Maybe the issue isn't women specifically but short people (who just happen to be predominately women)? Cars aren't sexist, they just don't cater as well to short people.
Well, see, this is the thing. You refuse to make it about sexism and insist it is height. But, when safety regulations were invented, the people doing it (and I think we can probably take a good stab at which sex they were) chose to use a crash test dummy that was in the 50th percentile for men. Not for humans. For men. There is something that made their brains think 'well if it's OK for men it's OK - end of tests.' There was something in their brains that disregarded the possibility that things might be different for women and stopped them even checking.
Anything that is developed with the height of the average man and not the average human in mind is disproportionately negatively affecting women ... and a word for something that disproportionately affects women? Sexism.
It's not malicious. Nobody set out to make a car that injures more women then men - that's true enough. It is the fact that they simply didn't think to check for safety of women and that therefore women are disproportionately harmed (despite being demonstrably safer drivers) where the sexism is. It is insidious and invisible (hence the title of the book). They're not setting out to discriminate, they just do. Because man is default is so ingrained they cannot see it is discrimination.
And of course, as the video points out, it's not just the height thing. It's a neck muscle thing - which is a physiological difference between the two sexes and harms women but not men no matter what the height. Their attempts to create a safer head rest meant they created one that was safer for men and
more dangerous for women ... the safety tests let it through regulations. It's a mass and weight thing - the firmness of the seat is designed to support the bulk of an average male - but is too firm for the smaller bulk of an average female and so in a crash throws her further forward. And it's a boob thing - seat belts are not designed for humans with boobs. So women have to wear them 'improperly' - which makes them less safe. And that's before they get pregnant.
Cars are not maliciously sexist. But anything that disproportionately harms women is what sexism is. And an industry using an average male to safety check and not also putting an average female through the exact same paces is clearly treating the sexes differently. And that's what sexism is.
Look at it this way - why do cars not cater as well to 'shorter people'. Is that just the way it is - God ordained, how nature intended? Cars are for the tall. Or is that a man made design flaw that could be rectified? And if the latter - why aren't they rectifying it?
People keep like acting like 'these are the problems and for anybody who suffers them they need to suck it up because this is how it is, there;s nothing can be done, this design is right - and no, there is no discernible pattern as to who is having the problems.'
Except that the data shows there is a discernible pattern, and why on earth do we just accept something is the way it is when it isn't working, if we could change it? Unless - we secretly don't think the people who need the changes are worth the time, expense and innovation it would take to change. Unless we think the people it does work for are the ones who matter and everyone else just needs to fit themselves in around them.
You know ... sexism.
