Alberta man changes gender to save money in car insurance

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Locke

Its not necessarily 'discrimination' because all they're doing is correlating information. Its straight Data.

As much as people want to live in this Utopian world where everyone is equal the fact of the matter remains that certain factors beyond anyone's control exist and those factors alter likelihood and nature of risk.

Something can be derived for correlations and still be discriminatory.
In a more extreme example, what if someone like Trump proposed a curfew on black people because there's higher rates of crime by African Americans. Probably could be backed up statistically, but still obviously discriminatory.

Lets even imagine this was reversed and women paid higher insurance because they're higher risk. No way that would still be happening in 2018; this current policy is only allowed because it's men who are paying more.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Dan02

and on a unrelated note, isn't that pretty much the justification every low-key racist uses?

I dont appreciate that accusation.

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Something can be derived for correlations and still be discriminatory.
In a more extreme example, what if someone like Trump proposed a curfew on black people because there's higher rates of crime by African Americans. Probably could be backed up statistically, but still obviously discriminatory.

Lets even imagine this was reversed and women paid higher insurance because they're higher risk. No way that would still be happening in 2018; this current policy is only allowed because it's men who are paying more.

Thats fair and a very good example, but can the inverse not also be true? Can something derived from correlations also not be considered discrimination?

I'm thinking of this from a Health Insurance perspective, different demographics have inherently different risk factors, do we expect companies to just ignore them?

When you apply for health insurance you have to go through the whole song and dance to accurately reflect your risk factor and ergo your premiums.

[V]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I think the test might come if he ever has to make a claim. He might find himself denied and having to prove his legitimacy in court. That's probably where the fun would end. Pronouns on purpose.

Whatever you say, Ben Shapiro.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont appreciate that accusation.

There was no accusation just a similarity in the line of thinking.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Dan02

There was no accusation just a similarity in the line of thinking.

You know who likes to point out similarities in the line of thinking? Nazis.

Now I'm not saying you're a Nazi, I'm just saying there's a similarity.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Premiums should be based strictly off driving experience and history. Full stop.

From a business perspective, no. When a person just gets their drivers license the risk assessment has to be based on something, in this case young males on average cost the insurance company more.



The rest is a moral argument.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't doubt that the actual transgendered people would welcome the investigation. I just don't see it happening. And yeah, the scenario isn't important, but we're talking about car insurance. there are thousands of claims everyday, and I can't see insurers increasing their ratios and putting people through the grind for something they likely couldn't prove.

In this case, aside from the guy outright admitting his actions, how would you do it? Realistically, a guy who goes to the length of signing an affadavit and changing his sex on his drivers license has made a pretty solid case that he identifies as a woman?

I really can't imagine anything easier than proving David lives as a man. One picture of him dressed as a man ought to do the trick. Check his social media. Talk to his buddies. Insurance companies investigate all the time. They find out people aren't injured all the time. For $30 an hour they are most definitely going to try to get out of a million dollar claim. And figuring out what sex someone is couldn't really be much easier.



It may not be criminal fraud but an insurer can deny your claim based on what they consider a fraudulent application and then you get to sue them. You get to go in front of a judge and explain how you really live as a woman. I'm sure David thought that through though.

[V]

What the heck does that mean? Lives as a woman? Who the heck are you or anyone else to be arbiter of what’s woman enough? Doctor note and birth certificate says female, so there you go.

I think you’ve watched Chuck and Larry too many times. Shame on you.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by V

What the heck does that mean? Lives as a woman? Who the heck are you or anyone else to be arbiter of what’s woman enough? Doctor note and birth certificate says female, so there you go.

I think you’ve watched Chuck and Larry too many times. Shame on you.

Yeah sorry that's not the case at all. I know you're trying to be the hero here but it's better for people with legitimate identity issues if dumb schmucks like this get caught scamming the system. Sorry, but a note from a doctor obviously does not cut it. It's one part of a much bigger whole. Transgendered women shouldn't have to prove their identity beyond a reasonable doubt. But when it's patently obvious a scam has taken place, and the man who says he's a woman is actually a man, then it needs to stop.

[V]

So should we be putting all applications past you so that you have a chance to decide who’s woman enough to have an F on their birth certificate?

You call it a scam, I call it an inevitable step in the process.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by zamler

From a business perspective, no. When a person just gets their drivers license the risk assessment has to be based on something.

You're entirely correct, as I said earlier, risk should be analyzed based off of driving experience and claims history.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by V

So should we be putting all applications past you so that you have a chance to decide who’s woman enough to have an F on their birth certificate?

You call it a scam, I call it an inevitable step in the process.

Yeah but it is a scam. So is marrying a goat. So is changing in the women's locker room. Its not that hard to figure this out.

