Lurker > adjl

Moonjay posted...

People up in here talking like adjusting your behavior for a human being that you love is an alien concept and like men have never disapproved of a purchase made by a woman.

Oh, it's perfectly reasonable to adjust behaviour for an SO, provided the requested adjustment is reasonable. Vetoing a TV that was going in a shared living room? Perfectly reasonable. Vetoing a larger TV that would cost more? Perfectly reasonable. Vetoing a larger TV that cost the same amount as the intended purchase and would be going in a space she never uses? Quite a bit less reasonable. There's a difference between compromising and catering to arbitrary whims, and this definitely sounds like the latter. At least, it did until this post:

Far-Queue posted...

Maybe I caved too easy, but honestly I don't care to have a TV much bigger than 50"-55", I only got the 58" because it was all they had in stock and it was the same price as the 55"

In that case, I guess it worked out and she was mostly just reminding you of what you really wanted. With that information, I don't really see a problem anymore, so meh.

DirtBasedSoap posted...

jfc women. Literally 3 inches

As mentioned above, it's actually 8" more than what she wanted, and even if it was 3 inches, it would be an 11% increase in area. That's fairly significant.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Far-Queue posted...

BTW, this TV is in my office/gaming room. She never uses this room, let alone the TV, which is why I didn't think it'd be such a big deal.

I'd say you caved too easily, then. If she doesn't use the room, it's not really her business how you make it look. It'd be one thing if you were spending too much money on a giant TV, but she got you to spend more money on a lesser product.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Sahuagin posted...

adjl posted...

F: An outdated theory for the function of giraffes' long necks. Giraffes typically don't reach for high leaves the way that theory would suggest; it's more likely that the necks evolved as a form of runaway sexual selection.

the picture demonstrates B, whether that is or isn't why real giraffes have long necks, or even whether darwin's theory is correct or not.

It demonstrates a short giraffe dying. The implication would be that it died because it couldn't reach the leaves, but where that's not consistent with reality, that is not actually the case. Therefore, it tries to depict Darwin's theory, but fails in doing so because it doesn't reflect what actually happens.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

jsb0714 posted...

Jen0125 posted...

I was supposed to leave Sunday but my insurance decided I'm cured Friday so I'm leaving then instead

This seems concerning.

While it's true that health doesn't really follow normal business hours, and that's a pretty sketchy decision, I doubt the extra two days would change all that much.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Join some kind of club or organization that promotes talking to people, and work on feeling comfortable when they talk to you. You'll make friends eventually, some of whom will be girls, and some of whom will be interested in more than that.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

"Or, to save on postage..."
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Depends on the gamepad and the DVD player. The player in particular should have a list of compatible gamepads somewhere.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

F: An outdated theory for the function of giraffes' long necks. Giraffes typically don't reach for high leaves the way that theory would suggest; it's more likely that the necks evolved as a form of runaway sexual selection.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Dr_Kain posted...

WastelandCowboy posted...

None of them - I haven't bought a digital game in the past year

No, that just says you haven't bought any in a year, not that they are worthless wastes of money.

In other words, it answers the question perfectly, it just doesn't give you the opportunity to anonymously and passively voice an opinion that's not actually relevant to the question that was asked. Sounds to me like it's working as intended. Fortunately, the site also includes several public fora in which you can express such opinions with the specific nuances you desire.

Dr_Kain posted...

It's real. It actually exists. They can't remove content from the game because they offended someone, a license expired, or something. They can't make you buy it again to play it. It is yours until you say otherwise.

I take it you haven't actually read any of the license agreements that come with your physical games, because none of those things you said are actually true. You own the disc. You don't own the contents of it.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

green dragon posted...

adjl posted...

It was actually 8" more than she'd originally planned, which is a very substantial difference

Bro, I already said that!

You hadn't when I started typing, and I had to remind myself how to do trigonometry and algebra.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

Sounds more misandrist than misogynist.

It's very much both.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

And, broadly speaking, forcing changes to tradition is very identity politics.

I'd say it's usually more a matter of recognizing that said tradition is pointlessly harmful, and not really anything inherently related to politics at all. Politics only comes into the mix when some kind of political impetus is needed to effect the change.

Granted, I've seen you criticize gay marriage for no other reason than that it deviates from tradition, so I guess I should expect some pretty questionable statements when it comes to changing tradition.

Zeus posted...

