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.
Completely OT; I apologize, but on AlterNet they’re discussing the serial rapist on Reddit from a couple of days ago.
http://www.alternet.org/inside-mind-serial-rapist
@HD: um, yeah, those are pretty much almost verbatim things people I have love have said out loud in a serious way.
If it’s meant as satire, then it’s not very good. Satire should be more scathing and should expose the ideas being shown, should show what underlies them. This? If it’s not real it’s a pretty convincing copy.
Yep, I refuse to be tall enough to reach the top shelf out of spite, that’s it, I’m sure! Idk about 7′ but 5’6″ might be a decent start.
Shouldn’t he be ranting about how tall people are oppressed though? Isn’t like there aren’t short men (averages, NWO hates them, what, with them being a math type concept and all).
Is this great woman had been straight, married (to a man) and with children, would it have been a bad example, since she would have been an example for other women and apparently space should be boys-only?
What if she had been straight with children, but they hated space and stars and became accountant, pop singer or cook?
What if she had adopted four children and given to all of them a desire to go to space or study stars?
Would her life had been fulfilled then? Does the Housewife think than men who go in space and die without children are also worthless people?
@Freitag
That was a very interesting read, thank you for linking.
Although I ordinarily try to avoid this reaction, the only thing that kept going through my mind as I read Thinking Housewife’s rant about Sally Ride was “Ur just jealous”. And in fact, whenever I happen to read one of TH’s screeds about how educated, brilliant, accomplished women supposedly live worthless lives, I get the distinct impression that TH isn’t merely patriarchal, or deluded, or even hateful, but actually jealous, big time. Godforbid anyone will think she isn’t the pinnacle of womanly achievement by virtue of limiting herself to reproduction and domestic services.
And speaking of inglorious jobs — as someone who grew up in a fairly patriarchal environment, few things are more inglorious than constantly scrubbing those bathrooms befouled by people who don’t care where their piss flies because they are above such concerns; or dragging home half your weight in canned peas, on three crowded trains; and having this thankless, unpaid job with no breaks, weekends or vacations, while everyone pretends that you aren’t actually working. Meanwhile your husband, who supposedly heroically performs an “inglorious” job, plows through daily three-martini lunches and six-martini dinners, and never carries anything heavier than car keys, and puts his feet up when he’s at home (because HE is entitled to his rest, unlike you), then bitches to his buddies about how much you’ve aged (sometimes in your presence). Talk about “inglorious”. Between that and spinsterhood on a space station, I’ll take the latter without batting an eye.
@Pam:
Thing is, that’s something a person might actually do. I mean, you could go to University and get a degree that interests you, even if you have no intention of using it to get a job, and you might meet a spouse in the process. Or you might do what my mom’s friend did and take a degree in home economics, and learn a lot of really valuable skills for homemaking — how to budget effectively, how to repair clothes yourself instead of paying someone else to do it, that sort of thing. But nobody is going to go through all of the trouble of getting into the space program unless they actually want to go to space.
I’d love to hear what Laura Hood has(or had) to say about Valentina Tereshkova…..Now there’s a real space hero(ine)! Capitalism just doesn’t seem to be very good at keeping manned space flight a continuing enterprise now, does it?
the twisted spinster: The, “dislike of women” trope is based on really strong gender essentialism.
1: Women (and men) are hardwired to like/do certain things. They find fulfillment in them, and are incomplete as human beings without them.
2: Some people deny this.
3: Ergo they hate women (or men).
Are we doing logic? Because premise 1 is false, and an example of Spot That Fallacy!!
Fallacy of division – assuming that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts
(Please tell me I got division vs composition right this time, I mucked that up earlier)
pecunium idk how you feel about playing devil’s advocate, please ignore me if it isn’t your cup of tea.
@ Amused
Yeah, what I’m getting from Hood is “I’m trying really hard not to regret the choices I’ve made, and fuck you for making me think about this, Sally Ride”. Reading her stuff is just depressing. I mean, I’m terribly sorry that trying to contort yourself in such a way that you can almost kind of fit into the role that your religion has laid out for you* has broken your spirit and left you with such low self-esteem that you can’t even imagine wanting more out of life any more, but that’s no reason to go around pissing in the Wheaties of the recently deceased.
*Or so she thinks. Given how many other Christians have a different interpretation I’m going to go ahead and say that she may be wrong about what Jesus wants.
Screw this horrible person. It make me sick to see Ride’s contributions discounted, especially after all that American women had to go through just to get NASA to (finally) send them into space.
And women make fine astronauts. They match men in capability, and even surpass them in some aspects of what is required to be an astronaut.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/07/the-women-who-would-have-been-sally-ride/260246/
The comment section over on the Spearhead is also especially over-ripe. http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/07/29/sally-ride-obit/
I’m really wondering, do the MRAs have ANY idea how affirmative action works? It’s like they think we have 10 qualified guys, but we need to have a woman, so they go out and pick any woman regardless of her qualifications. And, she doesn’t have to do anything on the team. They really seem to think that.
Argenti: I don’t think I’m committing that fallacy. I am arguing that TH, and those who have like views, share that sense of extreme gender essentialism, and that from that level of it they assume those who don’t share it hate women.
It’s a case of extremely limiting blinders, and confirmation bias.
Wow. I had Sally Ride for an undergrad teacher once. (yes, another overedjumacated woman who isn’t “fulfilled” here).
Totally. She was an astronaut and had a loving partner of 27 years, but she wasn’t a Thinking Housewife! Too bad she missed out on meeting all those great NASA men. o.O.
If thingie here did go into NASA to meet men, I have a feeling she would’ve ended up more like this.
I favor affirmative action in employment rather than education. Academics should have a uniform standard that applies to everyone regardless of who they are, what group they belong to, and what their background is. That’s how it’s done in most continental european countries and AFAIC that’s how it should be done here. But people need jobs even more than they need education in this country. Since we have a capitalist economy, people need an income to pay for the necessities of life. Affirmative action in employment unfortunately is not available for a lot of minority groups, notably aspies and other people with mental illnesses(85% of people on the autistic spectrum are unemployed FYI). This is why so many black americans are unemployed: They lack the social connections to talk people into hiring them. There is a very thick glass ceiling for people in low paying and especially minimum wage jobs.
pecunium — I wasn’t saying you were committing a fallacy so much as this premise —
1: Women (and men) are hardwired to like/do certain things. They find fulfillment in them, and are incomplete as human beings without them.
Was committing the fallacy of assuming everyone wants what they want, because how you can think everyone wants the same thing, and then get all pissy that some people say they don’t…hurts me head. (Yeah, it’s definitely a confirmation bias problem, just seems like a confirmation bias problem and a fallacy rolled into one)
Ah… I see, you were declaiming their fallacy. Yes, I see it now. Sorry to misunderstand you.
And yes, it’s a fallacy, which is exacerbated by confirmation bias. Every person they think is unhappy, and isn’t doing what they think such a person ought to do “proves” the case. Those who aren’t unhappy have yet to discover that they are like that, and will later.
So it’s also got some begging the question.
pecunium — glad we’re on the same page again, no big deal about the misunderstanding 🙂
And agreed on the begging the question part (with note that “begging the question” might be the most misused phrase in English, so you get the Spot That Fallacy!! 2x multipler for using it properly)
Ok brain, I’m fully aware it’s too damned hot, but “hurts me head”? Seriously?
I think this is the right thread:
The fifties were such an oddity. If you look at the films of the 30s, you see women in independent roles; with professions (across the spectrum). Then came the war, and the dislocations of the total mobilisation of the society to cope with it (in the US this was completely new; in the UK a bit less so, because of WW1).
The desire to, “return to normalcy”, and the Red Scare combined to make “Suzy Homemaker” an ideal she hadn’t been before that.
With the rise of TV, and TV playing up that ideal (and movies being even worse) the sense that “it was always like this” was, in a really short period of time, entrenched in the popular memo
Argenti I’ve lost track of how many times I have been awarded some portion of an internet for being correct in the usage of same (jezebel had someone praising my use/definition pair).
Yes, it’s probably about as misused at Ad hom in false assertions of fallacy, but the other misuses outnumber it.
“Yes, it’s probably about as misused at Ad hom in false assertions of fallacy, but the other misuses outnumber it.”
Discussing just fallacies, yeah, ad hominem could “win” that one; I had meant in general though.
And I think you mean that if you had a dollar for every internet you’d been given, you’d actually own the internet by now 🙂
No. I think actual awards of internets is about half a dozen. I run with crowds which are hard to impress.
But do have a RASFF Award, and a knighthood out of the deal too.
Not bad for various honors.
..considering that the Venus of Willendorf as a hip to waist ratio of .7….yeah. google it.