person as a better driver than the other. They’re all out to kill you.
I’ve seen both genders fail pretty badly at driving, so I don’t think females can pick on male driving, and vice versa.
IMO, though, old drivers are the worst, no matter what gender they are.
Agree. I’ve seen one drive in wrong way in highway tunnel. (Well, just security cam video)… I think he was 78 years old. (And then almost everyone was violating the red light).
http://24ur.com/novice/crna-kronika/video-78-letnik-obrnil-kar-sredi-predora.html Here’s the video.
Your O is wrong. Teenage drivers are demonstrably the worst. Unlike most statistics, this one is not made up. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/teenweb/more_btn6/traffic/traffic.htm
While we may be the most dangerous, that doesn’t make us the worst.
Going too fast and not making a corner is stupidity, going too slow around a corner and still not making it is bad driving, which seems most common for older people.
Sorry, I’m a bit biased, as I’ve actually had family members killed by an older driver (80+) doing stupidity, and I’ve seen a lot more bad driving from old drivers over teenagers.
Statistics of dangerous driving don’t necessarily show whether a group are good or bad drivers. Crashes involving teenagers are quite likely to be heavily influenced by a small amount of ‘boy racers’, and doesn’t show the quality of other drivers the same age without that urge. It would also stand to reason that perfectly competent but inexperienced drivers won’t be able to avoid accidents so easily even if that accident isn’t of their own making.
Of course, the same applies to pretty much any group; there’s always going to be a range of quality in any group you pinpoint (unless that group is based upon quality), and so a minority can heavily influence the results. All that means though is that crash statistics aren’t the be all and end all of the matter. In my experience, bad drivers are more likely to cause an accident for those around them instead of themselves.
Wow. What idiocy.
That’s not just you, X. I mean to include BlackDragon too.
You kids need to understand something. Making a conscious decision to drive dangerously IS bad driving and when you do it, it makes you a bad driver. It only takes once.
I sympathize with GE’s loss, but the fact is that many more people are killed by teenage drivers, both because there are more of them and because they’re proportionately in more accidents. Not that there aren’t plenty of bad older drivers out there — there certainly are — there are just fewer of them, and despite some of the obvious examples, fewer of them get into accidents than teens.
It’s true that male teenage drivers are about half again more dangerous than female teenage drivers — but BOTH are more dangerous than any other age group.
Wut? Nothing you said there had any relevance to anything I said whatsoever, and Blackdragon wasn’t saying anything even remotely similar to me. If you’re going to accuse someone of idiocy at least formulate a response to their argument instead of skimming over it and trying to guess at what they’re saying, otherwise you just waste your own time (and mine for typing out this response, but I don’t really mind).
I never said teenagers weren’t bad drivers, I’m sure they’re among the worst quite easily, and I very clearly said they were inexperienced and that boy racers would be crashing left right and center. I simply said crash statistics aren’t a very good indicator of how good particular groups are at driving, which is completely reasonable since being a bad driver won’t have much effect one whether you crash or not unless you’re appalling.
Of course, if you still want to call me an idiot then that’s perfectly fine, so long as you provide some kind of reasoning as to why everything I’ve said is not only wrong but so obviously wrong that it can be justifiably called idiocy.
“I simply said crash statistics aren’t a very good indicator of how good particular groups are at driving, which is completely reasonable since being a bad driver won’t have much effect one whether you crash or not unless you’re appalling.”
This is the part that’s wrong. When you say things like this, you’re making excuses for people who get into lots of accidents. Getting into lots of accidents is something good drivers don’t do, regardless of age. Those who do, when they’re consistently responsible (even if only in part) are BAD DRIVERS. You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference. We’re talking about statistics taken over populations here, not individuals. If a group tends to engage in more dangerous driving habits, where accidents are more likely, then that increased likelihood will show when considering large numbers EVEN IF many individuals are lucky and never personally suffer the consequences of the risks they’re taking.
Who cares about how “boy racers” might skew the results? As I pointed out, even if you consider girls alone teens are STILL the most dangerous drivers on the road. They’re more likely to speed, they’re more likely to allow themselves to be distracted, they’re more likely to drive drunk, and they’re more likely to over-estimate their own skills.
