Space conquest : female figures in the shadow of a male narrative

Date : 02.06.2022

Written by : Anais Gancel

Translated by : Barbara Sika Kudjahu

Space conquest, since the last century, has been at the centre of rivalries between different countries, including the United States and the USSR were thrown into a race to space. From this race, we remember historical moments and names that became legendary: Neil Armstrong, the first man on the moon, Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, and even Laïka, the first dog sent outside the atmosphere. The presence of women in this sector remains minor, as they have historically been excluded from the world of aeronautics, as well as from scientific production in general. The story, as it is told, is the result of a well-thought-out choice: it testifies to a desire to represent the male. However, female figures have indeed existed in the scientific and space domains; they have simply been silenced in favour of a male narrative, which puts men first and perpetuates gender stereotypes and the gendered representation of social roles. The place of women in the world of space has certainly increased, but they remain a minority. Although women are becoming increasingly qualified and successful, they still struggle to reach the highest levels of the hierarchy. According to the UN, only 11% of astronauts are women, and the percentage of women in the aerospace industry has remained at 20% for at least 30 years^[1]Nations Unies. « Only around 1 in 5 space industry workers are women”, UN News, 4 Octobre 2021, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1102082. Women researchers in the fields of science, technology, mathematics, and engineering are also underrepresented: they constitute only 28.8% of those working in this sector worldwide^[2]Nations Unies. « Only around 1 in 5 space industry workers are women”, UN News, 4 Octobre 2021, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1102082. Furthermore, of the 560 people who have travelled to space, barely 70 are women.  Finally, only 19% of management positions in the aerospace and defence sector are held by women^[3]Nations Unies. « Only around 1 in 5 space industry workers are women”, UN News, 4 Octobre 2021, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1102082.

We will therefore investigate the place of women in science and in the production of knowledge through the question of space conquest. Delphine Gardey, historian, and sociologist, asked herself the following question: “who could (who can) produce science in Western societies?” [loose translation]^[4]« Qui a pu (qui peut) produire des sciences dans les sociétés occidentales ? », Gardey, Delphine. « La part de l’ombre ou celle des lumières ? Les sciences et la recherche au risque … Continue reading .  This leads us to question who produced knowledge and science in the context of the conquest of space: to what extent was this production influenced by the dominant socio-cultural environment – in the case of our study, a patriarchal environment? To what extent has female contribution been inhibited and rendered invisible?

The hidden figures of the space race

Among the hidden figures of the space race and the world of aeronautics, there are many women, particularly African Americans: among them, Katherine Johnson, Mary Jackson and Dorothy Vaughan, calculators and actual human computers who have contributed greatly to the success of NASA’s projects. In the context of heavy racial segregation, both in the larger society and in the research centres, their careers were all the more brilliant: “At the time, opportunities for women to advance in their careers were limited. African American women faced additional barriers due to racial discrimination” [loose translation]^[5]« À l’époque, les possibilités pour les femmes de progresser dans leur carrière étaient limitées. Les femmes afro-américaines étaient confrontées à des obstacles supplémentaires en … Continue reading . As victims of deep inequalities and sexist and racist injunctions, they remained for a long time in the shadow of their male colleagues.

These computing positions were first opened to white women in 1935; then to Black women from 1943, largely due to a lack of workforce during the Second World War. The three women whose names are remembered by posterity began their careers in the West Zone Computer Section, an all-African American centre. Through their prowess and successful computations, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson became, respectively, the first African-American female manager of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) in 1949 and the first African-American female engineer of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Katherine Johnson, for her part, contributed greatly through her work to the Apollo project and to man’s first landing on the moon^[6]Shetterly, Margot Lee. Hidden Figures: The Untold True Story of Four African-American Women who Helped Launch Our Nation Into Space. New York: William Morrow and Company, 2016. .

The transformation of NACA into NASA in 1958 coincided with the elimination of segregated research centres. Yet women, especially African Americans, were not given more prominence. Only recently, with the 2016 film ” Hidden Figures,” were these three scientists honoured for their crucial work in the space race, including putting astronaut John Glenn into orbit and Neil Armstrong’s moon landing. We had to wait almost half a century to recognize the originators of this work, which was nevertheless essential for aeronautics and science. 

