Jamie Chadwick - First competitive female driver in F1?
Discussion
Seems to be quite a range of drivers here, will be interesting to see the test times.
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
df76 said:
Seems to be quite a range of drivers here, will be interesting to see the test times.
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
Why are they holding a women only test?https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
freedman said:
df76 said:
Seems to be quite a range of drivers here, will be interesting to see the test times.
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
Why are they holding a women only test?https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
Seriously, how do they get so much exposure whilst being so utterly hopeless?
I can't imagine anyone would be falling over themselves to help a man with similar abilities.
freedman said:
df76 said:
Seems to be quite a range of drivers here, will be interesting to see the test times.
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
Why are they holding a women only test?https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
That would be the point.
df76 said:
Seems to be quite a range of drivers here, will be interesting to see the test times.
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
Well if they can’t find a couple of regular FE drivers from that lineup, which pretty much covers every young woman out there racing at the moment… https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/511254
freedman said:
Why are they holding a women only test?
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
Normal test: anyone allowedWhat’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
This test: women only
What a load of b
ks. Or not as the case may be. If they're good enough they'll be good enough up against any male driver, using a false barometer seems a waste of time.trackdemon said:
freedman said:
Why are they holding a women only test?
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
Normal test: anyone allowedWhat’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
This test: women only
What a load of b
ks. Or not as the case may be. If they're good enough they'll be good enough up against any male driver, using a false barometer seems a waste of time.MKnight702 said:
trackdemon said:
freedman said:
Why are they holding a women only test?
What’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
Normal test: anyone allowedWhat’s the point of including Calderon, and De Silvestro? They’re hardly the future
This test: women only
What a load of b
ks. Or not as the case may be. If they're good enough they'll be good enough up against any male driver, using a false barometer seems a waste of time.This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
freedman said:
TheDeuce said:
I suppose what you're fishing for is for someone to point out that there aren't many to choose from... so they've had to scrape the barrel to make up the numbers.
That would be the point.
I’m not fishing for anything, I’m asking a straightforward questionThat would be the point.
Calderon and De Silvestro are involved because at present they need female drivers in the spotlight, generating clicks and views, with the hope of encouraging stronger female interest in the sport for 'tomorrow', and therefore a larger talent pool which will hopefully produce some more competitive (with the male) female racers.
Is that a plan that's likely to work? Perhaps it's an overly optimistic plant that fails to account for the fact there are core reasons why women generally are unlikely to reach the same level in motorsport? Who knows - but the plan is to find out. Even if that means introducing segregation and putting on a bit of a pointless show sometimes.. Neither of which I agree with in principle really, but if I think about it as an experiment, I'm interested to see the outcome, either way,
trackdemon said:
Of course I don't. Neither do I object to football, tennis, swimming etc having separate womens disciplines, the key factor being a recognition that there are biological differences between men and women that would make it unfair to compete against each other - hence the furore about trans competitors in womens sport, but that's whole other can of worms.
This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
Even if there’s are no physical reasons why women can’t compete at the same level as men (and no one here really knows do they?), there are plenty of reasons why girls don’t have the same access to opportunities as boys at the formative stage which is so important. This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
So done form of positive discrimination doesn’t seem unreasonable.
Edited by ContactName on Saturday 2nd November 10:28
ContactName said:
trackdemon said:
Of course I don't. Neither do I object to football, tennis, swimming etc having separate womens disciplines, the key factor being a recognition that there are biological differences between men and women that would make it unfair to compete against each other - hence the furore about trans competitors in womens sport, but that's whole other can of worms.
This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
Even if there’s are no physical reasons why women can’t compete at the same level as men (and no one here really knows do they?), there are plenty of reasons why girls don’t have the same access to opportunities as boys at the formative stage which is so important. This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
So done form of positive discrimination doesn’t seem unreasonable.
So called 'positive discrimination' is still discrimination, ergo I don't agree...
trackdemon said:
ContactName said:
trackdemon said:
Of course I don't. Neither do I object to football, tennis, swimming etc having separate womens disciplines, the key factor being a recognition that there are biological differences between men and women that would make it unfair to compete against each other - hence the furore about trans competitors in womens sport, but that's whole other can of worms.
This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
Even if there’s are no physical reasons why women can’t compete at the same level as men (and no one here really knows do they?), there are plenty of reasons why girls don’t have the same access to opportunities as boys at the formative stage which is so important. This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
So done form of positive discrimination doesn’t seem unreasonable.
So called 'positive discrimination' is still discrimination, ergo I don't agree...
Lack of sponsorship and role models
Equipment being designed around the mad physique
Probably best to actually ask a woman but I’m sure there are many more.
You may not agree that it is right to counter discrimination with positive discrimination but it’s a generally accepted practice in many fields. The only real question is how much to apply and for how long.
ContactName said:
trackdemon said:
ContactName said:
trackdemon said:
Of course I don't. Neither do I object to football, tennis, swimming etc having separate womens disciplines, the key factor being a recognition that there are biological differences between men and women that would make it unfair to compete against each other - hence the furore about trans competitors in womens sport, but that's whole other can of worms.
This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
Even if there’s are no physical reasons why women can’t compete at the same level as men (and no one here really knows do they?), there are plenty of reasons why girls don’t have the same access to opportunities as boys at the formative stage which is so important. This test isn't for women to race in a separate women only discipline of FE, it's giving women a chance to test ahead of men who's track record would normally make them more deserving of that opportunity. That's what I object to. If we're going to accept that biologically women are highly unlikely to ever beat a man in motorsport (by which I mean regularly at the top level) then sure, go ahead and have a separate competition. But as it stands there's nothing stopping women getting to the top level of motorsport if they're fast enough on top of all the other obstacles that everyone trying to get into motorsport encounter - which, lets face it, is mainly £££
So done form of positive discrimination doesn’t seem unreasonable.
So called 'positive discrimination' is still discrimination, ergo I don't agree...
Lack of sponsorship and role models
Equipment being designed around the mad physique
Probably best to actually ask a woman but I’m sure there are many more.
You may not agree that it is right to counter discrimination with positive discrimination but it’s a generally accepted practice in many fields. The only real question is how much to apply and for how long.
ContactName said:
Do you seriously think
Motorsport is equal opportunities. Either based on gender or race?
Why is representation so uneven then?
Why is LH the only black F1 driver for example?
In fairness, people are sexist and racist, often passively so in terms of who they consider it worth giving certain opportunities too. People run motorsport so motorsport, and all other things run by people, will have those influences to a small degree.Motorsport is equal opportunities. Either based on gender or race?
Why is representation so uneven then?
Why is LH the only black F1 driver for example?
But I actually don't think motorsport is in itself prejudiced at all, it's one of the few sports which has always pursued the best people for the job regardless of who they are. If there was a TP that happened to be massively racist and sexist, they would still most likely give an Asian woman a drive if they believed they were the best driver for the job - because nothing including personal prejudices ever counts for more than actual performance. That's why Lewis was able to secure support in entering the sport from a very young age - because he was the best available. Had he also happened to have a vagina, I doubt Ron would have said "no, actually that's a step to far - get me the slightly slower kid". No chance.
Representation is uneven mostly because the sport has appealed far more to some demographics than others.
This is actually where I struggle with the idea that forced discrimination to 'fix' the imbalance is justified, because I don't think the imbalance that exists came from a bad place or was motivated by an attitude that needs fixing in some way.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff