There is a rather silly spat going on at the moment about whether or not Carmen Jorda should be considered to be serious as an F1 test driver. The fact is that she is in that role and so all the chat is irrelevant. It is what it is. On paper she has no qualifications to be where she is, none that 500 or so other drivers do not have. Maybe more. But, she’s well-connected, from a rich family and (for the old-fashioned) she looks good in a race suit. Is it right or fair? No. But that’s life. Is it good for the sport? Some think so. Personally I don’t. Yes, it means a media spat that gives the desperate Internet tappers something to tap into, but is it what F1 wants to be in the spotlight for? Contrary to popular belief, all publicity is not good publicity. Some of it is very damaging.
F1 is a meritocracy on almost all levels, to an impressive extent, apart from when it comes to the drivers. In a perfect world teams would choose the drivers on the basis of talent alone, but it’s not a perfect world. They need money to be able to do that and the people who “own” the sport want that money. They don’t want to invest in helping people. They are private equity, not a charity. They sweat their assets.
Yes, F1 wants to expand its audience. It wants to find an Asian driver, it wants to find a Russian, an American, a woman, an African, (there is not much interest in Eskimos)… whatever, but putting someone into a race suit and pretending isn’t the way to do it. Imagine the ridicule that a team would face if it found a good-looking local from Zimbabwe, stuck him in a race suit, and let him wander around the garage being photographed. Is that really any different to what Jorda is doing? I think it actually works against women being taken seriously in F1 because it trivialises the achievement. If we’re going to get women in Formula 1, let’s get ones who have achieved things, and who might achieve things in an F1 car. Maybe we have to wait for that. IndyCar and NASCAR had to wait for Danica to come along. She’s got a lot of talent, even if she’s not absolutely top notch, but she’s good enough to be there. That is what F1 needs. A woman who is good enough to be there. I think a great opportunity was wasted with Simona de Silvestro, who proved in the U.S. that she had speed, guts and the potential to do well. For whatever reason, F1 did not embrace that opportunity. Why? Because it involved greedy people having to put their hands in their pockets to invest and, as we all know, PE people have short arms and very deep pockets… So, we have to make do with see-through tokenism. Hell, if we do that we might as well have see-through overalls…
joeblogsf1 
I’ve been brought here under false pretences… 🙂
Can’t quite recall where I recall this from (whether I read it online or it was a piece of filler during Sky’s TV commentary) but I thought Carmen was technically a marketing employee at Lotus. That caused rumblings because it trivialised the role… Heard anything along those lines?
Regarding Zimbabwe . . .
Ken Tyrell didn’t have a problem with putting Bulawayo’s John Love in a Formula Junior team in the early 60s – and I doubt he was there as a PR stunt.
If the good looking Zimbabwean could pay for the privalige I’m sure there are a few teams in the paddock that would jump at the opportunity for a photo-op driver.
Renault do seem a bit keener to play down her role. She wasn’t up on stage with K-Mag, Palmer and Ocon for instance. I can’t see her in the team long term though.
I think it extremely unlikely any F1 team will ever put Carmen Jorda in a contemporary F1 car for an actual official test. Not least because testing is extremely restricted meaning that they can’t exactly afford to waste track time on a driver who isn’t even remotely close to a relevant pace.
No, it’ll just be simulator work for her and/or if she’s really lucky some demonstration runs in several year old machinery on demo tyres which would be completely irrelevant anyway.
It’s a shame in many ways because it doesn’t make a good advert for female racing drivers having someone who has proven to be drastically off the pace when they are actually female drivers with the talent to fulfill that role.
As pointed out the likes of Silvestro and Wolf, whilst perhaps they aren’t going to setting the sector times purple they are perfectly capable of driving at a pace within the bounds of respectability.
I firmly believe that had Susie Wolf raced a Williams Mercedes then she would have scored points. I doubt she would have been much threat to Bottas or Massa but her pace was good enough to be competent and respectable.
There’s no evidence Jorda having demonstrated that potential in the junior catorgories so how can she expect to in a F1 car?