This lack of recognition is unfortunately not an exception. In history, women have been regularly side-lined for the simple fact that they are women. This is evidenced by the many women scientists who are not cited in the work to which they have contributed, or whose work has been stolen by their male colleagues. This phenomenon, conceptualized by Margaret W. Rossiter in 1993, is called the “Matilda effect”: it is the minimizing or denying the involvement of women in major scientific discoveries. One example is the astronomer Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, who discovered the composition of stars in 1924: just as she was about to make her work public, Professor Henry Russell prevented her from doing so and then published the discovery himself a few years later, which earned him a Nobel Prize nomination for physics^[7]Allais, Etienne, « 7 femmes scientifiques dont le travail a été volé par des hommes », Entre-Autre, https://entre-autre.fr/7-femmes-scientifiques-dont-le-travail-a-ete-vole-par-des-hommes/ . History repeats itself with Lise Meitner, a Jewish physicist who discovered nuclear fission in 1938, a discovery for which Otto Hahn received all the laurels and the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1944.

These numerous examples confirm the existence of a recurring pattern. They do not represent mere “anecdotes” or “oversights” but are symptoms of systematic side-lining for precisely systemic reasons.

Gender Inequality in the Exact Sciences

Gender inequality is a widespread problem in science, and also technology, mathematics and engineering. Beginning in high school and higher education, boys are over-represented in science and engineering majors. This inequality is rooted both in distinct primary socialization and in the functioning of the academic institution^[8]Backouche, Isabelle, Godechot, Olivier, Naudier, Delphine, « Un plafond à caissons : les femmes à l’EHESS », p. 253-274, 2009. .

Christine Wenneras and Agnes Wold, medical researchers, have studied the case of biomedical doctoral candidates to try to explain the sparse number of women retained. They denounce the implicit selection criteria and the discriminatory way in which they operate^[9]Wennerås, Christine, Wold, Agnes. “Nepotism and sexism in peer-review”. Nature 387, 1997 . Their study shows that women’s performance is often underestimated and that a woman candidate had to be 2.5 times more productive than a man candidate to receive the same competence score. A lack of objectivity is also observed: when the jury knows the gender of the candidate, a man’s work is rated higher than that of a woman. When the gender is not specified, the scores are similar^[10]Wennerås, Christine, Wold, Agnes. “Nepotism and sexism in peer-review”. Nature 387, 1997 .

They conclude that this is not an issue of lack of motivation or female productivity, but rather of gendered discrimination. In the space field, the excuse of a so-called productivity differential between women and men is quickly discarded: in the 1970s, a group of women pilots and parachutists named “Mercury 13” proved this by performing the same physical and psychological tests as those to which male astronauts are subjected. Equally capable and successful on tests as their male colleagues^[11]Tellier, Maxime, « Les femmes dans l’espace : une conquête inégale », France Culture, 18 Octobre 2019, https://www.franceculture.fr/histoire/les-femmes-dans-lespace-une-conquete-inegale , they also accumulated 8000 to 10 000 hours of flight time compared to 2900 to 5100 hours for their male counterparts. Yet they were denied entry to NASA^[12] Theunis, Laetitia, « Les femmes, ces oubliées de la conquête de l’espace », Daily Science, 12 Mars 2021, https://dailyscience.be/12/03/2021/les-femmes-ces-oubliees-de-la-conquete-de-lespace/ .

If the inequality in accessing an astronaut career is not due to women’s lack of aptitude, then it is part of “more subtle forms of pressure aimed at dissuading girls from studying in these fields” [loose translation]^[13] « formes de pression plus subtiles visant à dissuader les filles d’étudier dans ces filières », Breda, Thomas. « 5. Pourquoi y a-t-il si peu de femmes en science ? », Regards … Continue reading .

