There is a danger if one makes any remarks about females in motorsport that one will instantly be abused by fervent feminists and self-righteous male do-gooders. Very often these people do not actually bother to read what is written and simply object to any suggestion that women and men are different. All I can do for these people is to point out the words of Michèle Mouton, arguably the most successful woman motorsport competitor at international level, and the first woman to win a World Championship rally. Today she is head of the FIA’s Women in Motorsport Commission. Some years ago, in an FIA publication, she was asked whether women can race in Formula 1.
“Sure,” she said. “If it is the right girl, with the right skills and the right opportunities. It is a simple truth that women do not often get a chance with a top car; they do not get sufficient testing. You need all of that but I am sure that a girl can do that. That, though, is not the real question. The big question is whether a woman can win in Formula 1 and I am not so sure about that. Men and women are different. We are not built the same way and I think the biggest difference is in terms of emotions and sensibilities. I never had a problem going at top speed with a 300ft drop right next to my car, but on a race track when you are doing 300kph down a straight you feel lighter, more exposed, or at least I did. I think that women have a stronger sense of self-preservation than men. It is an instinct that is more developed in the woman than in the man. And I think this is important when you come to that last hundredth of a second. A woman can work up to the top level but men will just do it. Boom. Flat out. I hope that I am wrong in my analysis and that it is not really like that, but that is what I think.”
It is interesting to note that history backs up Mouton’s opinion. Women have generally done better in rallying and drag races than they have in circuit racing. South Africa’s Desiré Wilson won a British Championship F1 race at Brands Hatch in April 1980, driving a Theodore Racing Wolf WR4. That was quite an achievement. Divina Galica, in the same era, achieved a series of podiums finishes in British F1 but never won a race. But no-one has ever claimed that British F1 was at the same level as the World Championship. It clearly wasn’t. Danica Patrick is probably the woman with the most impressive track success with her IndyCar win at Motegi in 2008. In rallying Mouton was outstanding but Germany’s Jutta Kleinschmidt, for example, won the Paris-Dakar Rally, while Pat Moss-Carlson, Stirling Moss’s sister, was the most successful female British rally driver ever, winning outright on the Liege-Rome-Liege in 1960 and the 1962 Tulip Rally and a series of other strong placings. There was also the highly-successful Louise Aitken-Walker who achieved a great deal at British national level in the 1980s and was recognised with an MBE in 1992.
I am all for there being more women in motorsport, at every level, but I do not believe that they should be rewarded for anything other than their actual achievements. If one is to have a truly egalitarian sport, one must be even-handed in recognising achievement. Undeserved awards create false expectations. Winning women-only championships is all very well, but can one really compare such things to the major titles?
It is great that Claire Williams and Monisha Kaltenborn are running F1 teams, but does Claire really deserve more recognition from the British government than Lewis Hamilton, one of only two British drivers to have won three World Championships, who has won more Grands Prix than anyone else, apart from Michael Schumacher?
She has an OBE, he has an inferior MBE, the same as 2009 World Champion Jenson Button. Now they have been joined by Susie Wolff. Good for her. She has been doing great work in trying to encourage young women to get into the sport, but the programme is only very recent and it is hard to see any real results as yet. Is it right, therefore, that she has the same official recognition as Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button? I don’t know about you, but I don’t think that is fair and it has nothing to do with men and women. It is simply about recognition.
If you look back, British F1 World Champions have traditionally been awarded OBEs: Damon Hill (1997), Nigel Mansell (1991), Jackie Stewart (1971), Graham Hill (1969) and Jim Clark (1964), but when it came to Jenson and Lewis they received only MBEs. Mike Hawthorn, James Hunt and John Surtees never received any recognition for their World Championships. Hawthorn died soon after winning his title, Hunt was highly anti-Establishment and Surtees had previously won an MBE for motorcycle racing in 1959 and, by bureaucratic logic, he could not win another similar award for a certain period of time. He was eventually made an OBE in 2008 – 44 years after his F1 title. He is the only man to have won World Championships on two and four wheels (an amazing achievement) but when the worthies of Whitehall decided to upgrade him to a CBE in 2016, it meant that he is unlikely to get a knighthood, unless he lives into his nineties. Or unless people make a fuss. I note that recently those rigid old rules seem to have changed a little with Sir Bradley Wiggins winning a CBE in 2009 and a knighthood in 2013.
When it comes to other sports, I feel that motor racing – one of Britain’s biggest success stories for more than 50 years – has been very badly overlooked. The tennis player Andy Murray has just been knighted. Good for him, he has won a few Grand Slams, but he does not figure in any of the all-time great lists one can find. Wiggins was knighted in 2013 after one Tour de France victory, but last year Chris Frome won his third Tour de France and is still just a plain old OBE. Where is the logic in that?
There have been nine British athletes knighted (three of them this year). There have been 14 British football knighthoods, 10 British cricket knighthoods, seven British horse racing knights and six British yachting knights. Ten British F1 racing teams have won 33 World Constructors’ Championships of the 56 awarded. Ten British F1 drivers have won 16 World Championship titles, including four in the last nine years, but there have been only four knighthoods for British motorsport: Jackie Stewart, Stirling Moss, Frank Williams and and Patrick Head.
One can argue that motorsport might include the two Land Speed Record holders who were knighted in the 1930s (Henry Segrave and Malcolm Campbell), but I don’t agree with that. In any case, there is no real logic in this either because George Eyston, Parry Thomas, Ernest Eldridge, John Cobb and Lydston Hornsted all set similar records but only Eyston was given an OBE. Richard Noble held the record in the 1980s and was recognised with an OBE, and his successor Andy Green has the same.
It seems to me that the British honours system needs to look again at motorsport and realise what a successful business it is and what great glory it brings to the country.
joeblogsf1 
The first part of your text is based only on suppositions. A woman who won something in a Motorsport category is hardly qualified to talk about biological and phisiological differences or similarities between men and women.
