Can a female legitimately compete in F1?
Discussion
Efbe said:
I am a little shocked of the things I am hearing tbh. I'm not sure if it's just you trying to push a point obstructively, or complete and utter unawareness of the world
I used to be a teacher, and have three kids of my own now, alongside being a children's football coach & referee, so maybe I do have a bit of a broader background in the area.
Quite simply, look down the brands/sections of toys on here:
http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Browse/ID72/33007361...
There are boys, girls, and more general toys.
The ones aimed at boys and girls specifically are bloody obvious.
Yes children may like playing with toys aimed at the other gender, but by 8 or 9 they will definitely know which toys they should be playing with. You ask a 10yo boy if he likes playing with barbies; he may say yes to you. Ask him at school with his friends and he will say no. By this age there is a complete understanding amongst kids of their 'proper' toys.
Maybe not nearly as much so as Ben10, Spiderman or TMNT, but unfortunately cars do fall under the boys bracket.
I think parents and others with charge or care of a child can make a bit of difference. Whilst manufacturers push their own agenda you don't have to follow. I used to be a teacher, and have three kids of my own now, alongside being a children's football coach & referee, so maybe I do have a bit of a broader background in the area.
Quite simply, look down the brands/sections of toys on here:
http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Browse/ID72/33007361...
There are boys, girls, and more general toys.
The ones aimed at boys and girls specifically are bloody obvious.
Yes children may like playing with toys aimed at the other gender, but by 8 or 9 they will definitely know which toys they should be playing with. You ask a 10yo boy if he likes playing with barbies; he may say yes to you. Ask him at school with his friends and he will say no. By this age there is a complete understanding amongst kids of their 'proper' toys.
Maybe not nearly as much so as Ben10, Spiderman or TMNT, but unfortunately cars do fall under the boys bracket.
In my experience the problem lies when they go to school and you, as a parent, lose control of their development to a great extent. It is there that they are first divided on gender grounds. All of a sudden they are confronted by the differences that were not apparent up until that age.
Whilst toys are aimed at a specific sex, you as a parent do not have to accept their interpretation. Pink and blue, that sort of thing. Certainly there is no need for toy assault rifles.
At a pre-school play group I take my grandkids to both sexes enjoy the Little Tike cars.
Boys play with dolls. They might play in a different way, certainly as they get older, but action man is a doll.
Compare the way kids are brought up now to my childhood environment. Girls didn't 'go out to play'. Never heard of then (nor now but for both I suppose). Boys, on the other hand, were expected to climb trees, kick balls and misbehave. At school the boys sat one side of the classroom and the girls the other. In some classes the girls sat at the front and the boys at the back. Almost what shocks the DM now.
It was seen as odd if a girl was in a group in my youth.
It is different nowadays. Part of the reason might be the pursuit of the nappied pound, and the differentiation is just a way of selling more stuff. I don't know. But you don't have to comply. Girls can be interested in dinosaurs and trains, and boys can be interested in cooking.
I think the debate over what is genes (or jeans) or environment could rage and rage. I think some children will find their true gender identity no matter what 'guidance' (or non-guidance) they are given. And I think that others will just confound all non-guidance and go with stereotypes anyway. To whit, it's all incomprehensible.
But I do abhor those who try to dictate the norm or, worse, denigrate the non-norm.
But I do abhor those who try to dictate the norm or, worse, denigrate the non-norm.
Derek Smith said:
I think parents and others with charge or care of a child can make a bit of difference. Whilst manufacturers push their own agenda you don't have to follow.
In my experience the problem lies when they go to school and you, as a parent, lose control of their development to a great extent. It is there that they are first divided on gender grounds. All of a sudden they are confronted by the differences that were not apparent up until that age.
Whilst toys are aimed at a specific sex, you as a parent do not have to accept their interpretation. Pink and blue, that sort of thing. Certainly there is no need for toy assault rifles.
At a pre-school play group I take my grandkids to both sexes enjoy the Little Tike cars.
Boys play with dolls. They might play in a different way, certainly as they get older, but action man is a doll.
Compare the way kids are brought up now to my childhood environment. Girls didn't 'go out to play'. Never heard of then (nor now but for both I suppose). Boys, on the other hand, were expected to climb trees, kick balls and misbehave. At school the boys sat one side of the classroom and the girls the other. In some classes the girls sat at the front and the boys at the back. Almost what shocks the DM now.
It was seen as odd if a girl was in a group in my youth.
It is different nowadays. Part of the reason might be the pursuit of the nappied pound, and the differentiation is just a way of selling more stuff. I don't know. But you don't have to comply. Girls can be interested in dinosaurs and trains, and boys can be interested in cooking.
whilst what you say may be true; it does miss my point. Even if my point has lng been forgotten.In my experience the problem lies when they go to school and you, as a parent, lose control of their development to a great extent. It is there that they are first divided on gender grounds. All of a sudden they are confronted by the differences that were not apparent up until that age.
