Psychologically, women score higher than men on emotional and verbal intelligence, and on the personality trait of neuroticism. Evolutionary theory suggests our early female ancestors had to develop an acute sense of danger for anything that threatened them and their young if their cave was undefended while men were out hunting. That ‘early warning system’ instinct is still relevant today, and women drivers tend to be more sensitive to negative stimuli, so get angry and frustrated quicker.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Tempting Fate, Hyundai Releases Study Showing Women Are Angrier Drivers
Duck. And. Cover.
In these politically correct times, where microaggressions and mansplaining — perhaps even manspreading — can ruin a career faster than you can say “culturally appropriated Halloween costume,” Hyundai has done the unthinkable. The automaker conducted a study to find out which gender fares better when it comes to anger behind the wheel, and the fairer sex lost.
Divisive? Perhaps, but the study also reveals the many things that unite us all.
Hyundai Motor UK commissioned Patrick Fagan, a behavioral psychologist from Goldsmiths University London, to test the responses of 1,000 British drivers to a number of driving scenarios.
The results? On average, women are 12 percent angrier behind the wheel. When dealing with a backseat driver, the female test subjects proved 14 percent angrier than men, and 13 percent angrier when dealing with motorists who fail to use their turn signal. Hey, maybe it’s just Brits.
The study blames deep-seated anthropological issues, which may or may not be offensive. According to Hyundai, “Researchers found driving sparked ancient ‘defence’ instincts from when humans were hunter-gatherers.”
“These evolutionary traits kicked in during the test when women were either undertaken, shouted or beeped at,” the automaker claims.
While no one wants to have their gender impugned, even when it comes to driving, can an offended person argue with science? (Our money’s on “yes.”)
According to Fagan:
Road rage, of course, affects drivers of all genders. Every crowded freeway features at least one motorist, man or woman, taking his or her hands off the wheel in frustration, uttering something along the lines of, “Why would you do that? What the HELL is wrong with you? God!”
The study went beyond the differences between the genders, exploring issues that unite all of humankind. According to test subjects, personal freedom is still the main appeal of driving (51 percent), while mobility comes in at just 19 percent.
For men, sitting behind the wheel makes it more likely that they’ll pour out their soul, with 29 percent saying they find making conversation easier while driving. What makes all drivers happy? The open road, according to 84 percent of the participants. Another 78 percent specified “the countryside.” The top in-car activity that makes British drivers happy is singing, perhaps to Adele, or maybe some god-awful pop act from the 90s.
Speaking of music, the study also found that eight out of 10 drivers continuously play tunes while behind the wheel. The top tracks for driving enjoyment? Meatloaf’s Bat Out of Hell and Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody.
Hyundai claims it developed an industry-first Driving Emotion Test (DET) for use on its human guinea pigs, employing facial coding technology, eye tracking analysis, galvanic skin response and a heartrate monitor.
A March 2016 email published Monday by the organization Wikileaks reveals that George Soros, in anticipation of a meeting with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, requested Podesta read a memo accusing President Barack Obama of emboldening radical Islam in Malaysia in order to get the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) passed.
Podesta received an email in March 2016 from Soros spokesperson Michael Vachon. “I have attached a memo on TPP and Malaysia, as it may come up when you see George and Alex [Soros, George’s son],” he writes. “In general I think George is more interested in talking about policy than the campaign per se, though I can’t imagine you won’t spend some time on politics.”
Podesta later forwards the attached memo in question to another Clinton campaign official. Subsequent emails seem to indicate Podesta met George and Alex Soros for dinner on March 15 of this year.
The attached memo, titled “The TPP and Malaysia’s Corruption Crisis,” argues that President Obama has wrongfully chosen to support the government of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, accused of a variety of outrageous abuses of power and responsible for the dynamic growth of radical Islam in the southeast Asian nation.
The memo appears to have been authored by John Pang, a board member at Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Pang writes that Najib is “a poster boy for the 21st century kleptocracy” who has used “a racial supremacist ideology that is collapsing under the weight of corruption” to perpetuate himself in power. Najib, he argues, has created “a Malay-Islamic state in which Sunni Islam’s supremacy is indivisible from the political and legal supremacy of the Malay race.” The result is a country in which “1 in 10 Muslims there had favorable views of ISIS and that a 53% majority were in favor of implementing Hudud, the Islamic penal code.”
Pang writes that, specifically, Malaysia under Najib has enacted laws prohibiting non-Muslims from using the word “Allah,” banned Bibles in the Malay language, and seen thousands of its citizens leave Malaysia to join the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. At home, Najib has “raised street demonstrations threatening violence against the nation’s Chinese and Christian minorities and fanned anti-Semitism,” Pang writes.
The more prominent allegations of corruption against Najib, the memo argues, the more he has embraced radical Islam.