As far as I know the argument that women and men don’t biologically take risks the same way can easily be reversed to men and women don’t take risks the same way because they aren’t created in a culture that equally encourages both gender to take risks.
This seems obvious enough to me to render the whole argument invalid or at least as weak as the next one.
As to achievements and recognition, I think that when you talk about a supposedly “egalitarian sport”, you need to ponder that the pool from which Motorsport drivers are picked from is 99% composed of men.
A woman is born in a culture where people “think” they drive slower, they’re sloppier and more error prone (I won’t even consider the whole “risk” argument”). They are hardly if ever encouraged to drive more, let alone pursue a Motorsport career.
When a women does it and succeed (as in international recognition, this is not about absolute success measured by race wins or championships, but rather something much more broad and sometimes subtle), it’s an fantastic achievement in itself.
To climb the ranks of shark-men infested waters, carve your name on the wall, deal with petty males looking down upon you, drive fast cars for a living… I mean, when I put myself in a woman’s shoes I might as well try to understand the gargantuan challenges they have to go through first being a woman and then being a racing driver.
So, when I compare Susie Wolff with Lewis Hamilton, you better be assured I do think it’s not fair. She had it real rough, she’s the only one representing a whole gender.
Now Hamilton is black and he sure proved everyone he is the best and by being black he too had it rougher than almost all his other fellow competitors, and I can understand that too. But he is still a man. If he was a woman he would probably never do it, ever.
So, I think the subject is delicate enough to render lots of discussion, but at least we can hope for respectful ones.
Happy 2017, Joe. Keep up the amazing work!
Regards from Brazil.
I think that she is probably more qualified to comment than you are on this subject, but in this post-expert era, it seems that anything goes. In my experience (which of course means nothing to you) motorsport is an amazingly open meritocracy. If a woman can do the job better than a man then they will be given the job. Yes, there may be some resistance to that but it’s a competitive world. Secondly, Susie is now the only person representing her gender. There have been many others who did not get as far, notably Simona di Silvestro, who was there on merit alone. There was also Katherine Legge. Thirdly, Lewis did not have it easy. He had to prove his worth at every step because McLaren would have pulled the plug if he had not delivered.
Joe and Daniel very interesting discussion. I liked it a lot (except Joe’s “which of course means nothing to you” sad Trumpisum). To be sure it is complicated, but I am sure a woman will master F1 someday.
Taking part or winning?
By the way, I consider any reference to Trump in relation to me to be an insult. Read the blog rules.
As would I. Thank You!
Sadly, 2017 is the year where Tweets will come up Trumps.
Satirists will have a field day – journalistic money to be made there?
As for those honours – merit being slowly replaced by celebrity bling?
If I may, you can hardly say “In my experience (which of course means nothing to you)” and then complain about being insulted for it.
Interesting arguments as ever on both sides. Although I agree with the argument supported by Michèle Mouton’s views I am rather sceptical of claiming her personal feelings apply universally.
Joe, it’s a matter of qualified perspective, not opinion. As far as I know she doesn’t hold any degree in biology or neuroscience to say what she said. Her observations are empirical and you don’t need to know her personally to say that, neither do I.
I have no idea why you think your experience means nothing to me. I’ll leave that to you to sort if out. If it didn’t mean anything, I wouldn’t read your blog, and if my comments weren’t important to you or anyone, you wouldn’t open a comment section on your blog which is, to me, the best one out there, let alone reply to my comments.
You seem to not understand (or accept) that the times are a-changing and that these women who are being recognized today live in a world where these issues I raised in my comments are way more visible than ever. So, it is only natural that the women who are on edge of what they do, as far as women are concerned, will get the recognition and that triggers a good trend in which women will feel more encouraged to take the path. The recognition is a reflection of the times. Women have it MUCH harder than men. We are not having a WDC woman so soon and if we have to wait for it to recognize one, we might as well keep saying they “don’t take risks because they are, well, women”.
About Lewis, I reckon you are a busy professional as you always so amusingly tell us in your green notebook posts and I’ll just consider you didn’t read what I wrote at all because I said precisely that Lewis had it rougher than most of his fellow racing drivers. If anything, Lewis should be commended twice as hard as a pure German blonde like Rosberg.
It seems naive to take societal implications of being black, woman and other human characteristics out of the equation but I think that it is to be expected in the world of motorsports. Otherwise we would have a grid full of blacks and lots of women besides our only black driver EVER (no need to name him) and the likes of Button, Rosberg, Palmer, Ricciardo, Verstappen, so forth and so on. But I’m not surprised.
Danny Ongains from Hawai was black too, Lewis is not the only black driver EVER.
How does one define black? Not really a subject we need to get into, because the haters will come out…
I personally don’t accept that Lewis had it that much tougher than other kids, ok maybe compared to real rich kids. But that goes the same as for any other non rich kid. But Lewis was under the wing of McLaren at a very young age and while he had to deliver, he was also taken care of and had the best of the best to help him advance his career. So his spiel of I had it so tough and I am a streetfighter because I had to be, is total bullshit and just fits his image, and to be perfectly clear. I have zero problems with Lewis’ image / behavior when he’s not driving.
Well, you are wrong. End of story.
Lewis had a father who was willing to do whatever it took to put him in competitive go kart racing, including holding down multiple jobs and putting all of his discretionary income into racing. That alone makes Lewis more fortunate than 99% of youngsters who ever dreamt of being a F1 driver.
This fact does not detract from Lewis’ accomplishments, and it is certainly the case that Lewis and his Dad had a tougher road to hoe than Nico Rosberg and almost ny other driver in F1 that you can point to.
So, it’s a question of the consideration set. If you are comparing Lewis to other F1 drivers then he had it tough. But if you are comparing him to every youngster that dreamed of being a F1 driver then he was incredibly advantaged.
And how did Lewis get signed up by McLaren? Is it possible that between the ages of 8 and 14 he and Anthony worked their arses off with limited resources to achieve exceptional results?
