Space Travel Near Impossible As Space Sex Is Too Hard

Human space travel! Already difficult because of the gnarly technology and expensive dollars it costs, but even more difficult because humans just can’t stay alive long enough for interstellar trips. We need to, like, have sex to procreate and raise kids and stuff.

Why is sex so important? Aside from the obvious, space trips to other stars need hundreds of years to complete and the average life span of a human just doesn’t cut it. We need generations of humans, a whole civilisation of people to make that trip. And that means babies. And gravity.

Yep, gravity! Of which there is none in space. That lack of gravity translates to weightlessness which is terrible for humans over a long period of time: it decreases our blood volume, atrophies our muscles, diminishes our bone mineral content and screws with our vision. But most terrible is that it makes it increasingly difficult to have sex. Biologist Athena Andreadis of the University of Massachusetts Medical School says:

“Sex is very difficult in zero gravity, apparently, because you have no traction and you keep bumping against the walls. Think about it: you have no friction, you have no resistance.”

Not only that, scientists have no idea what the repercussions of raising a child in gravity-less space would be. Would it disrupt embryonic development? Will the baby have weaker bones? Can you even have a baby? Seriously, giving birth is aided by gravity (mothers need the weight of the baby to push ‘em out), without that gravity and weight, how would that happen? It’s messy.

Our only answer now: We need to create a way to simulate gravity on a spacecraft. For the sex. [Life Science, Image Credit: Shutterstock/1971yes]

Discuss

(25 Comments)
  • [–]

    Drew

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 9:45 AM

    I call bullshit. Lack of gravity does not mean that there is no friction or resistance.

    • [–]

      Tom Barber

      Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 2:12 AM

      The Force of Friction = Coefficient of friction between the surfaces * normal force acting perpendicular to the surfaces.

      For most cases, this normal force is due to gravity and in this respect, zero gravity environments would be frictionless.

  • [–]

    Hotcarp

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 9:51 AM

    Seriously? Best press release ever! Bumping against the walls, lol!

    • [–]

      Mike

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 12:09 PM

      I rofl’d

  • [–]

    TSH

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 10:00 AM

    Surely you could solve the “bumping against the walls” issue by adapting the “beds” with some kind of harness or hand-holds system?
    Anyway, simulated gravity is necessary for truly long-term space travel for many different reasons besides making sex easier.

    • [–]

      Ozoneocean

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

      Padded sex-pods obviously :)

  • [–]

    EckyThump

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 10:22 AM

    “Space Travel Near Impossible Because Space Sex Is Too Hard”
    What rot,… where there’s a will, there is always a way! Just climb into a one man sleeper for example! #}

    • [–]

      Anonymous

      Wednesday, October 5, 2011 at 12:12 AM

      dude wtf does that #} thing you always post mean?

  • [–]

    Barry

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 10:33 AM

    I would like to prove the yes/no people right/wrong. My partner and I are willing to have sex in zero-G environment.

    NASA….give me us a call.

    • [–]

      Corteks

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM

      Gotta agree I’d love to test their theory of sex being too hard in zero-G. Personally I think it’d be pretty fun with a bit of padding around. Although probably a bit messy…. yeah :P

  • [–]

    poltak

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 10:57 AM

    Well it’d be a lot harder but not impossible (I’m sure there’s a way, such as harnessed beds etc). It’d sure make things such as rape a whole lot more uncommon. Let’s go live in space already! :(

  • [–]

    monkeymind

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM

    Please. This is about as reliable as a 1500′s ship builder telling you that you can’t make a 300m supertanker because wood is not strong enough.

    Any ship designed to travel interstellar distances would be spin fot gravity. End of problem.

  • [–]

    Tom

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 12:14 PM

    Try operating on someone in zero gravity…can you imagine having blood particles floating around your spacecraft? ugh!

  • [–]

    David

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM

    “darling… Care to step into the highspeed centrafuge for 15 minutes”

    They never explain the gravity on sci fi movies…

    • [–]

      Drew

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

      It’s magic, stupid. Happy now?

  • [–]

    FiveStein

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 4:45 PM

    So the only people going into space now have to be into bondage so they dont float all over the place…

  • [–]

    Matt L

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 4:48 PM

    Firstly. You wanna trust an entire civilization of humans to travel safely through space for many of years? No. I don’t even trust one human to make me a decent big mac… All we gotta do there is send a bio lab with the codes for human DNA, and an artificial womb…. Easy… See! If all this brain research goes well, we should be able to upload a god into a computer to get us there safely. (I’ll be god)… Then we can kill the original god, so he doesn’t conflict with the new, artificial clone god… haha…

    On top of that, you don’t really need gravity, friction or resistance from an external source. As long as she is in the right position I can use my arms to pull her, push her and so on…

  • [–]

    dave

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM

    biggest load of rubbish! Just means big girls can finally get stiffed while standing. Give me magneto boots!

  • [–]

    villainsoft

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 5:20 PM

    I called bullshit when i read “human space travel”. Humans will never travel the stars, at least in our current form. Our feeble DNA and protein based systems, cannot survive multi-generational space travel, despite what sci-fi might tell you.

    • [–]

      space junkie

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 9:52 PM

      actually, it’s entirely feasible. The nearest star is only about 60 years of travel away. Solving the problem of dynamic instability from a centrifuge would allow us to bypass any gravity induced problem. So it’d only take one generation to get to the nearest star. All the tech for power and flight already exists.

  • [–]

    Another Aaron

    Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM

    I read a while ago Russia ran a few experiments during the cold war to test out the viability of space giggity and the most troubling issue was that the male astronauts had trouble getting boners in zero gravity.

    I’ve done the bad business in the ocean and a deep swimming pool, which is not quite weightlessness, but a close approximation, and that wasn’t the easiest thing in the world.

    • [–]

      Russell

      Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 9:13 PM

      I think the issue might not be with the weightlessness, but with the coldness and the wetness and the shrinkage…

      • [–]

        Matt L

        Wednesday, October 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM

        Or his partner was a dolphin…

  • [–]

    Ak

    Wednesday, October 5, 2011 at 3:10 PM

    Lets take this very seriosly. NASA can give me a 50 Million dollar reasearch grant and I will choose my playboy playmates and start the “research”…… That would be the most read reaseach paper in the history of science.

  • [–]

    jane

    Saturday, October 8, 2011 at 4:13 AM

    Land on the moon for some space-lovemakin’!

Join The Discussion