FARK.com: (6663528) Women are more likely then men to be seriously injured in a car crash because crash test dummies are designed to look more like men. Mmm Mmm Mmm

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		Women are more likely then men to be seriously injured in a car crash because crash test dummies are designed to look more like men. Mmm Mmm Mmm (heraldsun.com.au)		133
		More: Interesting, American Journal of Public Health, crash tests, sexisms

• • •

2734 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Oct 2011 at 12:40 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/6663528

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

133 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

maxximillian		2011-10-21 01:40:12 PM

ManOfTeal: Once there was this kid who
Got into an accident and couldn't come to school
But when he finally came back
His hair had turned from black into bright white
He said that it was from when
The car had smashed so hard

Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm
Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm

Once there was this girl who
Wouldn't go and change with the girls in the change room
But when they finally made her
They saw birthmarks all over her body
She couldn't quite explain it
( From: http://www.elyrics.net/read/c/crash-test-dummies-lyrics/mmm-mmm-mmm-mm m-lyrics.html )
They'd always just been there

Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm
Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm

But both girl and boy were glad
'Cause one kid had it worse than that

'Cause then there was this boy whose
Parents made him come directly home right after school
And when they went to their church
They shook and lurched all over the church floor
He couldn't quite explain it
They'd always just gone there

Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm
Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm

Some 90s songs should DIAF.

img.photobucket.com

I'll KILL YOU!

LaraAmber		2011-10-21 01:41:05 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Snakeophelia: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

All I know about crash test dummies is from a "how it's made" type of show, and it's obvious that they make dummies in all different shapes and sizes. However, do those dummies take into account things such as different bone densities, different muscle mass, and so on? Perhaps they do, because not all 5'4" people are created equal, but I have no idea how many variables would be important when it comes to car crashes.

Short answer is yes. Crash test dummy technology has come a long way in the past 30 years, but there are still factors that we cannot represent without crashing an actual human. Factors such as bone density, tenseness, posture at time of crash, etc are simulated using a variety of means, but these are still only simulations.

So use actual humans. It's not like we have a shortage.

Genevieve Marie		2011-10-21 01:42:08 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: We've been long aware that women are more likely to die in car crashes. The problem is that when it comes to seat belts and air bags, there are no "one size fits all" solutions.

So the study makes complete sense in the context of what you know about crash safety. Because all they're advocating is exactly what's stated in the abstract:

JackieRabbit: Conclusions. To address the sex-specific disparity demonstrated in this study, health policies and vehicle regulations must focus on effective safety designs specifically tailored toward the female population for equity in injury reduction. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print October 20, 2011:e1-e6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300275)

Which is a position that makes complete sense. I

The article was written with a sensationalist slant (just like most of them are) but the underlying point is sound.

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian		2011-10-21 01:42:37 PM

LaraAmber: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Snakeophelia: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

All I know about crash test dummies is from a "how it's made" type of show, and it's obvious that they make dummies in all different shapes and sizes. However, do those dummies take into account things such as different bone densities, different muscle mass, and so on? Perhaps they do, because not all 5'4" people are created equal, but I have no idea how many variables would be important when it comes to car crashes.

Short answer is yes. Crash test dummy technology has come a long way in the past 30 years, but there are still factors that we cannot represent without crashing an actual human. Factors such as bone density, tenseness, posture at time of crash, etc are simulated using a variety of means, but these are still only simulations.

So use actual humans. It's not like we have a shortage.

Are you volunteering, biatch?

lsmsrbls		2011-10-21 01:43:18 PM

Chthonic Echoes: They haven't shown that women are physically harmed by sexism. They have shown that women suffer more injuries in car accidents than men.

Did you miss this part? "The positioning of head restraints, for instance, fails to take into account how women's necks are different in size and strength." That indicates to me that safety for women is, at most, an afterthought in the industry.

But at any rate, I couldn't find the actual study and we all know the media does an awful job reporting on research. If you prefer, I'll revise my complaint to "an article says that in a certain situation women are more likely to be injured than men and farkers respond by making jokes at the expense of women." That's not a hell of a lot better.