Having served in the military with women, I will argue against the concrete idea that “women have a stronger sense of self-preservation than men.” Just because ‘a’ woman has been programmed to think this way doesn’t mean that girls and women can’t be trained to have absolutely no desire for self-preservation or heightened degrees of aggression. If aggression and fearlessness were the greatest factors in driving fast, Formula One champions would all be certifiable and institutionalized.
I simply quoted what Michele Mouton said
You forgot to mention that Ron saw the opportunity to take credit for setting Lewis on the path to the status that Willy T Ribbs failed to achieve (I will endeavour to find the citation/quotation, but I have quite a vast library motor sport books!).
I agree with your views on the honours system. It stinks. But I really want to applaud you for your raising Simona as a woman with real talent. She drove most of this year’s Bathurst without her cool suit working. Yet she drove with guile and finesse. And was fresh as a daisy afterwards! I also share your views on the talent that is Lewis. But I’ve tried and mostly failed many times to try to sway the populist view on him. He’s such a lovely guy in person, but very few get to experience that. So continue to fly the flag for him; I will!!!
Be careful. You are in danger of patronising the women you are so eager to support.
You need to get used to that idea that success in sport is defined by winning, not “something much more broad and sometimes subtle”.
I have never seen any evidence which suggests that the preponderance of men in motor sport is due to anything other than personal preference on the part of the participants. Maybe most women don’t get excited at the prospect of driving fast cars.
Susie Wolff may be one of very few representing her agenda, but her achievements in motorsport are very limited indeed.
I hear ya.
Thing is, me and Joe, we’re not discussing about whether or not women should be granted sports titles because they are women. That is nonsense.
He is questioning the royal titles rules and reasoning which I think is fair enough but I don’t think he has a point when he says women should not be granted any titles in this case as the titles: 1) are not bound by a strict rule and 2) are of political nature.
So, in knowing that, I think it is very appropriate to grant women such titles if not for their outright talent in a given sport (well, to be in such a strict and competetitive sport as F1 you HAVE to have some kind of talent), at least for their sheer passion about it and defeating ALL the odds, especially the odds that comes free when people who say they are too “emotional” or cannot take any “risks” because… well, women.
Beware of misconceptions. Have a wander around the honours web pages.
https://www.gov.uk/honours
The majority of the honours committees are people who are NOT in politics. IMO it is more accurate to say that the committees represent the establishment far more than they do the political classes, and that many of the difficulties are due to the establishment view being different from that of the man in the street.
The selection criteria quoted on the front page are :
a) making a difference to their community or field of work
b) enhancing Britain’s reputation
c) long-term voluntary service
d) innovation and entrepreneurship
e) changing things, with an emphasis on achievement
f) improving life for people less able to help themselves
g) displaying moral courage
Obviously, the criteria are broad and vague to allow room for wriggling (there’s good wriggling as well as bad wriggling). In the context of motor sport, I’d say that c), f) and g) don’t apply and that d) is marginal. Using ONLY the quoted criteria, I’m struggling to convince myself that either Ms Williams or Mrs Wolff have satisfied the criteria significantly better than all the British men who have been ignored; there is also a danger that giving awards to women in order to encourage other women might be seen as patronising and condescending behaviour.
I have no problem with using Claire Williams and Susie Wolff as examples to encourage women to get involved in motor sport, but I think that the honours system is NOT the best or even the right tool to use.
You have just described a token honour system that gives out honours as trinkets, with a wink and a pat on the head, as opposed to achievements. If you want that type of honour then stop your cowardly, hand wringing apologist rhetoric and say so. Then we all know what the honour system is and no confusion exists. If you want a system that thumbs the scales because it is the “right thing to do”, then have the courage to say so. But saying the achievements of Clair and Susie are greater than the drivers who have won championships is disingenuous at best.
Your timing and class need work…
Often merely participating in sport is considered infra dig and it is related activities which decide who has earned a medal, be it charitable work or getting involved with promoting healthy recreational habits in schoolkids. For example Ian Botham was knighted for his charity walks, not for his cricketing career.
Mentioning Botham reminds me of the old teaser, can anybody name three batsmen and a left-arm bowler, all British, to have been knighted?
Hobbs Cowdrey, Hutton and Garfield Sobers (born in Barbados when it was still British)
Good try, you got two batsmen, but they all have to be born in Britain, which Cowdrey wasn’t (India).
In which case Sobers cannot be correct because all the others (even the women) were right-handers. If I cannot have Cowdrey, I’ll have Francis Lacey…
Yep, Lacey is good. And you’re correct that Sobers is incorrect, apologies if my previous post didn’t properly make that clear. You have three batsmen, now for a knighted left-arm bowler, born in Britain.
The only left armer I could think of was Derek Underwood, but on checking he was awarded the MBE.
The establishment view is that in order to win an award you have to contribute and/or achieve AND you must be a suitable person. ‘Suitable person’ means whatever a committee of establishment figures decides it should mean.
It is Botham that gives the lie. He has never been an establishment figure, and on several occasions has made headlines for personal indiscretions. He was never considered for an award based on his cricket career because the committee did not approve of his behaviour or of him as a person.
It is also Hamilton that gives the lie. Tattoos, a slightly racy lifestyle in recent years. Clearly not the right stuff.
As you pointed out down the page, the selections emerge from murky waters and no sense or logic can be applied to form a verdict as to why any individual has or has not been awarded one, in whatever field. For many, many years I would not have envisaged Jagger, John or McCartney, for example, kneeling to receive the sword.
I think that any Botham ‘Indiscretions’ were trivial and blown up by news media. I suspect that his Knighthood may have been in part related to the legal case in which a certain Pakistan cricketer had been accused of cheating. I don’t remember the details other than that it ended very suddenly. I put that down to the British judicary being unnwilling to find against someone who might well become an important political figure in future. Whatever happened, Botham made no fuss about the outcome and may have been so advised by the diplomatic service in the ‘national interest’. That was my take on it. I have similar views on Sir Mick Jagger who was very discrete about certain ‘Royal’ confidences.
