Good. Space suit design needs a modernization anyway.

There is no "how human societies have been organized". Some societies have had (and even continue to have) near complete segregation of the sexes except for reproductive purposes. Some have had full integration.

And "popular wisdom" is in general stereotype BS. It was "popular wisdom" that said that people of African descent were worthless for anything except manual labor and it's pointless to try to educate a woman, that gays are a social evil that needs to be obliterated, that burning witches is the only way to save the town, and that letting the races mix is tantamount to national suicide.

Males are not optional. ... Male aggressive creativity would be essential to survival

Strangely not creative enough to hide your gross sexism. Perhaps an aggressive retort would help defend your point?

You seriously think you can make a claim credited to a scientific study, and then when you can't show evidence that such a study claiming what you did was ever conducted, suddenly switch to a "but everyone knows" laden with old gender stereotypes and the standard lame appeal to darwin - and think that will fly?

In almost any sentence where people say "Women (verb)..." or "Men (verb)..." and it's about something psychological (as opposed to, say, something involving reproductive organs or a statistical difference in strength / height or the like), 99% of the time it's equally accurate to simply say "People (verb)..." The popular perception of differences between genders (including the effects of both brain structure and hormones) is often vastly different from the statistical reality. Screw Mars and Venus; men and women are from Earth. Psychologically, we're statistically virtually identical in most measures. And in many cases where there are differences that even manage to meet statistical significance, what differences there are may well be artifacts of culture.

How little are most of these "differences"? This set of graphs puts it into perspective.

Again: Either present your supposed "study" or drop the issue.

Okay, so I'll take this as "urban legend" until you can find backing.

The above is an answer to a question along the lines of "what do people outside of the USA think about the Tea Partiers".
It's an opinion derived from what has been filtered through the international media and should not be considered as reality.
It's how the group is presented to people who are too far away to distinguish the reality through the noise.

Either way it's not important since I don't know any more about them than what the media has decided is amusing enough to pass on and the topic should be getting kids interested in stuff via tie-ins. I'm all for it. Maths, politics whatever (since the original Dalek stuff was blatantly about fascism), if it gets the kids learning via activity that can stick more than other ways.
Maybe Dr Who could be used to show me WTF is really going on in US politics :)

I'm not from the UK, but I think "Tea Partiers" really have so little grasp on their history and US politics in general that, for example, they have no idea why the original Tea Party dressed up as Indians. The extra irony is those "Tea Partiers" that want a "strong" authoritarian government resembling the sort of thing King George was imposing on the colonies.

He also tore CUPS authors and the open source user interface authors a new one in an infamous essay

And comparing their work versus ESR on fetchmail is a classic case of glass house and thrown stones - but someone has to be a critic. Airing his political dirty linen and annoyance with investigative journalists in the "jargon file" was probably the point where he spent the capital of goodwill he had built up and was taken less seriously

Actually linux back in the day, as in about 1997, resembled this sort of thing with the animated effects available for the Enlightenment window manager - however they were designed to be very easy to turn off if you didn't want them. It even had the little window snapshot images that are in win7, and of course the multiple desktops coming with Win10 (but even twm has those).
Rob Malda had an popular web site for the Enlightenment application ePlus when Slashdot started which is why a lot of people who used it turned up in this place early on.

which you can melt down and reform to sheet/billet/whatever

Only if you've got a very hot furnace and can keep all oxygen and nitrogen away from the molten metal. Titanium is a bastard to work with which is why something so easily mined (there's a lot of it in beach sand) is so expensive.

milled titanium alloy back when I had fuckloads of money to burn

That pretty well sums up what you need to do when you choose titanium :)

Blackberry is dead anyways. One way or the other it's going to be cannablised. Move to a platform with a future.

That is, of course, for a given radiation dose, which is independent of body cross section - which is relevant in real-world scenarios. If we assume an isotropic radiation exposure profile, an average male height of 174cm, an average female height of 161 cm, and asssume an equivalent profile, then a man presents a 17% higher profile to radiation exposurediation exposure, so if a woman has a 50% higher (150%) cancer risk, then it's only 29% higher for a fixed radiation flux per square meter.

However, let's look further at this. Given the smaller size of members of a female crew, you can shrink the spacecraft occupant space by 8% on each axis, or a volumetric decrease of 26%. Mass changes are more difficult to reckon. Life support, food, water, etc is dependent on metabolism, which the article shows is dramatically lower for women in space. Fuel needs are proportional to all other mass issues. Only a few things (such as computers and scientific equipment) don't trace back to crew member size and mass. Regardless, for a given launch weight, it's clear that you can afford the mass of a significantly increased amount of radiation shielding for a female crew due to the weight savings elsewhere, probably easily more than offsetting the cancer risk.

Beyond this, the average US astronaut age is 34, an age well after when most women are done having children (assuming that they even want to have children). Given that the article states the risk is from breast, ovarian, and utirine cancer, I wouldn't be surprised if many would consider full hysterectomy for the ability to travel to Mars.

I love the fact that Mars is the only planet known to man that is solely inhabited by robots

Despite how radical that statement sounds, it's actually perfectly reasonable for a zero-G environment. They're not only dead weight, they're also in the way and make you require larger accomodations.

Even in Mars's gravity field a legless person would deal quite well, at least inside the facility (picture how easily you could get around without your legs if you suddenly were given 2.5x the arm strength, didn't have your legs weighing you down, and on top of that add in how most double amputees already have good arm strength to begin with). They should be able to "hop" with their arms all the way to a 2 1/2 meter ceiling without trouble, and the full arc would take a good two seconds to come back down. On the moon it'd be even easier. Of course, if they're legless, why would they even need such tall ceilings to begin with?