The different primary socialization of women and men, gender stereotypes and various social pressures play an important role in career choice^[14]Backouche, Isabelle, Godechot, Olivier, Naudier, Delphine, « Un plafond à caissons : les femmes à l’EHESS », p. 253-274, 2009. . Growing up being told that some jobs are for women and others for men, coupled with the difficulty of accessing training for girls for centuries, played a crucial role in the belief that they would be less competent than men and would not belong in the hard sciences. The fact that women generally have to prove their credibility and abilities much more than men does not make it easier for girls to pursue careers historically reserved for men.

For Margaret W. Rossiter, historian of science and originator of the term “Matilda effect”, the predominantly male academic and scientific community underestimates the contribution of women^[15]Backouche, Isabelle, Godechot, Olivier, Naudier, Delphine, « Un plafond à caissons : les femmes à l’EHESS », p. 253-274, 2009. . On one hand, the logic of the glass ceiling does not spare the scientific and space world. The existence of a “hierarchical segregation” slows down the hierarchical rise of women during their careers. On the other hand, what she calls “territorial segregation” relegates women to scientific disciplines considered more “feminine” such as public health or biology, thus excluding them from the so-called “hard” sciences^[16]Rossiter, Margaret W, “Women Scientists in America, Struggles and Strategies to 1940”, 1982 .

This inequality is further explained by the traditional division of labour in the family. Jean-Yves Le Gall, President of the National Centre for Space Studies, explains: “If historically, the astronaut profession has always been predominantly male, this can be explained by the fact that the preparation to be an astronaut presupposes leaving home for a very long time and it is sometimes complicated for a young woman to make this choice when she wants to have children or a family life” [loose translation]^[17]« Si historiquement, le métier d’astronaute a toujours été majoritairement masculin, cela s’explique notamment par le fait que la préparation pour être astronaute présuppose de quitter … Continue reading . The woman is quickly assigned to the home and relegated to the private domain. Little girls grow up internalizing the mainstream social roles, especially the one she has to play. Historically, the construction of the social identity of women – essentially bourgeois – is often done within the private sphere. The man works, focuses on his career and is expected to support his family financially. The woman, however, is responsible for raising the children and running the household. The standards are therefore not at the same level, and women’s access, first to a professional career, and then in the case of our study to a career as an astronaut requiring particularly high personal investment, is subject to these stereotypes.

These cumulative expressions of male domination within the scientific community lead to self-censorship among women^[18]Carrere, M., Louvel, S., Mangematin, V., Marry, M., Musselin, C., Pigeyre, F., Sabatier, M., Valette, A, « Entre discrimination et auto-censure : les carrières des femmes dans … Continue reading . When choosing a field of study, women underestimate themselves and believe that they are less capable of embarking on a scientific career. This fear is also caused by a lack of representation: there are few known female figures in the sciences, or “role models”.

In economics, the “role model” method consists of “having female students interact with female scientists with whom they can identify. […] There is a lot of research showing that having a woman as a science teacher improves both the level of female students in science and their likelihood of pursuing science” [loose translation]^[19]« faire interagir les étudiantes avec des scientifiques femmes à qui elles peuvent s’identifier. […] De nombreuses recherches montrent ainsi qu’avoir une femme comme professeur dans les … Continue reading . The invisibility of female figures in history and science plays a role in women’s self-censorship. When a little girl grows up, and this is all the more egregious for women of colour, she is subjected to advertisements of women doing household chores, to movies in which women are reduced to their bodies and sexuality, embodying at best the love interest of the male hero. On the contrary, she sees few or no women in positions of power or highlighted for their intelligence.

Yaël Nazé, an astronomer at the Institute of Astrophysics and Geophysics at the University of Liege, adds: “It is not a question of a lack of desire or motivation. This under-representation of women is more a cultural and societal problem than a scientific one. [..] In the 1960s, NASA claimed that the absence of women was due to their lack of interest in space exploration. However, it was discovered that the American agency received many letters from girls fascinated by space, who asked for advice on how to study to become astronauts!” [loose translation]^[20] ” Il ne s’agit pas d’un manque d’envie ou de motivation. Cette sous-représentation des femmes est un problème davantage culturel et sociétal que scientifique. […] Dans les années … Continue reading.

