|
Post by Kirby on Mar 27, 2016 15:30:36 GMT -5
A woman can portray a US Army tank commander as long as she brings her tank...
|
|
TarawaJon
2nd Lieutenant
Issue in doubt!
Posts: 990
|
Post by TarawaJon on Mar 28, 2016 11:07:10 GMT -5
A woman can portray a US Army tank commander as long as she brings her tank... Oh sure the exceptions! For Soviet women in the frontlines, my old professor would say that is, "...a 1990s suburban viewpoint," meaning not really historically based from evidence but more what we want it to be. Sure there were women but not a significant number within the millions of Soviet soldiers. For reenacting overdoing this is a danger. TJ
|
|
|
Post by americansoldier84 on Mar 28, 2016 11:44:03 GMT -5
FJRI said: "Well I guess I'll jump in here in response to the 2 items I've high lited on your comments: 1. If I read this correktly then you are saying that there should be NO one in the hobby doing enlisted line infantry who is over 25 yrs old and perhaps 25+ lbs over weight - Right? After all we MUST be historically accurate! I would wonder if you can meet those restrictions? 2. I would guess that you have not studied a lot of WW 2 history in Europe or do you just disregard the female ruskies who did front line infantry service. They had whole battalions of them, many carrying PPsH SMGs, as well as a lot of fighter pilots. Dean"
Maybe I should clarify. At least per American, German, British, and the majority of all other nationalities involved in the war there were no women in the infantry or combat arms. If you read my post you would have noted that I said "AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE." So don't tell me that you are trying your hardest to uphold accuracy when you allow females into a position that they were not in per their nationality. I never said that there were no females in the Soviet Union who fought on the front lines as infantry. You cannot argue the fact that as a reenactors it is our goal to uphold historical accuracy as much as possible. If thats not your goal, then you might be in the wrong hobby. There are some things that we cannot control, such as age. That's okay because everyone ages, and the average person with common sense realizes this. I don't understand why your mocking the need for historical accuracy in reenacting.
You have too look at the issue from an honest perspective. If we are trying to be historically accurate, then we should at least try to be historically accurate. If there were no women in the infantry or combat arms in certain nations during the war, why would we allow it in a historical representation if its not correct?
|
|
Mayo
1st Lieutenant
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by Mayo on Mar 29, 2016 22:23:01 GMT -5
If you let women portray men, then turn in your man card, and vote for Hillary.
|
|
TarawaJon
2nd Lieutenant
Issue in doubt!
Posts: 990
|
Post by TarawaJon on Mar 30, 2016 7:16:52 GMT -5
If you let women portray men, then turn in your man card, and vote for Hillary.
|
|
Mayo
1st Lieutenant
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by Mayo on Mar 30, 2016 9:24:16 GMT -5
^^^^^LMAO.
|
|
|
Post by armoredmedic on Nov 15, 2016 3:55:43 GMT -5
In the 1980's there was a woman who portrayed an Infantryman in the 110th Panzer grenadiers in Illinois. She was ALL woman, believe me, but once she put on the german stuff, you'd never think her out of place.
|
|
|
Post by doc101 on Nov 15, 2016 19:02:03 GMT -5
Inaccurate. Just because some Farb unit did it, doesn't mean it's appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by armoredmedic on Nov 15, 2016 22:12:14 GMT -5
Point taken. And all of the units that do not have accurate T O & E, a full platoon instead of 5 or 10 guys, members greater than military age, or of larger physical appearance, wearing contact lenses, instead of period glasses, etc etc etc...Are therefore inappropriate...Since they do not conform to actual conditions or events, they are not historical...
I'd invite you to identify the commander/owner of the M5A1 Stuart operated by the unit I belong to - when she is up in the turret...
Only problem with the entire thing, is that the young guys, who look the part, and can fit into original uniforms, etc...Probably are not the guys that can afford the MB,GPW, or Kubel to run around in, let alone the occasional tank or halftrack...
So, instead of continuing/escalating argument, which was not my intention, only to offer alternative ideas, I'd say, if the person can look the part at 10 feet (the standard when I began doing this in the late 70's), let them participate.
|
|
|
Post by doc101 on Nov 15, 2016 23:47:28 GMT -5
So in your version of historical accuracy, women served as TC, were in combat as US Forces, etc. That's the difference between MY generation and you of the "new generation". You all think that just because YOU think it should be: it was. So go ahead, FARB away, change history to meet your SCA version of it, because God knows, you are serving the Vets and history so well.
