Author Topic: Episode #716  (Read 2655 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
Re: Episode #716
« Reply #60 on: April 13, 2019, 04:43:44 PM »
YES, The spacesuits they wear today are a relic of that time, and thus built for some bodies better than others, but fits no one perfectly. Just keeping them functional is a challenge and a drain on limited resources.. THAT does Effects what is happing today but it does NOT make what is happening today sexist.  It is an unfortunate result of history and money and no amount of press or complaining could have changed the "event" (science wins over publicity stunts) or can help Female astronauts (or smaller yuhangyuan ) in the near future. All the bad press only harms the agency and give ammo to misogynists. It was a failed publicity stunt that backfired and wasted a lot of time.

The fact that it is a result of history and money does not make it not sexist. I don't think anyone here has been saying that the mission planners at NASA are malicious and behaving in a deliberately sexist way. We're not talking about individual intentions at all. We're talking about institutional sexism--the sexism built into the structure of the organization--and we're talking about its results: restricted opportunities for women.
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline ta_erog

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: Episode #716
« Reply #61 on: April 13, 2019, 07:23:19 PM »
. It was a failed publicity stunt that backfired and wasted a lot of time.


Thanks for your insights in these posts.

The one quibble I have is with the idea that the two-women space walk was a publicity stunt. It wasn’t. It came about in the normal course of mission planning and the fact that it was the first time that two women were space walking was noticed and publicized.

As you pointed out, due to issues with the suits the schedule was changed. Had it been a stunt done for publicity they wouldn’t have changed it.

The real issue here is that like every other government department NASA gets hit constantly with budget cuts. Sometimes targeted, sometimes across the board and sometimes, as was the case with space suits, money that’s been budgeted and appropriated but not spent gets taken away.

Thanks, Republicans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I overstated that a bit.  Clarification is, The mission was a mission first the all-woman participation it was sort of after the fact "stunt" for media. Some wanted to make bank on that "first" even (no problem here, Stunt may imply bad, but that was not my intent. but Firsts are a big thing in this community and that could not be ignored) it was what it was and they could have gotten some good press but it backfired and got way worse then it deserved. The mission still was completed the astronauts really did not make much of it, everyone else did.
But thanks for pointing that out.

Quote
The fact that it is a result of history and money does not make it not sexist. I don't think anyone here has been saying that the mission planners at NASA are malicious and behaving in a deliberately sexist way. We're not talking about individual intentions at all. We're talking about institutional sexism--the sexism built into the structure of the organization--and we're talking about its results: restricted opportunities for women.

- The Latinist

Many implied rather heavily that is was current active sexism. And others (though you are correct not here) state it directly.
"We're talking about institutional sexism--the sexism built into the structure of the organization--and we're talking about its results: restricted opportunities for women." is quite correct but AMO this case is still historical not current and this is NOT how it is reported in all of the press.  A 40-year-old decision on the first non fitted suites ever designed that DID plan to include ALL sizes (even x-small and small)  That by a chain of events limited them to fewer sizes do to available tech, to loss, to budget, to redesign, to more budget, and attrition, to outliving its expected lifetime over 2x.  Not a lot of "the sexism built into the structure of the organization" or culture effect here - more first go and construction (no chance to learn from mistakes), bad luck and no budget to change much, . (some as they were NOT going to make a specific male and female version in multiple sizes, but then again why would they at the time? - context is important here.)
Though I do agree this is a very gray area and your comment is a good one.






 

personate-rain