Sally Ride, the first American woman in space, died last week, as most of you no doubt know. On The Thinking Housewife, Laura Wood uses the occasion as an opportunity to bash lesbians, feminism, and Ride herself. Wood begins her most unusual eulogy by quoting Gloria Steinem, who once said of Ride:
“Millions of little girls are going to sit by their television sets and see they can be astronauts, heroes, explorers and scientists.”
Wood scoffs at the very notion, suggesting that
Steinem’s real point, in keeping with her intense dislike of women, was that women should want to be astronauts and there was something wrong with them if they didn’t.
So we’re off to a great start here. Wood then offers this patronizing assessment of Ride’s life – which nonetheless turns out to be the nicest thing she says about the legendary astronaut.
Ride, who had a warm, radiant smile and is said to have served ably in her two missions in space, died Monday at the age of 61.
After this bit of faint praise, Wood moves on to her main point: Ride was lesbian, and therefore a terrible person, so she’ll quickly be forgotten.
For all the fanfare that once surrounded it, Ride’s story will likely fade into history and her life ultimately inspire very few girls. This will be so not only because women do not excel at space science or the physical demands of space travel as men do but also because, as Ride’s obituary proved, she did not lead a full life. Ride was in a lesbian relationship with a childhood friend for 27 years.
Yep, apparently lesbians don’t live “full lives,” whatever that means. Are women only living “full lives” if they are filled up on at least a semi-regular basis with their husband’s penis?
Wood continues:
To her credit, Ride did not make her lesbianism public and was private about her personal life in general. Her sister and the woman with whom she had a relationship, Tam O’Shaughnessy, have released the information to the world and now Ride has the double distinction of being both the first woman and the first lesbian in space. O’Shaughnessy was Ride’s friend since the age of 12. Ride was briefly married to another astronaut, but they were divorced. So while Ride accomplished much in her career, thanks in part to the spirit of affirmative action, she seems to have never fully emerged from childhood.
Huh? Are lesbians inherently childish, or is Ride supposed to have been a perpetual “child” because she married her childhood friend?
Then Wood says one of the strangest things I’ve ever heard:
The only good reason for a normal woman to go through the grueling rigors of becoming an astronaut is that NASA is a great place to meet men.
Sorry, but I’ve got to pull out the Don Draper gif again: What?
Wood elaborates:
Ride’s life, however, does not even offer that slim hope to little girls, that wonderful compensation for dreary days in a control cabin. Ride flew into space but never experienced other thrills that are as great or far greater. She never gave a man such necessary and life-sustaining love that he was able to do great things, such as fly into space.
So apparently the real, true purpose of becoming a female astronaut isn’t to fly into space, but to inspire the dude you’ve married to fly into space?
She never looked up at the stars with her own children and encouraged their wonder. She did not pass on her love of space to a son or daughter or grandchild.
I guess inspiring girls around the world doesn’t count? (And I can only imagine that the thought of Ride now inspiring gay children strikes Wood with dread.)
Though she performed capably in her public position as a Role Model of the Century, Sally Ride’s example will likely be the exact opposite of what NASA and Gloria Steinem predicted. She will serve as a reminder of at least some of the very good reasons why women don’t want to be astronauts.
Because becoming an astronaut might make them lesbian?
The vast majority of women would sooner love an astronaut than be one. And given that most men are destined to perform inglorious jobs for most of their lives, women will come to see that the dream of conquering space rightly belongs to men.
A lot of men do crap jobs, so therefore only men should be astronauts? I can’t even pretend to understand the logic here.
Here’s Ride’s web site, and her official obituary.
I would rather love an astronaut than be one*!! Clearly I’m the only good woman on this site and y’all should be ashamed of yourselves.
*Get back to me when that shit speeds up some and we’ll be in business
As for me, I’m so very lonely. It’s two thousand light years from home.
Is NWO’s “quota for female astronauts” a “woman born woman” thing or can I join the party?
On a serious note, how in the world are my genitalia more important than how easily I get motion sick? Logic NWO, try applying some.
wtf?? Sooo… wait, Sally Ride got to fulfil her dream of space travel, not once, but TWICE. And she got to be with her childhood friend and later lover for 27 years. Sorry, I’m not seeing how Ms Ride missed out on life. Sounds like a life well lived to me.
RIP Ms. Ride and respect for being an astronaut.
Also on account of the fact that Ozy has all my shirts.
If I don’t survive, tell my wife “Hello”
Cassandra, I must question your sartorial choices with some of these shirts.
Can I wear all of Cliff’s shirts instead?
Oh cool, if I can have my shirts back then that’ll work perfect with my see-through space-mini. Those are a mandatory part of the uniform in honor of Owly, btw.
Also we’ll need to recruit some tweeners. I think even Ozy is a bit long in the tooth for Owly’s liking.
Sometimes I have to wonder why women like this “thinking housewife” who believe that all women should be submissive and completely silent and not have opinions are often the same women who keep saying shit like this. If you believe that what women have to say and do is meaningless, then why are you still talking?
How does a space-mini differ from a regular mini? Are there stars on it?
I’m twenty, are you kidding, I am PRACTICALLY DEAD.
I think a space-mini creates a vacuum, but only around your vagina. Which works great, since that’s the only part that Owly cares about anyway.
@ Nanasha
I have asked that multiple times. Still haven’t received an answer. I feel that being a meek, submissive, traditional lady should probably involve less bossing other people around.
SPPPPPPAAAAAAACCCCCCCEEEEEEE!
Can’t argue with Pinkie Pie.
Excellent way to get rid of centipedes, no?
But for real, ouch.
For real, this is always my mental image of what creepy sexist dudes imagine when they babble about virginity – for the first time a woman has sex to produce a sound not unlike the one you get from opening a tube of Pringles. Sealed for freshness!
Skeptifem
6. The “women pilots and astronauts can’t take the G-forces” claim:
Opponents of women finally getting to fly combat aircraft, and some male pilots, bandied this about in trying to prevent women from flying the newer, faster, aircraft – most of which were designated as combat planes.
The reality is that women can counteract G-forces because their physiology makes them more tolerant of G-forces than men.
(G-forces push down on a body, they overcome the ability of the heart to pump oxygenated blood upward into the brain. Blood begins to pool in the lower extremities, while blood circulation to the head is reduced. When blood circulation to the head is sufficiently reduced, the oxygen supply to the brain becomes insufficient.)
Height, not strength or gender, is the most negative factor in a pilot’s ability to tolerate G stress. Because women have a smaller body mass the shorter distance between their heart and brain makes it easier for them to counteract the G-forces. Advances in centrifuge technology and training , special exercises, and newer G-suits are making marked improvement in aircrew G-tolerance.
Taken from http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/myths.html
@Shadow
Lol!
“all I know is my gut says maybe”
@CassandraSays
Except for them, once they pop, the fun does stop.
I feel like a vacuum in your vagina would cause disturbing things to any entering penises. Are there resident physicists who can confirm or deny this?
The see-through space mini is a trap! Thus making women’s sexuality misandry, according to the Slavey principle by which women’s sexuality is wearing clothes.
I read this article and hear, “That Don’t Impress Me Much.”
Women who wanted to be astronauts, passed the same physical and other tests men did, but the boys still kept them out of their treehouse: Mercury 13!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_13
Um, ozy how strong do you think those things are?
I could point out that in the early years of manned space flight, NASA specifically excluded women from their program.
Do you think that this was fair, Owly? Do you think that it was a problem back when there was a quota and that quota was 100% men and 0% women? Do you think that that system was just so that men wouldn’t have to compete and would “just up and get slots”?
This is an honest question. I seriously want to know. Do you “quota thingies” and the like on general terms? Or are you fine with it so long as it’s only women who are disadvantaged?
Even if NASA has a “quota thingy” now (which I doubt, given your track record for accuracy), at least they aren’t excluding an entire gender from becoming astronauts.
I’m sure that, by manipulating the data, an individual could design a study to prove just about anything they want. I’m sure that by, by cherry-picking the data, someone could find a study that’s already been done to support just about any claim that they want to make.
I didn’t ask if anyone had done a study which showed that female bodies were often better suited to space travel than male bodies. I asked if anyone else here had heard that claim before and whether or not it was legitimate.
I’d also like to note that the people here who responded to my question didn’t say “Oh, yes, women are totally inherently better than men at everything, which was clearly proven by a study done by Whomever et al., whose authority cannot be questioned.” They actually provided possible reasons as to why female bodies might typically be better suited to space travel than male bodies in some ways.
No one here thinks that citing a study magically makes you correct. No one here thinks that all studies are valid. Studies can be misinterpreted and poorly constructed. Actually being able to give reasons for the claims you make is more important than being to cite the authority of a study.
Like I said, studies can be misrepresented or poorly conducted. I don’t know what studies you are talking about, but that could easily be the case here. I’m not going to suddenly believe that women are naturally more caring than men simply because someone asserts that studies have shown this. Which studies have shown this?
The only way you can blame women for being uncaring for studies that purport to show that women are more caring is if women actually designed these studies and gathered the data. That sounds like something that takes science and math skills. I thought that in Owly’s world, women were supposed to suck at math and science, so I’m a bit surprised that he thinks women are capable of doing scientific research and writing up scientific studies. I’m also surprised that Owly can’t be bothered to cite any of these studies, but he specifically remembers that all of the authors were women.