You can apply for insurance however you want but if your company sells insurance and you're liable for a million dollars....maybe checking David's Facebook page isn't such a big deal? You really need to face the consequences when the product you buy doesn't apply to you.

[bob-loblaw]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I thought this happens every time a man buys a Chevy Cruze

Or a Mazda Miata.... Or White VW convertible...

[btimbit]

Did he just tick the wrong box on the application form like on that one episode of King of the Hill

[Northendzone]

Perhaps he could start dressing vintage, like mad men, redo his apartment in retro and claim he is really 50.

[Wormius]

To really game the system, what he should do is get his gender reassigned as male and claim that his insurance policy should stay the same since his driving habits as a woman haven't changed.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I really can't imagine anything easier than proving David lives as a man. One picture of him dressed as a man ought to do the trick. Check his social media. Talk to his buddies. Insurance companies investigate all the time. They find out people aren't injured all the time. For $30 an hour they are most definitely going to try to get out of a million dollar claim. And figuring out what sex someone is couldn't really be much easier.

It may not be criminal fraud but an insurer can deny your claim based on what they consider a fraudulent application and then you get to sue them. You get to go in front of a judge and explain how you really live as a woman. I'm sure David thought that through though.

First, his name isn't "David", it's a pseudonym to protect his identity (presumably from people who think like you).

Second, we're told gender roles are social constructs, and our ideas of how men and women dress are as a result of society suggesting that men and women ought to dress differently. Those societal norms are now being challenged.

So accepting that, and getting back to what V said, who are you to make the determination of what constitutes male or female dress or behavior? What does living as a woman mean, a woman can live however she pleases. A biological female who identifies as a woman could have a garage full of old muscle cars she works on for fun, a better power tool collection than any guy in this board, hate watching The View, and name her favorite place to shop as Home Depot. Would you insist that she's clearly living as a man, and thus a fraud as a woman?

In case it wasn't clear, you don't get to decide how people live and whether or not they are who they say they are. And that is why this is not as cut-and-dried as "oh it's insurance fraud". The insurers themselves are using gender to determine insurance risk, risk that is actually based on biology, which sex you are. So if something is so easily changed or rejected, why are we paying more for insurance because of it?

If the insurers weren't idiots, "David" would never have gotten an insurance discount because his biology is what influences his risk, not whether or not he wears a dress to the pub.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

First, his name isn't "David", it's a pseudonym to protect his identity (presumably from people who think like you).

Second, we're told gender roles are social constructs, and our ideas of how men and women dress are as a result of society suggesting that men and women ought to dress differently. Those societal norms are now being challenged.

So accepting that, and getting back to what V said, who are you to make the determination of what constitutes male or female dress or behavior? What does living as a woman mean, a woman can live however she pleases. A biological female who identifies as a woman could have a garage full of old muscle cars she works on for fun, a better power tool collection than any guy in this board, hate watching The View, and name her favorite place to shop as Home Depot. Would you insist that she's clearly living as a man, and thus a fraud as a woman?

In case it wasn't clear, you don't get to decide how people live and whether or not they are who they say they are. And that is why this is not as cut-and-dried as "oh it's insurance fraud". The insurers themselves are using gender to determine insurance risk, risk that is actually based on biology, which sex you are. So if something is so easily changed or rejected, why are we paying more for insurance because of it?

If the insurers weren't idiots, "David" would never have gotten an insurance discount because his biology is what influences his risk, not whether or not he wears a dress to the pub.

I suspect that determination of whether or not this person's gender identification to his insurer was sincere and in good faith has nothing to do with his fashion choices and everything to do with how he identifies in other similar areas of his life (such as to his bank, to the Canadian government, to his employer, etc.)

[Red Potato Standing By]

So does he now have to technically use the girls bathroom seeming legally he is female?

[Deegee]

Males being in more accidents is too simplistic to charge higher rates for insurance.

Would you say it's 50/50 for males and females being behind a wheel? I know at least where I live I spent a lot of time on the QE2 and I notice far more male drivers than female drivers. Even when there is a male and female in the car, it is usually the male driving. I don't have any hard evidence to back that up, it's just what I notice.

So, I'd be more interested to understand the accidents per 20,000km driven for each sex as opposed to just accidents per licensed driver.

Doing some Google searching seems.to suggest that although males are in more vehicle crashes, they are also driving approximately 40% more than males. One study even suggested females are in more accidents when mileage is taken into the equation.

Of course, that's internet research so the legitimacy of some of the sites I was reading isn't exactly known.

Originally Posted by Ducay

With gender based anything going out the window these days, its only a matter of time until women can no longer compete (realistically) at sport. That'll be the day I long for, when the identity politics folk finally realizes its quest for equality is literally unquenchable. Men will simply dominate at every sport and it will be discriminatory to have a separate league or competition by gender.

It's not such a bad thing to recognize or celebrate our differences as males or females. It's possible to do this without being discriminatory.