I just want the best drivers in the cars. Black, white; male, female; tall or short. Don’t care. It’ll never happen.
You have seen Susie’s DTM results right?
I seem to remember that she was regularly in the back of the pack, if not the very back.
They’re nearly as bad as David Coulthard’s….
+1 – Wolf’s credentials to be in F1 were only a couple levels above Jorda’s. In her 7 year DTM career, she finished in the points twice and (to the best of my knowledge) never finished above a teammate at the end of any season.
She achieved very little in an ordinary racing career – no more than the likes of Channoch Nissany or Adderly Fong, yet we do not hold either drivers up as shining beacons for Israeli or Hong Kong footholds in F1.
If people are truly serious about F1 being a meritocracy, then the barometer for success must be equal for all drivers, irrespective of their nationality or sex.
Had Wolf been a man, then she’d have never got close to testing for an F1 team (unless they had bags of sponsorship perhaps).
More credible female candidates are out there in the forms of de Silvestro, Alice Powell and Tatiana Celderon.
Her two points finishes were in a two-year old car.
Several drivers have achieve such a feat on multiple more occasions though – this in itself is not a huge measure of success.
Well, some people might argue that, in a male-dominated sport, maybe the only way to make some change is by forcing one, because, if not, thing will not change…
That by putting a woman (driver or not) in a race suit in the paddock, maybe other women will consider being there, and feel welcomed.
I don’t know what to think. It’s not easy to change the status-quo sometimes. I don’t know if putting Carmen Jorda there might help or not other women to dare to be there (in any case, you should ask a woman if it helps or not).
Why I do think is that if you don’t change a thing, you can’t expect it to change spontaneously. Something needs to change to expect change. Is F1 really changing to allow more women to be drivers? How?
Cheers.
It’s not a male-dominated sport. There are plenty of women involved doing important jobs. It’s really just the driving that is male-dominated
Sadly the mass media always focus on the drivers being a males club. Hearing success stories about the women in F1 is as rare as hearing the positives of the engines we have now (Thankfully we still have a few places like these).
It is absurd to me that people seem to be more interested in playing the victim card rather than bringing those success stories.
What is more likely to bring in more people: we construct a view about the sport not being inclusive at all or we parade the diversity that it already has?
The latter would be my guess.
Drivers 0% Mechanics 0% Team principal 9%. What is not male dominated about that.
My group of 50 engineers we have 11 female engineers and I still consider it male dominated.
I do think that the bro that thought adversizing he was 12 seconds faster in the simulator missed the reason for being in a simulator.
You counted all the mechanics in F1, did you? I know of several. There are female engineers aplenty. Things are changing and it is still not easy for women in a man’s world. Much of F1’s administration and legal activity is run by women. Sorensen is a good driver. We don’t know how good, but we do know that he is better than Jorda. It is clear as a bell. You may be right about people missing the point, but there are things one cannot say, aren’t there?
I find it rather inexplicable to suggest F1 isn’t a male-dominated sport and I suspect feminists would have a field-day with that assertion. How many women are employed by F1 teams, F1 itself and in the F1 media versus the number of men? Further, how many women work in F1 but not in cleaning, catering and promotional roles? The only defence F1 may have is that it’s no more male-dominated than other major sports, which isn’t much of a defence, really. Sure, there are the exceptions to the rule – Clair Williams, Monisha Kaltenborn at Sauber, some engineers and marketing people and a couple of drivers floating around the fringes. But look at the typical post-race victory photograph of the driver sitting with the trophy surrounded by the race team. A female face in there is very much the exception, let alone a non-white one (but that’s another story). Similarly, Mercedes’ car-park celebratory championship snaps of the whole team shows the same gender breakdown. OK, a couple of photographs do not a quantitative survey make, but they do provide (literally) a snapshot of F1’s current top team’s gender breakdown.
I’m not suggesting that “male domination” of what is essentially a trivial entertainment business is necessarily something to lose sleep over, or suggesting that women be given a helping hand in F1 simply because they’re women. Nor am I suggesting that F1 is intrinsically, cynically sexist; perhaps it is no more so that any competitive and highly-pressured industry, which while again not being anything to be proud of, at least recognises it is what it is. And what it is, I believe, is male dominated.
F1 isn’t a male dominated sport…apart from the drivers. As Graeme Lowden pointed out at CASS, F1 is by definition a sport where there is pure equality, because all anyone in it wants to do is make money or make the car go faster, and they’ll employ absolutely anyone who is the best person to do that, regardless of who they are and where they are from.
There are fields in life where a helping hand can potentially lead to the wrong person being a role in the short term, but for the longer term outcome the benefits can far outweigh the risks. All female candidate lists for MP’s come to mind. However, in F1, the outcome is so immediate, so definitive and so public that this would be disastrous. This, to an extent is what happened with Carmen Jorda and Susie Woolf.
At this point I was planning on saying that the only way to do this is as Red Bull are with Beitske Visser, but then I saw her results. However, when you think how quickly Max Verstappen came through the ranks, that there are some female kart drivers with high potential, things could change very quickly.
I don’t think Visser is still with Red Bull
Is Max’s sister any good?
Visser was dropped by Red Bull after seven months.
Simona was the one that got away she has real talent. Consider her better than Danica.
Carmen Jordan is just a rich kid with limited talent. She has always been at the rear road sweeping the track for faster drivers. No real talent, just eye candy for Bernies 70 plus toupee wearing Rolex watch buying men. The smell of ‘Au Du Sloanes Linament’ wafting down wind as the hips creak of the mobility scooter.
Danica has had some good races but is not F1 material. Simona has the talent shame Saucer dumped her when they needed the money.
People have a habit of forgetting that Danica Patrick did pretty well at the Indianapolis 500. In her career she finished 4th, 8th, 8th, 22nd (pit lane accident), 3rd, 6th and 10th. She struggles in NASCAR but so did Juan Pablo Montoya; it’s a whole different driving series.
Simona probably would have been pretty good but except for a few starts with Andretti Racing, she was always on backmarkers.
Danica tended to struggle on road and street courses though, which would have made life a little tough for her in F1.
Have a look at the numbers. I am not sure that was actually true.
She probably wasn’t too bad, glancing through the numbers. But googling on danica road/street ovals, there are several stories from 2011 where she says she doesn’t qualify too well on road/street and with 10 road/street and 7 ovals, IndyCar needed more ovals:
For the first time ever, Joe, I must strongly disagree with you. Everything was fine, in fact as astute as always, until your last sentence. I do not wish to see Mr Hamilton and all his tattoos nor do I wish to know if Mr Vettel has bigger balls than Mr Alonso. See through cars, as I think Stirling Moss sort of used in Monaco 1960, is fine but see through overalls. Anyway where would Danial Riciardo put his infiniti sticker, Mr Massa put Hackett and the mind boggles at My Kvyat and Siemens. By the way, more seriously, I agree about Simona. There is still time.
I would like to correct myself. Monaco 1961.
See through cars so we can watch the drivers working the pedals and steering wheel is a good idea…
What’s also interesting is if you could see the drivers facial expression and blink rate
It’ll never happen… H&S runs F1 now Patrick. Besides, make the most of what you can see now… it’ll be closed cockpits before too long!
Once again Russell Brockbank was ahead of the pack, having suggested this in the mid-Sixties after Colin Chapman allowed his drivers to lie down on the job. It was not enough for the driving to be done, it should be SEEN to be done. So the drivers should either sit up straight again or the cockpit sides be panelled in clear plastic.
Of course it wouldn’t be much use once they invented sidepods. No-one (save a few creepy oddballs) wants to see an oil cooler doing its stuff.
Suggestion: how about a third friday practice session for women drivers only? Just one hour. Teams without a woman driver need not take part.
Think of the added track/test time. I can’t see many teams turning that down.
Trouble is, aside from Silvestro, are there other women out there who could be recruited? Strikes me there are not enough interested parties at present.
In fairness to Carmen, you have to say her presence is not in itself denying others their chance. And yes, I am old fashioned 🙂
..maybe just one 3 day test per season with the ladies alone. That would be welcomed I think. It would be a start anyway
In fairness, this is a reasonably smart idea. A women only test session would be sure to get takers keen to get extra track time for their car – I’d go for something more like the young driver test than a session during each GP weekend, but it would at least help the ladies prove their speed and rack up the mileage they might need to get licenses.
Fair is fair: I have to say I was first to propose a test session per season for women only drivers, let me see now, a year maybe two years ago!
funny how f1 is hyper-capitalistic in this regard. business remains very small compared to the potential it has. that is a good climate for investors as venture capitalists love “potential”. but for F1 to grow I think it needs to take some business lessons from the NFL and NASCAR.
Non Engine Tokens, “Ah” I thought they are going to have bodywork tokens!
It seems I am correct. Or at least correct in the reverse.
Also here you are writing about her, whilst with great restraint, managing not to mention the team.
As you so often say “It is what it is”
Its all about money, we know that.
Good luck to her.
Eye candy drivers, brings to mind one Milka Duno of Indycars. A woman with I believe multiple engineering degrees, easy on the eyes, and a boatload of money. Only problem was she spent most of the race with eyes on her mirrors to keep from getting run over.
I’m not convinced that Danica would still be where she is if she were a man. Evrery time I take a quick look at a NASCAR race she’s usually running around 20th when pits stops cycles are over.
Then what about the men who are running behind her? Presumably they should be shown the door also?
If F1 as a sport was serious about promoting female drivers, Simona Di Silvestro would probably be racing for a team this year. Instead, Susie Wolff has retired from motorsport, and now we have Carmen Jorda, whose racing results are awful no matter which way you crunch the numbers, operating as a very good-looking promotional prop for Renault. Nothing screams “we don’t take women seriously as drivers” more loudly than a mediocre driver who looks like a fashion model.
…..not to mention Katherine Legge. Put her car in the lead at the Daytona 24 hour and a co-driver stuffed her car.
Got to agree with you Joe, De Silvestro & Patrick could have made some impact, although my view is that having pts from 1st to 10th dumbed down F1, it should have been left as Top6 and only spread from 9 or 10 down to 1, the current pts situation demeans the achievements of even the recent great drivers.
It makes no sense at all for F1 or motorsport in general, to avoid trying out female drivers, as far as about 30 yrs back Michele Mouton tamed the awesome Audi Quattro WRC cars and came within a fag paper width of being World Rally Champion, and back then it was a much tougher sport than the modern version!
However, the bottom line is that no matter how smart you tell us that F1 people are, they are too dumb to understand how putting a woman or two into an F1 car would drive up viewing figures…..i’m the resident dinosaur visiting your blog, but F1 folk are fixed further in the past than i am on this issue!
To back up the Michele Mouton comment I would add her win on Pike’s Peak in the 80’s. Upset quite a few of the “Good Ol’ Boys” as I recall.
Not to mention Pat Moss and Ann Wisdom on the Liege in 1960…
Other than the fact that points totals are now massively inflated, I really don’t see how stretching points down the grid devalues achievement. F1 cars are more reliable than ever, it remains difficult as a backmarker team to come close to scoring a points finish.
Actually, without bothering myself with the maths, if one goes back to say 1986, and around 26 cars on the grid, sometimes previous to that even larger grids, however if one has 26 cars and 6 points places, that is harder than 18-20 cars and 10 points places, although as you say, the reliability factor is so high now, that any team outside the Top 5 of MB,Ferrari, RBR, Williams & ForceIndia is going to need an act of God to be a regular Top 10 finisher.
It is not clear to me how CVC and “private equity” fit in this discussion. CVC are shareholders in FOM, not team owners. FOM shareholders do not select drivers nor do they pay drivers. It’s the teams that select and pay drivers, along with their sponsors.
There is no mechanism for FOM to pay drivers directly, nor for them to subsidize a team that is willing to take on a female (or African or whatever) driver. And there is even less of a mechanism for an FOM shareholder to pay direct or subsidize. Is CVC supposed to pay it out of their own pocket? CVC’s pocket and FOM are not the same economic entities. If CVC owns 65% of FOM then are the other shareholders going to pony-up the other 35% of the subsidy? And if the other shareholders won’t participate then CVC would be entitled to additional equity, i.e. dilution of shareholders that would not participate. But dilution based on what Enterprise and equity value? Can the shareholders agree on a valuation? Can they agree on the “value” of this subsidy for a female driver (or African or whatever)? I don’t think so, or rather, not a chance.
Sometimes things are more complex than they appear.
If you cannot see the connection, you cannot see the connection
Open your mind, Joe. With all due respect you might learn something.
My mind is wide open. If only you knew…
Ha ha, likewise…!
The short-sightedness of your reply mirrors that of CVC and other F1 “shareholders” who can’t see beyond the bottom line. I could re-explain the point that Joe is making about why teams are having to recruit pay-drivers and publicity stunts like Carmen, but I still don’t think you’d get it.
It is not a question of “short sightedness”, it is a question of the capital structure of FOM.
And if you think that were FOM to increase the share of revenue that went to teams those monies would be used to subsidize African and or female drivers then I have a bridge spanning Brooklyn and Manhattan in which you might be interested.
I must admit that I do get amused by all this CVC bashing. They are what they are, a private equity company, they exist to get the maximum return for their investors.
If someone put their nearest and dearest in a cage with a tiger and the N&D were savaged, would you blame the tiger? Of course not!
So if you want to have a moan direct your moaning to those who sold F1 to CVC.
PS I am in no way connected with CVC or, as far as I know, any other private equity company.
I’m always a little surprised that some of these supposedly sharp business types are amazingly dumb when it comes to stuff like Carmen Jorda. Maybe it’s simply arrogance, as always.
je suis tout à fait d’accord avec votre raisonnement, Jorda fait du tort aux pilotes féminines sérieuses et capables, son palmarès parle. Simona de Silvestro était la bonne personne. Image de Renault, je l’ai vue surnommée dans un article, la “blondine Renault”….
sorry, but Joe doesn’t read French.
Of course I read French
Funny how these auto translators (upon which I rely) always get the gender wrong.
I’m glad Carmen is never in a car. What,s the point of that, all covered in overalls and wearing a helmet!
Goes to show that drivers developing the cars is something from the past now. Teams can afford to hire drivers for marketting purpose and call them test driver as sensors that they use give more datas feedbacks than the whole grid all together. Wolff Jorda and Mazepin ( 16 years old ) prove my point
See-through overalls or see-through financials… I think I can guess which one you’d prefer. The few times I’ve wondered about Ms Jorda, I was curious about what she herself thought of her role? It’s pretty obvious she’s a photo op and will never get serious track time. Surely that cannot help her self esteem?
Joe,
Agreed about Simona de Silvestro. I saw her race a number of times; and at the Indy 500 battling through serious injury and pain. In my view, a lost talent for FI – on merit, not gender. Much more deserving of a F1 chance than a number of others who followed her. I am sorry that we, as fans (and, of course Simona), were never given the opportunity to see what she might have achieved.
Have to say, I was amazed when Simona de Silvestro didn’t get a drive. A huge missed opportunity to get a whole new demographic – the one that, according to Joe, tends to control a family’s spending – interested in F1, along with the next generation in tow.
Utterly incomprehensible.
She was not fast enough for a top team to be interested in her. She would have been another also-ran. Top teams rather look for new Hamiltons, Rosbergs, Vettels, Raikkonens, Alonsos, Buttons among the newcomers..
Seems Britains own Katherine Legge is almost out of contention here…? Although, I think she is the best talented woman ever to drive in Formula Racing. And a pleasure to watch outside the racer too….
I do not agree. I think that there have been a number of women who were better.
There is a whole new (ish) “Women in Motorsport” campaign being run by the FIA with Susie Wolf as it’s figure head.
It was sad I thought, that it became obvious that she was never going to get anywhere. She had just about the best connections one could have and I am sure the money was there, but it was obvious and I commend her for not hanging on and dragging it out.
