561

submitted 1 day ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 54 minutes ago

I have a book to recommend:

Imagine a world where your phone is too big for your hand, where your doctor prescribes a drug that is wrong for your body, where in a car accident you are 47% more likely to be seriously injured, where every week the countless hours of work you do are not recognised or valued. If any of this sounds familiar, chances are that you’re a woman.

-Invisible Women, by Caroline Criado Perez.

I believe I first heard her interviewed on the 99% Invisible Podcast.

[-] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 35 points 21 hours ago

Seems to satisfy the ask.

I mean, I knew medical research was misogynistic but this is still somehow shocking.

[-] Iapetus@slrpnk.net 88 points 1 day ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

We landed ~~two~~ three rovers on Mars before medical science discovered the clitoris.

The Mars Exploration Rovers landed on Mars in January 2004. (See the reply below for the earlier one I forgot!)

An accurate anatomical model of the clitoris was not created until 2005.

[-] ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

Now this is some fake news

[-] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 89 points 22 hours ago

"Medical science" didn't only just discover the clitoris 20 years ago... Fairly accurate descriptions of the structure of the clitoris go back to the 1840s. It's the textbooks used for medical training that were omitting the already known structures to the detriment of medical professionals and healthcare.

Never mind that discovering and accurately mapping something are very different. That's like saying we hadn't discovered the moon until we saw the other side.

It's a funny meme that scientists couldn't find the clit, but it detracts from the actual sexism that was preventing the known science from being taught properly to doctors.

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/anatomy-clitoris-2005-helen-e-oconnell-kalavampara-v-sanjeevan-and-john-m-hutson

[-] Iapetus@slrpnk.net 20 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

My wording was for comedic affect. I agree with you, but it's still shocking how recently we mapped this organ in its entirety.

There's a fun article about the history of the clitoris here, if anyone's after yet more reading on this.

[-] HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

I love the part in the article you linked about Ben Shapiro, really made me chuckle. wonder how he felt after believing that lie.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 8 points 23 hours ago

You forgot Sojourner.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] NightFantom@slrpnk.net 57 points 1 day ago

What does anatomically correct mean here? Should I switch to my alt account before searching?

[-] Iapetus@slrpnk.net 78 points 23 hours ago

Weight distribution and physical density.

[-] piranhaconda@mander.xyz 44 points 23 hours ago

Height is a big factor too

[-] multifariace@lemmy.world 19 points 22 hours ago

Height is a big factor. Being taller than average I notice a lot of backbreaking standards. Especially if I have to use facilities modified for shorter or wheelchair bound people. Look at airplane seats for example. Why do I have to pay more for a seat that won't crush my knees? And decorations; quite often I will go to a place festively decorated where things are constantly bumping me or in my face. There was even a fancy balloon arch used at one place I had to move out of a doorway to get through.

[-] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 18 hours ago

Why do I have to pay more for a seat that won't crush my knees?

I mean, it sucks, but the larger seats do cost the airline more to provide. I pay more for shipping inanimate objects that are long, even if they're the same weight.

[-] wildwhitehorses@aussie.zone 5 points 5 hours ago

Then why don't we also pay be weight? I'd love to be able to pack an extra 20kg in my bag as I weigh at least 20kg less than the average male.

[-] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 44 minutes ago

That's my whole point. If you're gonna ask the airlines to give different amounts of space for different sized people, don't expect your tickets to stay the same price.

The current system is that the ticket prices are the same (price fluctuations happen but not based on the size of the passenger), and that everyone of a particular fare class gets the same sized seat.

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 hour ago

Because that would be discrimination. Otherwise they absolutely would do it lol

[-] dr_robotBones@reddthat.com 11 points 15 hours ago

We aren't long inanimate objects, we're human beings and we deserve to be treated better than a can of sardines.

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 hour ago

Then you can pay more for your ticket. Simple fact is, to save money on fuel, the airline has to use the smallest possible airplane and have high seat density. Luxury airlines like Emirates or Etihad might have lower seating density but you'll pay extra for the tickets.

Emirates CEO is asking Airbus to start building the A380 again, but in a new more fuel efficient version. Even gave them some design ideas. Reason being, that huge-ass plane can be better optimized for comfort due to economies of scale. Unfortunately I think they're using a lot of that space for first class, which gets showers and shit.

In the US, supposedly JetBlue has more space in economy than the big 3 tend to. Willing to bet it's more expensive too, but I wouldn't know, I've only flown European airlines and cheap to midrange ones at that.

[-] bss03@infosec.pub 10 points 15 hours ago

Dr., this is Captialism; that level of empathy is toxic.

[-] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 14 hours ago

Yes, we're human beings, so airlines do a different pricing strategy, where everyone pays the same price and everyone gets the same amount of space.

