Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space NASA

The First All-Female Spacewalk Is Scheduled For This Month (cnn.com) 108

Posted by BeauHD from the one-giant-step-for-womankind dept.
After the first all-female spacewalk was scrapped in March, NASA has now scheduled another attempt with astronauts Christina Koch and Jessica Meir for October 21. CNN reports: For the intended spacewalk in March, Koch was going to be paired with astronaut Anne McClain, who has since returned to Earth. In March, NASA cited spacesuit availability as the reason for scrapping the walk. McClain herself made the decision and the teams supported her, Koch said. "We do our best to anticipate the spacesuit sizes that each astronaut will need, based on the spacesuit size they wore in training on the ground, and in some cases (including Anne McClain's) astronauts train in multiple sizes," Brandi Dean with NASA's public affairs office told CNN in March. "However, individuals' sizing needs may change when they are on orbit, in response to the changes living in microgravity can bring about in a body. In addition, no one training environment can fully simulate performing a spacewalk in microgravity, and an individual may find that their sizing preferences change in space."

Koch conducted a spacewalk along with fellow astronaut Nick Hague instead of McClain at the time. When asked about spacesuit availability this time around, Koch said there are currently two medium spacesuits on board. After the first all-female plan was shifted, Koch configured the second spacesuit herself using what was available on board. She and Meir have both trained in medium-sized suits for the last six years. Koch will conduct three spacewalks in October, one alongside NASA astronaut Andrew Morgan on October 6, another with Morgan on October 11 and the walk with Meir on October 21.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The First All-Female Spacewalk Is Scheduled For This Month More

The First All-Female Spacewalk Is Scheduled For This Month

Comments Filter:

  • exceited (Score:2, Insightful)

    by cygnusvis ( 6168614 )
    Excited to see women do for the first time what men have been doing for decades.

    • Like not being able to even spell the one-word title of a misogynist slashdot post correctly?

      • The Fourth Rule of Acquisition

        A woman wearing clothes is like a man in the kitchen.

        oooooooooooo:IIIIHIHHIHHHII::I:o
        ooooooooooIIIIHIHHHHHHIHIIIIMHHI:,
        ooooooo:IIIIHIHHHHHHMMHHIHHIIHHIII:o
        oooooo:IHIHHHHHHHHHHHHHIHIHHIHHHIH:I:,
        oooo,o:HIHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHIHIHHII:o
        ooo,o:IHHHHHHHHHHMMMMHHHHHHHIIHHHIHIII,
        ooo:IIHHHHHHHHMMMMMHHHHMMMHHMHHHIIIHIIII:
        oooIIHHHMMMMMMMHHMMMHHHMMMHHMHII:HHHII:Io
        oo:HIHHHMHMMMMMMMMMMMMHMHHHHII:HHMMHII:II
        o:HHHHMHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMHIIHIHHMMHHHHII::I:
        :IIHHHHHMHMMMMMMMMMMHMMHIHMM

      • Oh, "womyn" have been able to do that for many, many decades.

    • Valentina Tereshkova

    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by Chris Katko ( 2923353 )

      I am also excited that entire groups of vaginas are in space for the first time. Because there's no difference between men and women, so the only thing left is genitals apparently. So horray for genitals.

      • Yes there is differences other than plumbing between men and woman. However these differences have very little if anything in stopping someone from actually doing a job.
        Men are on average stronger and taller than woman. However they are a lot of women who are taller and stronger than the average man.

        The degree of these differences are only a few percent different allowing a good number of acceptable people who can do a job, that has been historically reserved for a gender.

        Both genders are human and have f

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          In fact they trouble with the Apollo astronauts being too big. They had a height limit due to the small size of the vehicle and some of the astronauts had to work to keep their height under it.

        • I personally love how much mental gymnastics you had to do to explain the cognitive dissonance.

      • Iâ(TM)m offended You are assuming I have to have a vagina to be a woman. In fact, I suppose the first spacewalk was already all female if we just ask the participants how they identify and they confirm they now use her as their preferred pronun
    • The old astronaught suits at Houneysuckle Creek, Canberra Australia confirmed the first males were beanstalk thin - like 000 model size.Like is it 100kg or fuel for each 1kg of payload back then? So are these females in the 35-40Kg range? Meanwhile Chinese airlines have worked out thin hosties = fuel savings. Its not discrimination, but payload physics.

  • Cancelled spacewalk (Score:3, Funny)

    by excelsior_gr ( 969383 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:29AM (#59298850)

    So... They wanted to go out, but they had "nothing to wear"?

    *ducks*

    • Man, that's sexist. As I understand it, NASA was just waiting for a night when there wasn't too many dishes in the sink.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I'm surprised they are all willing to go out while wearing the same outfit!

  • Why does this matter? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jarwulf ( 530523 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @02:52AM (#59298868)
    Why do we constantly have to care that the first xyz did this and the first xyz did that? Shouldn't the only first that matters be the actual first? And if something like this does matter why can't we criticize it? Either something doesn't matter and its pointless to care about it or it does matter and it has a good and a bad side We used to say that skin color, and sexual orientation, and sex doesn't make an difference and so its fair enough to also say you shouldn't discriminate against it because its a completely pointless and inane thing to take into account. But now that we're celebrating five gajillion different holidays for sexual orientation and race this is pretty much an admission that these characteristics have a significant effect. If they have a significant effect they by definition have properties that would justify discrimination in certain cases. Either something doesn't matter or it does and it should be open to criticism and possible discrimination, you can't have it both ways.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by weilawei ( 897823 )

      Rules for thee and not for me.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Well it is kind of odd that in 60 years of humans in space, 50 years after we set foot on the moon, and this is the first time two women have been outside the ship together. They are 50% of the human race, after all.

      Obviously there are reasons for this, not least the fact that manned space flight started in an age when sexism was deeply ingrained in society, but it's still a little surprising it has taken this long considering that in most other areas it happened long ago.

      Try not to get too upset at people

      • So in order to ensure that we are no longer sexist, we must now pay special attention to their gender?

        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

          So in order to ensure that we are no longer sexist, we must now pay special attention to their gender?

          We are much more sexist - even stridently so. It's just a different group of people who are bigots, and it is sanctioned by law to the point of not only ignoring sexism, but promoting it.

          Witness this story being brayed all over the internet. It is inherently sexist, promoting these ladies not as competent astronauts, but as possessors of vaginas. Blatantly sexism, not based on anything but genitalia.

          I'd love to talk to the ladies off the record to ask how they feel about being promoted as possessors of

          • I'd love to talk to the ladies off the record to ask how they feel about being promoted as possessors of vaginas, not competent and intelligent spacefarers.

            Can't speak about these ladies specifically, but I've asked female pilots as well as female aircraft technicians what they think of the constant focus on promoting the ability of humans with vaginas to do such jobs. Only one had anything positive to say on the matter; the rest hated it but felt that they couldn't say anything negative about it in public.

            • Can't speak about these ladies specifically, but I've asked female pilots as well as female aircraft technicians what they think of the constant focus on promoting the ability of humans with vaginas to do such jobs. Only one had anything positive to say on the matter; the rest hated it but felt that they couldn't say anything negative about it in public.

              Exactly. One of our engineers happened to be female, and yes, quite beautiful and in excellent shape, and a great person. We're good friends. Every time some bigwig would come through for a tour, they would trot her out as one of the talks or display presentations.

              At first she thought it was okay, but as time went on, she came to resent it more and more, as it was ovbious that they weren't promoting her as a good engineer, (she was good) but putting her on display because she had a vagina. That's a hella

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            The point of the story is that they ARE competent astronauts and got there on their own merits.

            It's really reaching to describe it as sexist, requiring a very disingenuous interpretation. Exactly what you accuse others of doing.

            • Clearly the point of the story was they are women doing this and it's the first time such a thing has happened. How good at astronauting they may be has nothing to do with anything. This only made headlines because they are women.

              In a way, that kind of does diminish these individual persons' accomplishments. They worked their butts off but what's the important part, that they are women? Does seem a little insulting.

              • Clearly the point of the story was they are women doing this and it's the first time such a thing has happened. How good at astronauting they may be has nothing to do with anything. This only made headlines because they are women.

                In a way, that kind of does diminish these individual persons' accomplishments. They worked their butts off but what's the important part, that they are women? Does seem a little insulting.

                Exactly. It's funny how saying that the important thing about this spacewalk is that there are two females out the hatch. Not what they are doing, not the training they have gone through, not their degrees, not their very aspect of being an astronaut just like men are astronauts.

                No. we must have a parade because they have female sex organs.

                Women have done spacewalks before and performed brilliantly. But these ladies work is of no importance. Their sex is the most important thing. That is damn insulti

            • The point of the story is that they ARE competent astronauts and got there on their own merits.

              It's really reaching to describe it as sexist, requiring a very disingenuous interpretation. Exactly what you accuse others of doing.

              I disagree. If they are competent Astronauts, their vaginas have nothing to do with the situation.

              Can you tell me exactly how story being spewed all over the world about two women taking a spacewalk together isn't sexist? They are being heralded because both of them have vaginas, which is the very definition and exposition of sexism.

              Women have been doing spacewalks since 1984 - didn't their spacewalks count? They meant nothing until there were two out at the same time? What is the next great feat to h

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                They are being heralded because people find it surprising that it's 2019 and this is the first time it's happening. In most fields there are few gender related firsts yet to happen.

                • They are being heralded because people find it surprising that it's 2019 and this is the first time it's happening. In most fields there are few gender related firsts yet to happen.

                  How is it a first? Is something special going to happen specifically because of their sexual organs?

                  Seems to me there are two astronauts doing a spacewalk. Any interpretation that thier genitals make it special is by definition sexism of the first order.

                  Females will always be unequal if everything they do has to be about their genitals. It's like "Isn't this amazing? two people with female sexual organs did something."

                  Sexism isn't just for men. Because saying that would be..... sexism.

      • How dare you presume the gender of all astronauts up until this point. That's incredibly transphobic.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by d.kalor ( 457101 )

        It is not in the tiniest bit odd or surprising. Going to space is extremely dangerous. There are always far more men than women willing to do extremely dangerous things.

      • Re:Why does this matter? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Some Guy I Dont Know ( 6200212 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @07:17AM (#59299188)

        Well, akshually...

        Space flight, until recently, has been risky... and men are more disposable than women.
        Male bodies deal with the stress of launch better.
        Most astronauts are former military, which also means almost entirely male.
        Astronauts are almost required to have a STEM degree, which is biased male.
        The Pilot and Mission Commander positions (the only 2 required positions, of the 5-7 per mission) are required to have at least 1000 hours of pilot-in-command experience... which means mostly male.
        Or, as in this case, the smaller custom exosuits that these women required were not considered worth spending millions of dollars to launch, for no reason other than to have two women spacewalk simultaneously... until now.

        So, in other words, there are plenty of reasons beyond "sexism" as to why the US space program has been dominated by males. Try not to get too upset over reality trampling your sexist prejudices.

        • They're not "custom", just smaller. The plumbing had to be distinct, because women can't wear the condom based connector for the urine bag.

          • There is also a very good article at https://www.theatlantic.com/sc... [theatlantic.com] , discussing the sizing differences for spacesuits for men and women. It seems quite a good article about the available space suits and fitting them, even if makes some claims about wehre NASA should be focusing its money that are based on NASA having money, and finding space in the ISS, for more suits.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          I doubt NASA considered men disposable.

          • Early spaceflight was insanely risky. While NASA wouldn't have wanted to lose any astronauts, everyone involved knew that there was a very strong chance that some of them would die. And as hard as it was to lose male astronauts, it would have been unthinkable to lose a female. Even with combat deaths in the military, dead women get far more publicity than dead men.

          • Men aren't seen as disposable, but women getting blown up is *much worse PR*. Nobody wants to be that guy who ordered women on a suicide mission.

            • For example, you send a Navy Seal team in of 40 men and 10 die fighting, then you have the funeral, etc like normal. Or ... you could be the general who sent an all-female Seal team into the same battle, and now you've got 10 dead female officers. Great PR right there. Women are a protected class. That has both benefits but there are also limitations that come with that. To dismantle the limitations, you must also dismantle the protected status, and you should then expect that 50% of all workplace deaths ar

              • You could suggest a mixed Navy Seals team of 20 men, 20 women, but what will pretty much *always* happen in that case, if there were 10 casualties, is that ~9 male soldiers would die fighting and ~1 female soldier would die fighting (since whoever is running the unit itself also wouldn't want to be known as someone who puts women in harm's way), then the media would focus in for *months* on the backstory of that one dead female soldier, giving her death equal if not more coverage than all the male soldiers

              • The all female seal team would get their ass kicked. Have you seen the original numbers with the USMC failure rates for women? It was 90%+ compared to all male combat units. And when they do make it past initial training, they hardly ever actually go serve in a combat capacity. They usually find a way to be in the rear with the gear. Virtually all women find a way to be on a medical profile that prevents them from deploying. They also, as a group, have significantly more injuries than men.
            • I was in elementary school when NASA sent up a female teacher on the space shuttle that blew up on launch. EVERY single teacher made it a big deal because it was a women, and a teacher that died. They totally neglected the men. Society is inherently sexist because women are given incredible privilege. Ask any young kid trying to get their first college job.... women get scooped up because they have a pulse. Having a 4.0 in engineering doesn't make up for the crime of being a male.

              • I was in elementary school when NASA sent up a female teacher on the space shuttle that blew up on launch. EVERY single teacher made it a big deal because it was a women, and a teacher that died. They totally neglected the men..

                Christa McCulliff.

                The men on that mission? I have no idea without going to Wikipedia or NASA.

                Which proves your point, because I try to be even handed regarding groups, so I failed.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              The only two times NASA has blown anyone up the crew included women.

            • Men aren't seen as disposable, but women getting blown up is *much worse PR*. Nobody wants to be that guy who ordered women on a suicide mission.

              Disagree - men are inherently disposible.

          • I doubt NASA considered men disposable.

            Alomst 100 percent of males are disposable. That isn't even a social construct - it is evolutionary and practical pressure.

            Whereas in the matters of survival, human women have inherently singular reproduction of new generations, males have a massive overproduction model. Women my age are no longer fertile, but I'm still quite capable of fathering children.

            Take 50 women and 2 men and isolate them

            Take 50 men and isolate them

            Take 2 women and 50 men and isolate them

            Come back 100 years later and do a

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              I mean, biologically, yeah... But kinda the point of civilization is to move beyond that.

      • I'd say there is nothing surprising about it. Spacecraft have very limited numbers of suits. Since women are smaller than men, but also pass rigorous physical training, they're likely to be short powerhouses and all need the same _small_ space suit. It's not a deliberate selection not to provide a wider variety of smaller space suits, it's that it's easier to fit someone in a spacesuit that is too _big_ than one that is too _small_. So the variety of space suits that fit well for women in space work is limi

      • No less odd than the fact that 95% of all on-the-job deaths in the US are men. Funny that nobody makes a big deal about that massive inequality.

        The two facts are, of course, linked. Women tend to avoid dangerous occupations. Unlike men, they don't often need to take a dangerous job to feed a family, or to prove their worth to potential romantic partners.

    • Re:Why does this matter? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @08:18AM (#59299294) Journal

      you can't have it both ways.

      Ah, but you can have it both ways ... that's what we have seen for decades now.

      Person A: "Diversity is beneficial, different groups bring different strengths!"

      Person B: "Oh, they do? Do they bring different weaknesses too?"

      Person A: "Differences; you think there are differences?? You bigot!!"

    • that women got the right to vote in America. And in large parts of the world, notably our close ally Saudi Arabia, they're still essentially just property of men.

      The fact that there's enough women up in space that there'll be an all female spacewalk shows that, at least in some places, the move from property to people has been successful.

      But that said human beings are very, very good at regressing. Rome was a modern city/state with a penchant for science and it fell to a thousand years of dark ages.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Blymie ( 231220 )

        You need to be realistic here. Look at how long *men* have been able to vote.

        For example, in the UK? 1918 -- every man could vote, 1928 -- every woman. Prior to that, only property owners, with hard currency, were allowed to vote. EG, a very, very small percentage of men.

        In the early days of the US, it was the same thing. Only property owners could vote, there were further restrictions, and again .. leaving a very small percentage of the male population.

        Prior to these times, NO ONE voted, on only "Lord

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Cederic ( 9623 )

          For example, in the UK? 1918 -- every man could vote, 1928 -- every woman.

          Of course, there were 700,000 fewer men around to vote in 1918, 250,000 of whom had died without the right to vote.

          Remind me of the sacrifices women made to get the vote?

      • What is sexism is when feminists and politically correct politicians push "all female" astronauts or anything all-female. That IS sexism by definition. Men and women are different. There actually is a difference between a male and female brain. This is well documented in science. Furthermore, most women didn't even want the right to vote in the USA because they didn't want equality. They didn't want to be drafted into the military. Today, women want equality as long as they still get all the perks of

      • that women got the right to vote in America. And in large parts of the world, notably our close ally Saudi Arabia, they're still essentially just property of men.

        I find that horrifying, as well as the genital mutilation of females in some African cultures. And yet, I don't see a whole lot of Social justice people ever discussing that other than complaining about how our patriarchy has these people as an ally.

        I sure as hell have brought up that issue as a terrible evil, not because they are allies, but because doing such things is patently evil.

        So women are being infibulated, while we're busy turning holding hands into sexual assault: https://www.macalester.edu/v [macalester.edu]

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

          Need I remind you about the male genital mutilation going on in America every day? Circumcision. They sell it as more hygienic - what about women and their periods? No one says anything about that. All kinds of BS around circumcision. It's child abuse, it's genital mutilation and it's sexual abuse. They cut off what would be 15 square inches of highly sensitive skin and we wonder why there are so many homosexuals today. Men aren't stimulated like they're supposed to be.

          All of that is wrong, however the "wom

          • All of that is wrong, however the "women's" movement is only interested in protecting women.

            That is correct, because the women's movement is demonstrably misandrist.

    • In a better world, a two-woman spacewalk would happen simply because on that occasion those two people were the best available choice for that particular job at that particular time. Perhaps after the fact someone would note, "Oh, turns out that was the first all-woman spacewalk."

      Making a big fuss about it beforehand gives rise to reasonable suspicion that these astronauts were chosen for for the specific purpose to have an all-female spacewalk, in pursuit of "social justice" brownie points, rather than bei

  • Serious question (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Given that women carry a fixed (though diminishing over time) number of human eggs around with them everywhere they go, what are the odds that radiation in space will mutate said eggs tragically? Is it safe to breed after a space walk?

    • Given that women carry a fixed (though diminishing over time) number of human eggs around with them everywhere they go, what are the odds that radiation in space will mutate said eggs tragically? Is it safe to breed after a space walk?

      Of course it is safe to breed after a space walk. The human body is bombarded by radiation all the time, and it contains many mechanisms to repair damage from it. The ISS is so close to the Earth's surface that it is still within the protective Van Allen belts, and is in the "shadow" of the Earth from solar and cosmic radiation. The ISS is not experiencing all that much radiation and what they do experience is barely enough to register as an increased cancer risk.

      I'm thinking you watched too many bad sci

  • Or are women better? Or are they the same? Are there more men in the candidate pool to select from and so the quality of male astronauts is better? Do they need more women candidates? Does this help us achieve our space mission more effectively? This is unclear to me.

    This is a federally funded program right? What is the message here, that NASA used to discriminate and be sexist but now they don't anymore? Shouldn't that be demonstrated by showing the actual numbers of male to female ratio for all the missio

    • Or are women better? Or are they the same?

      Women have been going to space for many years now. I'm pretty certain they do just as well as men.

      Women have been performing EVA's since 1984.

      This is not news, this is sexism personified, as if there is something special about not having a penis wielder on an EVA. It is no more special than celebrating an all male spacewalk.

      And having spent a career around strong smart ladies who were engineers and scientists, I'd bet Koch and Meir are seriously embarrassed about the unwarranted attention. But they a

      • You're right. This is all sexism personified. It's fake female accomplishment. People don't realize how mountains were moved to get these women up there from the day they graduated high school, through college, etc. It's all set up to make this fraudulent claim that women can do anything men can. By the time these women got up there, all the unknowns became well known and mostly formulaic. How many women could equal someone like Neil Armstrong, who loved what he did and was a military pilot and engine
    • Men are better. I can assure you that out of 3000 candidates, only 1 or maybe 2 was female. Yet, NASA, a politically controlled organization, had to make this into a PR stunt by putting minorities into the group. By sheer statistics alone, the odds of two females going up at the same time is... astronomically remote. That means that this is a PR stunt, just like putting a teacher into space. The same thing happens at airlines. If you have a pulse, you can become a female pilot. They don't care how ba
  • put them up in space in the first place and who are going to be guiding/monitoring their activity during the walk. Just saying.

  • If you wanna be my lover
    You gotta get with my friends
    Make it last forever
    Friends until the end

  • Sheesh (Score:3)

    by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @07:42AM (#59299220) Journal
    I would seriously be embarrassed to be in a group that everybody had to contrive "firsts" for while making a huge fuss about it.
  • And for the next step, I suggest a mission to Mars, consisting of a female only crew. I have a couple of candidates in mind already.

  • In the 1970s or even 1980s this would be a highly symbolic gesture, and while usually these gestures are more condescending than anything else, I could see the point for something rare and high-profile like a space walk. No harm done and it might be genuinely inspiring for future female cosmonauts.

    In the 2019 the correct attitude is: "The first two women? Never thought about it, they were just the best qualified."

    • Or - they just happened to be there and next up to do it. The fact that you can do a spacewalk at all is still pretty amazing, but many women have done spacewalks before, it still carries risk, but is not differentially risky for women. It wasn't really much of a story when Sally Ride went up, swell, so now *women* can ride around in standard air at 15 psi and 68 degrees, what does it prove.

      This is just more condescending bullshit. Who cares? What are the people who think this is some

  • did her spacewalk in 1984.
    Why is this news?
  • First all female is so 90s. I'm waiting for first all-transgender.

  • Can women be Astronauts?

    This video is great, asking "what kind of Astronauts do we want?"
    Along with other good questions & points.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video... [bitchute.com]

    Enjoy!

  • Who the frack cares?!
    Were women afraid to space walk alone before?
    Were women afraid to be caught alone with a male partner in space?!

    ANY ho-ha about never-befores tends only to promote biases; or at least acknowledge biases.

    Who in the heck cares about such "firsts".
    I have never considered women incapable. Any PERSON that qualifies for a job should get the job -
    irregardless of gender, race, religion (to a degree here), or any other thing we might place social weight on!

    There's already too much i

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close