You may consider adultery and consumption of illegal narcotics as ‘trivial’. Many people do not, especially those in the establishment.
Botham was knighted more than 10 years after his legal battles with Imran Khan. Your suggestion that the judges found in favour of a foreigner because he might be important in the future and that Botham was bought off with an honour is more than a little implausible, offensive even to all parties.
Botham has always been opinionated, chippy and difficult; it’s part of what made him a great sportsman and someone who has achieved so much for charity, but it doesn’t sit well with people who often consider that the end does not justify the means.
At some point, the committee of the day decided that Botham’s substantial positive achievements outweighed his negative points and he became Sir Ian.
I have just looked up the Independent report of the case which described the virdict as a “surprise”. It seems that most expected botham and lamb to win. Botham said he was “astonished” but i think he said little more afterwards. I stick by what I said – in F1 terms a dodgy call by the stewards😌
I completely agree with Joe regarding the comparison between Andy Murray and Lewis Hamilton. I’m a big fan of Murray on and off the court but it’s far too early for him to have a knighthood. Away from drivers, what about Adrian Newey? How many title winning cars has he designed? Off the top of my head, at least 7? Or Ross Brawn?
I consider Ron Dennis contributions to both Motor Sport and the Motor Industry are fully deserving of a knighthood.
MJR
And the relevant honours committee considered him to be fully deserving of a CBE. Your point is ?
Lewis is a non-dom choosing to pay taxes outside the UK. I assumed that Non-doms would never get knighthoods but now Mo Farrah who lives in the USA has one it seems I was wrong. Anyway honours seem to be awarded for very little these days and sadly I believe are much to do with the government wishing to court popular opinion. Regarding F1, as a generalisation, Conservative governments don’t understand it and Labour governments consider it ‘eliteist’.
Jackie Stewart lived in Switzerland for many years. So?
You’re correct about the political parties’ view of F1. Plus in recent years F1 has unjustly become a bête noire due to the environmental perceptions which are erroneously ascribed to it.
Do your research. The honours system makes provision for non-doms. You will find the relevant information on the government’s honours web pages. The majority of people on the honours committees are non-political and there are much better ways of courting public opinion than abusing the honours system, if that is possible.
also away from drivers and considering women in motorsport how about Leena Gade?
Yes. I think she has done great things.
The ‘British Honours’ system is a joke which harks back to a long-dead time. Its purpose is inherently political. Few people outwith the media and the Establishment pay much attention to it.
Maybe Claire Williams got the higher award over Lewis Hamilton because her hill (as a woman) was steeper to climb than Lewis’. Not saying that’s why, but it could be.
I think you may have overlooked the fact that her father owned the team she runs…
Growing up, my understanding of the awards, were that they were no just given due to success in your field but also given because of additional humanitarian reasons. Eg that person may have started a charity or saved a life etc etc. On that note, let’s take a whistle stop tour of some current F1 names.
Notably Bernie:
Bernie has noted millions upon millions to various charities over the years but primarily to GOSH. He facilitates a lot of charitable giving. On success in his field. I don’t see anyone else responsible for building an industry that turns over billions each year and is responsible for ginormous amounts of tax for HER MAJESTY’s government. As a result of his vision, 1000s of people have gainful employment. Like him or loathe him this is all fact.
Lewis Hamilton:
His on track success is un-disputed. His off track humanitarian efforts are less recognised. It doesn’t sell papers – so who cares, right?? He is a long term ambassador for Unicef and aside from that has done a lot for other charities over the years. My own personal interactions with him have seen him dutifully take time out of a corporate event to have one on one time with a terminal patient (who died only a few days later). There were no cameras, no press. He did it because he is a good human being.
Jenson Button:
More undeniable success in his field. Plus the Jenson Button Trust he set up some years ago has generated a tonne of money for various charities in that time.
Christian Horner:
He has built a pretty bloody successful race team which has won a tonne of plaudits and pots.There has been no recognition for that. Further he always ensures that Starlight have good presence in Monaco each year and makes sure the kids are well looked after.
Ultimately the whole system appears to be crooked with no set rules or procedures (not just in relation to F1 – but the country as a whole). These are Royal awards, which have no sign off from Royalty and are dished out to whichever minority is currently in the press. I may sound cynical but it can’t really be argued with. It’s a shame. It would be better to limit it to 500 awards which the Queen (head of state) formally approves before the ceremonies take place.
Strictly speaking the awards are all approved by the monarch, though in keeping with our status as a parliamentary democracy, the Queen has rarely if ever intervened in the choices made.
Lewis did the same for a terminally ill child for the Lotus 7 Club GB. No cameras, no fuss, no publicity.
Good read as always Joe. On the lack of acknowledgement of Motorsport….
If nothing else those running teams, and indeed Richard Nobel and Andy Green, should be Knighted for their contributions to engineering and technology in the UK. Ron Dennis, James Alison and Paddy Lowe would all reckon in my book for at least something.
The work being done now by the Bloodhound Project to promote STEM in schools is by far enough to put a sword on their shoulders let alone the fact that both the principles have done over 700mph in a car (to be over 1000mph for Andy Green hopefully next year). What a world leading feat!
Well said…..
Adrian Newey – has he ever been honoured ? Surely he should be knighted
Newey received an OBE in 2012
Joe
Thank you for having the courage to raise the topic. The following webpage may be of interest :
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/honours-committees
There are many problems with the honours system. In the interests of brevity, I summarise :
1) Honours committees consist almost entirely of establishment people. The establishment view prevails.
2) Most committee members are high profile figures, but very few of them have any history of participation in their field – they are administrators and ‘public figures’. In depth knowledge and understanding of any field ? Not a chance.
3) The territory covered by each committee is enormous. The chances of anything non-mainstream being considered worthy of note are extremely remote. Motor sport is non-mainstream.