Outlaw Thirds		2011-10-21 01:43:32 PM

lsmsrbls: So a study shows a situation where women are physically harmed by sexism and many responses here are sexist jokes at the expense of women.

Hilarious.

No, it shows that while they could be doing real jobs, people waste time on things that are obviously already taken care of. There is no financial incentive for car companies to make cars less safe for women-on the contrary, women who die in car accidents tend to get more attention (as with any tragedy).

Genevieve Marie		2011-10-21 01:47:02 PM

lsmsrbls: So a study shows a situation where women are physically harmed by sexism and many responses here are sexist jokes at the expense of women.

Hilarious.

Yea, agreed. I think the story was a little bit sensationalist, but the underlying point of the study and its recommendation is completely and totally sound.

LaraAmber		2011-10-21 01:49:33 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: LaraAmber: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Snakeophelia: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

All I know about crash test dummies is from a "how it's made" type of show, and it's obvious that they make dummies in all different shapes and sizes. However, do those dummies take into account things such as different bone densities, different muscle mass, and so on? Perhaps they do, because not all 5'4" people are created equal, but I have no idea how many variables would be important when it comes to car crashes.

Short answer is yes. Crash test dummy technology has come a long way in the past 30 years, but there are still factors that we cannot represent without crashing an actual human. Factors such as bone density, tenseness, posture at time of crash, etc are simulated using a variety of means, but these are still only simulations.

So use actual humans. It's not like we have a shortage.

Are you volunteering, biatch?

Nope, but imagine how hard kids would study if the kids who didn't get their high school diplomas were open for a draft into the crash test program. It would be a heck of a "stick". Also: repeat offenders, child molesters, murderers, and people who root for Michigan.

vudukungfu		2011-10-21 01:50:55 PM

Genevieve Marie: , but the underlying point of the study and its recommendation is completely and totally sound.

What dumb broad came up with that study?
*ducks*

Look, As an ex cop, I'd like to say I RARELY saw a man applying makeup while driving. RARELY saw a man turn around and talk to someone in the back seat while driving, and RARELY saw a man wait to check himself in the mirror right after parking and before exiting a vehicle.

That being said, that was back in the 70s.
Nowadays, it's equal opportunity supidity out there.
Texters, and phone yakkers, and snowflake sitters.

I avoid packs of them. Regardless of their gender.
No one takes driving seriously.

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian		2011-10-21 01:53:29 PM

Genevieve Marie: lsmsrbls: So a study shows a situation where women are physically harmed by sexism and many responses here are sexist jokes at the expense of women.

Hilarious.

Yea, agreed. I think the story was a little bit sensationalist, but the underlying point of the study and its recommendation is completely and totally sound.

You read an article that cites a study. You perouse the study, noting a few key facts. Therefore you are an expert.

/and my industry is sexist
//also, amaed that we don't use simulated female dummies
///was pretty sure we did for the past, oh i dunno, 30 years

I'd post all kind of photos that you guys'd get a kick out of if they weren't confidential. My droogs are also Farkers and I value my job too much.

BurnShrike		2011-10-21 01:53:42 PM

Women are more likely then men to be seriously injured in a car crash

Sounds like someone's crash test dummy has sand in her vagina.

snocone		2011-10-21 01:54:04 PM

JackieRabbit: This wins the prize for the stupidest thing I've read all week. Un, head restraints are all adjustable and have been for 30 years. People with shorter legs are LESS likely to sustain leg injuries in a crash. Finally, there are both male and female crash dummies; there are also child crash dummies. All cars are tested with all types of dummies. Conclusion: this crap is just made up.

Are you the ONLY one that recognizes this?

Please light the derisiion and stupid lamp. This sounds like Bachmann speachifying.
All we need is Laurana Danna Danner. (sp?) "Nevermind"

pervvywanker		2011-10-21 01:59:22 PM

lsmsrbls: So a study shows a situation where women are physically harmed by sexism and many responses here are sexist jokes at the expense of women.

Hilarious.