I suspect that Carmen may be kept on as a press attraction and source of revenue until she realises the same as Susie. But would it not be great if she thrashed the other dev drivers on the sim?
This topic is a minefield of ordinance ready to jump up and hurt the feelings of passers-by who rightly want to see talented female drivers step-in.
It needs tackling to move forward into a world where gentleman racers are not the only option. At present, with the amount of cash needed to begin a driver’s career, it seems the difference between the thirties and the teens is the cut of a fellow’s jacket.
How then to inspire the quick-witted woman’s parents to fund their kid’s career if the main prize is out of reach.
There are so many talented women behind the scenes in mechanical and engineering roles but they are driven by the satisfaction of the technical challenge. A modern driver is part celebrity/PR person; isn’t there some merit in having a female face even depicted in a driver’s setting?
I know it’s not F1 and she’s not a driver but you don’t get any of these questions concerning Audi and Leena Gade in the WEC as she became the first female Lead Race Engineer to win the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 2011 and 2012. In 2012 she also won the FIA WEC’s ‘Man of the Year’ award and the C&R Racing Woman in Technology Award. She is also an Ambassador of the FIA Commission for Women in Motorsport. …… and if VAG had been moving into F1 I’d bet she would possibly be part of the team on pure merit. I also had high hopes for Simona after your piece Joe and followed her results – shame it didn’t work out. Personally, As you’ve previously said I’m also shocked more teams haven’t come up with any excuse to have celebrities and /or glamourous celebrities just around and in the pits.
I have never thought female drivers had “the balls”, so to speak, to ever be as fast as the top male racing drivers in any series/class. This is based on quite a few decades of racing and following racing and assisting my doughter racing. In my opinion females can be very good racing drivers, as can many men/boys, but they haven’t got that “extra something” needed to equal the top male drivers!.
But I do believe that if any female could get close to succeeding in F1, Simona De Silvestro would have been the one! It’s sad that she has missed the oportunity!
PK. (NZ)
Bunch of men worrying about us little women in motorsport. 🙂
Well, it may help for you to give a “wimmins” opinion of all of this, then. What do you think about Jorda?
Yes, do tell…
Thing is Rachel, that there have been good women drivers, but not enough seats available in F1 for them to have a fair chance. Now there are fewer seats than there have been since the 1960’s so the situation is worse. However i think that whilst some of the F1 cars of the past might have stretched the physical strength of women in general, the current cars require more brain than brawn….and for that reason i think a good woman driver would, given proper chances, be able to be competitive and even manage a WCD title fight with the men.
I haven’t read all the comments, but here’s my nickel in the hat: one does not say Eskimo anymore but Inuit instead. Eskimo means ”Raw Meat Eater” and is now considered derogatory.
From the Great Canadian North
I say eskimo.
You shouldn’t. It’s offensive to the Inuit people. There’s other words you wouldn’t say in this blog, such as the one that starts with N, or that Asian reference that rhymes with pink. This is no less than those.
Or Limey, for that matter…
I like Limey. It’s a historical reference to the fact that we were cleverer than other nations.
Good one, Joe.
PS: Do you ever sleep ?
