Mandalorian females?

That the average man is not smart enough to pilot a ship?

I've never actually seen these restrictions Q_M, but I can only go by the Royal Navy, there are only three jobs a woman is not allowed to do, Submariner, RM Commando and Roman Catholic Priest, everything else is fair game.

We had a lengthy discussion about this on the Black Library boards last year, and came down to ''Coz we don't want girls'. Seriously it went on for months, even went in the genetics of it all, and it was just that.

Um, no. I can?t say that I could in good faith accept being offended of itself as a good reason for doing or not doing anything.[/quote]

You know it's this same argument that means women get paid less for doing the same job as their male counterparts. 'Women are the weaker sex and as such should come second to men.'

There wasn't a GUY on the battlefield who could've matched him for strength.

Like I pointed out in my first post, the langauge has no distinction between gender.

?? Eh?

That?s not really the impression I?ve gotten (could be wrong though).
[/quote]
The current holder of the highest belt in Aikido is a woman.

 

Jumping in late:


QM: I really don't see the point your making about physical strength being largely relevant in a modern military. Last I checked, we have progressed to the point where we tend to enjoy shooting each other with small caliber weapons at > 200 yards. When was the last Bayonet Charge? The simple fact is that if you can carry 60 pounds in a pack (I think I'm sure the good Sgt. will correct me if I'm wrong), an M-16 or M-4 (we'll say 7 pounds, the weapon itself is lighter), Ammo (10 pounds), and extra water/etc. (3 pounds). So 80 pounds all told. If you can do that physically while running/walking/marching/crawling. Fine welcome.

My Primary Concern when dealing with a combat situation is whether or not my comrades will be willing and able to "pull the trigger" so to speak... Not whether they are female or even Martian. If I was arguing against women in combat I would focus more on the emotional and "head" side, not the physical. (not that I'm completely sold on the idea in any case)

 

Would you accept that they?ve been cultural constructs long enough to have become instinctual?

True enough, but I still don?t see that as a benefit great enough to outweigh the inherent difficulties.

Well, thank you.

Well, you could say that you?ve been conditioned to think that way.

I know, but you were talking about different religions, ideologies and nations thrown together. Having a common background, ideology and religion, or at least comparable backgrounds, ideologies and religions is more helpful in cultivating cohesiveness among a group than a collection of mutually opposed belief systems from wildly disparate cultures. A good example of this is the cooperation that?s been shown between the English-speaking countries in military matters in recent years, as British, Americans, Australians and Canadians have a fair bit of common ground to draw on, despite their marked differences.

I think it has to be considered though, just to what extent male aggressiveness and female nurturing are acquired during the life-time of the individual rather than the result of physiological specialization. Whatever anyone may believe about the different roles men and woman tend to play, it has to be admitted that women are designed to bear children, and men are not, and in all likelihood that salient fact dictated that human males were going find it much more advantageous to be aggressive and easily disposed to violence in the interests of finding a mate, securing her from other males, and then providing for her and her offspring and defending them if need be from predators, while women, being saddled with the difficulty of bearing and then raising child

 

Steering well clear of the women-in-the-military-debate because it's being handled by people far more qualified than I, I do have to pop in and make a point abour Warhammer 40K, that's probably neither here nor there, but irritates the **** outta me.

Namely, Sisters of Battle and their STUPID HAIR CUTS.

I mean seriously, what's up with that? Could you possibly imagine a more impractical hair cut?

I lack direct experience, but I'm pretty sure that were I about to enter into a chaotic combat situation, I'd want very short hair so it would stay out of my eyes, or, if that weren't possible for some reason, my second choice would be hair long enough to tie back very tightly so it would stay out of my eyes.

What would I not want? Some bizarre chin-length bob that's going to obscure my view in a light breeze.

So either they've found the galaxy's most intractable hair gel, or there's a design flaw somewhere along the line.

I will now return you to your regularly scheduled debate about girls, guns and relative strength.

 

D'you know, I'm actually going to have to agree with you there. That is a pretty impractical hairstyle.

If I had to guess at the reasoning behind it though, I'd suppose it's meant to be reminiscent of Joan of Arc, since the saint is sometimes depicted (I think) with a similarly fanciful variant on the Medieval bowl-cut, which seems to have been the military high-and-tight of its day, and many of the Sisters of Battle's hero characters seem to be inspired by Saint Joan to some degree, not to mention copious use of fleurs-de-lis as a general design motif on the part of the Sororitas as a whole.

Then again, knowing Warhammer, the galaxy's most intractable hair gel isn't out of the question either...

 

Well sure, visually it's definitely striking and I'm sure the designers were probably thinking more "How can we make the model look cool?" than "How would a marine cut her hair?" because it's fantasy where style often trumps purpose.

But I just CANNOT look at it without imagining the horror and stress I'd feel if my hair were anything like that. It's one of those stupid, irrational, pet hates I just cannot let go of.

 

I'll surprise the lot here by saying I have a Mandalorian helmet. It fits beautifully, on most anybody.

 

Well, not all Sisters are depicted with that particular hairstyle. I've seen everything from buzz-cuts to braids in the artwork, but the "bizarre bob" does seem to be the most iconic, unfortunately.

Details?

What colours did you get it in?

 

good ole
[image=http://www.otherlandtoys.co.uk/images/bobafett2_800.jpg]

 

Cool.

 

Well, the fact is that individuals vary so much that even if women are on average less effective, a highly effective, motivated female is going to be a much better soldier, leader, and asset than a mediocre male. And the fact is, most modern militaries that actually fight wars need as many people as they can get, and as high a caliber as possible. That said, I'm not saying the US Army should allow women into the combat arms branches; I like the status quo in this case.


Edit:

Royal Marines, Basra, 2003, if memory serves.
SSG David Bellavia had to kill someone with a knife in the Second Battle of Fallujah. It was a pretty brutal brawl.

 

How would you defend maintaining the status quo in light of the reasons you've presented for changing it?

 

Ok, so I was wrong, I was thinking the last Bayonet Charge occurred in Korea. Though I'd agree that the old fashioned knife/tomahawk (read something about a Ranger using one to great effect in the sandbox) isn't completely out of place on the modern battlefield. However, the likelihood of fighting descending into ole fashioned close combat melee is growing smaller and smaller (I personally would only resort to edged weapons if I was either 1) out of ammunition completely (including sidearm) 2) not wanting to make noise and didn't have a suppressed pistol or a contact shot was too risky.

Basically: Rifle -> Pistol -> Rifle w/ Bayonet -> Knife/Other only the last one would pure strength really matter a great deal.

SoB's: meh, I always viewed the SoB's as eyecandy for fanboys and a change of pace or Targets for my True Marines.

 

I don't know. I'd agree that you don't generally want to have to resort to edged weapons if you don't have to, and their general utility in combat is rather limited these days, but I don't think the likelihood of melee fighting is actively getting smaller and smaller. If anything, I'd say we've reached something of a plateau with regards to it.

Meh, save your zeal for the Xenos and the Chaos-Spawn, Brother.

 

Nice, I got that one too! Along with a Mando Mythosaur tattoo on my left shoulder, so I might just have you all beat

This is a great discussion. I totally agree with everything Q_M has said, I would chime in but I feel he sums up my feelings with far more evidence to support the argument

 