You sound REALLY fat.

ciberido		2011-10-21 02:00:40 PM

vudukungfu		2011-10-21 02:01:25 PM

pervvywanker: You sound REALLY fat.

I'm sure she's the one skinny gal in Alabama.

Gramma		2011-10-21 02:09:24 PM

The shoulder belt (that is supposed to go across my chest, rides up and actually spends most of it's time across my throat. If I ever hit something, I'm going to get a busted neck.

/short

Genevieve Marie		2011-10-21 02:09:28 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: You read an article that cites a study. You perouse the study, noting a few key facts. Therefore you are an expert.

/and my industry is sexist
//also, amaed that we don't use simulated female dummies
///was pretty sure we did for the past, oh i dunno, 30 years

I didn't claim to be an expert and I wouldn't say your industry is actively sexist by any means- that implies a conscious decision towards sexism and I know damn well that's not the case. And I know that there have been a lot of improvements made to safety and it's because of people like you and the industry you work in.

The only point this study makes is that a sex-specific disparity does exist in how safety features work, and that focusing on why is important to improving safety features for women, and the industry should do this. No one's questioning the work you guys have already done- this is the type of study that helps inform your work going forward.

For example, you've already stated that while crash test dummy technology has improved quite a bit, and that you take factors like bone density into account to the best of your abilities, it's far from perfect. There's a fair chance that the physiological differences between men and women aren't completely accounted for in current crash test dummy technology. This is the type of study that would be used to argue that funding should be allocated towards continually improving that technology, and that sex-specific differences should be a focus because a disparity exists there. It's not meant to criticize your work, it's meant to help it progress in the future.

Do you really have a problem with that assessment?

afarkingirl		2011-10-21 02:11:07 PM

Hey I love that song!

meanmutton		2011-10-21 02:12:31 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

You're in Okinawa and a safety engineer for GM? Odd... I thought they generally did their safety testing at Milford and at Lang Lang.

Cthulhain		2011-10-21 02:18:59 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

Um, you do understand why shiat gets greenlit on Fark right? So we can make fun of how stupid, pointless and/or inaccurate it is. It's very rare that an article is posted here for its merits.

Jesus, dude.

meanmutton		2011-10-21 02:19:38 PM

Gramma: The shoulder belt (that is supposed to go across my chest, rides up and actually spends most of it's time across my throat. If I ever hit something, I'm going to get a busted neck.

/short

They make seat belt adjusters for people who are short: http://www.mypreciouskid.com/seat-belt-adjuster.html

Ehh		2011-10-21 02:21:16 PM

meanmutton: You're in Okinawa and a safety engineer for GM? Odd... I thought they generally did their safety testing at Milford and at Lang Lang.

There's a confidential crash test program in Okinawa too. By the way, if you are walking along the street and some beautiful women in a van pull up next to you and offer you a lot of money to come party with them, don't get in.

Somaticasual		2011-10-21 02:24:51 PM

If they made crash test dummies with realistic features, a figure, and breasts, women would complain about that too saying it was objectifying. Really, it should go without saying, but you can't please all the people all the time. There's just going to be that segment of the population that complains no matter what a company does.

meanmutton		2011-10-21 02:27:17 PM

Genevieve Marie: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: You read an article that cites a study. You perouse the study, noting a few key facts. Therefore you are an expert.

/and my industry is sexist
//also, amaed that we don't use simulated female dummies
///was pretty sure we did for the past, oh i dunno, 30 years

I didn't claim to be an expert and I wouldn't say your industry is actively sexist by any means- that implies a conscious decision towards sexism and I know damn well that's not the case. And I know that there have been a lot of improvements made to safety and it's because of people like you and the industry you work in.

The only point this study makes is that a sex-specific disparity does exist in how safety features work, and that focusing on why is important to improving safety features for women, and the industry should do this. No one's questioning the work you guys have already done- this is the type of study that helps inform your work going forward.

