People selling cars who cite

[bodenbiscuit]

'Only one female driver'

As if the person's gender impacts on the car. Surely this sort of thing should have stopped by now?

Women drive more carefully. Its a fact... Remember all of those insurance companies that used to offer cheaper insurance for women drivers? They've had to stop now because its discriminatory to men, but it doesn't make it any less true that on the whole women drive more carefully.

Doesn't mean that the one female driver of that particular car was any good though

I agree. It's puzzling. As if women are always responsible drivers... I drove like a banshee when I was young and idiotic. Never serviced my car either.
Not proud of this. Just saying.

Isn't the whole sentence '1 female driver, who only used it to take her dog to the park on a Sunday' (or some similarly innocuous, once a week short journey) - I've had that line at least once every time I've gone browsing for cars.

I file it under the same section as estate agents 'cozy rooms'....

Driving is definitely not my forte. I just find it pathetic and patronising. Especially when it says 'lady driver'

It seems like a small thing, but really it is not.

Even though statistically women are safer drivers etc I don't think the reason they describe a car as such is because of this fact.

I think it's because we are supposed to consider women timid and cautious drivers.

Exactly!

But women are usually more 'softer' on their cars. thats just a general fact and it's not really sexist to state that it's only had 1 lady owner if it's had 1 lady owner.
-we'll put aside the owner could have sod all to do with the driver for a min-

Of all the women I know who drive I can count on one hand the ones who I'd suspect of 'thrashing the bollocks' off their car.
Think about it for a second and you'll see its generally true.
Can you envision you mum,sister, daughter, female friends tearing down an empty motorway doing 120+ or doing general spirited fuckwittery whilst driving?
What about the men in your world ?
I could count on one hand the men I know who drive who don't abuse their cars somewhat.

Of course their are anecdotal exaggerations and exceptions in both directions, but generally it's true or at least more likely that a car has had a easier life if it's only had women behind the wheel.
Stating 1 lady owner in reality means nothing as the driver/s of the car could be anyone.
If you wanted to construe it as sexist then you'd consider that having 1 lady owner as a warning not a benefit. It means you best check it's got a service history 'cos we all know women never change the oil, check the tyre pressures, replace the coolant etc

Females also crash just as much if not more than males but the driving prior to the crash is generally more 'sedate' so the crashes are more 'easygoing' iyswim which equalled much lower premiums to reflect the risk/cost ratios. I'm sure there's telematic data about to back this up.

Some stereotypes are broadly true.

Well I disagree.

about what?
Women generally being more careful thus safer drivers and being that is often translated into less abuse on the car itself and so is used as a legitimate selling point?
It's a fact, disagreeing with it is verging on idiocy.
The '1 lady driver' statement obviously needs to be taken with a pinch of salt as it may not be the entire truth. but when it is true, -for instance my mums car, driven solely by my mother- is a fairly good indicator that it's led a unharried existence and is quite probably, statistically speaking going to be in 'better' shape than if a man had it.

I don't think it generally is true. Not in my experience.

But how extensive and pertinent is your experience? Do you work in car insurance, or as a traffic controller or a paramedic attending many an RTA?

Good grief OP, do you trawl the Internet looking for something antifemimist (or not in this case) to get cross about? It's fact that women drivers are more careful drivers. So if a car has only been driven by a woman, it usually means that it's not been completely spanked. Not in my case, I drive like a loon most of the time but honestly, find something worthwhile to get a wedgie about.

It doesn't make sense.

From an insurance POV you were looking at a large group of men & women and any average differences. Differences which were then applied to large groups and can't be any more because of the ruling. Same as life insurance a 50yo base premium is more expensive than a 20yo because in general looking at large groups of 50yo they are more likely to die than 20yo. It doesn't mean that this specific 50yo is more likely to die than this specific 20yo in the absence of any other information.

With buying a car you are looking at this specific one so any statistical differences between how men care for their cars and women are irrelevant as it is one specific owner (or a very small number of specific owners).

If you were buying 1000 cars then it would make more sense to buy all one female owner than all one male owner (if there is a statistical difference between how women and men care for their cars and I'm not sure there is TBH).

Car Insurance that was marketed as being "only for women" (Sheila's Wheels, Diamond etc) was always considerably higher than other insurance, and was always reduced when I added my male partner to my insurance. It was a scam.

Sheilas wheels has always been competitive for me whether dh was on the policy or not.

Hmm I didn't explain that very well

I know what I meant!

You can't take average differences based on very large groups, and say that they will be true for an individual. That's not how it works.

