Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 22 posts

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#11

Post by yesenadam »

LASR wrote: post #8

I am sorry, but this article is drawing some sensationalist conclusions that does not directly follow. I am not even sure what it means for a dummy to be male. Dummies are constructed to a certain shape and size, representing some average or median person. They represent a person. You may have dummies that are closer to the average man, and others that are closer to the average woman. Now consider males who are Prett…

I don't have all or any answers, but your comment made me daydream about a similar article talking about, say, how there should be more women in leadership positions in politics and business. And in the daydream you replied similarly, "But very tall people are underrepresented, as are the very short, the very fat, the very skinny. Pretty much anyone with a body unlike the average is underrepresented. Gender has very little to do with this."

I think the point was that you could argue your way out of seeing gender bias anywhere at all with your argument—it doesn't just apply in this crash-test situation.

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#12

Post by Zackhardtoname »

buchanmilne wrote: post #9

The article says: > Why? All the crash test dummies are male. Even the “female” dummies the government requires in tests are just smaller versions of male dummies. Wait, so are there or aren't there female dummies? Secondly, does "All" refer to only the U.S., or Europe too? It seems not. For example (see https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/safety/euro-ncap ) > From 2015 Euro NCAP added a new restraint test, a full f…

Wow can't believe I actually can apply my knowledge about Jensen's inequality already within one year of graduation

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#13

Post by jho10 »

I work for General Motors. We have test dummies of all shapes and sizes to represent children, women, babies and men. Just because NHTSA does not require them for a 5 star rating does not mean that we want women and children dying in our vehicles. We've had "smart dummies" since 2010 and have been using the data collected from those dummies to improve our models and make them more robust and safer.

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#14

Post by Proven »

jho10 wrote: post #13

I work for General Motors. We have test dummies of all shapes and sizes to represent children, women, babies and men. Just because NHTSA does not require them for a 5 star rating does not mean that we want women and children dying in our vehicles. We've had "smart dummies" since 2010 and have been using the data collected from those dummies to improve our models and make them more robust and safer.

No post body was provided.

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#16

Post by alanwreath »

yesenadam wrote: post #11
LASR wrote: post #8

I am sorry, but this article is drawing some sensationalist conclusions that does not directly follow. I am not even sure what it means for a dummy to be male. Dummies are constructed to a certain shape and size, representing some average or median person. They represent a person. You may have dummies that are closer to the average man, and others that are closer to the average woman. Now consider males who are Prett…

I don't have all or any answers, but your comment made me daydream about a similar article talking about, say, how there should be more women in leadership positions in politics and business. And in the daydream you replied similarly, "But very tall people are underrepresented, as are the very short, the very fat, the very skinny. Pretty much anyone with a body unlike the average is underrepresented. Gender has very…

And your comment makes me think that you could argue seeing gender bias in anyones response. Not trying to be belligerent by the way (I know the response sounds like I am - but really I’m seeking genuine understanding of the line being crossed in the parents logic). I do see the value in deducing gender bias even when it’s not specific as I would assume that would be a hard requirement to pass. However, at some point it’s valuable to determine that the test was not constructed in a manner to come to any conclusions with regard to gender bias.

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#19

Post by 0xdeadb00f »

saikia81 wrote: post #18
ondee wrote: post #15

Please can we push back a bit against the use of the word "females"? The correct word for this title is women.

Quoted post unavailable.

It isn't about being "woke". Calling a woman a "female" in real life, just sounds wrong coming out of my mouth.

Have you ever heard someone call women females IRL? It never sounds right.

In anything that isn't extremely formal, it reads creepy to me.

It's just like calling people men "males" - it doesn't sound right, and nobody does that in conversation.

Re: Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why

#20

Post by yesenadam »

alanwreath wrote: post #16
yesenadam wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have all or any answers, but your comment made me daydream about a similar article talking about, say, how there should be more women in leadership positions in politics and business. And in the daydream you replied similarly, "But very tall people are underrepresented, as are the very short, the very fat, the very skinny. Pretty much anyone with a body unlike the average is underrepresented. Gender has very…

And your comment makes me think that you could argue seeing gender bias in anyones response. Not trying to be belligerent by the way (I know the response sounds like I am - but really I’m seeking genuine understanding of the line being crossed in the parents logic). I do see the value in deducing gender bias even when it’s not specific as I would assume that would be a hard requirement to pass. However, at some point…

Sorry, I couldn't understand that, although I tried. i.e. not the first sentence nor the last two.
Post reply on HN