4) The terms of reference for each committee explicitly prevents it from a) seeking outside opinion and b) using any form of comparative scheme to assess the merits of any case. Each case is judged only by the committee, and is judged on its own merits against some notional ‘absolute’ standard. I have been told this by three very different sources, so I feel comfortable stating it as fact.
You don’t have to think for long about the above to realise that no matter how hard any committee tries, no matter how smart its’ members, the chances of its’ awards being fair, reasonable and consistent (or even any one of those things) are very remote indeed. Unfortunately, it is probably the best we can do – the idea that there should be any form of public involvement in the vote fills me with terror and dread.
There are very many British men in motor sport who have achieved far more than either Claire Williams or Susie Wolff and who have not received honours. We must therefore conclude that the ladies received preferential consideration. Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton, the best driver on the planet, has just a MBE. Must be the tattoos, the establishment feels threatened by tattoos. And no, that last comment was not a joke.
Of all the sports which I follow (and there are many), motor sport in general and F1 in particular seem to me to be the most truly meritocratic. How sad that the external recognition is so much at odds with that notion.
Very well argued indeed
I’m not saying she’s wrong. However, her experience is just that…her experience. To project her own insight to an entire gender is problematic, in my opinion.
“I am all for there being more women in motorsport, at every level, but I do not believe that they should be rewarded for anything other than their actual achievements.”
Sounds great in theory, but I can’t help but note that pay drivers are the obvious example that shows F1 is far from egalitarian and does not simply give the best drivers a seat.
My personal opinion is that based on physiological differences between men and women, men will always have a physical advantage. But, if you look at fighter pilots, both men and women are capable of high levels of performance. This seems like a decent analogy to racing, one which also had socio-cultural barriers. So, give people a chance and the cream will rise to the top.
“My personal opinion is that based on physiological differences between men and women, men will always have a physical advantage.”
Michele Mouton was the real deal. She rallied a physical car — Audi Quattro — and beat it. She beat men too.
That’s what Pat Moss did too.
John Marshall
With regard to physiology, there is any amount of evidence that men cope much better than women with most types of extreme physiological stress. As a consequence, there are still incredibly few women fast-jet pilots, even in countries where both sexes are given equal opportunities. A few years back, the RAF made a lot of fuss about their first woman fast-jet driver and even put her in the Red Arrows, but they very soon reverted to a selection system based strictly on performance and capability. If you consider that F1 drivers and fast-jet pilots are selected from the tail of the capability/performance distribution, only a small systemic difference in capability (10 per cent is the figure usually quoted) produces a tail populated almost entirely by men.
Get ready for posts by those who claim that science has disproved Ms. Mouton’s point… even though science has never-ever-ever addressed her point…
RShack, you don’t seem to be trying to provide any evidence to support her hypothesis either (and, at the moment, what she has given is a statement of opinion and nothing more).
She didn’t provide a hypothesis, and this is not a scientific experiment. She reported her insight based on her direct experience… which is a lot more than we have to go on.
If you don’t buy it, that’s fine. But don’t go confusing this with science. There is no science that has studied the complex matter she was talking about.
RShack
There is no need to pay much attention to Ms Mouton’s comments, because the reasons for the dearth of women drivers in F1 can be explained by physiological reasons alone. There is a huge amount of scientific evidence which says that men typically have greater physiological capability than women (the number usually quoted is around 10 percent) and driver performance depends very heavily on physiological capability. As soon as you limit the selection to the very best physiological specimens (say 100 in a few billion), the population of candidates slews from 50-50 to about 1 in 10,000 women. If you ask really nicely, I’ll do the stats properly for you.
In summary, F1 depends so heavily on physical capability that there are very few women who are good enough. Attitude, commitment and all the other necessary attributes which women have developed in recent generations matter far less.
On the contrary, we shoudl lsiten evry carefully to those who have been successful.
I am interested to hear Ms Mouton’s thoughts, but she is guilty of arguing from the particular to the general, so there is good reason to treat them carefully.
The F1 ladder doesn’t pull 100 from a few billion… it pulls 100 from maybe a hundred thousand, tops, when you consider all the non-performance barriers to getting on that ladder…
I find the whole honours system a complete joke, and many others do too. Not everyone wants to be honoured in the same way Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith, Nicolae Ceausescu and countless other punchlines to distasteful jokes were. No wonder David Bowie, John Cleese, Michael Faraday, Alan Bennett, TE Lawrence, George Bernard Shaw and countless others wanted nothing to do with them.
Fully Agree! As an F1 fan who’s adopted The Great Britain as home, I felt dejected that Lewis Hamilton dosen’t have the recognition Andy Murray has received. Clearly something amiss here.
I am surprised/disappointed Suzi Woolf accapted the honour.
I think less of her for doing so – not more.
Great article Joe,
Its always been a mystery for me why since the invention of power steering has reduced the strength required to drive has reduced the main physical barrier to competition. Give an engineer a chance to design a car for a bigger heavier body frame or a smaller lighter one we all know what they would choose.
Women are better at endurance where it is not limited by aerobic or anaerobic factors (according to a 2001 study in the American Journal of Physiology,) so might be equipped for the longer F1 races than there male counterparts.
A study publish in live science last month says that “There is no such thing as a “male brain” or a “female brain” so that can’t be blamed.
My guess is the limiting factor is the pool of women who go racing, if you have 9 men for every 1 woman, the odds of are in favour of the best driver being male.
I think it’s great that we have Donna Patrick, Susie Wolfe and Claire Williams, hopefully they will inspire more young women into the sport.
Ps I really enjoyed the interesting facts last month.
Is Donna Patrick any relation to Danica ? Sorry …
It is not physical strength which is the biggest problem, it is much more the ability to cope with g forces. Speak to any doctor in the RAF and s/he will tell you that women typically cope very much less well than men in high-g environments, hence the dearth of female fast-jet pilots. There is a definite association with body size and shape – the effect is less pronounced in tall and large women, and small and light men don’t do so well. Unfortunately the RAF won’t release their data, nor will they allow academic institutions to use their facilities to do their own tests.
