Study finds female body form more efficient for space travel

I've always thought that on average women make much better astronaut candidates than men - higher social aptitudes, lower body masses, lower caloric needs, etc.. In a more rational and enlightened world, NASA would have gone with the Mercury 13 rather than the Mercury 7.
 
 all femal crew? They should take a look on all female working enviroments which tend to be not harmonic at all....
 
So what is your specific experience in all female working environments :D? And on a completely unrelated matter, can you name the most recent female mass shooter (let's arbitrarily set the lower threshold at 10 casualties) in US history?
 
Last edited:
paralay said:
Men, in extreme cases, will stuff each other's face and become best friends after that. Women will take revenge forever
Click to expand...
Concrete evidence or just misogynistic bromance BS?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Here comes the usual hypocrisy. I was told that females needed to be in all-male groups in the name of "equity", even if it came at the detriment of that group. Now suddenly we need all-female groups?
 
njiiaf said:
Here comes the usual hypocrisy. I was told that females needed to be in all-male groups in the name of "equity", even if it came at the detriment of that group. Now suddenly we need all-female groups?
Click to expand...
Please provide concrete objectively verifiable examples of your alleged "detriment".
 
martinbayer said:
Please provide concrete objectively verifiable examples of your alleged "detriment".
Click to expand...
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...that female ITB,percent of male injuries did.Here. Now stop gaslighting. You know exactly what everybody in this thread is talking about. You don't need studies to prove that men and women are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. But when women have weaknesses, those have to be overlooked in the name of "equity". When men have weaknesses, its perfectly ok to take those into account?
 
njiiaf said:
martinbayer said:
Please provide concrete objectively verifiable examples of your alleged "detriment".
Click to expand...
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...that female ITB,percent of male injuries did.Here. Now stop gaslighting. You know exactly what everybody in this thread is talking about. You don't need studies to prove that men and women are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. But when women have weaknesses, those have to be overlooked in the name of "equity". When men have weaknesses, its perfectly ok to take those into account?
Click to expand...
Don't know if things have changed over the last eight years, but " Editor's note: This story was originally published at 12:01 p.m. on Sept. 10, 2015."
 
Next step - japanese schoolgirls!

514GTQ1nqzL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg


(ironically, anime "Rocket Girls" made use of exactly that premise; fictional japanese space agency tried to make a human flight, but their only available rocket is seriously underpowered. So to save as much weight as possible, they resort to recruiting schoolgirls as crew)
 

Attachments

  • 1683473241155.jpeg
    1683473241155.jpeg
    12.3 KB · Views: 24
I was once the only male employee in an otherwise all-female workplace, and can attest to the vicious and toxic work environment that it generated. It got to the point where if I said hello to someone in the corridor, there would be trouble. If I didn't say hello, there would be a different kind of trouble.
 
jstar said:
njiiaf said:
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...that female ITB,percent of male injuries did.Here. Now stop gaslighting. You know exactly what everybody in this thread is talking about. You don't need studies to prove that men and women are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. But when women have weaknesses, those have to be overlooked in the name of "equity". When men have weaknesses, its perfectly ok to take those into account?
Click to expand...
Don't know if things have changed over the last eight years, but " Editor's note: This story was originally published at 12:01 p.m. on Sept. 10, 2015."
Click to expand...
They've gotten worse.
 
martinbayer said:
I've always thought that on average women make much better astronaut candidates than men - higher social aptitudes, lower body masses, lower caloric needs, etc.. In a more rational and enlightened world, NASA would have gone with the Mercury 13 rather than the Mercury 7.
Click to expand...
How many of the "Mercury 13" were test pilots?
 
hagaricus said:
I was once the only male employee in an otherwise all-female workplace, and can attest to the vicious and toxic work environment that it generated. It got to the point where if I said hello to someone in the corridor, there would be trouble. If I didn't say hello, there would be a different kind of trouble.
Click to expand...
If you have trouble with everyone around you, you might want to explore what the common denominator of your problems is...
 
