Who REALLY drives and SUV? According to New Yorker, vain, insecure people.

[AP]

A friend told me that there was an article in last weeks (?) New Yorker (Jan 7?) about how dangerous and awful SUVs were.

She said that SUV drivers are insecure about their marriages, are vain, etc. etc. Also, SUVs are marketed to dumb people. Apparently, SUV drivers rank the cup holder as one of the most important safety devices in their vehicles. The auto companies target these people with ads that exploint their stupidity.

The article also lays out just how dangerous SUVs are.

Anyone read it?

I haven't yet, so this is mostly hearsay. I hope it's reliable.

[Enjolras]

1. Dumb, no. Insecure, definitely.

SUV's have replaced guns as the phallic symbol of the moment. All manly, masculine guys drive SUV's and big pick-ups. Compact cars are for wimps and faggots.

Read this hilarious column by Dave Barry. He only mentions specifically the pick-ups, but the principle is the same.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/dave_barry/7536760.htm

P.S. I don't feel one bit conscientious about my shrivelled, little Olds Intrigue.

[tridim]

2. I'm in the market for a new (used) vehicle

and after about 20 seconds I decided the number one feature I want in a car is 35+mpg and top reliability. Pretty much limits my choices to small Hondas and Toyotas. What are all these 15mpg SUV owners going to do when gas goes above $3.00/gallon? My guess is that there will be a lot of cheap, used SUV's in the paper soon. In the mean time, SUV owners are going to make Bush's oil buddies super-duper-uber-rich.

[Military Brat]

3. I read the article. It's quite good, but it isn't that insulting

It covers the theory that people drive SUVs because they're taken in by the illusion of safety, rather than the reality. It explains the unusual high death rate of SUV drivers and passengers as related to the fact that SUV owners have a "false sense of security" and are more likely to make mistakes, coupled with the fact that SUVs are not nimble enough to steer out of danger or brake in time.

And, yes, there are a few whacks up the side of the head because of SUVs appealing to vanity and macho egos, etc.

[Moderator]

4. Locking

Duplicate at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1014607&mesg_id=1014607

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator