Poll: Is it sexist that men in the military have to shave their heads and women don't?

[DefunctTheory]

Not really.

Hair standards for modern militaries are less about lice, and more about having soldiers that don't look like a crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries. Shaving a females hair, which may take years to grow back, really isn't practical.

You do know that there are guys with long hair too right? Like a lot of them.

And for the most part, they don't look professional. If they do, it's probably because its styled in such a way, which is, again, against military standards.

On Topic: Sexist in the literal sense, yes. However, I have seen female Marines get a high and tight like their male counterparts. I have never met anyone who really thought this was a big deal considering the myriad of other problems we have when it comes to sexism in the military. For example: http://morallowground.com/2013/05/09/disgusting-fn-wook-facebook-page-degrades-female-marines/

Yah. I can't say any branch of the military is entirely free of sexism, by Marines take it to the next level, just like they do with everything else.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

As a long-haired guy myself, yeah. I don't know if sexist is too harsh a term for it, it is just hair after all, but it's definitely some kind of shitty, outdated double standard. I can take care of my hair just as well as any woman can, and if need be, I can tie it up too. Hair should be a human general thing, not a gender thing. Males and females have the same ability to manage the same styles of hair, no problem at all. Either ensure everyone has their hair kept short and tidy, male and female both, or don't include such a rule at all. That's the way I see it.

 

[TheEvilGenius]

Yah. I can't say any branch of the military is entirely free of sexism, by Marines take it to the next level, just like they do with everything else.

The Marines are a pretty... special group.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Not really.

Hair standards for modern militaries are less about lice, and more about having soldiers that don't look like a crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries. Shaving a females hair, which may take years to grow back, really isn't practical. Sure, it may help with the whole training thing, but then what?

As it stands, be grateful. I knew a lot of females in the Army that had to wake up at 5 in the morning to be able to get their hair right for physical training.

You may not like short hair, but at least it's simple.

Why is it practical when men are made to shave their heads? What's stopping the women from looking like a "crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries?"

Because whether anyone likes it or not, the business standard, social standard, and perceived 'attractiveness' for males and females are different.

The vast majority of men wear their hair short when in a professional setting, and the vast majority of females wear it long.

And whats stopping females from looking like shitty mercenaries is AR 670-1. Which I actually haven't read in forever.

Here's an analysis of military hair standards.

http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/Prep_For_Basic_Training/Prep_for_basic_uniforms/hair-standards.shtml

The word of the day is professional.

Again call me an asshole if you will, but if I deploy and get shot and am surrounded with only women, I doubt they'll be able to drag my 235 lb ass into cover, oh wait, 260 lb ass loaded down with gear.

Talk from actual military folk who have been in that situation would indicate you're wrong. Not an asshole, but definitely not correct.

Actually, no. This is a very real concern. Males who meet current physical requirements can weigh up to 300 pounds depending on gear - That's tough as shit to drag.

Which isn't to say I've not known military women who couldn't do that. But the vast majority can't.

Then again, Ive known men who meet Army standards that couldn't haul that. The current PT test the Army uses (Unless they changed it in the last year) is woefully out of date. I've known several soldiers who scored 300 on their physical fitness test (Max score) who were from a practical stand point significantly weaker then I was (About 240 score), simply because they were super light weights. Sit ups and push up scores mean exactly jack shit when you weigh 160 pounds soaking wet.

You hit the nail on the head, the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) is woefully outdated, and way too heavily favors the 140 pound guys with 0.5% body fat.

Ranger Battalions have devised a huge new PT test that takes the better part of two days to execute, and 2 of the events are a 185 lbs benchpress and a 225 lbs deadlift (max reps). Plus you actually have to run in armor, so they're attempting to get away from the wiry guy who can run fast and more in line with someone who actually has some muscle.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Yah. I can't say any branch of the military is entirely free of sexism, by Marines take it to the next level, just like they do with everything else.

The Marines are a pretty... special group.

When I was in Iraq, i was put on a detail with some Infantry guess who had been rotated out of patrol duty, and they told me about the one time they worked with the Marines.

They were on a convoy, and took fire from a building that was a couple hundred meters away from the road. The vehicles were way outside of their effective range, so rounds were just kind of bouncing off their hull. The Army guys dismounted and took cover behind the vehicles, and were calling in for support. While they were doing so, from complete safety, the Marines let out a mighty yell and sprinted for the building. Out in the open. With no cover.

Miraculously, they took no casualties, but it wasn't due to any effort on their part. I have a great deal of respect for the fighting skill and spirit of US Marines, more so because I understand that they have a massive heavy equipment shortage compared to Army units, but the amount of stories I heard about them doing shit like this is ridiculous. Those guys are complete loons.

Special is a good word for them.

