5 foot rule and female "soldiers"???

[wilber6150]

Women should have thier hobbies, interests, etc without men to intrude upon them. Men should expect the same. If you want to be upset by the fact that many men want male-only bonding time, then be angry, but at least I am being honest. Everything in life does NOT have to be a multi-diverse, all inclusive, anything goes free-for-all where everyone arrives with their lawyer to sue or gripe if they are excluded.
And yes, the women choose to put themselves in the camps and ranks and in the midst of men behavior. However, many men will not continue to cut up or bond or pee publicly while a women is around despite her being 'okay' with it.
It is also time that some men stand up for the right for us to be and act as men. The 'Oprahization' of our society whimps down men, villifies any masculine behaviors, disenfranchises fathers from the family (look at the illigitamacy rates), and makes it okay to discriminate againt men (just watch a few TV commercials for proof).
Jim Butler

So again you are saying in a longer diatribe this time that having women around ruins your male bonding time and freedom to pee in public... Well, you seem to forget that reenacting is about honoring our ancestors and the men that fought.. If you want to pee, fart, or tell rawdy jokes with only guys then forget reenacting rent a cabin in the woods and have at it.. I don't believe that women who put care in their kit and impression and do a decent job in the ranks take anything away from other men..If you think that having females in a camp takes away from your manhood then there are definitily deeper issues in play that have nothing to do with female reenactors...Its about honor and respect not the freedom to pee...

[Memphis]

IMHO, perhaps your question should rather be: "When did interpreting history to each other become so much more important than interpreting history to the public?"

Well played, Sir, well played. Touche!

So much of the hobby is centered around the 9 to 5 aspect and when the public arrives and departs.

Apologies to Dolly Parton and The Ramones. Two different songs really.

[hendrickms24]

I took it that his implication is that this is something he sees at events he attends and groups he has seen or associates with (unless his comment is just assumptions based on myths). I must assume he has seen this in the ranks somewhere and has come to accept it whether he likes it or not. He makes the assertion that I tolerate "hair down the the arse" so I should accept women in the ranks. At MOST events I attend I don't see women or 'hair down to the arse' in the ranks, as most events I attend don't allow either.

Jim Butler


Actually, I have and still see long hair at all the types of events I attend and I do attend all types (what ever you want to call them!) You see I worry more about what I can change or effect and that’s mainly me but I do try my best to help members of my own unit! Now, I do have a member in my unit that is female and she is far better at this hobby then I am and can out walk my butt on road marches. Is this an attack on my manhood? Maybe but that’s my problem not hers, so I'm not going to have her kicked out of my unit because my manhood is hurt. Oh and I miss not seeing Bug around the camp fire!

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

"Well, you seem to forget that reenacting is about honoring our ancestors and the men that fought.. ."

Is it, really?

IMHO, I think it would be hijacking this thread, and opening another well trampled by hundreds of threads over the years, can of worms....
to say if what one sees in terms of some History-Light clothing, gear, impressions, drill, and activities at most Civil War reenactments is "honoring our ancestors" I would have to pessimistically sigh that those ancestors are spinning in their graves.
Sometimes, the "honoring" is little more than what folks do by patting themselves on the back when the weakend of BBB is over...

CHS
Descendent of over 25 who served, suffered, died of illness, fought, lost limbs, or were killed; and likely cut a joke, teased a pard, passed gas, gave up a belch, scratched their butt, and peed on a tree or bush one time or two

[Memphis]

"...those ancestors are spinning in their graves. Sometimes, the "honoring" is little more than what folks do by patting themselves on the back when the weakend of BBB is over...

Fig leaf number two.

So, are you possibly suggesting a Civil War themed toga party or a Civil War infield tailgater sans asphalt oval is neither educating the public nor honoring some ancestor? You may be right.

Will the Greek chorus please express shock at this time? Masks optional.

[flattop32355]

Ah--hiding the boys club behind the sacred veil of history ploy.
But lest it gets forgotten--it's HISTORY. There WERE WOMEN in the ranks. And the real veterans regarded them with astonishment and awe. The veteran's wives, however, received them with less kindness. Like the carmudgions on this forum.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to put on my gear and march for a couple miles to preserve my boyish figure, work on an article and read about civilians in the Maryland Campaign and a selection from Wood's Dispensatory of the United States.
Have a good day.

Andy,
Will you marry me? ;)

I've heard more objections to women in the ranks from our female members, both married and single, than from our military members. This was particularly evident when the subject came up for an organizational rules vote.

There is something to be said for a reasonable place for men to interact with other men. It has become a missing component in our modern society.

My personal philosophy:

However, if there are those exceptional women who are willing and capable to be men in the camp, I can live with it. They need to accept the added requirements demanded of them to do so, and accept that if (in particular) the physical attributes that are a part of allowing them to fit in change enough, it may no longer be possible for them to fit the role.

Some of the same hesitations seen in having women in the camp are the same as those seen in having a very devout Christian (Muslim? Jew?) in the camp. What would otherwise be open conversation gets guarded, just for somewhat different reasons. On the religious front, that's not limited to female only. One must accept that if one attends, one will hear things not always within one's comfort zone, and should not expect others to comform to one's own personal standards, and to enjoy the company of those of different view for who they are, not who they aren't. Both should attempt to make the other comfortable in the other's presence.

For those women, if any, who wish to reenact to make a gender statement, I say stay away. For those who cannot accomplish the feat of blending into the camp, I say please refrain. For any looking for a husband, I say look from outside the military camp.

For those who do it for the love of the hobby, and who can physically, mentally, and emotionally pull it off, same as the men, I say come on in. If you have pulled off the impression, and I discover that you are female, and nothing changed in your impression to alter that original lack of notice, I will welcome you to subsequent events as military, and not penalize you for "dropping your guard" in real life.

For me, that seems a fair and reasonable approach. Other's mileage will vary.

[Jim of the SRR]

Hallo!

"Well, you seem to forget that reenacting is about honoring our ancestors and the men that fought.. ."

Is it, really?

IMHO, I think it would be hijacking this thread, and opening another well trampled by hundreds of threads over the years, can of worms....
to say if what one sees in terms of some History-Light clothing, gear, impressions, drill, and activities at most Civil War reenactments is "honoring our ancestors" I would have to pessimistically sigh that those ancestors are spinning in their graves.
Sometimes, the "honoring" is little more than what folks do by patting themselves on the back when the weakend of BBB is over...

CHS
Descendent of over 25 who served, suffered, died of illness, fought, lost limbs, or were killed; and likely cut a joke, teased a pard, passed gas, gave up a belch, scratched their butt, and peed on a tree or bush one time or two

Well said! Since this is a hobby, thus the idea that we do this for 'honor and respect' is just a way to justify what we do. It seems hypocritcal to hide behind the "Its a hobby" argument to justify all sorts of other behavior, but if I try to use "its a hobby" argument to justify my male bonding then all of a sudden it is about 'honor and respect'! You can not have it both ways. Its a hobby, so yes you can have obvious females in the ranks and I can have my male bonding experience without women. Each group can allow what it wishes. Don't tell me I have to like or allow obvious women in the ranks. Ditch the pitch on 'honor and respect" it is about OUR hobby and OUR time and HOW we wish to spend our personal, valuable time.

Jim Butler
"Your kit may be perfect, but I still can't have a baby!"

[flattop32355]

Well, you seem to forget that reenacting is about honoring our ancestors and the men that fought.. It's about honor and respect not the freedom to pee...

You are correct...but only partly so.
Reenacting is not necessarily about any one particular reason for doing it.

Personally, I got started for the simple reason of spending time with my son away from the female component of the family, and because he asked if we could do it. At no point in that initial decision did "honring our ancestors", etc, come into play. Those reasons crept in later, but the original reasons have also remained.

Some like to dress up in funny clothes and camp. Others enjoy burning powder. Some like to exercise command authority. Some like the pageantry. Some like the comradeship. Some like the history aspects. Some honor the past. Some like to teach others of our history. Many, many other reasons.....

And I do like peeing on a tree or barn from time to time.

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Agreed.

"And I do like peeing on a tree or barn from time to time."

Sexist... ;) :)

Hey... I may have slept in that barn once or twice... :)

CHS
Peed Piper of Hamlin Mess

[Pvt Schnapps]

Again with the pee... Corporal of the Guard, Number One!