There is plenty of sound science which says women cannot drive F1 cars as fast as men can; it is only in extreme sports like F1 where the systemic difference between the sexes is significant There is any amount of anecdotal evidence which says that men are far more likely than women to be excited by the thought of driving very fast. Those two statements alone can account for the huge disparity in the size of the two populations.
Spot-on …
John Surtees just keeps on going. Every year he organises a kart event or a street display of racing cars on the streets where Surtees cars were made. For charity.
John Surtees is an awkward contrary bloke — and a very good man.
There are no Canadian drivers invested in our equivalent called the Order of Canada. Sad indeed.
Most Canadians are too sensible to make good racing drivers – that’s a compliment by the way. I can think of Tracy, Tagliani, Villeneuve pere et fils, Carpentier – it’s not a long list.
It’s a very odd “establishment tradition” How can Wolfe be honoured when as far as I know she has never won a car race of any sort and the Dare to be different project has yet to bear any shoots let alone fruit. John Surtees not being Knighted is beyond rational thought when one sees the ex drug takers and other sundry wasters getting the honour. Then again who can forget Jenson Button’s face when Ryan Giggs won BBC sports personality of the year in 2009! Ah the British establishment. ….
One of the defining characteristics of members of the establishment is that they never rock the boat. When the prevailing mood involves capitulation to any minority which makes a bit of noise, that is what you do. If it is all the rage to promote women’s causes, that is what you do. In the advertising industry it is called the echo chamber effect. With a bit of effort, even people like Susie Wolff who have achieved very little can be made to appear worthy and significant figures.
I don’t think anyone can reasonably question Surtees’ achievements. I suspect that he may have upset people in high places – as the saying goes, you can’t make omelettes without breaking eggs. By the time we became more tolerant of people who put achievement before PR, I suspect he had faded from the memory of the average (non-motor sport) person.
Don’t forget that BBC Sports Personality is voted for by the public. However, I remember how the BBC presented the 2009 candidates in an outrageously biassed way and thinking that the fix was in for Giggs – not only was Jenson robbed blind, so was Jessica Ennis.
I don’t get it. Joe’s piece seemed a thorough and even-handed piece on women in motorosport. Why the rickus?
Knighthoods and honours are nice, but the people IN the sport know who has done what and where respect is due. Outside recognition is nice, but it is often under-informed or political.
Oh, dear. This gender malarkey is downright perplexing. On one side we have those upright citizens who demand rigid equality for everyone, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, musical tastes, favourite chocolate treat, etc. On the other we have the bleeding hearts who want to award gongs to people who have achieved comparatively little in their field of endeavour but who happen to be females competing against males who have had greater success. So much for ‘equality,’ eh?
Most forms of motorsport require athletic ability, in some cases (not least F1) to much the same level as the various football disciplines and most track & field events, all of which are contested separately by men and women in officially-sanctioned categories. It is surely paradoxical to protest that there is prejudice against women in motorsport, especially when (as Joe points out) we have had a woman like Pat Moss demonstrating her ability by winning the Liège-Rome-Liège rally, an event which required almost superhuman levels of stamina.
As readers of GP+ will know, I have written columns pointing out that motorsport (not to mention Bernie) has a pretty good record when it comes to accepting female competitors. I might pay more attention to the moaners on the day when Manchester United names a female player to start a Premier league match.
As for awards, I can only agree with Joe that it makes no sense for ‘Angry’ Andy Murray to be knighted for winning Wimbledon twice when Lewis Hamilton has won the British GP four times and taken three drivers’ championships while still being plain ‘Mister.’ But then this is the same wonky awards system which has chosen not to recognise my country’s most successful politician of the last 60 or 70 years …
Tony Blair?
Come on, chum, I said ‘successful.’ Think of someone who beat the odds more recently. Like in June last year.
Ahhh of course, you mean Boris!
To be fair to Blair he did win 3 landslide elections. Love him or loath him (and there are plenty of good reasons to do both) that is quite a masive achievement. Surely you don’t mean a guy who actively campaigned against our national interests in Brussels and was rejected by the electorate a staggering seven times? It would be churlish to deny his role in Brexit, but “most successful politician of the last six decades”? I must, most respectfully, disagree.
“Tony Blair?” Surely hypocrisy does not stretch that far, though he has done more for arms sales than many of his contemporaries.
Well said. I suspect that few people who are not motor sport fans have any idea of the exceptional fitness and athletic ability required to compete at the highest levels.
Do you think that a womens series of some sort would be possible and/or appropriate ? Are there enough drivers to make it feasible ?
The honours system is biased a lot by the status of activity the potential recipients belong to. Horse racing has status, motor racing doesn’t. It is the same for occupations. In the 2016 New Years Honours 5 out of the 43,000 architects in Britain received an honour, or 1 in 9,000. 16 out of 184,000 doctors were given an honour, or 1 in 11,500. There are 275,000 computer programmers on whose work the modern world runs, not one of them was honoured.
Interesting article, the British honours system should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway.
I’d agree with Joes views and I’d even go as far as to say neither Susie Wolf nor Claire Williams deserves either accolade.
Joe I think where you are making your mistake is, you are being logical and sensible. Those two things have no relevance with politicians and bureaucrats.
Grr don’t get me started. If anyone can seriously explain to me why the vacuous, miserable Victoria Beckham deserved a gong this year perhaps they could explain it. The whole system is corrupt and has been for years.
Victoria Beckham has made a substantial contribution to the fashion industry. The received opinion is that she is a very skilled designer and the facts tell you that her company has contributed significantly to our export earnings.
I find it strange that you dismiss the honours system as ‘corrupt’, apparently because the views of the honours committee(s) do not coincide with your opinions. Tell me, in your world does the sun go round the earth ?
“Victoria Beckham herself has confessed that she did not actually draw any of the dresses, saying, “Do I draw? No. Then again, nor do lots of designers. But I put it all on myself and walk around in it, and I know what feels comfortable. I know how a dress should sit.”
