256
US transportation department unveils first female-modeled crash test dummy
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2025
256 points (98.5% liked)
News
37153 readers
1600 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"And here we see the seatbelt sliding sideways to squash one boob and cut into the side of the female dummy's neck because it's not sufficiently adjustable. Meanwhile we notice that in order to be able to fully depress the brake pedal, the female dummy must position the seat so close to the steering column that the airbag will likely cause severe injury."
They've been told these things by actual living women for decades but maybe they'll find it harder to ignore the proof from the plastic dummy.
Yep. I'm a 5'5" woman with short legs and a long torso. In order to fully depress the clutch on my car, I have to have the seat nearly all the way forward. There are plenty of other signs that my car was built for a 6' tall man, but that's a biggie.
They would have to design and make two cars of each model, one for women and one for men. Where's the profit in that when it's easier to just ignore those issues.
Edit: Lemmers don't get sarcasm :(
Or just incorporate more modular designs. Steering columns are only made for the middle ~70% of drivers. Anyone outside of one standard deviation on the bell curve will struggle to get their steering column adjusted properly. It will either be too short, (meaning they have to reach too far for the steering wheel, and the airbag won’t fully cushion their impact), or too long, (meaning they’re cramped when driving, and dangerously close to the airbag when it deploys).
For instance, I’m tall. I have proportionally long legs. In order to be able to properly reach the pedals without my knees next to my ears, I need my car seat basically all the way back. But that means I’m constantly reaching for the steering wheel, which doesn’t extend far enough to be comfortable. It also means that if I hit something, my airbag basically won’t do anything. I may rub my face on it, but the vast majority of the stop is going to be handled by the seatbelt. Meaning my left shoulder and collarbone will take the brunt of the force instead of having it evenly distributed across my torso. It also means I’ll be more likely to develop whiplash, as my head won’t be sufficiently cushioned by the airbag until after it has already snapped almost all the way forward.
Volvo tried at one point.
Honestly surprised some auto manufacturer hasn't tried this in a production vehicle
The profit is in the pink tax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_tax
I think when it comes to gendered cars there would be more of a "blue" tax I guess. There are just a lot more guys obsessed with cars whan women
You are using quotes, but what are you quoting? Because it's not from the article that I can see.
Are you quoting yourself?
I agree with the observation, but it's kind of misleading to post it as a quote.
In that case the normal thing to do is to lead with
Narrator: ...
Not to make a false quote.
Pretty moronic that I'm downvoted for pointing out it's not actually a quote of the article.
It doesn't matter if it's obvious to the majority, it's the ones it's NOT obvious to that count.
The tone made it very obvious it was not a real quote.
Nothing else was needed.
Tone is not something that everyone can pick up equally. If you have an option to make it clearer, why are you people so determined that it mustn't be changed?
Okay. Can we take a minute to just acknowledge that this comment has a little neurotypical ableism and regional bias? Some people literally need more context than others do to understand the tone of a text. Just because you do not need that assistance with context clues in play doesn't mean everyone also doesn't need that.
Kindness and extending a little help costs us so little.
That presumes people have read the article, and can see the difference in tone.
As a Dane there would be nothing wrong in having a similar tone in an article here. The same goes for many other countries.
Not everything is USA or Anglo-style body shame double standards, where saying boop makes things 21+.
And requires parental warnings more than showing people killing each other.
Could as easily have been a tongue in cheek comment.
Hey Buffalox, coming in later and seeing all the downvotes, I'm sorry, you don't deserve them. I was deliberately using phrasing that English or American people would recognize from certain kinds of public instruction short films or nature shows, and also in comic parodies of those films. Specifically, "And here we see..." as the opener. As a Dane, that might not be familiar to you. And I used quotation marks to indicate I was doing the (usually rather pompous) voice of that kind of narrator.
But I probably should have prefaced it.
Oddly, you'll notice in my history my prefacing actual quotes with
From the article:
followed by the quote and then
From me:
for my comment.
Thanks, I must admit I find it strange why my post is so controversial?
It seems some people tend to forget that people come here from all over the world, despite the name of the server is lemmy.world.
Looking at the thread, I bet some people didn't downvote your initial comment at first, then kept reading and got to "moronic" and your off-topic little rant about "Not everything is USA or Anglo-style body shame double standards, where saying boop makes things 21+. And requires parental warnings more than showing people killing each other."
And that's when they went back and downvoted your whole string.
By the way, there's nothing in my comment that would be NSFW even in the US.
Then you bet wrong, because the downvote ratio was way higher before I wrote the other posts.