[wilber6150]

Well said! Since this is a hobby, thus the idea that we do this for 'honor and respect' is just a way to justify what we do. It seems hypocritcal to hide behind the "Its a hobby" argument to justify all sorts of other behavior, but if I try to use "its a hobby" argument to justify my male bonding then all of a sudden it is about 'honor and respect'! You can not have it both ways. Its a hobby, so yes you can have obvious females in the ranks and I can have my male bonding experience without women. Each group can allow what it wishes. Don't tell me I have to like or allow obvious women in the ranks. Ditch the pitch on 'honor and respect" it is about OUR hobby and OUR time and HOW we wish to spend our personal, valuable time.

Jim Butler
"Your kit may be perfect, but I still can't have a baby!"

So why do we spend time in researching the men who fought and died, why do we march and pay respect to the monuments of the men we portray... If its just a hobby with only a nod to the actual men, then all this authenticity talk is just Bull S..T and a waste of time..The conversation on this thread has gone from not allowing women in the ranks because its not authentic, **** even had a woman marched out of camp for it ! to well us guys need some bonding time and then lastly its not about our ancestors at all but just a hobby that we can do whatever we want with...This would be comical if it wasn't so sad..

[bulletsponge]

I NEVER stated I WANTED to 'play their games'. So, your statement has twisted my words to what you would like to believe. Women should have thier hobbies, interests, etc without men to intrude upon them. Men should expect the same. If you want to be upset by the fact that many men want male-only bonding time, then be angry, but at least I am being honest. Everything in life does NOT have to be a multi-diverse, all inclusive, anything goes free-for-all where everyone arrives with their lawyer to sue or gripe if they are excluded.
And yes, the women choose to put themselves in the camps and ranks and in the midst of men behavior. However, many men will not continue to cut up or bond or pee publicly while a women is around despite her being 'okay' with it. And if you want to be technical, you can be arrested and cited as a sexual predator for urinating in public.
It is also time that some men stand up for the right for us to be and act as men. The 'Oprahization' of our society whimps down men, villifies any masculine behaviors, disenfranchises fathers from the family (look at the illigitamacy rates), and makes it okay to discriminate againt men (just watch a few TV commercials for proof).
We would like to make it about "History", but it IS the Social Dynamics that cause issues like this one.

Jim Butler

You can have all the all-male bonding experiences you want. There are plenty of drumming groups and lots of "Get In Touch with Your Maleness" symposiums to go to just for that purpose. You can even meet at Hooters for a plate of wings, to watch a game and for a good old fashioned ogle-fest. Just don't expect to have your male experience on ground that has been purchased using public funding without some sort of push back from some of the people who helped make the purchase possible and don't agree with your rules.

[Jim of the SRR]

So why do we spend time in researching the men who fought and died, why do we march and pay respect to the monuments of the men we portray... If its just a hobby with only a nod to the actual men, then all this authenticity talk is just Bull S..T and a waste of time..The conversation on this thread has gone from not allowing women in the ranks because its not authentic, **** even had a woman marched out of camp for it ! to well us guys need some bonding time and then lastly its not about our ancestors at all but just a hobby that we can do whatever we want with...This would be comical if it wasn't so sad..

I am using the 'hobby' argument as tongue-in-cheek to point out the hypocrisy you now complain about. So you want women in the ranks, but complain about doing 'whatever we want'?! Are you for guidelines or not? If you are then you would not want 'obvious' women in the ranks. It sounds like you spew Bull S..T all over the place to justify women in the ranks.

And NO I don't need to go to a men's symposium for male bonding. My reenacting group works just fine for me because we don't allow 'obvious' women in our ranks!

Jim Butler

[Jim of the SRR]

You can have all the all-male bonding experiences you want. There are plenty of drumming groups and lots of "Get In Touch with Your Maleness" symposiums to go to just for that purpose. You can even meet at Hooters for a plate of wings, to watch a game and for a good old fashioned ogle-fest. Just don't expect to have your male experience on ground that has been purchased using public funding without some sort of push back from some of the people who helped make the purchase possible and don't agree with your rules.

