Another ‘ism’ gone wrong

The ECJ’s decision that it is unlawful for insurance companies to discriminate between men and women is surely an example of  the hazards of good intentions.   There may be many circumstances where it is relevant not to discriminate, but it cannot apply universally.

If men are more likely, statistically, to be involved in an accident, why shouldn’t their insurance premiums be higher than a similar policy for a woman?  Insurance is surely a matter of statistics.  This decision is like forcing a bookmaker to give the same odds for a three legged donkey as for a thoroughbred stallion.  (Not that I’m comparing women with donkeys or men with thoroughbred stallions – or vice versa) – nor am I condoning gambling.

Don’t give little Jimmy a doll for his birthday, don’t buy Lucy a train set (unless they specifically ask for one) and don’t make judgements that pretend everyone is the same – we’re not.