I love how so many people assume that women are generally passive and less violent and agressive. it's actually amusing. That's what women what the men to think, and so many gullable husbands, fathers, sons and people in general beleive it. It's how women get themselves out of so many messes, they can use the whole 'maternal' and "innocent" persona right? Heh. Such naivety.
If anything, women are more aggressive then men and I know alot of people who would agree with this. If anyone truly knows women, you'll know they are far from passive and non aggressive.
Ever hear of PMS? Not to mention the fact that women have testosterone as well, and the average male doesnt have that much more than the average woman. On top of that, when adrenaline kicks in during battle (or any other life threatening or other situation) ANYONe male, female or otherwise, get a rush of pure rage. There have been cases where grandmothers have lifted cars to save their grandchildren. So the flawed stereotype that women would be using their "head" in combat and "oh lets go talk this out with our enemy" is proposterous. If a female soldier was in the middle of battle, her adrenaline would be kicking in. And if she was a soldier to begin with I highly doubt she'd be the "stand back and talk it out" type.
Guys are more laid back int today's society BY FAR and are usually the ones calming the girls down. I know plenty of fights that were broken up by guys, and girls were diong the fighting. The common stereotype is that innocent, nuturting woman (Princess Peach) stands back and screams for the men to stop fighting.(Mario and Bowser). It's so ingrained on what people were grown up to. Some people need a reality check. I remmeber at my school a few years back, they had an assembly for just us girls about physical violence and how out of control the girls in my school were. Watch Mean girls, girls can get down and dirty and fight just as easy as any guy can . They are also very quick to over react over stupid things, which is normally the male sterotype of being a "hothead".

 

I don't mind if you agree w/ Q_M, that's absolutely your right, but keep in mind that he's not stating any facts or evidence. He's expressing opinion and stereotypes. That's not at all the same thing...

"Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, the problems start when they decide to share them."

 

Not something I'd want to have to deal with in a squadmate, thanks.

Oh good grief...

Look, just... stop, okay? This is getting ridiculous.

Calls to mind an old saying about pots and kettles, that does...

Everyone is indeed entitled to their own opinions, but as Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed, "they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

I must say that I don't really agree with anything written in this thread on the matter of women in SW in frontlines... I don't see much use in talking about testosterone in a galaxy where they got midichlorians in their bodies.

 

is
Well, there are merits in some of the "physical strength" arguments, for one thing. Walking a long ways with heavy rucksacks is a big part of infantry; Armor and Artillery have to handle heavy shells. And IMHO, it's no great injustice if women can be in most jobs in the military, just not all. Like I said, MPs still see a lot of action.

 

Well since we aren't allowing women in combat roles can we PLEASE go back to the M-14, FAL, or G3 please? The Stoner (what a coincidence that) Special has proven that its less than ideal as a combat weapon for 40 years now. I thought that was the whole point of the M-16/M-4 family people were too big of sissies to cope with a real weapon...



40K:

I'm afraid you have quite misjudged me: DEATH TO THE FALSE EMPEROR, Then we can worry about the Xenos filth.

And No, I don't love the Great Gods so much as I hate the Imperium, what a titanic waste, they are quite useful at times though.

Enjoy worshiping your Corpse God though

 

I'd just like to throw in that even if you assume that women's brains wire one way and men's brains are wired another, it is very possible for one's mental gender and physical body to be mismatched. (In reality there are just some trends with a lot of individual variation and a lot of gray area, but we'll ignore that for the moment.) There exist people who are physically male but have minds that tend towards "female" thought patterns, and those who are physically female but tend towards "male" patterns. Anatomy is not an absolute predictor. And since Mandalorians can presumably come from almost any original culture, one that had less cultural pressure to yield certain outcomes might end up with even more variation than usual and plenty of people with female body parts could fit the mental requirements for combat.

 

Also note Mandalorians are not exclusively humans - there are some alien species where the female is in fact the stronger, more aggressive one. (A similar sexual dimorphism seen with some insects here on Earth).

 

Well, this thread proves the the Imperium is a disease that must be cleansed. All Hail Slaneesh!!

*Ahem*

In answer to your question Q_M, she was the champion because she could beat male opponents as well as female ones.

 

Well, according to Karen Traviss very few alien species are attracted to the Mando lifestyle, and they're probably more like humans in their social outlook then other races.