crfriend wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:58 am
moonshadow wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:49 amWell, while I'll grant most men likely have no desire to wear skirts, many do have a desire to grow a beard, and like women, these beards allow these men to feel "more like a man inside".
Practicality reigns here. Beards aren't compatible with gas-masks; earrings are. It's the same reason that kilts went right out during the first part of the World War of the 1900s -- they leave a lot of skin exposed, and quite a few chemical agents are quite adept at attacking bare skin.
Sure, most men had beards as soldiers as (1) shaving hadn't caught on and (2) it's kind of tough to find time and facilities to properly shave if you're at the front -- but that was in a time when things like gas and biological agents weren't in play.
Note that many modern firefighters sport moustaches -- none sport beards; beards interfere with respirators.
A neatly trimmed goatee can work fine with most respirators as well. You just need smooth skin where the edges seal to the face.
moonshadow wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:10 am
Yeah, that makes sense. This is one of those matters where I admit to being a bit conflicted. Military matters are complex. Of course, note the relaxing of hair guidelines for women. Seems hair is hair to me, though it's my understanding women aren't allowed to serve on the "front line". Though I may be mistaken.
Women are allowed on the front line now, all positions in the military are open to them. Many positions they still cannot be forced into, although they can volunteer to take them.*
Long hair was disallowed by modern militaries for men because it is a liability (and allows personal expression - the military doesn't want that, either). It can be pulled in a fight, be caught in machinery, catch fire, or get soaked in chemical weapons.
Militaries as recently as the US Revolutionary War would prescribe hair on men to be pulled back in a pony tail at the base of the neck and cut "short" just below the ribbon that held it in place there.
moonshadow wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:10 am
I wonder if then a mustache could be considered a fair compromise?
Actually, this is already allowed in some cases, but it must be closely trimmed to regulations that make most guys look terrible with it. I've heard the regulation mustache referred to as a "creeper 'stache" by military members more than once...
For special forces interacting with locals in certain parts of the world, a full beard is even permitted, but this is far more limited.
*My hope would be that standards get adjusted, not just on appearance, but on physical fitness and more, to be based on the job someone is assigned instead of sex. If a female can do the job and meet the same physical (and psychological, etc.) standards as the men, great! She should be able to have the job, and get treated just like the boys. On the other hand, if a man is in a desk job, there is no reason he needs to be able to run as fast or long as the guys out front, or any faster than the woman at the desk next to him.
Also, the fact that women were disqualified from front line combat was the main reason that the courts upheld the male-only draft. Now that that has changed, this is the subject of a lawsuit right now, being appealed to the Supreme Court. Hopefully SCOTUS will take the case and rule out the male-only draft as unconstitutional. I'm sort of hoping for female draft registration, but getting rid of the draft entirely would be okay, too.