Wow, if only the rest of us knew if clothes were functional/comfortable when we wore them.
Victoria Beckham’s name may have contributed but her skills are dubious at best. (Although using a name to generate interest isn’t a bad thing – just ask Banksy)
My understanding was that her husband bailed out her fashion business to the tune of several million pounds.
Personally i think honours should be bestowed on people how have made significant contributions to society the betterment of peoples lives and Britain as a country. I don’t think winning a world championship or Wimbledon and becoming very wealthy at the same time meets this criteria. Sir Frank et al deserve to be honoured for building a motorsport industry in Britain that provides employment and recognition. I agree with Joe that others within F1 deserve more recognition than they get.
An American perspective: OBE, MBE CBE, PDQ, XYZ… who cares? Make your case with the statistics but don’t worry about the honorifics. Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, a medal would not enhance that feat. Be who you are! Now I must leave to argue about who shot first, Han or Greedo… 😉
U.S. servicemen have chests filled with medal ribbons and I guess that most care very deeply about them. Recognition is important.
Neil Armstrong picked up a few gongs for his exploits.
Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Congressional Space Medal of Honor and the Congressional Gold Medal. The Scots made him a Freeman of Langholm.
While Michele Mouton’s experience of the sport is clearly superior to ours, I’d like to know what the likes of Susie, Danica, Katherine or Simona say in response to the quote. At this point in time they seem to be amongst the few people who could predict whether women will ultimately succeed consistently in Grand Prix racing. I’m particularly curious of Michele’s reference to the risk element – Group B rallying is hardly the safest pursuit; would a female circuit racer say that what Michele did was the epitome of bravery while they themselves feel comfortable with the risks posed by a Formula car?
Michele Mouton established her racing career under the Group 2/4 rules. Her Audi of that time was a big car and must have been a handful.
The Group B Audi was another big car but Mouton was a winner. Michele Mouton was an outstanding driver in 1982.
Skip any patronising comments about lady racers. She was really quick.
To whom is this addressed?
in response to Phil Charnock…
Agreed Phil B, she was a star and can rightly be argued to be the female driver with the greatest impact on motorsport to date. I’m just wondering if the current generation of circuit racers would look at driving an Audi between trees, through crowds and across ice as fundamentally dangerous in the same way she believes Formula and Indy racing is? Katherine Legge and Lynn St James had monster smashes in US racing and still kept coming back for more, so they certainly didn’t shy from danger. From my perspective as a casual observer Michele’s considerable achievements actually seem to show that women can indeed deal with the challenges she outlines, but until we see a similar performance from a female racer in another area of the sport (the Force family excepted) in the modern era then we don’t truly know.
Very good points made Phil. Let’s not forget we do have a sprinkling of female racers on two wheels who may also have an issue with Mouton’s comments about self-preservation. Jenny Tinmouth and more recently, Maria Herrera spring to mind. Worth noting that these ladies compete in probably THE most dangerous (and physical) form of track racing.
Joe, I agree with your points about the Honours system. Susie Wolff and Claire Williams may in the future both achieve things in Formula 1 and motorsport which truly are worthy of their reward, but I wouldn’t say either have so far. The question is, what would be worthy of such a reward?
In my book, transforming Williams into a regular race-winning team again would fit that bill, as would mentoring a female racing driver through the ranks, starting in the junior formulae, taking them all the way up to an F1 drive in a respectable team (i.e. not a seat sold to the highest bidder).
I do have some sympathy for their achievements in breaking down barriers, however, and I would always admire them for using the advantages of their status to the fullest rather than hold it against them as some people might, but position and initiative is one thing – the fruit must follow. I hope it does for both, as I’d love to see Williams win championships again, and I’d love to see women doing really well in F1.
In not so many words…
I think Ms Williams’s efforts deserve higher recognition.
This is not because of her gender but because she is directly sustaining and pushing the industry with the family business. This affects many people and their families whilst showcasing ‘the best of British’ on the world stage.
The drivers are ‘only’ good at their niche role in the sport but not putting in to growth in the same direct manner.
(this is the not so many words bit)
The obvious counterpoint to the above is that the drivers attract fans to the sport. This is true but can anyone honestly suggest Lewis or Max are thinking of any people or promotion other than their own selves?
They may become legends in their own right but legends don’t keep the wheels of industry turning.
See also: the Williams team post-Senna.
> This is not because of her gender but because she
> is directly sustaining and pushing the industry with
> the family business.
She is?
She mainly looks kinda scared to me…
I almost see a thought bubble rising from her head while her hand hides her mouth: “What exactly am I supposed to do?”
Susie Wolff has done great work and continues to (I surmise, not that I really know…) but I agree it seems a bit much to hand out titles too readily. It immediately devalues the system and that is not good at all. I’m sure Lewis and Jenson aren’t going to lose any sleep over it though. If I ever received anything like that how would it feel if you didn’t think you had earned it. Some even hand them back like Lennon and others…
There’s around 20 F1 drivers on a grid, so for 1 driver to be a woman, we need around a 5% participation rate for females across all the lower categories of motorsport (assuming all things such as skill etc are equal).
It’s been a while since I’ve looked at the high end karting scene but I still think we’re quite a way from 5% women races. Until we get a sizeable chunk to enter at ages 9-10 into karting, we’ll only see the odd female driver here and there.
If statistics provided the answers we’d have two females from India and two from China on the grid. It doesn’t work like that.
I think the difference with India/China is money and opportunity. In the UK there are simply less girls interested in racing when they are young, could be society or genes but you can’t escape the fact that at the grass roots there was far more boys starting out or wanting to race.
Two questions
Does anyone honestly think susie would have gotten her F1 opportunities, based on prior competitive performance if she was (a) male (b) not married to Toto?
No to a, and no to b.
Happy New year to Joe & All the people who comment on this blog!
If there was any justice in the world of gongs then Big John Surtees would have been a Sir years and years ago!
Michele Mouton was a great driver…..not just a great female driver, but a great driver in any gender!