Malaysia is a key player in the passage of TPP, however, which is nominally a measure to attempt to court China’s major trading partners to do more business with the United States.
“The Obama administration has made heavy and often personal bets on the leadership of Prime Minister Najib Razak as a partner in the region in the ‘pivot to Asia’ and the struggle against Islamic radicalism,” the memo argues. “These priorities have been undercut by being subsumed under the administration’s aggressive pursuit of the TPP.”
Since Najib assumed power, Malaysia has been home to some of the most outrageous violations of human rights in the name of Islam in the world. Among them are the arrest of a rapper for using the word “Allah” in a rap song, the arrest of a teenage girl for hugging a pop singer in public, protests against another teenage girl for hugging a dog (dogs are considered “unclean” in Islam), the banning of the phrase “hot dog” as it confused Muslims into thinking they were eating dog meat, widespread protests against Cadbury chocolate eggs, and the arrests of couples celebrating St. Valentine’s Day.
Malaysia has been refused FIFA soccer hosting duties over refusing to let Israeli nationals into the country, and its government has admitted to monitoring liberal Muslim “deviants” as a national security threat.
The first successful Islamic State attack in Malaysia occurred in July 2016, and targeted a Cuban nightclub.
October 23, 2016 | 9:53pm
New Yorkers enjoying Brooklyn’s Prospect Park late one Friday afternoon this month got a surprise: an NYPD helicopter landing in the middle of a field.
No, they weren’t responding to a terrorist attack or a scary clown. It was just our fearless mayor — hopping the chop because he was late for a Queens event.
De Blasio’s Operation On Time matters beyond being just another flub. It reminds us of lots of things wrong with Hizzoner, from failing to safeguard New Yorkers’ quality of life to fiscal profligacy.
First, there’s the obvious: Helicopter travel isn’t progressive. Unless you travel by coal-fired space shuttle, it’s hard to think of a way of getting around that’s worse for the air.
These aren’t global-warming emissions we’re talking about here, although there’s that. Helicopters spew regular old nitrous oxide and other toxins, the stuff that gives kids asthma. When you walk by the heliport on Manhattan’s West Side, you walk fast — because it smells bad and is deafeningly loud.
Sure, Mike Bloomberg and other mayors used helicopters. But one doesn’t recall them landing in a public park.
No mayor should be using the park as a heliport any more than he should race his SUV motorcade across Central Park’s Sheep’s Meadow to cut travel time.
De Blasio’s private need — to avoid the embarrassment of yet another tardy appearance — outweighed the public right of Brooklyn’s kids to use their park without breathing in toxic fumes. Progressive for thee, but not for me.
It would be one thing if the mayor were a hawk on quality-of-life issues, and just being hypocritical here. But he isn’t interested in protecting New Yorkers from the helicopter traffic that continues to plague waterfront New Yorkers, nor is he interested in protecting them from construction noise.
And de Blasio is uninterested in traffic and transit. Well, yes: He can avoid it. Meanwhile, the subways are finally so full that they’re losing riders, as people choose bikes, or, if they’ve got money to spare, Uber, to avoid the rush.
Frustrated drivers block intersections, making both walking and driving worse than it’s been in a decade. It’s dangerous, too: 188 people have died in traffic so far this year, compared to 174 last year.
Plus, de Blasio still doesn’t know how to deal with the police. After the Prospect Park heliport incident, the mayor’s people blamed the NYPD, saying his security detail is in charge of getting him around in whatever way they see fit.
Nonsense. The mayor supervises the police, not the other way around.
De Blasio is also sending a bad message to cops. If the mayor can park his helicopter illegally in Prospect Park, why shouldn’t officers park their private cars in illegal spots all over the city, blocking sidewalks, bike lanes and crosswalks?
The incident also demonstrates the mayor’s fiscal irresponsibility. Helicopters and the police who pilot them and secure their landing spots are expensive. All four of the city’s “rags” — the term the mayor uses for newspapers that report the facts — have written recently that the city’s payroll is at record levels.
This would perhaps be OK if the mayor had worked to reform city workers’ health-care and pension packages, but nope. Progressive means that city workers can avoid the government-retiree safety nets — Social Security and Medicare — that everyone else relies upon.
Finally, the mayor is showing which of the “tale of two cities” he wants to live in. Once you’ve joined the helicopter class, it’s hard to go back to traveling like a commoner. The skies are full of indispensable men.
The mayor fancies himself an important man, and he is: The decisions he makes can save or cost lives.
But he’s not all that important, just as no public (or corporate) official is. If he’s late to give a speech in Queens — or even if he doesn’t show — it doesn’t matter. A waitress who is late for her shift causes more problems than does a mayor who fails to give yet one more workaday speech.
Public officials love to cocoon themselves to revel in how critical they are. Perhaps de Blasio should spend some time walking or taking the subway, to remind himself instead of how the other 99.99 percent lives.
Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal.