3 ms·

Astronauts Going to Mars Should Be Only Women – It's Basic Science

9 points by amichail 4y ago

ftxbro 4y ago
if those are the reasons they should send only sterile dwarfs or whatever would be the preferred nomenclature
- nine_k 4y ago
  Not dwarfs, hobbits. We should send hobbits. They are even more compact. On a more serious note, it was pretty standard to prefer shorter men to train as fighter plane pilots. Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, was merely 1.57m (5'2") tall. I can imagine that smaller physical dimensions may become more than a tie-breaking factor in choosing participants for future Mars missions.
  - ftxbro 4y ago
    > Not dwarfs, hobbits. We should send hobbits. They are even more compact. OK but can they still be sterile > On a more serious note, it was pretty standard to prefer shorter men Another example Audie Murphy's height was recorded as 5 feet 5.5 inches (1.66 m) and his weight as 112 pounds (50.8 kg).
orionblastar 4y ago
If you want a Mars colony to grow you need men and women. Otherwise no birth rate. Stranger in a Strange Land had the first birth on Mars and he grew up to own the land while everyone else died in a crash.
- themadturk 4y ago
  No one said there should never be men on Mars missions. The reports say the first Mars mission. That mission would probably be equipped to set up a rudimentary supply infrastructure on Mars, thereby doubling the number of available supply depots.
JoeAltmaier 4y ago
I'm thinking, treating astronauts as brain-carriers is maybe misplaced? Sure it saves on mission cost, except when something involving strength happens on Mars. We'd have to model possibilities to come up with an optimal astronaut, instead of just assuming smallest, lightest is best. Anyway I'm good with women dominating spaceflight. If it makes sense.
paulddraper 4y ago
Lolololololololololol > Their bodies are typically smaller and lighter Have you even seen a horse race? > Their reproductive systems were thought to be more insulated from radiation Yes, the first reason I thought for 100% women was "for reproduction." > They are less prone to heart attacks than men. That's pretty specific. --- "Astronauts going to Mars should be only men. They are more goal oriented, physically stronger, and less susceptible to depression. "It's basic science." Blegh
joebiden2 4y ago
Wow, that's the most misogynist (non-flagged) piece I ever read on HN.
- dsq 4y ago
  Wouldn't that be misandrist?
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
The study is worth perusing [1]. (This title is nonsense.) It suggests an all-woman crew could save "additional food (+ 3993- vs. + 5688-kg) and storage volume (+ 5.4- vs. + 7.7-m3)" on "a 1080-day mission." Some of this is due to stature, but independent of that women astronauts "are lighter than theoretical male astronauts at equivalent statures and have lower relative VO2max values." It's just one among many mission planning parameters. But it's undeniably interesting to be able to trade off e.g. the stature and gender of an individual astronaut against a piece of scientific payload or shielding. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31713-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31713-6
two_in_one 4y ago
> Their bodies are typically smaller and lighter This is plane stupid. It's easy to find small and light men. Mission will have not an "average american" weight and size. BWT, women still don't dominate in near space for a reason. Interesting is another thing, saying that women are superior is acceptable. Imagine they said that about men. They would be looking for a new job by now.
kbelder 4y ago
But then who would take care of the Martian Spiders?

9 points by amichail 4y ago

ftxbro 4y ago

if those are the reasons they should send only sterile dwarfs or whatever would be the preferred nomenclature

nine_k 4y ago
Not dwarfs, hobbits. We should send hobbits. They are even more compact. On a more serious note, it was pretty standard to prefer shorter men to train as fighter plane pilots. Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, was merely 1.57m (5'2") tall. I can imagine that smaller physical dimensions may become more than a tie-breaking factor in choosing participants for future Mars missions.
- ftxbro 4y ago
  > Not dwarfs, hobbits. We should send hobbits. They are even more compact. OK but can they still be sterile > On a more serious note, it was pretty standard to prefer shorter men Another example Audie Murphy's height was recorded as 5 feet 5.5 inches (1.66 m) and his weight as 112 pounds (50.8 kg).

orionblastar 4y ago

If you want a Mars colony to grow you need men and women. Otherwise no birth rate. Stranger in a Strange Land had the first birth on Mars and he grew up to own the land while everyone else died in a crash.

themadturk 4y ago
No one said there should never be men on Mars missions. The reports say the first Mars mission. That mission would probably be equipped to set up a rudimentary supply infrastructure on Mars, thereby doubling the number of available supply depots.

JoeAltmaier 4y ago

I'm thinking, treating astronauts as brain-carriers is maybe misplaced? Sure it saves on mission cost, except when something involving strength happens on Mars. We'd have to model possibilities to come up with an optimal astronaut, instead of just assuming smallest, lightest is best. Anyway I'm good with women dominating spaceflight. If it makes sense.

paulddraper 4y ago

Lolololololololololol > Their bodies are typically smaller and lighter Have you even seen a horse race? > Their reproductive systems were thought to be more insulated from radiation Yes, the first reason I thought for 100% women was "for reproduction." > They are less prone to heart attacks than men. That's pretty specific. --- "Astronauts going to Mars should be only men. They are more goal oriented, physically stronger, and less susceptible to depression. "It's basic science." Blegh

joebiden2 4y ago

Wow, that's the most misogynist (non-flagged) piece I ever read on HN.

dsq 4y ago
Wouldn't that be misandrist?

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

The study is worth perusing [1]. (This title is nonsense.) It suggests an all-woman crew could save "additional food (+ 3993- vs. + 5688-kg) and storage volume (+ 5.4- vs. + 7.7-m3)" on "a 1080-day mission." Some of this is due to stature, but independent of that women astronauts "are lighter than theoretical male astronauts at equivalent statures and have lower relative VO2max values." It's just one among many mission planning parameters. But it's undeniably interesting to be able to trade off e.g. the stature and gender of an individual astronaut against a piece of scientific payload or shielding. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31713-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31713-6

two_in_one 4y ago

> Their bodies are typically smaller and lighter This is plane stupid. It's easy to find small and light men. Mission will have not an "average american" weight and size. BWT, women still don't dominate in near space for a reason. Interesting is another thing, saying that women are superior is acceptable. Imagine they said that about men. They would be looking for a new job by now.

kbelder 4y ago

But then who would take care of the Martian Spiders?