If i's not to sycophantic I'd like to echo RMC's praise for Genghis, who I've read and been educated by for many years now....
And the replies here are (I'm sure) equally well thought out and based on good science.
Let's also remember that what the aircraft is made of doesn't change the fact that the OEM will specify what level of inspection is required after undesirable encounter (turbulence, heavy landing, whatever) so the detail of whether composite or metal construction can endure is interesting but must not induce the Technician to make his own allowances based on that argument.
From a flight crew pov, please do everything reasonable and safe to minimise overweight landings, (and PLEASE report them if they occur, for whatever reason, for your safety on subsequent flights) as it will have a direct effect on the level (cost) of inspection/repairs, but from a maintenance pov, just do what the OEM tells you - don't try to second guess the designers unless you are one, and authorised to certify the inspection regime (I'd guess most Maintenance Technicians aren't both).
Humble two-penn'orth, offered after being bitten both ways in the past...