You can go play air soft now, I'm sure that somewhere on Omaha. Beach, a GI carried a BB gun, so it's all good.
|
|
|
Post by armoredmedic on Nov 16, 2016 19:00:57 GMT -5
You are obviously correct, and I do beg your pardon.
I joined the hobby that you seemingly own and administer in 1978, so I guess I am a newbie compared with your own record.
Your liberal democrat inspired commentary concerning airsoft, FARB, etc was unnecessary, as is my suggestion that we usually do not conduct re-enactments in safe rooms, with warm fuzzies and time out cards in my area, so you may be at a disadvantage.
I just have never seen a unit as precise as your own, containing 3 squads of 8 men each, combined to make one of three sections of 24 men each, to staff the one platoon of which your unit has at least two, making the company of approximately 100 men, properly equipped with original uniforms, weapons, and vehicles to match.
Or is it that you have that many Dragon models on your train board at home?
Thanks for your own overseas service, since you brought up Vets, I spent a year in the sandbox myself.
It's a hobby...get over yourself.
|
|
|
Post by doc101 on Nov 17, 2016 11:59:14 GMT -5
You're not re-enacting. You're pretending. Historians do it correctly.
I've got more OCONUS time than you have playing "soldier". You are just ANOTHER in a long line of lazy people who think that what they feel must be correct, regardless of historical fact. If you can't admit that what you are doing is wrong, then you should stick to AS and playing in your backyard.
. I'm betting you own or use a "Gun Jeep" during your play...
|
|
KG
T/3.
Posts: 292
|
Post by KG on Nov 18, 2016 14:49:43 GMT -5
Doc, according to you there is only one way to reenact. But I bet you can't give anything but a bs reason why every person who can't be seen as a male of any age or size, can't partcipate without you getting your panties all up in a wad. So even if you can't see them you can't help but sniff them out and have a hissy fit?
|
|
|
Post by doc101 on Nov 19, 2016 17:37:02 GMT -5
It's really simple: You either historically do the best you can, or you just dress up and play bang-bang. Farbing up seems to be the way this is going. Fine. Just stop calling it re-enacting or living history. It's Comic-Con: female US soldiers. Female W-SS. Female Paratroops. Female Patton. Right.
|
|
|
Post by ww2dave on Nov 20, 2016 14:33:40 GMT -5
My Opinion (for whatever it is worth): First: I like women in the hobby for the obvious male reasons and for some non obvious male reasons. Modern males & females would probably consider me a "male pig" or "Dinasoar" when it comes to my opinions on women. Q: What is wrong with men doing stuff that is exclusively or predominantly male, together? Why do some feel the need to have women involved in everything we males do? What is wrong with women not being there at all, or doing a period female impression? Why do they need to interject themselves into male impressions? Can't we keep it as historically accurate as we are able to without over doing the modern morals ? A few years back, in our unit, we limited women to period female impressions ONLY - NO CROSS DRESSING. OK, saying all that then .... Tactical Fantasy battles: If she can pull it off at a Fantasy Tactical event .... I don't/ won't like it, but I will tolerate it. Our group (before our current NO Women as men rule) had a female come out with us back in the 1990s (she was a girl-friend of a unit member) she was a prior service (active) and current service (Reserve) serving as a US Army MP. She looked OK in male uniform (not overtly female) she had very short hair (shorter than some of the men) did an OK job in the field, and carried her own very well - no special attention needed. In the end the only people who didn't like her, were the Germans she took out during tactical engagements - they didn't like being taken out by a girl. The rest of us (out of respect) were just careful with our language & Topics of conversation and how & where we "whipped it out" to pee in the field when said female was in the area. Public Displays/ battles/ camps Now women as men (in plain public site) during a Public Camp, Display or Battle .... NO. This is where we need women doing period female impressions - not cross dressing as men. But ... if we need a driver/ crew for a tank or track "like" vehicle where they would be "out of plain site" ... No problem. But when they returned to camp/ display they must/ need to go back to a period Female impression. OLD SCHOOL Dave
|
|
|
Post by redsoldat on Jan 12, 2017 15:35:53 GMT -5
It boils down to groups against each other, with what ever authenticity guidelines fit their "impression". Tacticals are BS, unit organizations are BS, uniform standards are BS. So tell her to cut her hair like everyone else and have a nice day.
|
|