For example, you've already stated that while crash test dummy technology has improved quite a bit, and that you take factors like bone density into account to the best of your abilities, it's far from perfect. There's a fair chance that the physiological differences between men and women aren't completely accounted for in current crash test dummy technology. This is the type of study that would be used to argue that funding should be allocated towards continually improving that technology, and that sex-specific differences should be a focus because a disparity exists there. It's not meant to criticize your work, it's meant to help it progress in the future.

Do you really have a problem with that assessment?

I have one -- they've been using female crash-test dummies for quite a while. The NHTSA and IIHS have been using them for over a decade and quite a few companies have been using them longer. When I did an engineering internship with GM back in the mid 90s they had a large range of crash test dummies from very large men to newborn babies.

Doing a little research, I found that starting in the 1980s, they began using a "95th percentile male" and "5th percentile female" crash test dummy as industry standard. These are a dummy the size of a male who is bigger than 95% of the population and a woman smaller than 95% of the population. They used these as their benchmarks.

My issue is that you seem to assume that no one's thought of this before. I assure you, they have.

vudukungfu		2011-10-21 02:27:41 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM

Bring back the Bedfor Beagle or GTFO.

Doink_Boink		2011-10-21 02:27:48 PM

AmazinTim: Donnchadha: poe_zlaw: well their stupid then than. Ill just go ahead and say it. Your welcome.

FTFY. Seriously.

farking hell THIS so much.

X 1,000,000

It's like 1/2 the US learned English from Hooked on Phonics.

Somaticasual		2011-10-21 02:27:51 PM

BurnShrike		2011-10-21 02:29:01 PM

Doink_Boink: It's like 1/2 the US learned English from Hooked on Phonics.

I don't think that many Americans speak English.

KatjaMouse		2011-10-21 02:33:53 PM

Does this mean there may be a chance that I can get a seat belt that doesn't insist on sliding over my bust and resting against my neck no matter how I adjust my seat? Cuz that'd be peachy.

But seriously, myself, my sister and our little cousin all have the same problem with seat belts and all three of us had car accidents in which the worst injury sustained were cuts and lacerations to the necks and collarbones from the seat belts.

snocone		2011-10-21 02:35:27 PM

Somaticasual: LaraAmber: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Snakeophelia: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

All I know about crash test dummies is from a "how it's made" type of show, and it's obvious that they make dummies in all different shapes and sizes. However, do those dummies take into account things such as different bone densities, different muscle mass, and so on? Perhaps they do, because not all 5'4" people are created equal, but I have no idea how many variables would be important when it comes to car crashes.

Short answer is yes. Crash test dummy technology has come a long way in the past 30 years, but there are still factors that we cannot represent without crashing an actual human. Factors such as bone density, tenseness, posture at time of crash, etc are simulated using a variety of means, but these are still only simulations.

So use actual humans. It's not like we have a shortage.

The industry does, actually. If you look closely at some tests, you'll notice in some cases the "dummy" has a flimsy rubber mask on and what looks like realistic hair underneath. Those are the tests that use actual cadavers, not sure why they use the mask unless it's for clearer analysis on the high-speed..

It holds in the loose parts and makes clean up easier.
Can't wait for the sensitive sisters to start wailing about desecration of the dead meat.

snocone		2011-10-21 02:37:24 PM

KatjaMouse: Does this mean there may be a chance that I can get a seat belt that doesn't insist on sliding over my bust and resting against my neck no matter how I adjust my seat? Cuz that'd be peachy.

But seriously, myself, my sister and our little cousin all have the same problem with seat belts and all three of us had car accidents in which the worst injury sustained were cuts and lacerations to the necks and collarbones from the seat belts.

Throw away the farkin belts and install a decent harness.

ciberido		2011-10-21 02:38:58 PM

lsmsrbls: So a study shows a situation where women are physically harmed by sexism and many responses here are sexist jokes at the expense of women.

Hilarious.

pervvywanker: You sound REALLY fat.

You sound REALLY misogynistic.

/Not that it's the first time

invictus2		2011-10-21 02:44:19 PM

Fourth Reich Salesman: Our tireless safety engineers crash test over 1000 cars a year.
Lisa: Hey, wait. That's not a dummy...
Fourth Reich Salesman: This exhibit is closed!