 

[memristor1]

If it is sexist, wouldn't it be sexist towards women? From what I've seen, women who do shave their heads on the military get a lot of flack from both men and other women. Rumors and comments about her sexuality etc. The sexist part about it is probably the sad message that a lot of people think part of a woman's worth is her attractiveness (hair being a part of that). But that same message isn't applied to males.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Spoiler

Not really.

Hair standards for modern militaries are less about lice, and more about having soldiers that don't look like a crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries. Shaving a females hair, which may take years to grow back, really isn't practical. Sure, it may help with the whole training thing, but then what?

As it stands, be grateful. I knew a lot of females in the Army that had to wake up at 5 in the morning to be able to get their hair right for physical training.

You may not like short hair, but at least it's simple.

Why is it practical when men are made to shave their heads? What's stopping the women from looking like a "crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries?"

Because whether anyone likes it or not, the business standard, social standard, and perceived 'attractiveness' for males and females are different.

And as we all know social standards and business standards are totally fine by virtue of being social standards and should never be changed ever.

The vast majority of men wear their hair short when in a professional setting, and the vast majority of females wear it long.

And if either can look professional then why should we care what they wear? Also short hair is not the same as shaved hair. If you're really worried about taking a long time to regrow hair, how about everyone with long hair gets it cut, everyone with short hair gets it shaved (because apparently we have a haircut fetish now).

And whats stopping females from looking like shitty mercenaries is AR 670-1. Which I actually haven't read in forever.

Here's an analysis of military hair standards.

http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/Prep_For_Basic_Training/Prep_for_basic_uniforms/hair-standards.shtml

That articles doesn't explain why we need separate standards or even why military members need to shave their head at all.

The word of the day is professional.

That's a weak excuse. If you're a guy and you show up with an already professional, accepted hair style you still have to shave it. If you're a woman and you show up with an unacceptable style you have to change it but you don't have to shave your head.

Forgive me if this method of response is slightly harder to read then yours, but if we keep this up we're going to have some monstrously nasty looking replies, format wise. These answers are in order of your points, from top to bottom.

The military can't change what looks professional. And its definition of professional looking isn't weird - It's what's in line with what current business like. It may be slightly more conservative, but not to a large degree, and that's mostly due to the fact that styling is by and large looked down upon as something that requires extra maintenance that may not be available to a soldier in the course of his or her duties.

Again, this comes down to a styling issue. I've never seen a style of hair that a male wore that was long and required little maintenance and was also professional looking. Particularly when hats get thrown into the mix.

The last two get the same answer - The hair gets shaved because basic training doesn't have time to be pissing around with proper haircuts. They put you in an assembly line when you first get to basic. You get to know what a F-150 feels like when its being built in a factory. The clippers they use look like this.

Spoiler: Unusually Large Imagine

It has a built in vacuum and an oil reservoir that's constantly oiling the blades so it doesn't rip your scalp off (The blades also feel like molten steel is being pored on your head when it touches your scalp, they get so hot). And then they shoot a volume of penicillin into your ass roughly equal to that of a golf ball, just in case you may, possibly, be sick (They actually stopped doing that about a month or so after I went through basic I'm told. Which makes me wish I had waited).

As for females who go to basic, I'll give you that one. I went to Fort Benning and didn't see a woman for almost 3 months. I'm unsure what their hair preparation is like.

Additional Fact: All males get their hair cut down evenly also so that it's easier to make the group is all within standard all the time. We went to the barber exactly 3 times in basic - Once at the begin, again bout half way through (Assembly line again), and a final time right before graduations, where they did actually take us to a real barber where we got to choose a between neat longer hair or a bald shave. Most of us went for a bald shave. basically, there was no time for us to be going at separate intervals to cover down for the people who has longer hair. This actually caused me some problems... my hair grows fast, so in the week before each hair cut I started looking pretty shaggy.

Note: I'm unsure why I mentioned the penicillin thing. It's been 8 years, but I think I'm still a bit traumatized by that.

 

[Kolby Jack]

I don't mind the short hair, but I wish we could have well groomed beards. Not mountain-man shit, just a classy coating of face fur. We can have porn staches or "molestaches" as one sergeant I knew called them, but we can't have a beard? That's some bullshit. I shouldn't have to join the SEALs to be able to grow non-creepy facial hair.

 

[madster11]

Yes, it is sexist. It's also sexist in a way that's detrimental to the women.

There's very good practical reasons for short hair, including visibility and CQC. The army 2" requirement is pretty much perfect, and realistically should be the same or similar for females.

Attractiveness < Practicality.


As in most things, the ADF rules are the most sensible. For males AND females, hair must not go below eyebrows or touch the collar. Long hair can be held up in a bun style, but few army chicks do that.

 

[Winthrop]

I don't mind the short hair, but I wish we could have well groomed beards. Not mountain-man shit, just a classy coating of face fur. We can have porn staches or "molestaches" as one sergeant I knew called them, but we can't have a beard? That's some bullshit. I shouldn't have to join the SEALs to be able to grow non-creepy facial hair.