Therefore, a heroine appearing in the Star Trek series in the 1960s helped to change attitudes: she is the lieutenant and astronaut Uhura, played by African American actress, Nichelle Nichols. In the context of the fight against racial segregation, Nichols joined NASA as an activist to encourage not only women but also people from minority backgrounds to apply for jobs^[21]Jean L, « Les femmes et la conquête spatiale : une ascension difficile », Les Potiches, 11 mars 2021, … Continue reading . The role of culture, cinema, and representation is absolutely crucial to provide models and give credibility and legitimacy to women who wish to embark on this path. In this, the cinema has had a remarkable lead compared to what it was in reality.

Systemic sexism

It was not until 1978 that NASA opened the doors of astronaut training centres to women. Indeed, astronauts were required to have a degree in engineering and to be military test pilots by trade, fields that were then reserved for men.

After 1978, the few women who entered the highly selective astronaut corps in the United States encountered a world built by and for men. Spaceships are designed for men and not for a mixed crew. The late opening of the sector to women makes the revision and adaptation of equipment complicated – seen as a waste of time in the space race – just like the toilets which are not designed for the female anatomy^[22]Beall, Abigail. “How NASA failed female astronauts and built space travel for men”, Wired, 22 Mai 2019, https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nasa-moon-women-astronauts .

With no suits in their size, astronauts, Anne McClain and Christina Koch, scheduled to participate in the first all-female spacewalk in March 2019, had their mission cancelled. Suits were adapted and developed according to the average male measurements. Eventually, a male astronaut, Nick Hague, took the place of Anne McClain on the mission^[23]

Taylor, Dylan. “What the Last Decade Taught Us About Women in Space”, Dylan Taylor, 17 Juillet 2020, https://dylantaylor.org/what-the-last-decade-taught-us-about-women-in-space/  . For an organization of NASA’s magnitude and importance to be unable to provide size appropriate suits for its astronauts seems absurd, as space operations require years of preparation, multiple material checks and huge investments. To be unable to send an astronaut on a mission because the right suit could not be provided in time is indicative of great negligence.

A NASA administrator, Kenneth Bowersox, also complained that the small size of women compared to men made them “less able to achieve certain things” [loose translation]^[24]« moins aptes à atteindre certaines choses », Clervoy, Jade. “Les femmes à la conquête de l’espace », Feminists in the City, 5 Octobre 2020, … Continue reading . Does the problem really come from the allegedly ‘too small’ size of women or from an organization unable to adapt its devices to all astronauts?

Sally Ride, an American astrophysicist, and astronaut was part of the very first class of female astronauts at NASA in 1978. She faced many sexist remarks: “Men go to war and fly planes. The fact that women are not in this field is a fact of our social order. It would be undesirable, [loose translation]” says her colleague, John Glenn^[25]« Les hommes partent faire la guerre et pilotent les avions. Le fait que les femmes ne soient pas dans ce domaine est un fait de notre ordre social. Cela serait indésirable », Blakemore, Erin, … Continue reading . This relegation of women to a predetermined position according to the social order is also reflected in what is considered to be their needs in space: male astronauts benefit from a ‘shaving kit’ for their missions, so engineers prepare a ‘make-up kit’ which they think is a necessary equivalent for women. Sally Ride said in an interview in 1983: “Everybody wanted to know what kind of make-up I was using. They didn’t care how well prepared I was […] to deploy communications satellites” [loose translation]^[26]« Tout le monde voulait savoir quel genre de maquillage je prenais. Ils ne se souciaient pas de savoir si j’étais bien préparée […] pour déployer des satellites de communication. », … Continue reading . In these interviews, they were also asked questions not related to their skills but about their personal lives; for example, Margaret Rhea Seddon was asked “if she would give up being an astronaut if she met the perfect man” or “if she had experienced sexual assault” [loose translation]^[27]« si elle renoncerait à être astronaute si elle rencontrait l’homme parfait » ou « si elle avait subi une agression sexuelle », Beall, Abigail. “How NASA failed female astronauts … Continue reading.

Finally, the ignorance of women’s bodies is blatant: for a one-week mission, Sally Ride was asked to bring the astronomical quantity of 100 tampons in case she had her period^[28]Bekkersgaard Stark, Felix, “Too few women in space”, DI Business, 04 Décembre 2019, https://www.danskindustri.dk/di-business/arkiv/news/2019/12/Too-few-women-in-space/ .

These oversights have had numerous consequences, most notably the glaring lack of data on women astronauts and the impact of space travel on their bodies.

In the 1950s, when the astronaut fitness guidelines were put in place, women’s health data were largely ignored. Margaret Weitekamp, chair of the space history department at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, says, “The lack of physiological reference [for women] was not something anyone was ashamed of. Aerospace scientists simultaneously declared women too complicated and largely irrelevant” [loose translation]^[29]« l’absence de référence physiologique [pour les femmes] n’a fait honte à personne. Les scientifiques de l’aérospatiale ont simultanément déclaré que les femmes étaient … Continue reading .

It is known how the male body responds to the characteristics of a space environment; in contrast, gaps remain about how the female body is affected. Yet these differences were not unexpected: “In particular, we know that susceptibility to carcinogenic radiation and immune system responses are different on Earth for women and that this could be more problematic in space as well” [loose translation]^[30]Nous savons notamment que la susceptibilité aux radiations cancérigènes et les réactions du système immunitaire sont différentes sur Terre pour les femmes, et que cela pourrait être plus … Continue reading .  On Earth, women are already at a severe health disadvantage; the medical community continues to perpetuate gender biases and beliefs, which contribute to a lack of understanding of women’s bodies as well as female symptoms for heart attacks or cancers, for example. Véronique Préault, director of the documentary ‘Femmes, les oubliées de la santé’, denounces the inequalities in treatment and access to care between women and men, showing that “female patients are less well diagnosed, are less screened and are therefore less quickly treated” [loose translation]^[31]« les patientes sont moins bien diagnostiquées, se dépistent moins et sont donc moins rapidement soignées »,Ruffenach, Emma, « Le corps des femmes, angle mort de la médecine », La Croix, … Continue reading . These inequalities persist outside the atmosphere, in an environment that would be conducive to progress. So many grey areas that could be cleared up with a greater number of women astronauts – remember, only 12% of those sent into space have been women.

However, various studies are gradually showing that the female body has certain qualities that are preferable to those of the male body and could make them more efficient astronauts: in general, it requires less food and oxygen than a man’s body to maintain its weight and produces less waste and carbon dioxide. Women’s immune systems are generally stronger and they tend to manage mental health risks better^[32]Vartan, Starre Julia, “Why Women’s Bodies Are Better Suited for Space Travel”, The Elemental, 2019. .  The “Women in Space” program created in 1959 by William Randolph Lovelace to test women’s suitability for space travel, comes to the following conclusions: first, “women consistently perform better than men in situations of prolonged isolation”; second, “men perform better on short-term missions, while women perform better on longer missions that may involve unexpected challenges” [loose translation]^[33]« les femmes sont régulièrement plus performantes que les hommes dans des situations d’isolement prolongé » ; d’autre part, « les hommes sont plus performants dans les missions à court … Continue reading .

Women in space conquest, an example of “Tokenism”?

 What must also be considered is the fact that the rare female candidates considered to join the astronaut corps have been instrumentalized. The great powers wish to break all the records – the first trip into space, the first man on the Moon, and very soon, the first woman in space. In this context of the space race, the female contribution seems to be a quota to be reached, and more precisely tokenism, which is to say, the symbolic inclusion of some members of minority groups to show a semblance of equality and inclusion and to escape accusations of discrimination.

It is not the very fact of sending a woman that is important at this point, but precisely the symbolism she will represent: this façade of diversity is well calculated. This is why the choice of the first woman cosmonaut, the Soviet Valentina Tereshkova, is not random: it is political. Of proletarian origin, daughter of a war hero, and member of the communist party, she will serve as a flag-bearer for the Soviet Union. Her image symbolizes the free woman as represented in the new socialist world.

The concept of tokenism also implies the choice of token individuals because they reflect the socially acceptable image that one intends to convey. The two other candidates – Irina Soloviova and Valentina Ponomariova – for the Soviet space program, however much better than Valentina Tereshkova in theory and practice, will be rejected from the selection because of their unmalleable personalities: they are considered too independent, sure of themselves and frank. Valentina Tereshkova, however, was praised by the head of the training centre Nikolai Kamanin: she is modest and “a model of good manners”.