The difference in car insurance *still* applies over a lifetime, even if the gender gap is less pronounced. Likewise, there are points in men's and women's lives when the health care gap is less pronounced.

"Less pronounced" meaning "no longer significant."

Zeus posted...

Women might incur more expense than normal on car insurance, but it evens out the fact that men incur more expense on health insurance to balance out women.

You're gonna need some actual numbers to make a claim like that. "1 act of insurance discrimination=1 other act of insurance discrimination" is not remotely valid math. I also think you really need to take a step back and ask why women are more likely to use health care, because I can tell you that there's one particularly significant set of services that doesn't only benefit women.

Zeus posted...

-Kind of an apples-to-oranges argument. Somebody who's never had health insurance before DOESN'T have a medical history any more than somebody who hasn't had car insurance has a record. They just automatically are able to go on their parents' plan.

Why yes, it is an apples to oranges comparison. That was precisely my point. Everyone that's ever been to a doctor has a medical history, regardless of whether they have their own health insurance or piggyback on their parents'. As such, you can't really compare medical insurance to car insurance, where you won't have a driving record until after you first start paying insurance.

Zeus posted...

-Not having health insurance presents the same financial issues as not having car insurance might. Rather than "kill you" (because hospitals are forced to treat patients in need of lifesaving care), it just means a far higher bill that can result in the loss of property -- same as would happen if you kill a pedestrian.

If we just look at the worst financial extremes, sure. That completely ignores the chronic problems associated with not having health insurance, namely letting yourself get sick enough to need life-saving care because you can't afford anything doctors aren't legally forced to provide. Not to mention the dramatically higher risk of death associated with being life-threateningly ill, though that should be obvious enough to not need specific mention.

Zeus posted...

Otherwise, access to a car is a necessity in many regions with poor public transit so, if you're mandating insurance coverage, there should be affordable options.

I agree. Car ownership is far too vital across all income levels for car ownership to not be affordable, which means something needs to change. Scaling insurance rates to one's income might be a start, at least for people who haven't proven to be particularly risky drivers. Or just inventing teleportation and giving it to everyone for free. That'd be fun.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Did you at least get it in position first, to see if she really did mind the size of it?

LinkPizza posted...

Though I wouldn't think 3"(for a tv) would be such a big difference.

It was actually 8" more than she'd originally planned, which is a very substantial difference (from 1068 sq. inches to 1437, a 35% increase in area). 55" was already a concession on her part, and I guess 58" was just too far.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I can get behind the fundamental concept of respecting other cultures and making an effort to understand them before adopting parts of them, since that's just a decent thing to do. The usual application of the term, however (read: white people doing anything white people didn't invent), is just obnoxious tumblr slacktivism at best.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

adjl posted...

That was not calling him mentally ill for the purpose of ridiculing him. That was saying that he's seems to be mentally ill, and that society's insistence on being amused by his ranting instead of sympathetic to his condition is insulting and disrespectful.

Saying somebody has a mental illness without any proof is ridiculing them.

Only if you consider mental illness to be inherently insulting.

Zeus posted...

Randomly accusing people of being mentally ill only has an insulting connotation.

Only because you choose to see it that way. Breaking the stigma around mental illness involves changing that connotation for yourself.

Zeus posted...

It's very clearly accusing him of being mentally ill specifically for the purposes of mocking him and diminishing the merits of what he has to say.

Let's look at an analogous situation: Imagine a video of Terry Fox running was making its rounds of the Internet because people thought his gait was funny-looking. In response to that, somebody said the following:

Can we stop using physically disabled people for our entertainment?

Would that person be "clearly accusing him of being physically disabled specifically for the purposes of mocking him"? Of course not. That would be a completely absurd thing to say.

Regardless of whether or not he's got a formal mental disorder, Kanye's current presence in the media is absolutely a matter of "Oh Kanye, you're so crazy," and people laughing at that and mocking him. Pointing that out is not insulting Kanye by insinuating that he's mentally ill (which shouldn't be considered an insult in the first place), it's wishing that everyone would just let him suffer his breakdown in peace.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Mario_VS_DK posted...

BlackScythe0 posted...

I wish they would ban all microtransactions, not merely loot boxes. Microtransactions push bad game design.

Not exactly. Though they are few and between, some games do microtransactions well.

Warframe for example is pretty good about it. You can pretty easily earn just about everything in the game simply by playing. You can sell your rare items to other players for currency purchased with real money which is mainly used for trading with other players or cosmetics.