Insurers make assumptions based on the fact they are insuring large numbers of individuals, and that the outliers will balance each other out (the 20yo who die very young, or the 50yo who live a long time).

It is not appropriate to take an average across a large population and say therefore it will hold true for any given individual.

Don't know if that makes more sense

Anyway I'm agreeing with the OP!

WHirlpool, i get you, your right. In each individual case as it's a pool of 1.
But who looks at just one car?
If you were trawling ebay and pulled every car that had '1 lady owner' for further consideration then you'd have a higher probability of finding a more 'valuable or better' car.
It's is still bs though as for every moderate female driver that pushes the cars standard up their could be umpteen times more that never did basic checks or only minimum service periods that pushes the quality down.
It's not sexist its just a rather poor yardstick that has a basis in truth.

I'm not sure anyway!

If we're going to go with gendered assumptions, then you could say, men know more about engines etc and so are more likely to have checked and kept the oil levels and so forth correct and have more sense for if something feels "off" and needs checking out.

Similarly, is it good for cars to do occasional, short journeys? My understanding was that it is good for cars not to do this as they never get properly heated up and this is bad for the engine. Engines like to get up and going and get the oil warm and distributed around and that. And that it's hard on the battery.

Anyway, I don't know a lot about cars but they are some things I have heard, both according to my dad

So he would not want one older female owner who only did short journeys, as he would be concerned that she didn't know or have the inclination to look after it properly and it would be fucked from all those short journeys. He would want to buy a car from someone "like him" I suspect. Who checks the tyres once a week without fail and knows what a park plug is

So yeah I'm just not sure here.

Plus of course even if you look at lots of cars you still just buy one. It still only works if you buy lots. Insurance is based on the principle of having lots, so the ones that turn out to be better than average balance out the ones that turn out to be worse.

Oh certainly, its full of pitfalls, you'd have to be pretty wet behind the ears to think its any sort of guarantee. There's all sorts of permutations of stereotypes that may or may not create a basis for a good car buy.

The two really really common stereotypes regarding women are; that they're generally more careful/restrained whilst using the car and they are generally more ignorant when it comes to general service/maintenance.
The first is borne out by the insurance as something of a fact, the second is up for debate
The maintenance issue is somewhat negated in a lot of cases by simply getting a yearly service and an mot add this to the careful driving and your n probably going to have a reasonably well treated car.

Now if you took the male stereotype of more aggressive driving and supposed higher maintenance awareness/involvement. Even with a yearly mot your more likely going to have a car that's suffered more abuse overall. as you have to be doing more than your average oil change and whatnot to counteract the impact of driving style

All other things being equal the gender has a good overall chance of influencing the wellbeing of the average car.

exclusions apply obv.

You should always let the engine warm up a bit before driving off, oil viscosity is lower when cold, so lower amounts of lubrication in the moving parts equals more wear on the components. just as your oil level should always be in the range on the dipstick when engine is cold/just warm. oil should be changed but that depends on certain factors.

Keeping your tyres at the right pressure also helps

Women drive more carefully. Its a fact... Remember all of those insurance companies that used to offer cheaper insurance for women drivers? They've had to stop now because its discriminatory to men, but it doesn't make it any less true that on the whole women drive more carefully.

It's not a fact. Socio economic factors mean that most cars on the motorway are driven by men and most cars in the supermarket car park are driven by women. The numbers of accidents between men and women is about the same, (adjusted for mileage, as men tend to cover far more miles) but women have less expensive accidents. A supermarket car park collision is going to be less serious than a motorway pile up. That's why insurance used to be lower for women. Until the EU stuck its oar in.

It's nice to say that women have less accidents, but the truth is they just have different accidents, that cost insurers far less money.

It isn't true in my case I crash into walls, fences, bollards a few times a week, every week!

You can't take average differences based on very large groups, and say that they will be true for an individual. That's not how it works. Insurers make assumptions based on the fact they are insuring large numbers of individuals, and that the outliers will balance each other out (the 20yo who die very young, or the 50yo who live a long time). It is not appropriate to take an average across a large population and say therefore it will hold true for any given individual.

True, but in the absence of any other info, it's all you have to go on. If you met 2 strangers, one aged 50 and one aged 20, and were asked to gamble £5000 of your own money on who would die first, you'd back the 50 y/o to die first. It's the more likely outcome.

If you are spending £5K on a car, and you have an option of buying one with a previous female owner, in the absence of any other info, it is likely to have lived an easier life, been used for local journeys, school run, supermarket run etc.