Clearly you’ve never done much work on studies, have you?
Again, nothing you said there had any slight shred of relevance to anything I said. I don’t know if you simply don’t understand or are wilfully ignorant, but I’ll try to go over it again:
“You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference.”
Wrong. Do you seriously think drivers who just aren’t very good go about writing off cars? Have you ever driven in your life?
“You’re simply wrong when you say you must be “appalling” for it to make a difference.”
Yes, people who crash are quite likely to be bad drivers. We’re not talking about them though, are we? We’re talking about all members of the group they belong to. Some members of the group are appalling drivers (since yes, being a slightly bad driver is highly unlikely to make you crash, as everyone who’s even cast a casual glance at a car will know – if that weren’t the case and you’d need to be an expert, you wouldn’t be able to leave the house for wreckages).
As for “Who cares about how “boy racers” might skew the results?”, everyone who’s trying to analyse the results cares.
I’m not entirely sure you understand how statistics work. It’s not a case of finding statistics which you think support your argument and then insisting that there’s no other way to interpret them, and the only explanation is a very simplistic answer of “They’re all bad drivers!”. The fact of the matter is that crash statistics alone aren’t enough, and other evidence is required (something you apparently agree with, since you just listed off a string offences teen girls commit). Yes, it suggests that teens are the worst drivers, but that alone isn’t even close to enough for that net statement.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to argue against, here. The value of one set of data? Relax. It’s really not that important. Your conclusion and mine is the same so why get so upset over my opinion of the worth of one single set of statistics involved in coming to that conclusion? It can’t be healthy.
He forgot to say women make twice as more miles because they get lost.
Anyway. My dad is a good driver. He can drive on any road, without having 4×4. It happened few times because bad maps of Croatia, marking little more than a foot trail like a main road.
My mom is also a good driver, just she thinks which road is too difficult for our car, so she rather goes around when she sees that road is for 4×4 and not what map promises.
My problem with this one is that what she said it’s true. It was a study done in I think the UK. Had she been making it up, then his comment would be warranted. She’s just pointing out the study results and her astonishment at them. I’m assuming she pointed this out to him after his comment was made.
What he said is actually also true. It was a study done in I think Croatia.
Thanks, Kim. I was going to mention the study.
It was done by an insurance company called Sheila’s Wheels.
http://www.sheilaswheels.com/media/MEN_LOST_FOR_LONGER.html
A “study” done by an insurance company, that only offers it services to women, coincidentally produces a result that panders to its target audiences stereotypical expectations. There are no sources cited, and not even any information about how many men were included in the study.
Its about as valid as a survey on women’s sexual interests done by GQ or Playboy.
Don’t men get lost more often because they’re tend to refuse asking for direction?
How can you be sure that the person you ask is as good a navigator as you are? Will they provide directions using landmarks such as “a house with the blue shutters” as if it’s a given that you’d be able to see it at night? Some people will provide directions even when they have no real idea how to get where you want to go; they think they might know, which is just enough to allow them to sound confident. Making a wrong turn because of bad directions can cause just as much of a delay as any other wrong turn, and it is certainly more infuriating.
In my household, I do the lion’s share of the driving when we venture into new areas. My wife’s driving is predominantly in places we’ve been before. Given this pattern, it would be very surprising for her to be lost for anywhere near 256 miles, but I’m sure I’m well below the 276 mile average myself.
The most likely reason for me to be lost is that I missed a turn in unfamiliar surroundings, or construction/accident forced an unplanned/unfamiliar detour. Either way, I am likely to find signs or other indicators of where I am, thus I’ll soon be able to to use the map to get me back on route. If it’s a good time for a break anyway, I might stop and confirm with a “local”, otherwise experience has taught me that pressing on is quite reasonable.
Everyone knows that women are terrible drivers. Case in point – a woman driver is trying to overtake me at 125 mph even as I type this out on my laptop. Daft cow almost made me spill my beer all over my pizza…
How can you be so irresponsible!? Use the cupholders– they’re there so we don’t have to worry about spilling. Don’t put your beer and pizza at risk like that. Be more careful!
