Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why(washingtonpost.com) |
Women are more likely to die or be injured in car crashes – test dummies are why(washingtonpost.com) |
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 < 5ft tall. Wouldn't they also be more likely to die? What about men who are over 6ft tall?
Pretty much anyone not represented by the dummy will have a higher risk. Gender has very little to do with this.
Some equally valid conclusions:
> People shorter than 5ft are more likely to die more in car crashes because the test dummies are taller
> People who are over/underweight are more likely to die more in car crashes because the test dummies are ...
Somehow this article seems to pull in some apparent gender bias in what is a more general bias against anyone not accurately represented by a single dummy.
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.
As we found out with cockpits[1], le homme moyen is a mirage. We'll see how long it takes car regulators to catch up.
But it's not just cars -- Jensen's inequality says that for any asymmetric cost function, minimising the cost of the average is different from minimising the average cost. Yet people are still -- and probably will be for a long time -- minimising the cost of the average.
[1]: https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-...
This is just crazy: "a woman is 17 percent more likely to die ... and 73 percent more likely to be seriously injured in a vehicle crash"
Honestly, I've not paid much attention to cars for a very long time, but I have checked for that feature on the few I've owned and driven over the past 20 years and very few of them have had it.
> 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 frontal impact against a rigid barrier at just over 30mph with small female dummies in the driver's seat and rear passenger seat.
and
> Improved child occupant protection (2016)
> Euro NCAP introduced two new crash test dummies representing a 6 and 10 year old child to better assess the effectiveness of restraint systems. Compatiblity with i-Size and a wider range of universal child restraints is also assessed.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/108721/women-at-great... seems to be a much better article, covering a lot of the misconceptions in the one from the topic.
Also:
> With men making up 49 per cent of the European population but 76 per cent of road deaths, using a male 50th percentile dummy allowed testers to ensure that assessments would relate to the largest proportion of accident victims.
https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/males...
WaPo needs to hire a fact checker