The mission’s female “token” is used to enhance the image of the institution, and to embody a semblance of inclusiveness in the sector although it remains dominated by men. Behind the scenes, no radical changes take place to fight for real equality, at all levels, and not in a performative way.

Indeed, Valentina Tereshkova’s mission in 1963 had all the makings of a mere performance and not of a real movement for equality and female inclusion. She never undertook another mission, in spite of her will and the international craze around her first flight. The Soviet corps of women cosmonauts was disbanded shortly after and it took nearly 19 years for a second woman, Svetlana Savitskaya, to be deployed. The latter, moreover, recounts “that upon her arrival at the Salyut 7 space station, the commander greeted her with a kitchen apron and told her to ‘get to work’ – despite the humorous tone underlying this anecdote, it demonstrates the mindset at that time” [loose translation]^[34]« qu’à son arrivée dans la station spatiale Salyut 7, le commandant l’a accueillie avec un tablier de cuisine en lui disant de se ‘mettre au travail’ – malgré le ton humoristique … Continue reading .

NASA announced in 2019 its intention to send a woman and a man to the moon by 2024, orchestrating the first female lunar landing. This project excludes the possibility of two women being sent, giving the impression of a sheer “diversity” exercise. According to Adeene Denton, a planetary scientist for Brown University, this announcement is “as if NASA was sending a woman and it was ‘one and done’, which I hope is not the intent” [loose translation]^[35]« comme si la Nasa envoyait une femme et que c’était ‘une et c’est tout’, ce qui, je l’espère, n’est pas le but recherché », Beall, Abigail. “How NASA failed … Continue reading . She continues: “I think that the formulation of their current plans, despite the probable good intention behind them, is much more symbolic than edifying” [loose translation]^[36]« je pense que la formulation de leurs plans actuels, malgré la bonne intention probable derrière eux, est beaucoup plus symbolique qu’édifiante », Beall, Abigail. “How NASA failed … Continue reading . It is important to make women’s participation systematic and not anecdotal, for their skills and not as a token to be claimed. For example women’s representation in positions of power and decision-making, is necessary to destabilize existing institutional mechanisms and encourage inclusion that is real and not a facade.

Conclusion

The first European woman astronaut, Frenchwoman Claudie Haigneré, waited until 1996 for her first mission into space. In October 2019, astronauts Christina Koch and Jessica Meir completed the first all-female spacewalk, a symbolic and long-overdue mission. It is vital that women continue to take their rightful place in aeronautics, science, technology, and innovation, not only for a more democratic society but also for the success of future space missions. According to Simonetta Di Pippo, Director of the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, “Space for women is about raising awareness, building capacity and skills, empowering young women and girls around the world, and promoting gender equality” [loose translation]^[37]« l’espace pour les femmes est synonyme de renforcement de la sensibilisation, des capacités et des compétences, d’autonomisation des jeunes femmes et des filles dans le monde entier … Continue reading. This would be a way to achieve one, or more, of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly the gender equality goal.

Women’s contribution to science is, in the words of Delphine Gardey, “an opportunity for enrichment and universalization of science. […] Gender studies have transformed and are transforming the ordinary conceptions of what science is and allow for a more realistic vision of it” [loose translation]^[38]« une opportunité d’enrichissement et d’universalisation des sciences. […] Les études de genre ont transformé et transforment les conceptions ordinaires sur ce que sont les sciences et … Continue reading . Women’s experiences are anchored in their own historical, socio-cultural, and geographical spaces, which allows them to bring a fresh look to science, allowing it to be broadened, to reinvent its limits and content. It is essential to tell the female story of the conquest of space, to offer women figures from the world of aeronautics whom they can identify with, promoting diversity and inclusion in the aeronautics sector, so that they can then contribute to the production of science for a more inclusive and prosperous future.

To cite this article: Anais Gancel, “Space conquest : female figures in the shadow of a male narrative”, 02.06.2022, Gender Institute in Geopolitics.

The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author.