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
I've always thought that on average women make much better astronaut candidates than men - higher social aptitudes, lower body masses, lower caloric needs, etc.. In a more rational and enlightened world, NASA would have gone with the Mercury 13 rather than the Mercury 7.
Click to expand...
How many of the "Mercury 13" were test pilots?
Click to expand...
Only a matter of training.
 
martinbayer said:
So what is your specific experience in all female working environments :D? And on a completely unrelated matter, can you name the most recent female mass shooter (let's arbitrarily set the lower threshold at 10 casualties) in US history?
Click to expand...
My ex-girfriends are reference enough for me (but I heard the same stuff again and again from friends, friends wifes etc.). I dont want to start a hughe controversy, but I can confirm you, that many women dont want to work in an all female enviroment anymore...

BTW:

https://www.biography.com/musicians/lisa-nowak-lucy-in-the-sky
 
Much like turkeys, to boldly stuff, where the sun never shines (and I don't mean Erdogan, although he is certainly a fucker)
 
Rationally, there is mo need for strength in space (non-planetary). I have already said that there isn't either not much use of legs (when physical handicap was raised in question (lower limbs)).

I don't see why an all women crew would lower perform. Then with a lower crew mass on average, it is logical to come to that conclusion. Even if I doubt that body masses will impact the efficiency of any mission... May I remind all that no space mission has reached orbital speed with Sherpas....
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
I've always thought that on average women make much better astronaut candidates than men - higher social aptitudes, lower body masses, lower caloric needs, etc.. In a more rational and enlightened world, NASA would have gone with the Mercury 13 rather than the Mercury 7.
Click to expand...
How many of the "Mercury 13" were test pilots?
Click to expand...
Only a matter of training.
Click to expand...
Yeah, uh-huh. And it's only a matter of training that has kept me from being a world class basketball player/brain surgeon/ballerina.

None of the M13 were, IIRC, trained test pilots. That was a requirement for being a first-gen astronaut.
 
I can’t give you a quotation, since it is many years ago that I read it, but there was on space shuttle mission with an all-female crew and this has never been repeated (one of them did the murder attac). The Nasa did make psychologic evaluations and made the conclusion, that mixed gender teams are the best choice. There tend to be at least one woman in every mission, which definitely helps to improve the atmosphere of the team. To my knowledge, there has never been a team with only one male in a female team, for whatever reasons..

I lived some years in communes during my studying years an I can confirm, that young men tend to keep the shared rooms in a better state and drank less alcohol when women as roommates were present.
 
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
I've always thought that on average women make much better astronaut candidates than men - higher social aptitudes, lower body masses, lower caloric needs, etc.. In a more rational and enlightened world, NASA would have gone with the Mercury 13 rather than the Mercury 7.
Click to expand...
How many of the "Mercury 13" were test pilots?
Click to expand...
Only a matter of training.
Click to expand...
Yeah, uh-huh. And it's only a matter of training that has kept me from being a world class basketball player/brain surgeon/ballerina.

None of the M13 were, IIRC, trained test pilots. That was a requirement for being a first-gen astronaut.
Click to expand...
That's completely fair and ok, but rather than rehash past millenium history, the real question is what's the best way going forward.
 
martinbayer said:
That's completely fair and ok, but rather than rehash past millenium history, the real question is what's the best way going forward.
Click to expand...
Make space launch as cheap and reliable as possible. Throw open the doors to free market capitalism, colonialism, commercial exploitation of space. Make sure that governments not only don't stand in the way of people making *bank* by exploiting the resources in the heavens, government *supports* that. Then the invisible hand of the marketplace and Darwinian selection will, over time, produce the best population for spaceflight. Those who aren't cut out for it will either stay home or will die in the cold embrace of vacuum; those who are up for it will start a new branch of human civilization. this will really only be possible by allowing *large* numbers of people to participate, not just hand-picked best-of-the-best-of-the-best groups of elites.

This will entail not just the transport and employment of humans, but many other species as well. Some will turn out to be unable to cope with the rigors and weirdness of space; others will doubtless do just fine. It may happen that differences within species will be important. For example, what kind of cattle will do best on, say, Island 4 or under the Lake Armstrong dome? Pickign winners is not the way to go; you do a mass dump and see who survives.
 

Attachments

  • FvioHyYWcAw9Cmx.jpg
    FvioHyYWcAw9Cmx.jpg
    57.1 KB · Views: 25
Right now I'm actually literally on a bender to catch up on the latest season of The Orville, so while as a staunch agnostic I don't cotton up to any voodoo hoodoo concepts like an invisible hand (seriuosly, watch ghost hunters much?), otherwise I largely agree with your reasoning. My only caveat is to first analyze any potentially detected extraterrestrial resources for any signs of life - I would hate to see the Dodo incident repeated on a universal scale.
 
martinbayer said:
Right now I'm actually literally on a bender to catch up on the latest season of The Orville, so while as a staunch agnostic I don't cotton up to any voodoo hoodoo concepts like an invisible hand (seriuosly, watch ghost hunters much?),
Click to expand...

You don't *actually* think that an "invisible hand," be it in free market economics or Darwinian evolution, implies an actual hand, do you???

martinbayer said:
otherwise I largely agree with your reasoning. My only caveat is to first analyze any potentially detected extraterrestrial resources for any signs of life - I would hate to see the Dodo incident repeated on a universal scale.
Click to expand...
We've been over this before. Mars, for example, is either dead or very much dying There *might* be some sort of bacteria or lichen or something hanging on somewhere... but that life will be sparse and have no future except slow extinction. I'll stomp said Martians into the ground with my own boots if it means we can terraform the place or detonate the whole planet into a cloud of rubble with which to build a billion city-state sized habitats.
 
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
Right now I'm actually literally on a bender to catch up on the latest season of The Orville, so while as a staunch agnostic I don't cotton up to any voodoo hoodoo concepts like an invisible hand (seriuosly, watch ghost hunters much?),
Click to expand...

You don't *actually* think that an "invisible hand," be it in free market economics or Darwinian evolution, implies an actual hand, do you???

martinbayer said:
otherwise I largely agree with your reasoning. My only caveat is to first analyze any potentially detected extraterrestrial resources for any signs of life - I would hate to see the Dodo incident repeated on a universal scale.
Click to expand...
We've been over this before. Mars, for example, is either dead or very much dying There *might* be some sort of bacteria or lichen or something hanging on somewhere... but that life will be sparse and have no future except slow extinction. I'll stomp said Martians into the ground with my own boots if it means we can terraform the place or detonate the whole planet into a cloud of rubble with which to build a billion city-state sized habitats.
Click to expand...
It really doesn't matter what I think (and yes, for the record, as a German aerospace engineer working for a major United States aerospace manufacturer and prime exporter as well as being an avid watcher of Penn and Teller "Fool Us", *of course* I don't believe in invisible hands or feet or any other more or less droopy body appendages), but any theory (economic or otherwise) that sillily (not sure that's an actual word though?) invokes such a *magical* voodoo device is automatically disqualified in my world view. Your mileage may vary though, of course.
 
Last edited:
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
any theory (economic or otherwise) that sillily (not sure that's an actual word though?) invokes such a *magical* voodoo device is ...
Click to expand...

... a major misunderstanding of the term. And please note that I
Click to expand...
Enlighten me then - remember, English is only my third language - the second was Latin, and the fourth was French - I am an abysmal failure at both (jeez, what is it about the French and their weird accents - they're just as bad a German umlauts, but that is clearly besides the point here). And please note that I won't cotton up to any metaphors, similes, or any other linguistic smoke bomb crap.
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
Orionblamblam said:
martinbayer said:
any theory (economic or otherwise) that sillily (not sure that's an actual word though?) invokes such a *magical* voodoo device is ...
Click to expand...

... a major misunderstanding of the term.
Click to expand...
Enlighten me then.
Click to expand...
It's no more magical than "unintelligently directed" forces turning chaos into order... steam turning into ice, say. Or how water "magically" fits precisely into the shape of a container. Market economics and natural evolution are (or at least should be) largely undirected forces that lead their subjects towards best fitting into their environments.
 
Less weight, less caloric intake, less space.... Let's go with an all midget NASA
 
Let's go with an all female midget NASA astronaut corps then :). The less body mass you need to accomodate a fully functional brain on space exploration missions, the better.
 
martinbayer said:
Let's go with an all female midget NASA astronaut corps then :). The less body mass you need to accomodate a fully functional brain on space exploration missions, the better.
Click to expand...

Better by far would be to baseline slightly chubby, but very muscular, men of well over six feet. Big, heavy, requiring more food, water, life support. Because once you've got that, you can take anybody worth taking.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom