Posted on 11/20/2011 1:19:40 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Congresswoman: ‘Women’s Lives And Safety Have Taken A Backseat’
November 20, 2011 2:40 PM
NEW YORK (1010 WINS) – Women are more vulnerable than men in car crashes—even when using a seatbelt, according to a new study.
The study, published by the American Journal of Public Health, says that women have a 47 percent higher risk of suffering a serious car crash injury than men.
“This report suggests that women’s lives and safety have taken a backseat when it comes to the standards and the building of the automobiles,” says Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who is calling for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to take stronger action.
She says vehicles are still being tested by using male crash dummies when the cars should be tested with female dummies as well.
(Excerpt) Read more at newyork.cbslocal.com ...
Being smaller and having less bulk muscle tissue couldn’t have anything to do with it of course.
>> Women are more vulnerable than men in car crashes
Then maybe they should put the @#$%& cell phone down when they drive!
waiting,....3,...2,...1...
I suggest dummy Pelosi as a test.
This doesn’t compute. A 47% difference? I don’t believe it.
I wonder what the congresswoman would say if some male chauvenist pig suggested to her that a more probable explanation is that women are 47% lousier drivers than men?
I would never venture to say that myself, especially to my wife, so, please, no flames!
THEY WANT US TO DIE ON THE FLOOR!!!!!!!!!!! Or, er, on the road.
Can I ask the stupid question? There are both male and female crash dummies? How can you tell? Are there anatomical differeces on the dummies?
And if we’re going to go there, what about the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, and trans-gendered dummies????? Since with anything related to sex differences nowadays, we are supposed to take the LBGT community into account, in order to be politically correct about these things.
Or should we have a crash dummy of the bulk and shape of Chazz Bono to represent certain types of people? Exactly where do they want to go with this reasoning??????
what is the ratio of those involved in these accidents between men and woman??
did they factor in whether or not the woman was driving and the severity of the crash? how about avoidability of the crash?
“Being smaller and having less bulk muscle tissue couldn’t have anything to do with it of course.”
You are correct.
I know!...Why don’t they have special car seats for women to be placed in the back seat of cars like those for children and make that the law?
Good grief!! The country is going to hell, and this is what Congresscrook Carolyn Maloney is worried about? Maybe she should volunteer to be a crash dummy if she is so worried.
I must have had a chick dummy. She didn’t shift and blew the engine.
http://www.arcadecabin.com/play/crash_test_dummy.html
womens’ bones break easier...it really is that simple.
Excellent point, Dilbert.
How dare you.........ROTFL! I love it.....:)
Maloney is full of balogna (baloney) whatever! There’s proof that some Demon womens brains have taken a back seat to their mouths.
Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, would make a perfect crash dummie.
She isn’t much good for anything else.
They already HAVE female crash test dummies.
They’re called “mothers-in-law” and you find them in the back seat telling the male crash test dummies what they’re doing wrong.
I’m absolutely certain that Maloney-Baloney qualifies.
Absolutely no clue. They indeed test with the female test dummy and they also use child and baby dummies as well. Perhaps it is the high variability of women’s bone density compared to men.
A new "protected class" for crash test dummies.
What color are those "dummies" anyway?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.