If Mouton could handle an Audi Quattro and win rallies, as well as fight for titles, then any fast and reasonably strong woman could do.
When one considers that many top F1 drivers now say that the current cars are the easiest to drive for years, with physical strength now not a paramount requirement, then that ought to open the field up to loads of women, who should be able to compete with men in F1 etc.
To resolve that issue the people in teams who have to make driver selection decisions should look further than the next teenage man!
“many top F1 drivers now say that the current cars are the easiest to drive for years, with physical strength now not a paramount requirement, then that ought to open the field up to loads of women”
I hadn’t considered this – very good point.
I should not really start this, but
As a Brit, I believe the honors system has become extremely devalued and pretty much a waste of time.
Some ordinary people who devote their lives to helping other people etc., are deserving, but when a prime minister honors the England cricket team for winning the ashes etc….”doing their Day Job Well (and well paid for it)”
– he should also honors all our armed forces for doing their day job well too!
It appears that if you donate a couple of million to a political party you can get a peerage – sit in the house of Lords – this to me devalues the house of Lords.
I would suggest abolishing the house of Lords, unfortunately I do not have a constructive replacement to suggest, but feel the current is not fit for purpose.
Love the blog, and cant wait for 1st GP of 2017
On the point about women in motorsport and making it to the top, there is one thing that is usually overlooked, and that is that generally women aren’t that interested at least to say far more men want to take part in motorsport (I’m not saying women are never interested or shouldn’t be). Because the numbers are so small compared to the men naturally if all things being equal you wouldn’t expect to see any women in F1.
I raced karts for a few years in a team endurance championship, the organising company provided the karts so there wasn’t really much in the way of barriers to entry just cost of racing suits travel and the entry fee. Each race had 20-35 teams each with at least 3 drivers, there were 12 races in the season. I think the maximum number of women racing was 4 in one race but usually 1-2 per race. I think this tells you something about why there aren’t women racing in F1 even before we talk about differences in ability. Much of it is down to generally men liking this kind of sport more than women.
To answer your previous and this post …………… Or it’s their Father’s NOT pushing girls to race. (and the Mother’s) ( how many boys got model cars / or full size carts for Xmas and how many girls got model cars / carts ) – You do the maths.
“Wiggins was knighted in 2013 after one Tour de France victory, but last year Chris Frome won his third Tour de France and is still just a plain old OBE. Where is the logic in that?”
I was always under the impression that these recognitions took a wider ‘services to the sport’ view, it’s not purely based on talent or achievement. I don’t think it would be too hard to argue that, rightly or wrongly, Wiggins is a name that is a major contributor to this countries massive success in getting people interested in cycling (perhaps more so due to his Olympic record, which is far more visible than the TDF), for whatever reason for Froome, not so much. People can’t even spell his name correctly.
In all cases recipients of awards need to be nominated, with evidence. Yes, ‘nominations’ will be a quick agenda item for a meeting in some relevant civil service teams, but the majority depend upon someone thinking someone else deserves something. The awards committee will only consider nominations that they receive, and don’t / can’t say ‘well, if this person gets this then this other person deserves it as well..’
Having a son who is 4 1/2 and a girl who is almost 3 I can already see why boys will make a racing driver and girl probably not. My son wants to ride his bike all the time, shoot things on the iPad, hit things, jump off things – his mates are very different – only girls in our NCT group so he has spend more time being around fairies and stuff than the stuff boys want to do – now his sister has hit the age to play with her older brother she doesn’t want cars and bikes but chooses to play with dolls, puppy dogs and more maternal type games. So to find a decent enough percentage of girls that don’t think like girls and then find an A girl to drive at F1 level will be extremely difficult.
Also I think if you have a look at the UCI Mountain bike Wolrd champion downhill they have women and men categories and rightly so as the women are a fair percentage slower than the men (look at the current female world champ vs her brothers one of which also won a world title).
A female world champ in F1 could happen but I feel the chances are very slim – let’s keep an eye on verstappens sister.
Also on the awards it does seem somewhat unfair but anyone who gets one should be proud. Maybe we should have campaigned for Surtees knighthood a little earlier?
When it comes to female drivers, Eliška Junková might have been the best of them all, having earned respect from colleagues like Albert Divo or Louis Chiron. She was not big in stature but still had the stamina to be competitive at races as grueling as Targa Florio.
I met her at Brno, back in 1984
I envy you. My only visit at Brno was in 1983. I remember that Tom Walkinshaw won the race.
The problem with British motorsport champions is … They have a predisposition to live in Tax Havens at the height of their sporting achievements.
Hamilton? Monaco (and formally Switzerland)
Button? Monaco / Guernsey
Hill? Ireland
Mansell? Isle of Man.
Stewart? Switzerland
This creates bad press.
Wouldn’t you do the same?
Re the comment you made about ‘making a fuss’ for John Surtees, a few years back my son Tom and I gathered the signatures of some 10 or 12 World Champions in support of Big John’s lack of a knighthood. Eight World championships and, at that time, only MBE and OBE recognition?
Tom worked in MotoGP at that time, while i was on the F1 beat. Every champ I asked did so with alacrity.and respect. I liked Tom’s story that the first person he asked was Ben Spies; When he hesitated, his mother, Mary, instructed him: “Sign that now Benjamin, the man is a legend!”
Subsequently, a year or so later we handed them over to the MSA who had a campaign of its own starting up (and from whom we never heard a word).
A CBE is not to be sneered at, but withholding a knighthood from a man of John’s character and calibre has long gone beyond scandalous and borders on spiteful.
Green and Noble should both have been knighted for their unique supersonic land speed record with ThrustSSC back in 1997.
Lovely article.
Agree entirely with the premise of the author.
I’ve stumbled upon the blog a few months ago, joyful that I did.
A subscriber of GP+ for 2017.
Thanks for the constant content!
I fail to understand why Richard and Andy haven’t been knighted. It’ll be a travesty if they’re not after they returned from Africa next year