No
Is it me, or is everything not offensive to someone, somewhere? The new world does not get it, but in England one is rudest to the people one likes most. So should some do-gooder arrive and start preaching that we should respect one another and not call each other rude names, just because they don’t understand what is happening? If I say Chinaman instead of man from China then a bunch of Canadians will start throwing wobblies because they think it is a nasty thing to say. Political correctness in this world is completely out of control. If members of the Inuit nation wish to complain to me, then let them do so, but what business is it of your’s? Is Kibble an Inuit name? You cannot be nice and sweet to everybody because if you are nice to one person, then someone else will be offended. If I say I think Trump is the scariest political figure I have ever seen, a whole bunch of people will love me and cheer and a whole bunch of others will accuse me of bias, anti-hairism or not liking elephants (or is it donkeys?). If I say that I am offended by people with guns who shoot children and dare to suggest that giving guns to everyone is stupid, I am accused of being racist, non-democratic, narrow-minded, fascist, liberal and God alone knows what else. You can do good by building slipways for tired gay whales, by giving jobs to people who are not capable of doing the work. You can go around telling everyone that they must use the word non-reflective, but I think there are more important things to worry about in this world…
Joe – with great respect, you are confusing opinions with titles. You have every right to your opinion on gun-toting-child-shooters, and are free to write about said opinion on your blog. I am free to disagree with your opinion, although out of respect I’m not going to argue with you (especially on your blog, that you keep, and you pay for, and that I read for free). Titles, on the other hand, are somewhat different. If a specific group of individuals, especially a certain race of individuals, requests not to be called by a certain title, then I feel we should all respect that request. I have yet to hear of a Brit who objects to being called a Limey (or for that matter, a Brit). The First Nations people of Northern Canada, formerly referred to as Eskimo, have suggested that the term is insulting to them and have asked to be called Inuit. Am I an Inuit? Well it depends on how you count. At best guess, I’m 1/64th First-Nation blood, so a very small portion of me could be directly insulted. The rest of me just finds it slightly disrespectful.
I realize this is off topic and maybe even a little pedantic. So I’ll let it go for now, despite any subsequent replies that are posted here. Love the blog, agree with most of your opinions, and have great respect for your background and understanding of F1.
You are free to disagree, just as I am at liberty to disagree with you, which I do.
The Inuit Circumpolar Council, as it is known today, uses both “Inuit” and “Eskimo” in its official documents.
Eskimo!! Inuit !!….Ok, i didn’t want to offend any Inuit however there probably aren’t any online here, and it is nice to use words that i was taught as a kid, now and again, without censorship. And, come on Steve Kibble! Why is it that words cause offence when in our daily lives, in broadcasting on the radio, tv, online, newspapers, magazines etc, every Anglo Saxon cuss word, and a few more, that one can think of, is used with no thought of the ladies or children present? Yet some folk get offended by calling others by a name that we’ve all known for hundreds of years? I think it is PC gone overboard personally.
I think Jorda looks amazing in hot pants, but I don’t think she’s doing much for women in motorsport. Paying to sit in engineering meetings, not drive the cars and hang out in the garage seems a strange thing to do for me. But I think that about most of these ‘reserve’/’test’ drivers. If you’re a racer, you should race. Find any formula you can and perfect your craft. I don’t see Jorda getting any better doing what she’s doing now. I think motorsport is a hugely male dominated sport. There are lots of us girls in it, but we’re still greatly outnumbered. I don’t necessarily see that as a problem, I just see it as an explanation as to why there aren’t so many women drivers. Certain things broadly appeal to the sexes and change will come slowly. I personally think motorsport is the best industry in the world and a great place to work as a woman, but I’ve yet to convert any of my non-motorsport friends or family to that opinion. And as for the inuit/eskimo nonsense, everyone should get a grip. If a word is said with spite it doesn’t matter what it is. Changing the word changes nothing. Discuss… 🙂
Thanks. As for the eskimo nonsense, it is made all the more galling when people claim offence on behalf of others. It is no different that going out explicitly to get drunk and start a fight with a complete stranger for an utterly arbitrary reason. It absolutely loathsome behaviour. It is becoming common place. Social Justice Warriors, as they are called, will fight on your behalf whether you like it or not and if you don’t, watch out, because they’ll be after you next.
Yes CBR there seem to be many more terminally stupid and intolerant people around today than even 20 years ago….if it carries on this way God knows how ridiculous the world will become!
Weeks late coming back to this but, perusing over it all again, one is tempted to wonder whether the new Driver Super Licence and Free Practice Only Super Licence regulations were brought in with Jordá in mind, Verstappen being merely a more convenient, i.e. less controversial, scapegoat.
Perhaps a line has trully been drawn and the FIA can actually keep to their own driver licence regulations now, as under the old set there may have been too many woeful precedents admitted to stop one as under-qualified as Jordá finding a way of getting in an F1 car on track during a GP weekend too, which would have been particularly unfortunate so soon after Silvestro could not for lack of funding.