[-] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 25 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

And also taking into account that women can get pregnant, and ride cars at various stages of said pregnancy, right?

Right?

[-] Iapetus@slrpnk.net 20 points 23 hours ago

Apparently the first with a pregnant crash test dummy was done in 1996

[-] exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 18 hours ago

Without looking up the details, I'm just gonna assume both facts are correct (no anatomically correct women dummies before 2023 and a pregnant dummy in 1996), by saying that the 1996 dummy was a pregnant man. Only two years after Arnold Schwarzenegger started in Junior.

[-] Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org 35 points 23 hours ago

[-] EffortlessEffluvium@lemmy.zip 11 points 20 hours ago

Hey! Leave Otto's girlfriend out of this!

[-] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 15 points 23 hours ago

I'm guessing it has to do with interaction between seatbelt and boobs. And all previous tests just assumed a flat chest.

[-] DrBob@lemmy.ca 15 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Boobs squish at crash forces. The pressure with crash testing is keep every variable consistent so that results can be compared over time. I read an article years ago about the trouble of maintaining a supply of "tea rose" colored underwear for that reason.

eta: http://www.lipkie.com/humor/1999/990430_36.htm

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 day ago

Test dummy with boobs, im guessing

[-] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 53 points 1 day ago

What’s with the pointing-at-camera thing?

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 89 points 1 day ago

She's trying to look inspirational but ends up looking like an overly-confident real estate agent.

[-] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 day ago

Yeah I can immediately tell she’s some business huckster, doing “motivational speaking” or some shit

[-] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours ago

It's got "I can sell you this" energy for sure

[-] Jolteon@lemmy.zip 3 points 14 hours ago

She wants you to join the United States army

[-] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 37 points 1 day ago

[-] TheBat@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

She's going to crash test you, dummy.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 9 points 1 day ago

That’s how you know who is the main character.

[-] SomethingBlack@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago

Has an "anatomically correct female crash test dummy" actually helped? What even is an "anatomically correct female crash test dummy" and how does it encompass all women's body types in a way that the, assumedly anatomically correct male crash test dummy wouldn't accommodate?

I am absolutely uneducated on this but to my uneducated mind this sounds like getting riled up over a non-issue.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

First thing that springs to mind is the chest strap on a seatbelt interacting with boobs

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Crash test dummies test the impact of vehicle accidents on human bodies. While more men than women are injured in vehicle accidents, they are more frequently involved in them in the first place. Women are 17% more likely than men to die in the event of a car crash, based on university studies in the US, and 73% more likely to sustain serious injuries in a front-end collision (Invisible Women, p186). In the world of crash test dummies, ‘human body’ has really meant ‘male body’; the first anatomically correct female crash test dummy was only created in 2022.

https://www.theactuary.com/2023/02/02/when-human-isnt-female

Before intervention

17% more dead women than men

73% more injured women than men

When women are in fewer crashes overall

[-] SomethingBlack@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

I appreciate your effort to find that data but it doesn't really address any of my original questions.

Also, from what you've quoted at least, there is no differentiation between drivers vs passengers.

Your data absolutely shows there is a problem, it just doesn't show that the problem is the lack of an "anatomically correct female crash test dummy".

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't think whether they're driving or not is a meaningful distinction at this level, people should be expected to sit in any of the seats of a car, so I'm making the fairly safe assumption they put dummies in various different seating arrangements.

The stats apparently originate from the US government, so it's going to be a pretty big sample size that should average out any differences in seating position.

I don't think there are really any conclusive after stats as the product was only introduced to the market a couple of years ago, I guess manufacturers need to buy these and then use them in their in-progress designs. Cars on the market that have used these dummies during design are probably only new designs sold in the past year or so.

I also can't seem to find it with a quick search, but I vaguely remember reading about this when it was new a couple of years ago, and there's a correlation with male safety improving with advances in the crash test process that aren't reflected equivalently with women's safety. But maybe take that with a pinch of salt unless you can actually find the source

[-] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't think whether they're driving or not is a meaningful distinction at this level

But it does! For example, if the driver seat offers better protection than the rest of the car, and women are more often than men in one of the other seats, it would explain the results and the dummy doesn't add much.

But if the fatality rate for women in the front passenger seat, for example, is the same as for men in that same seat, that's were probably having an "anatomically correct female crash test dummy" can be very helpful in understanding why these crashes are killing more women than men.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

One reason male crash test dummies are not representative of female vehicle occupants in an accident is that seatbelts do not sit in the correct position on female bodies, because of their breasts.

This is the only reasoning provided in that entire article

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 4 points 22 hours ago

I feel like this probably isn't the preferred terminology.

load more comments