Would have been alright if that woman stayed in the damn kitchen!
She was cooking at the wheel, which explains how she got a driver’s license. They don’t give licenses to women unless their cars have stoves built in.
How would he fit pizza in a cupholder? THINK, man, THINK.
Maybe it’s one of those teeny tiny pizzas from the supermarket for when parents can’t be bothered cutting a whole one up?
You’ve never drunk a pizza before? Man, you have some living to do. And blending.
You can use statistics to prove anything Kent. Forfty percent of all people now that.
Forfty?
I love you.
Satistically, the largest contributing factor to female motor vehicle accidents is that they should be in the *&^$ kitchen making me a sandwitch.
80 per cent of men will find this funny, the other 20 per cent are gay.
You mean 80% aren’t hoping to get laid in the near future?
There are more males involved in accidents or violations just because there are more males driving than females. Look around and youll see.
Making proportions between accidents caused by men and womens without taking into account how much of them are on the road is like saying china has more crime that other countrys just because there are more criminals.
To put it simply, if there 1000 guys and 200 women drivers. 5 guys and 2 women crash in different times of the day, the crash proportion would 5 to 2 and people would say “male drivers are worst” but 5 is a measly 0.5% of male drivers while 2 womens makes up a 1% of female, twice as much as the men. If there are more men driving, there will be more men involved in accidents.
Why can’t Helen Keller drive?
Because she’s a woman.
seriously, can you lot quit it already with the gender bashing? I don’t care if you think it’s funny – you know it hurts and inflames. why does every damn post on sexim turn into a sexist slugfest. Seriously, I wish the Battle of the Sexes would burn and die; it is the most stupid war on the face of planet earth, and does absolutely no good to either side – both sides lose.
woman ^
NoseMocking, I couldn’t agree with your argument more but this really isn’t the place to say it. Put it in its own comment, not as a reply to a simple joke.
Sitting in the passenger seat of a car being driven by a clergyman, my father asked him to pull over. When the car stopped, he said ‘we’ve got the division of labour wrong here, y’know – much better if I drive and you pray’.
Statistically, jokes about women in the kitchen are %50 as funny as jokes about doorsknobs, and 100% of people who tell them are unoriginal and think it’s funny because “I like to stare at women they deem “hot”" or “I am a woman” so how can they be sexist?
82% of replies will call me a feminazi, demonstrating that they think women wanting equal rights is not a crazy comparison to white christian heterosexual Germans wanting to kill everyone not like them.
100% of this comment says you don’t know how to type a simple comment.
I’m too lazy to read if this was posted, so I won’t, but people forget men are the ones normally doing the driving in the relationships.
Not only is the man driving to where HE needs to go, but usually driving his woman around as well.
That little factor should be accounted for.
Women drive much less…suck at driving much more.
This may be true. So what? Women take 4 times as long to shop as men.
The standard excuse is that men are embarrassed to ask directions. I’ve only rarely heard a man say this himself: it’s usually women making guesses as to men’s motivations. They’re wrong. It’s not embarrassing to ask for directions. It’s ANNOYING.
I’ve long suspected that this has to do with the ancient roles we adapted to back in the stone ages, when we were all hunter/gatherers. My guess is that women, burdened with the bulk of child care and so unable to assist in the hunt, tended to be the gatherers, leaving the hunting to the men. We lived like this for tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, and it left its imprint on us.
Modern women, in consequence, get a kind of visceral pleasure from the modern analogue, shopping, that is totally foreign to most men, while men derive a similar pleasure from navigating without directions — the closest thing many of us do to hunting nowadays — which is equally incomprehensible to women.
It’s a hypothesis, and may or may not be true or testable. But it makes a whole lot more sense to me than the “embarrassed” thing, which in my experience is flatly untrue.
Your hypothesis actually has some merit.
Sometimes when I’m very bored, I go for a drive and intentionally try to get lost. Then I try to find my way back without using a map.
I get the impression that when women become lost, they feel panic, for me being lost is an exciting intellectual challenge.
Some people pay to get lost in a giant corn maze, you have just as much fun in your car.
i don’t think she was making it up. haha.