I have more thoughts than I can coherently articulate on a subway ride but I'll try. Le Guin never falls into the trap of ~women's spiritual knowledge~ though I feel this story would have been an easy place for it. There's no 'women would have reached Antarctica because of their innate qualities.' instead, the book emphasises subaltern knowledges that allow the women in the book to try other approaches to the pole that help them succeed, and luck also plays its part.
This luck also stands in counterpoint to the idea of exploration in the book. The women cannot frame their expedition as a scientific endeavour, since their achievements can never be known, and so they must be honest with themselves. Why do they go? To see. One might imagine, when it comes down to it, that other explorers to the pole might have said the same, when it came right down to it. And likewise, the women do not race against another explorer, or to be first. They test themselves, and explore their own capacities, as much as they explore the world around them. Their achievements are rarely measured against those of other explorers, only compared without judgement, for the reader's reference. The comparison instead is outcomes that might have been, and this is where their luck factors in. They did not succeed because they were braver or because they were women or because men are ignorant. They were lucky to be in the right place at the right time, with all the faculties that all people are equipped with, that allowed them to succeed. No narrative of superiority is drawn from this, because Le Guin is not interested in superiority—a great frame for a story about a place where so many people were concerned about being first.
I am turning around a TC talk in my head now.