Isn't that to get a seal with the gas masks though? I've heard beards interfere and make the gas mask less effective. Could be wrong though.

 

[TheEvilGenius]

snip

GAAAH THE PEANUT BUTTER SHOT! *curls up into fetal position* I'm reliving it all over again in my mind! WHY would you DO THAT?!

Yes, it is sexist. It's also sexist in a way that's detrimental to the women.

There's very good practical reasons for short hair, including visibility and CQC. The army 2" requirement is pretty much perfect, and realistically should be the same or similar for females.

Attractiveness < Practicality.

Women aren't expressly prohibited from having short hair like men do (I've seen it on several occasions). If anything, I would say that women are given a lot more leeway when it comes to hair styles. Men, our standard is pretty much one style (max 2" etc.). Women can have their hair as short as men, long enough to touch the bottom of the back of their collar (any longer must be put into a bun), they can have braids, hair pins, corn rows, they can die their hair (as long as they aren't dying their hair blue or some crazy shit). Men can't even grow a beard unless you're fucking SOCOM.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Forgive me if this method of response is slightly harder to read then yours, but if we keep this up we're going to have some monstrously nasty looking replies, format wise. These answers are in order of your points, from top to bottom.

The military can't change what looks professional.

They can set their own standards though. Nothing's stopping them.

Again, this comes down to a styling issue. I've never seen a style of hair that a male wore that was long and required little maintenance and was also professional looking. Particularly when hats get thrown into the mix.

Ponytail? I was going to post a picture of Penn Jillette, but I can't find one where he's in a suit and you can actually see his ponytail.

The last two get the same answer - The hair gets shaved because basic training doesn't have time to be pissing around with proper haircuts. They put you in an assembly line when you first get to basic. You get to know what a F-150 feels like when its being built in a factory. The clippers they use look like this.

Spoiler: Unusually Large Imagine

Ok fine, fair point. But I'm still not sure why it wouldn't be necessary for both.

Wait did they literally shove penicillin up your ass? Sounds painful.

While I support the idea of basing military decisions and policy on what Penn does (I'm not joking, I love that guy), I think we can both agree its a bit silly.

I would not be opposed to them changing Class A (Dress) uniforms into 3 pieces pin stripe suits though.

As for the pony tail itself, that's a huge hazard when working with heavy machinery, which every soldier does from time to time regardless of his job. It's why females have that above the collar rule.

Spoiler: I could get behind this as a dress uniform, even for women. Especially for women, actually

EDIT: No, not up the ass. they inject it into your ass fat. You can't sit on that cheek for about a week. And it makes you feel like they did inject something into your anus for that long. It also hurts like fucking hell.

I don't mind the short hair, but I wish we could have well groomed beards. Not mountain-man shit, just a classy coating of face fur. We can have porn staches or "molestaches" as one sergeant I knew called them, but we can't have a beard? That's some bullshit. I shouldn't have to join the SEALs to be able to grow non-creepy facial hair.

Isn't that to get a seal with the gas masks though? I've heard beards interfere and make the gas mask less effective. Could be wrong though.

It does indeed cause problems with gas masks. It is impossible to get a good seal with any decent sized beard. The seal may hold against some of the lesser gases, like most tear gases (Which are pretty easy to deal with for the most part, as it takes a pretty hefty dose to actually knock you completely out of the fight in a huge ball of snot and tears), but the biological toxins and nerve agents will get through and completely mess you up.

 

[TheEvilGenius]

Wait did they literally shove penicillin up your ass? Sounds painful.

To be precise, they stick a big ass needle full of penicillin into your ass cheek. It's about as pleasant as it sounds. *shudders*

 

[The_Echo]

Hair standards for modern militaries are less about lice, and more about having soldiers that don't look like a crew of shitty 1980's mercenaries. Shaving a females hair, which may take years to grow back, really isn't practical. Sure, it may help with the whole training thing, but then what?

Well, say a guy like me, whose hair reaches his shoulders, joins the military.

They'd have to cut it off. You don't think that would take forever to grow back?

Either both men and women have to shave their hair, or neither. I feel the same way concerning the draft. Equal treatment.

 

[NoeL]

It is sexist, yes, but only so much as having different uniforms for man and women is sexist (I consider grooming to be part of a uniform). I don't really see it as a grave social injustice, but it's a distinction based on sex and thus sexist by definition.

 

[Something Amyss]

Because whether anyone likes it or not, the business standard, social standard, and perceived 'attractiveness' for males and females are different.

That's not an issue of practicality, though. If you don't have an argument for practicality, don't argue practicality.
Which isn't to say I've not known military women who couldn't do that. But the vast majority can't.

Then it's not really "actually no," if you've known women who could do it. It's especially not "actually no" since you yourself say men who meet Army standards who can't do it. There seem to be a lot of them, actually, making this concern of his less about actual practicality and more an artificial distinction. "Well, a dude can do it, but a chick couldn't!"

Actually, no.