Fark In The Duck		2011-10-21 02:47:18 PM

Now THISis a dummy!

i536.photobucket.com

KrispyKritter		2011-10-21 02:50:05 PM

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

well la-de-frickin-da. if you're all that and a bag of chips how about doing yer friggin' job instead of farkin around on the innertubes? it's people like you, actually it IS you, that ruined the American automobile industry. you, single handedly are responsible for it all. and you should be ashamed. coffee break is over, fat arse.

RosettaStone		2011-10-21 02:50:58 PM

Genevieve Marie: Do you really have a problem with that assessment?

Imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth on Fark if the study showed that men were 47% more likely to sustain serious injury.

hailin		2011-10-21 02:51:33 PM

LaraAmber: So use actual humans. It's not like we have a shortage.

Couldn't they use cadavers?

tacks		2011-10-21 02:53:52 PM

That's because it's too expensive to create ones that pull down the vanity mirror before the crash, or weep and try to flirt with you when you approach them in a police uniform. High tech stuff not yet available.

Firethorn		2011-10-21 02:57:37 PM

LaraAmber: Nope, but imagine how hard kids would study if the kids who didn't get their high school diplomas were open for a draft into the crash test program. It would be a heck of a "stick". Also: repeat offenders, child molesters, murderers, and people who root for Michigan.

Wouldn't fix the disparity in test data - if anything it'd make it worse.

JackieRabbit: Finally, there are both male and female crash dummies; there are also child crash dummies. All cars are tested with all types of dummies. Conclusion: this crap is just made up.

Way, way back in the day, they used actual corpses for crash testing. The corpses available tended towards 'older white males'.

Crash test dummy info - Gen 1 of the crash test dummies were indeed patterned as an 'average male'(larger/taller than 50% of males) in 1971*, but today they have dummies for everything from newborns to football/basketball players. It was very quickly followed by a 5% female dummy - logically it means that it'd be taller/heavier than only 5% of females - a rather small gal, in other words.

Standard Hybrid III crash suite:
50% Male(Dad) - 5'9", 170lb
95% Male(Big Brother) - 6'2", 223lb
5% Female(Mom) - 5', 110lb
Children - 10yr old, 6 yr(47lb), and 3 yr(33lb).

Now, I would argue that adding a 50% female might be good - but the 50% male might be 'close enough'. I know that I've noticed that vehicle safety systems are far more adjustible than they used to be. We'll probably see more of that in the future.

*Dummies existed as early as 1949, but were used for military testing.

docmattic		2011-10-21 03:02:10 PM

I came to this thread looking for pics of Ellen Reid (Crash Test Dummies' yummy redheaded keyboardist), but left disappointed.

Donnchadha		2011-10-21 03:08:33 PM

Fark In The Duck: Now THISis a dummy!

[i536.photobucket.com image 640x400]

Butterface dummy, maybe...

Donnchadha		2011-10-21 03:09:20 PM

AllyOop: AmazinTim: Donnchadha: poe_zlaw: well their stupid then than. Ill just go ahead and say it. Your YOU'RE welcome.

FTFY. Seriously.

farking hell THIS so much.

:P

I think you missed the joke

Gramma		2011-10-21 03:10:37 PM

meanmutton: Gramma: The shoulder belt (that is supposed to go across my chest, rides up and actually spends most of it's time across my throat. If I ever hit something, I'm going to get a busted neck.

/short

They make seat belt adjusters for people who are short: http://www.mypreciouskid.com/seat-belt-adjuster.html

I am buying one today, thank you.

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian		2011-10-21 03:23:37 PM

meanmutton: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

You're in Okinawa and a safety engineer for GM? Odd... I thought they generally did their safety testing at Milford and at Lang Lang.

meanmutton: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

You're in Okinawa and a safety engineer for GM? Odd... I thought they generally did their safety testing at Milford and at Lang Lang.

Misinformation. My actual whereabouts areof little consequence to you.