With EVE Online, most of the microtransactions are premium game time which you can sell to other players for money that they earned in game. The rest of the few microtransactions are cosmetics.

I've also started playing Dungeon Fighter Online recently, and they don't even let you spend real money on that game until you reach a certain point that I'm still not even at 20 hours into it. And even then, most of them are premium game time or cosmetics again.

There are games that do microtransactions well, but the model as a whole still encourages game design that emphasizes grinding and/or other artificial lengthening practices (like wait timers). The developers that do it well should be lauded for choosing to rise above that, since it's awfully tempting to rely on tricky psychological manipulation rather than on simply making a good product that people want to support.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Anisoptera posted...

what is a person supposed to do when they seek redemption or forgiveness?

Wait for the person they've wronged to forgive them while trying to be the best person they can be and fix the wrong that was done. Good deeds don't necessarily cancel out bad ones, so you don't become entitled to forgiveness simply because you did something good, but they certainly help make the person less likely to hate you.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Unbridled9 posted...

Here's a serious question.

Is it wrong to have an organization designed to cater only to a specific group? Is it wrong to have an all boys or all girls group? An all gay or all trans or all straight group?

Depends on the organization's function. If it's something that's only going to be beneficial for a specific group? There isn't much point in letting other people in. If it's something a broader population can enjoy taking advantage of, though, then discriminating is pointless and arbitrary, and that's not really a good thing.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

zebatov posted...

The breaker is meant to trip so everything else doesn't break.

Presumably he meant everything else in his computer, not on the house circuit.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LittleRoyal posted...

You chose to completely ignore everything else I said so to reiterate: girls perform better in classrooms that dont included males

Yes, I addressed two points and opted to say nothing about the third, since I didn't feel like I had much to contribute to that particular discussion (at least, not at the level I feel like committing to it). Is this a problem?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Smarkil posted...

But how are you gonna brag about fucking twins?

I guess he's going for a bit of double penetration now.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

That's a lot of ports.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

JanwayDaahl posted...

I mean if literally all you do on the move is play video games, then it might be a good option. But for people with priorities in life, hobbies, etc. it's not really worth it.

Apparently gaming isn't a hobby.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

Blightzkrieg posted...

Is America seriously so fucking backwards that shit which works in every other country on Earth crashes and burns in the US of A

Boy Scouts of America exist in other countries?

No, but Scouts is an international organization with branches in many other countries, many of which dropped the segregation decades ago.

pionear posted...

Do you think boys/males should be allowed to join the 'Girl Scouts' and sell them tasty cookies?

I don't see why not, but because of societal attitudes toward masculinity, those boys will probably end up being mercilessly mocked for doing so. Which is dumb.

That does remind me that I need to get on trying to put together a recipe for knockoffs of the mint ones. I'm figuring that a chocolate sugar cookie, topped with a peppermint patty, then dipped or drizzled with a mix of chocolate and mint extract should do the job, but I haven't actually put that plan into action yet.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LittleRoyal posted...

And as a women, with a brother, who was raised to be shy and quiet and polite, and to value those things (irl, I still follow them and am hurt when people see me as headstrong or outspoken; as a kid Id get in trouble for it)

(Obviously my brother was encouraged more to be a fighter, as many men are from young ages. Gender roles happen and exist)

And that's sexist.

LittleRoyal posted...

Now mix that with Girl Scouts having many female role models, thats complete good! Boy scours has NONE of those things for young women

Every level of Scouts for me had at least one female leader. That's what happens when the organization isn't gender-segregated.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Well, troll is a word that gets thrown around a lot to describe people you disagree with or don't like.

I see far, far more instances of obvious trolls using the "you just think that anyone that disagrees is a troll" "defence" than I do of people mislabeling others as trolls instead of arguing with them properly.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I did nazi that coming.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Archgoat posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Red flag is y'all haven't even tried living together and are getting married

But also yeah red flag. Two months is a long fucking time. I know some couples spend a little time apart before weddings, but that's like, what, a week? Two weeks, tops?

Cohabitation actually has a higher rate of divorce.

I have a hard time believing that. I guess maybe that could be that people who live together before marriage are not as religious so are more willing to divorce.

It it counterintuitive, but as far as I know, it is what the stats say. I haven't looked at the stats in detail, though, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if the actual stat is that they get divorced sooner, which makes sense if we assume that every relationship that ends in divorce was only ever going to last that long (a bit of a deterministic view, but I think it's somewhat appropriate here).

