Women in space.

[Gunnar]

According to some authorities a strong case can be made for the idea that The First Crewed Mission to Mars Should Be All Female. Here's Why.

Men have crewed every mission to the Moon so far, but when we finally send humans to Mars, it would be wise to send only women — at least at first.

Mind you, this wouldn’t primarily be for fairness — a correction for the rampant sexism that denied American women the title of “astronaut” until Sally Ride‘s historic flight in 1983 — but rather a practical decision based on calculations as cold as deep space. Available evidence bluntly suggests that women would be more efficient and capable crewmembers on long-duration missions away from Earth.

Dr. W. Randolph Lovelace II and Brigadier General Don D. Flickinger, the former chair and vice chair of NASA’s Special Committee on Life Sciences, originally made the pragmatic case for female astronauts in the late 1950s. The duo noted that women are lighter and thus require less oxygen; they have fewer heart attacks; their reproductive systems are less at risk from radiation. Of course, Lovelace and Flickinger were overruled amid the era’s prevailing sexism.

NASA scientist Geoffrey Landis reiterated the argument in 2000, applying it more strictly to deep-space flight, where the only resources available are the ones you take with you.

“Women are on average smaller than males: women use less oxygen, consume less consumables, produce less carbon dioxide. They have lower mass and take up less volume. The argument for an all-female crew is simple: such a crew would require considerably less support… and allow for a smaller spacecraft. This would produce a considerable savings in cost,” he wrote.

Long-term space missions

A recently published study put some concrete numbers behind Landis’ contentions. Scientists with the Space Medicine Team at the European Space Agency calculated that the average female astronaut requires 26% fewer calories, 29% less oxygen, and 18% less water than the average male. This translates to some sizeable resource savings. A 1,080-day space mission crewed by four women would need 1,695 fewer kilograms of food compared to an all-male mission. That’s about 10% of a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket’s payload to Mars — valuable space which could be filled with additional scientific projects and equipment to ensure a safe and successful mission.

Beyond physical practicality, there are psychological reasons women might be better suited to extended missions away from Earth.

“Statistics show that all-woman groups are far more likely to choose non-confrontational approaches to solve interpersonal problems, and most definitely are more likely to deal with a situation without resorting to violence, which could be a big problem on a Mars journey, where the crew must live in close quarters for 2-3 years,” Landis wrote. “Numerous sociological studies have shown that women, in general, are more cooperative, and less given to hierarchical social structures.”

Just over 60 years ago, the Women in Space Program put 19 female aviators through astronaut training, with more onerous testing than NASA gave to the original Mercury 7 astronauts. The 13 women who passed arguably topped the men both physically and psychologically. The first crewed mission to Mars, which will likely not occur until 2029 at the very earliest, will require every advantage possible, so it only makes sense that an all-female team should be the first to step onto the red planet.

[Physics Guy]

It would be nice to have a token male present, though, just to represent the whole species. It's an affirmative action case. Mars is a lot more than the Moon.

[Some Schmo]

I was sucked into that right away, wondering what their reasoning was.

I'm kind of shocked that it had to be explained to me. It seems so obvious after reading the article.

[Gunnar]

I was sucked into that right away, wondering what their reasoning was.

I'm kind of shocked that it had to be explained to me. It seems so obvious after reading the article.

I wish hard right conservatives could likewise be shocked into modifying or expanding their under-informed and/or bigoted views after having more comprehensive evidence of existing reality explained to them.

I admit that I was surprised too about their conclusion, but as with you, it made very good sense to me when I read their reasoning.

[Kishkumen]

Cool stuff! We just saw “Silent Sky” yesterday. An all-woman crew to Mars sounds great!

[huckelberry]

According to some authorities a strong case can be made for the idea that The First Crewed Mission to Mars Should Be All Female. Here's Why.

........

“Statistics show that all-woman groups are far more likely to choose non-confrontational approaches to solve interpersonal problems, and most definitely are more likely to deal with a situation without resorting to violence, which could be a big problem on a Mars journey, where the crew must live in close quarters for 2-3 years,” Landis wrote. “Numerous sociological studies have shown that women, in general, are more cooperative, and less given to hierarchical social structures.”

...... The first crewed mission to Mars, which will likely not occur until 2029 at the very earliest, will require every advantage possible, so it only makes sense that an all-female team should be the first to step onto the red planet.

Two to three years locked into a small cabin without possibility to go outside for a walk..Male or female these individuals would be facing a brutal brutal journey. Robots would be a better fit.

[Some Schmo]

Two to three years locked into a small cabin without possibility to go outside for a walk..Male or female these individuals would be facing a brutal brutal journey. Robots would be a better fit.

Heh. Hard to disagree with that. I'd kind of want robots to set up as much of a livable environment as possible without human assistance before going to the planet, but that's just me.

But I have no interest in relocating to Mars. I love where I live.

[Physics Guy]

Yeah, we should have robots put beer in the fridge before we send humans to Mars.

[Some Schmo]

Yeah, we should have robots put beer in the fridge before we send humans to Mars.

At the very least.

[Gunnar]

Two to three years locked into a small cabin without possibility to go outside for a walk..Male or female these individuals would be facing a brutal brutal journey. Robots would be a better fit.

Heh. Hard to disagree with that. I'd kind of want robots to set up as much of a livable environment as possible without human assistance before going to the planet, but that's just me.

Good idea! And I also think we should wait until we perfect more efficient and rapid means of getting there that don't rely entirely or even primarily on the use of chemically powered rockets before we send human beings there.