/It's under control, sir.

Super_pope		2011-10-21 03:24:51 PM

RosettaStone: Genevieve Marie: Do you really have a problem with that assessment?

Imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth on Fark if the study showed that men were 47% more likely to sustain serious injury.

We're more likely to die in car accidents. Nobody cares but the people who make our car insurance more costly. Rather than making some yammering comment about female privilege or 'mansogyny', I tend to just write that off as a potential consequence of my driving habits, and say, "better not have an accident I guess."

This is why you're complaining about a male dominated industry isn't doing enough to protect women, instead of protecting women yourself. We aren't whining navel-gazing wieners who's idea of fixing a problem is, "raising awareness." We're aware. Right now this is the best default we can manage that people will accept. Get over yourself.

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian		2011-10-21 03:29:12 PM

KrispyKritter: EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian: Hey ass-itter, I'm a senior saftey inspector for GM. This is article is baseless troll-food. At our testing facility we have dummies of all sizes. I hate when "journalists" make assumptions about the safety and run with it.

/been doing this job for 20 years
//pisses me off that this shiat got green-lit

well la-de-frickin-da. if you're all that and a bag of chips how about doing yer friggin' job instead of farkin around on the innertubes? it's people like you, actually it IS you, that ruined the American automobile industry. you, single handedly are responsible for it all. and you should be ashamed. coffee break is over, fat arse.

Yeah you're probably right. I actually used one of my sick days today because I have the flu.

/actually a bad hangover
//white russians are tasty
///shouldn't YOU be at work?

Andulamb		2011-10-21 03:34:59 PM

Superjew: Maybe if more women were concerned enough about safety to become safety engineers, this wouldn't be a problem. Instead, they're happy to let men do it and complain about it later.

It has more to do with the possible shortsightedness of the engineers and less about their gender. Crash test dummies should come in all shapes and sizes because people come in all shapes and sizes. There should be short dummies, tall dummies, fat dummies, thin dummies, and all possible combinations. If there aren't any fat crash test dummies, do you really blame fat people for not becomming engineers? Should engineers really be designing things with only themselves in mind?

Crash test dummies DO come in a variety of shapes and sizes, of course -- there are child-sized dummies, for instance. But is there enough variety? It should also be noted that these researchers are not saying that the maleness of the dummies is known to result in a greater risk of injury to women, just that it's one possible explanation.

EnglishChef PolishInventor GermanHumanitarian		2011-10-21 03:39:44 PM

Andulamb: Superjew: Maybe if more women were concerned enough about safety to become safety engineers, this wouldn't be a problem. Instead, they're happy to let men do it and complain about it later.

It has more to do with the possible shortsightedness of the engineers and less about their gender. Crash test dummies should come in all shapes and sizes because people come in all shapes and sizes. There should be short dummies, tall dummies, fat dummies, thin dummies, and all possible combinations. If there aren't any fat crash test dummies, do you really blame fat people for not becomming engineers? Should engineers really be designing things with only themselves in mind?

Crash test dummies DO come in a variety of shapes and sizes, of course -- there are child-sized dummies, for instance. But is there enough variety? It should also be noted that these researchers are not saying that the maleness of the dummies is known to result in a greater risk of injury to women, just that it's one possible explanation.

Women are just more allergic to death than men. Toughness is an evolutionary trait.

/blah blah blah childbirth

vudukungfu		2011-10-21 03:47:40 PM

KrispyKritter: 's people like you, actually it IS you, that ruined the American automobile industry. you, single handedly are responsible for it all. and you should be ashamed. coffee break is over, fat arse.

Chill out.
He's with GM, Not Chevy.

those are the droid farkers you want.

bonediddly123		2011-10-21 04:19:09 PM

embarrassed to see that this study comes from my alma mater...

Also, have you see n women drive? of course it cant be their terrible driving habits and skills, its GOT to be their bodies and the mean sexist car company's fault!

/came for gif of April from Ninja Turtles driving erratically, leaving very disappointed...

Displayed 50 of 133 comments