It may also be that living together means there's less practical incentive to encourage marriage (since you already get to enjoy spending all that (sexy)time together). That means a greater percentage of cohabiting couples that get married do so more because they think it will save a stagnating relationship than because they really want to. That's not likely to end well.

It's also only relatively recently that cohabiting before marriage has come into vogue, so the average stats there are going to have a hard time competing with all the happy 60+ year marriages from an era before it became standard practice. Even more so where, before it became more acceptable (and even now), cohabiting couples would frequently face outside pressure to get married, whether it's what they wanted or not.

There are a lot of possible explanations, really.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I've been surprised by how much I'm using its portability. It's not as comfortably portable as the 3DS was, but it fits well enough into my coat pocket or backpack that I can easily bring it anywhere that I'm expecting to be for a while. In particular, it's been really good for bringing to my girlfriend's place.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

The "Scouts" aren't dead. The Boyscouts are dead. Because they aren't exclusive to boys anymore.

Am I saying things that are difficult to understand or something?

They're pretty easy to understand, they've just so utterly devoid of semantic value that I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and offering you a chance to add some meaning by elaborating.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

dragon504 posted...

Buy it on sale to play later, but don't get around to it. It's not like you'll never play it, just haven't had the time for it.

Pretty much. That's the theory, anyway.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

If I was paying as much as women, I wouldn't care.

But since I'm paying MORE, simply because of my genitalia....I care very much. Because I have a huge problem with that. And so should you. So should any man. So should any reasonable human being that believes in true equality between the sexes.

The whole point of the higher rates is to reflect an inequality between the sexes, though. Young men are more likely to get into accidents than young women. That's just the statistical reality of the matter. Ergo, they get charged more for car insurance, at least until they amass a driving record that provides insurance adjusters with more significant data (at which point you stop paying more because of your junk).

Greenfox111 posted...

uh...no?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cleave

Prior to the official acceptance of the widespread, egregious misuse of "literally," "cleave" was the only word in the English language that is it's own antonym. Now there are two.

GreenKnight127 posted...

And yet.....the boyscouts are now dead

How exactly does this mean Scouts are now dead?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

As far as I know, Kanye hasn't made a public admission to being diagnosed with a mental illness so presuming that he has one to ridicule what he's saying in the video is pretty insulting...

But that's the opposite of what was said in the original quote:
Andromicus posted...

Can we stop using mental ill people for our entertainment?

That was not calling him mentally ill for the purpose of ridiculing him. That was saying that he's seems to be mentally ill, and that society's insistence on being amused by his ranting instead of sympathetic to his condition is insulting and disrespectful.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

What's wrong with everyone paying more across the board?

"Everyone" including established good drivers.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

This definitely needed two topics.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

If Kanye West were a question, he'd be Kanye Request.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

adjl posted...

"Cleave" and "split" are synonyms of each other. Does that mean "Cleave" can't also mean entirely the opposite of "split?"

You split something when you cleave it.

And then you can use some glue to cleave the split pieces back together.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

That's sex, not gender. I won't argue the two genders thing because that is wholly your opinion, but scientifically speaking, sex is determined by the bit between your legs and gender is the role you best associate with. That's irrefutable within the fields of biology/anatomy and sociology respectively.

No it isn't. Sex and gender are synonyms of each other.

"Cleave" and "split" are synonyms of each other. Does that mean "cleave" can't also mean entirely the opposite of "split?"

A pair of words being synonymous does not mean that all of both words' definitions are the same. For that matter, it doesn't even necessarily mean that one definition is the same. Just similar enough that they can be employed in similar contexts.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

If Kanye West were the star of a video game, it'd be called Kanye Quest.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GanglyKhan posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

IronBornCorps posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

IronBornCorps posted...

Scouts has been very Christian in the past. I'm curious how that will play out in the future. I'm happy to hear gender integration for all genders.

all two of them

I said all, not both.

same thing....

unless you include the minuscule percentage of people who are hermaphrodites as a third. then there are three

That's sex, not gender. I won't argue the two genders thing because that is wholly your opinion, but scientifically speaking, sex is determined by the bit between your legs and gender is the role you best associate with. That's irrefutable within the fields of biology/anatomy and sociology respectively.

Biology identifies five sexes for humans, actually. Male/female, male/female pseudohermaphrodites (having only one set of gonads, but presenting ambiguously or in opposition to that set, such as in androgen insensitivity syndrome), and true hermaphrodites (both sets of gonads). Obviously, the latter three are much rarer than the first two, but they're still counted.

LittleRoyal posted...

Girl Scouts do kore female oriented stuff

Boy Scouts are more boy roles

Sooo girls shouldnt do Boy Scouts
Bleh

Boy roles like... camping? Camping's not exactly a gendered activity, and that's all I really remember Scouts offering me that I couldn't get elsewhere (in a tidy, organized package, that is, since obviously I could have gone camping whenever).
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

adjl posted...

Zeus posted...

Can you stop using mental illness as an insult?

Who used it as an insult?

Well he was obviously using it as an insult to Kanye

Or an observation. The presumption that it's an insult is in fact using it as an insult yourself.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Yellow posted...

helIy posted...

i don't use shift for a ding dang thing buddy

it might as well not even exist on my keyboards

iT IS SO HOT OUT

Caught red handed.

He had to do that to get around topic title rules. He didn't necessarily have to use shift.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

We don't have the manpower, time, or money to run a detailed diagnostic on each insurance holder?

Um, completely removing the driver's gender from the equation would be, like, the easiest thing in the world to do.

It would, but then everyone pays more across the board. You're asking to have your more careful personality taken into account. That's highly impractical for a new driver, and happens anyway as you spend more time driving and have a more concrete, personalized basis for determining your risk level.

Zeus posted...

Which again comes back to my earlier observation -- health insurance companies statistically determined that women consume more services than men and, as such, want to charge them more. However, that's illegal on the basis of discrimination. Why shouldn't auto insurance discrimination against males receive that same treatment?

A number of reasons:

-That difference applies across an entire lifetime, whereas the gender-based difference in car insurance evens out as one accumulates a driving record
-People who are applying for health insurance have medical histories already, providing more salient variables that insurance companies can consider. New drivers don't yet have driving records to consider
-Not having health insurance kills people. Not having car insurance makes people take the bus.

Again, I wouldn't be opposed to giving car insurance the same treatment, but it's understandable that it hasn't happened.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

So basically you think charging based on a controllable factor like the kind of vehicle you buy and whether you're getting it used or new is no less discriminatory than basing it on innate human characteristics like gender and race? >_>

My comment could have stood to be more nuanced, since I was specifically talking about cases where the model of the car influences rates beyond just what the car is worth, but the underlying point is that it's just as arbitrary as discriminating on the basis of sex. The key difference, of course, is that it's significantly easier to buy a different model of car than it is to change your sex, so they aren't necessarily comparable in the severity of the issue, but it's nonetheless a matter of insurance discriminating on something that has no bearing on your actual driving ability.

Incidentally, I would be all in favour of making it illegal for insurance to discriminate on the basis of sex. I just understand why they do it. Young drivers are a major cash sink for them, and because they have no driving history to draw on, they use anything else they can find that seems to be correlated with a higher accident rate to justify increasing rates. Sex is included in that.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GanglyKhan posted...

No reason why boys can't learn to stitch and be artistic and there's no reason why girls can't do woodwork and shoot a rifle.

It makes a whole lot more sense to let the girls learn those things from the ones currently teaching the boys (and vice versa) than to get new teachers for both groups, though.

GanglyKhan posted...

Why even have clubs if you're not going to be exclusive?

You can be exclusive, just not on the basis of things that have nothing to do with club activities. That's just silly.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

Obviously, the insurance premiums should differ for such dramatically different valued vehicles.

And what about equally-valued vehicles that have different premiums? Because that also happens, based on how likely said models are to be involved in an accident.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

Can you stop using mental illness as an insult?

Who used it as an insult?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

The only thing that should impact the difference in the premium is what type of vehicle they drive

That's no less discriminatory.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

And, more broadly, just calling it "Scouts" is going to be stupid.

The overarching organization is just "Scouts Canada" up here. Hasn't killed anyone yet.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenKnight127 posted...

I was a responsible, calm, collected, and intelligent 16 year old. Why did I have to pay higher insurance premiums than the stupid, careless, irresponsible 16 year old girls who loved to speed in their little Dodge Neons to school?

Sexist.

Same reason people with hotmail accounts have to pay more than people with gmail accounts. Insurance companies just go by statistics. Presumably, the girls that spent the next few years continuing to drive irresponsibly now pay more than you, because they likely had more accidents.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.