Whilst toys are aimed at a specific sex, you as a parent do not have to accept their interpretation. Pink and blue, that sort of thing. Certainly there is no need for toy assault rifles.
At a pre-school play group I take my grandkids to both sexes enjoy the Little Tike cars.
Boys play with dolls. They might play in a different way, certainly as they get older, but action man is a doll.
Compare the way kids are brought up now to my childhood environment. Girls didn't 'go out to play'. Never heard of then (nor now but for both I suppose). Boys, on the other hand, were expected to climb trees, kick balls and misbehave. At school the boys sat one side of the classroom and the girls the other. In some classes the girls sat at the front and the boys at the back. Almost what shocks the DM now.
It was seen as odd if a girl was in a group in my youth.
It is different nowadays. Part of the reason might be the pursuit of the nappied pound, and the differentiation is just a way of selling more stuff. I don't know. But you don't have to comply. Girls can be interested in dinosaurs and trains, and boys can be interested in cooking.
I was initially arguing that to find a great driver you need a large base of students from which something special can rise.
True you can get it from just one lucky person, but it is very unlikely.
The more girls you have getting into cars, the larger the base from which a champion can rise. And so even if a few girls can grow up into the motorsport world, it will likely not be enough. The female Lewis Hamilton or Ayrton Senna is out there, she was just never put behind the wheel.
Efbe said:
The more girls you have getting into cars, the larger the base from which a champion can rise. And so even if a few girls can grow up into the motorsport world, it will likely not be enough. The female Lewis Hamilton or Ayrton Senna is out there, she was just never put behind the wheel.
I agree with you. And in an ideal world that could happen (and I also realise that your comment was not made from an ideal world)JonRB said:
Efbe said:
The more girls you have getting into cars, the larger the base from which a champion can rise. And so even if a few girls can grow up into the motorsport world, it will likely not be enough. The female Lewis Hamilton or Ayrton Senna is out there, she was just never put behind the wheel.
I agree with you. And in an ideal world that could happen (and I also realise that your comment was not made from an ideal world)When are Sauber putting Simona de Silvestro in a 2014 car?
BritishRacinGrin said:
JonRB said:
Efbe said:
The more girls you have getting into cars, the larger the base from which a champion can rise. And so even if a few girls can grow up into the motorsport world, it will likely not be enough. The female Lewis Hamilton or Ayrton Senna is out there, she was just never put behind the wheel.
I agree with you. And in an ideal world that could happen (and I also realise that your comment was not made from an ideal world)When are Sauber putting Simona de Silvestro in a 2014 car?
go to your typical club meeting, count the women, bugger all, try GT, still bugger all, GP3,GP2, none.
and people as surprised we have none in F1?
if Ms. Wolff was any good, why is she not doing a season in GP2?
That's obviously quite true and I'm not suggesting Wolff is the antidote, she's too inexperienced and too old to be emabarking on a high-profile formula racing career.
However if Williams can extract some value from her testing the car, gain a load of positive press and debut the first female F1 driver since 1976 in the process, then why not? It can only serve to raise the profile of women in motorsport.
Dare I say it- Times have changed but there's still a lot of tweed in British motorsport. Attitudes are much slower to change.
However if Williams can extract some value from her testing the car, gain a load of positive press and debut the first female F1 driver since 1976 in the process, then why not? It can only serve to raise the profile of women in motorsport.
Dare I say it- Times have changed but there's still a lot of tweed in British motorsport. Attitudes are much slower to change.
in a dominant car being the first driver sure, if your car is couple of seconds quicker than others and your colleague isn't allowed to overtake you it's doable for any physically fit woman with relatively good reflexes and enough practice
I doubt that men could be faster more than one second a lap in todays hybrid-lets-limit-the-F1-engine-to-one-cylinder-because-its-dangerous-otherwise silly vehicles.
I doubt that men could be faster more than one second a lap in todays hybrid-lets-limit-the-F1-engine-to-one-cylinder-because-its-dangerous-otherwise silly vehicles.
Susie Wolff shouldn't as she isn't fast enough, having never won a race in a car of any sort. One lap time close to another driver when nobody knows respective setups is not conclusive of anything.
In my opinion she is test driver mostly due to the fact her husband is a Williams director, not because she is genuinely the best person for the job. You would expect she would have had some sort of offer for a drive if this wasn't the case.
When somebody comes along who is fast enough then they should of course get the chance.
In my opinion she is test driver mostly due to the fact her husband is a Williams director, not because she is genuinely the best person for the job. You would expect she would have had some sort of offer for a drive if this wasn't the case.
When somebody comes along who is fast enough then they should of course get the chance.
yzrh said:
One lap time close to another driver when nobody knows respective setups is not conclusive of anything.
The Wolff thing is really beside the point. But her times last year were reasonable, too. If I'd got out of the simulator and got that close to someone who has been in the race car all season, I'd be well chuffed.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff