An all female future..

[Alien Overlord]

Harsh, but true. I believe it’s immature to think that the future of humanity depends on females simply because they consider themselves much more mature. It’s like fighting with your sibling of the opposite gender and saying because of his/her ignorance, this whole gender is condemned. And it’s sad that whoever taught this up is someone who is likely to escape to space.

Again, it's not just that.. they're more fuel efficient for one, and to amplify cooperation over competitiveness, regardless of gender, it's better to take just one gender or the other.

The only argument I've seen for mixed is you need strong men to set up a new colony, which seems highly questionable as to weighing over efficiency and less competition for the flight alone.

On setting up a colony can reproduce men, and certainly easier than reproducing females given an all male flight.

I'm presenting you with an argument right now. It should be mixed because it is morally wrong to only send a single gender to space-and just making more men doesn't alleviate that. It would be horrendous and tragedy to only take one gender-and i sincerely hope that if our species ever does this, that we fail miserably and die off, because we don't deserve to exist if we stoop so low. Just because something is more efficient doesn't mean its morally just or acceptable.

Both or nothing, choosing a gender is wrong. My argument is the morality of it. Bluelight helped illuminate my point-there are men out there that are going to use less calories than most women, and women who will use up more calories than most men. That is a fact.

[The Blaatschapen]

3 points..

1. Kate Greene participated in a mock Mars mission and found that female crew members expended less than half the calories of the male crew members. Less than half! They were all exercising roughly the same amount—at least 45 minutes a day for five consecutive days a week—but their metabolic furnaces were calibrated in radically different ways.

During one week, the most metabolically active male burned an average of 3,450 calories per day, while the least metabolically active female expended 1,475 calories per day. It was rare for a woman on crew to burn 2,000 calories in a day and common for male crew members to exceed 3,000.

The calorie requirements of an astronaut matter significantly when planning a mission. The more food a person needs to maintain her weight on a long space journey, the more food should launch with her. The more food launched, the heavier the payload. The heavier the payload, the more fuel required to blast it into orbit and beyond. The more fuel required, the more expensive the launch becomes.

2. New research from Dexeus Women’s Health in Barcelona shows that once sperm is collected and frozen, it can survive in microgravity with no ill effects.

3. Nasa looked into this years ago, according to Helen Sharman, the first Briton in space. She told an audience in 2017 that the US commissioned a secret study into long-term space travel, which recommended that to stop people having sex, “the crew should be the same gender: all men or all women”. Apparently women were the better choice, because men would quarrel about who was in charge.

So given a situation where the earth was truly in trouble and we had one shot of escaping this planet with long term space travel, our best bet is to have an all-female crew with frozen sperm.

Given this was the case, would you accept this, that only females be selected for the escape or would you object if not attempt to sabotage and have humanity wiped out regardless?

For Mars, sure.

For beyond, I wouldn't go with full grown humans on a spaceship. Frozen sperm, frozen egg cells, artificial womb, robot teacher, autopilot on spaceship. Robot teacher can be in hibernation until landing. Nine months before ETA, artificial womb gets the cells, and go.

[Bombadil]

I think this response says more about you than me.

You can tell yourself that if it helps.

It a bit like Pence being asked about climate change..

Is it a threat to mankind
We'll follow the science on that.
Science says it is, so do you?
I don't want to harm good American business
Answer the question!

The OP was phrased 'given this was true', so the idea is to run on the assumption it's true and answer the question. More than happy for reasons as to why this might or might not be a good idea, and discussion as to whether it can be true or not, but..

Except that's not the reality and will never be the reality. Your desire for a female-dominated society just makes you seem more misandrist.

..is not an answer, it's a refusal to answer the question while throwing out baseless assumptions.

What I'm always curious about is when people's beliefs bump up against a cold question. I'm sure I'm as guilty as every other human but, to my point, your response said more about you than about me.

[Israeli Defense Force]

3 points..

1. Kate Greene participated in a mock Mars mission and found that female crew members expended less than half the calories of the male crew members. Less than half! They were all exercising roughly the same amount—at least 45 minutes a day for five consecutive days a week—but their metabolic furnaces were calibrated in radically different ways.

During one week, the most metabolically active male burned an average of 3,450 calories per day, while the least metabolically active female expended 1,475 calories per day. It was rare for a woman on crew to burn 2,000 calories in a day and common for male crew members to exceed 3,000.

The calorie requirements of an astronaut matter significantly when planning a mission. The more food a person needs to maintain her weight on a long space journey, the more food should launch with her. The more food launched, the heavier the payload. The heavier the payload, the more fuel required to blast it into orbit and beyond. The more fuel required, the more expensive the launch becomes.

2. New research from Dexeus Women’s Health in Barcelona shows that once sperm is collected and frozen, it can survive in microgravity with no ill effects.

3. Nasa looked into this years ago, according to Helen Sharman, the first Briton in space. She told an audience in 2017 that the US commissioned a secret study into long-term space travel, which recommended that to stop people having sex, “the crew should be the same gender: all men or all women”. Apparently women were the better choice, because men would quarrel about who was in charge.

So given a situation where the earth was truly in trouble and we had one shot of escaping this planet with long term space travel, our best bet is to have an all-female crew with frozen sperm.

Given this was the case, would you accept this, that only females be selected for the escape or would you object if not attempt to sabotage and have humanity wiped out regardless?

As long as transfemales are also selected for the escape.

[Bluelight-R006]

Again, it's not just that.. they're more fuel efficient for one, and to amplify cooperation over competitiveness, regardless of gender, it's better to take just one gender or the other.

The only argument I've seen for mixed is you need strong men to set up a new colony, which seems highly questionable as to weighing over efficiency and less competition for the flight alone.

On setting up a colony can reproduce men, and certainly easier than reproducing females given an all male flight.

I'm presenting you with an argument right now. It should be mixed because it is morally wrong to only send a single gender to space-and just making more men doesn't alleviate that. It would be horrendous and tragedy to only take one gender-and i sincerely hope that if our species ever does this, that we fail miserably and die off, because we don't deserve to exist if we stoop so low. Just because something is more efficient doesn't mean its morally just or acceptable.

Both or nothing, choosing a gender is wrong. My argument is the morality of it. Bluelight helped illuminate my point-there are men out there that are going to use less calories than most women, and women who will use up more calories than most men. That is a fact.

It really is morally wrong. Not because of the calories part, but assuming that men fight vigorously over who’s going to be top just by looking at a few is sexist. Not as if women can do the same.

This thinking is dangerous. If we allow it to develop, we could waste human lives simply by a common thinking by avoiding the men living to escape when the time is right. Human lives depend on logic and not a common thinking that is wrong.

I think there are men who are willing to be submissive and dominant at the same time. Men like me. Except I’m a teenager boy who has no plans to go to space.

[Grapasia]

No way, men would hand over the keys to the spaceship and the women would jettison essential supplies to bring David Gandy and prime Fransisco Lachowski with them. Then they would get into an argument over whether food and around ship duties were really being distributed fairly, by which they mean whether they individually are getting as much food for as little effort at possible. When one of the male models they brought to keep them company proposes allocating resource and job distribution to the ship computers and the women listen, enough computing power will be diverted from the ship's anti-debris defences that a basketball-sized piece of ice and gravel will smack into the ship's hull at half the speed of light, puncturing it with the force of an atomic bomb and killing everyone on board. Lachowski would probably be thrown overboard before this unless the colony ship stocked finasteride. Friendly reminder that this is actually what would happen, just like men being sent into space with artificial wombs would probably end in a mix of amazing cultural/engineering achievements and solar system-sized wars between rival superpowers descended from the same colonists several centuries after arrival on Earth II.

[Bombadil]

I'm presenting you with an argument right now. It should be mixed because it is morally wrong to only send a single gender to space-and just making more men doesn't alleviate that. It would be horrendous and tragedy to only take one gender-and i sincerely hope that if our species ever does this, that we fail miserably and die off, because we don't deserve to exist if we stoop so low. Just because something is more efficient doesn't mean its morally just or acceptable.

Both or nothing, choosing a gender is wrong. My argument is the morality of it. Bluelight helped illuminate my point-there are men out there that are going to use less calories than most women, and women who will use up more calories than most men. That is a fact.

It really is morally wrong. Not because of the calories part, but assuming that men fight vigorously over who’s going to be top just by looking at a few is sexist. Not as if women can do the same.

This thinking is dangerous. If we allow it to develop, we could waste human lives simply by a common thinking by avoiding the men living to escape when the time is right. Human lives depend on logic and not a common thinking that is wrong.

I think there are men who are willing to be submissive and dominant at the same time. Men like me. Except I’m a teenager boy who has no plans to go to space.

Yet men do get do live, technically more men than women since you can place a great deal of frozen sperm on the ship than living women.. so a greater variety of men pass on their genetics than women.

Of course this assumes that the women decide to regenerate men, that is certainly a point I could see as an issue.

[Ostroeuropa]

White people also require less upkeep in space than minorities, but we don't really see this kind of thread on their behalf. The amount of Vitamin D needed to transport minorities will be higher than transporting white people. Moreover dependent on the colony and its exposure to the sun (Which means Mars is out, as is anything not as close or closer than earth to other stars) those upkeep problems exist in perpetuity.

Minorities can only exist in large numbers northern latitudes due to food imports tbh. On other planets that'd mean building our agriculture around those requirements.

Alternatively you just cut to the chase and tell them they need to breed themselves white, like white people initially did to survive in mordor Europe.

[Grapasia]

White people also require less upkeep in space than minorities, but we don't really see this kind of thread on their behalf. The amount of Vitamin D needed to transport minorities will be higher than transporting white people.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a shitty Xurious playlist on repeat — forever.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

We need men and woman to colonize the stars.

Gender bias in this area is dumb.

[Ostroeuropa]

White people also require less upkeep in space than minorities, but we don't really see this kind of thread on their behalf. The amount of Vitamin D needed to transport minorities will be higher than transporting white people.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a shitty Xurious playlist on repeat — forever.

Tbh it's entirely possible that all races will trend white over time if we colonize space.

[Bluelight-R006]

We need men and woman to colonize the stars.

Gender bias in this area is dumb.

It’s not just dumb. It’s immature.

Imagine you’re thinking about moving to another planet for the future of humanity and all you think is ’Ze men vil vite vor ze rezorzes... we must nott letz zem zurvive.’

Sexism should be thrown away with, along with whoever thought this up. Preferably in the Sun enroute to Earth II.

[Grapasia]

We need men and woman to colonize the stars.

If we have advanced enough biotechnology to make a tin can livable for thousands of years while it cruises through the freezing irradiated vacuum of space, while spinning the can to simulate a gravitational pull, while identifying and preserving whatever microscopic and macroscopic organisms are needed to seed a self-sustaining ecosystem elsewhere and while also probably intending on putting the majority of people in similar cans in orbit around the new star containing these things, we can probably grow people in vats. We're already on the verge of artificial wombs and making gametes from skin cells. Misogynist future humans could probably colonise the stars with axolotl tanks if they really wanted to, and space amazons could artificially inseminate themselves with genetic manipulation of their cells.

[The New California Republic]

So given a situation where the earth was truly in trouble and we had one shot of escaping this planet with long term space travel, our best bet is to have an all-female crew with frozen sperm.

If the situation was truly dire enough where such measures were being considered for immediate implementation, then I think the ethical concerns would be last on the list in terms of importance.

[Rojava Free State]

An all female mars colony? How do they expect to reproduce?

[Rojava Free State]

So given a situation where the earth was truly in trouble and we had one shot of escaping this planet with long term space travel, our best bet is to have an all-female crew with frozen sperm.

If the situation was truly dire enough where such measures were being considered for immediate implementation, then I think the ethical concerns would be last on the list in terms of importance.

Of course the third wave feminist method of preserving humanity is the one that is likely to fail horrifically. You can't sustain a population with some sperm samplea. You need men and women. Tell the mars colony they better take at least David hassleholf with them

[The Huskar Social Union]

We need men and woman to colonize the stars.

Gender bias in this area is dumb.

The Imperium of Man was carved amongst the stars not only by men and super soldiers, but women also.

All shall commit to the grand crusade in the name of our glorious emperor!

[The Krogan]

Rise of the Planet of the Lesbians.

[Hurdergaryp]

*needs big strong men in order to build the future*
*calls the little joke very sexist*
You're sending mixed signals here.

High strength labor is something men are better at statistically, just like lower caloric intake is in fact true regarding women. You’ll notice I didn’t take issue with that undeniable fact in the OP.

A lot of that has to do with testosterone, but it’s basic biology. There’s a concept called sexual dimorphism - learn it, love it.

The notion that men argue more or less than women has no basis in biology or fact, however. At least, not that I’ve observed.

And it wasn’t a joke - it was a NASA official conclusion.

High strength labor? Machines were developed for that purpose.

[Galloism]

High strength labor is something men are better at statistically, just like lower caloric intake is in fact true regarding women. You’ll notice I didn’t take issue with that undeniable fact in the OP.

A lot of that has to do with testosterone, but it’s basic biology. There’s a concept called sexual dimorphism - learn it, love it.

The notion that men argue more or less than women has no basis in biology or fact, however. At least, not that I’ve observed.

And it wasn’t a joke - it was a NASA official conclusion.

High strength labor? Machines were developed for that purpose.

Indeed. Of course, that means you have to carry the relevant machines - many types for many tasks - and something that can power them when you get there, which negates the weight advantage this whole thread is about.

[Risottia]

Apparently women were the better choice, because men would quarrel about who was in charge.

Because women absolutely never quarrel about their pecking order. Oh noes.

[Hurdergaryp]

High strength labor? Machines were developed for that purpose.

Indeed. Of course, that means you have to carry the relevant machines - many types for many tasks - and something that can power them when you get there, which negates the weight advantage this whole thread is about.

Hate to break it to you, but you're going to need machines to get there anyway. It's machines all the way down. Robotic machines, even.

[Galloism]

Indeed. Of course, that means you have to carry the relevant machines - many types for many tasks - and something that can power them when you get there, which negates the weight advantage this whole thread is about.

Hate to break it to you, but you're going to need machines to get there anyway. It's machines all the way down. Robotic machines, even.

Sure, some. Heavy construction would be helpful to have machines (a solar powered backhoe and crane would be extensively useful). But without the upper body strength of a couple average men (or a couple of really big not so average women, who would eat like men anyway), you’ll need a lot more machines than a digger and a crane, because of all the smaller work.

[Hurdergaryp]

Hate to break it to you, but you're going to need machines to get there anyway. It's machines all the way down. Robotic machines, even.

Sure, some. Heavy construction would be helpful to have machines (a solar powered backhoe and crane would be extensively useful). But without the upper body strength of a couple average men (or a couple of really big not so average women, who would eat like men anyway), you’ll need a lot more machines than a digger and a crane, because of all the smaller work.

A lot of machines are going to be needed anyway, because it's not as if the other worlds in our solar system are even remotely habitable.

[Tornado Queendom]

An all female future is the slow death of humanity, and we can NOT deal with that.