Don't throw that 'public funding', politically correct crapola in my face either. I have organized events at NPS sites and raised money as well at the effort. At the same time, obvious women were not allowed in the ranks at this effort. Could someone have called their lawyer. I am sure they could have. Then my volunteer efforts and money raised stops so some women with a personal agenda can make her point. Does that sound like a good trade-off? Does your lawyer follow you around looking for people to sue when you are offended as well. A women can come to a public site and portray history as a women of the 19th century. If she can pull off fooling everyone by appearing like a man then more power to her. And as far as puchasing public facilities, I could argue that only 52% of Americans pay income taxes and that not EVERYONE actually paid for it (but that would be another discussion/issue).
Next thing you know we will have Title IX for friggin reenacting!

Jim Butler

[Pvt Schnapps]

Don't throw that 'public funding', politically correct crapola in my face either. I have organized events at NPS sites and raised money as well at the effort. At the same time, obvious women were not allowed in the ranks at this effort. Could someone have called their lawyer. I am sure they could have. Then my volunteer efforts and money raised stops so some women with a personal agenda can make her point. Does that sound like a good trade-off? Does your lawyer follow you around looking for people to sue when you are offended as well. A women can come to a public site and portray history as a women of the 19th century. If she can pull off fooling everyone by appearing like a man then more power to her. And as far as puchasing public facilities, I could argue that only 52% of Americans pay income taxes and that not EVERYONE actually paid for it (but that would be another discussion/issue).
Next thing you know we will have Title IX for friggin reenacting!

Jim Butler

Before we spin off into arguing for the sake of it (wait -- too late! :) ) I note the reference to "obvious" women and the "more power to her" comment. I also noted Ross's concern about having a significant portion of obvious women in the ranks at a recent event. I agree with both of you on those points.

I'm a strong advocate against simply banning women outright, but folks owe it to history to try to get as close as they can to looking like an actual soldier of the civil war rather than your average fast food consumer in a period costume. I think the hobby is heading toward consensus in this direction, but I doubt that we'll ever be entirely free of embarassingly bad impressions, male and female.

The worst examples of women in the ranks probably offends the women with good impressions more than it does the rest of us. Along the same lines, I'd rather be the oldest guy in my company than the youngest. But, as a rather more famous Michael once said, "You can't always get what you want."

But if you try some time... oh never mind...

[Blair]

"The 5 foot rule", after all this time I thought it meant "distance". I always thought it was better to be safe than sorry.
Does this whole mish-mash sound a lot like comparing Apples to Oranges? Or is it just me? Just for the record, I'm kind of partial to Granny Smith and Tangelos. But I respect what ever you preferance may be.
Should the rules of an event require that I like Crab Apples and Key Limes, then that is what I will like... if I chose to attend that event.
Blair Taylor

[flattop32355]

and then lastly its not about our ancestors at all but just a hobby that we can do whatever we want with.

Will,
Read very slowly what I am about to repeat: It is not just about any one thing... :) ;)

For any given individual, the reasons they reenact are multiple, varied, and changing. They will include honoring ancestors among many others.

Some people emphasize one reason more than all others. Some have a few that are more important. Some have a lot or reasons they think valid, with none that stand out.

If honoring your ancestors is the single most important reason for you to reenact, that is a perfectly legitimate reason to do so. For me, there are other reasons that take priority. They are just as legitimate as any other. The same holds true for all of us in the hobby.

The fun part is that we can take our differing motiviations and come together for our common and individual purposes and satisfy most, if not all, of them.

[Charles Weathers]

If a woman can take a bunch of men sitting around a campfire eating beans simulating a scene from Blazing Saddles more power to her :)

It's not only the men, just ask my husband! :shock:
And I would often rather pee on a tree than use the port-o's. :rolleyes:



...or worse yet, hear some of these women soldiers totally lie to the spectators about the subject - the best one by far was hearing a pony-tailed young lass discuss the "dozens of female Confederate Marines" who saw service in the war.

This is quite offensive to me. I work VERY hard at knowing the history of female soldiers and being able to give references to the public. I am adamant about its rarity but that it did exist. I call myself one of the generic unknown female soldiers so I can speak about the history at any venue. I discuss how some reenactment groups do not allow women in uniform, and I am not afraid to speak about how my modern life and my portrayal of a soldier mesh (i.e. I have long hair).



The worst examples of women in the ranks probably offends the women with good impressions more than it does the rest of us. Along the same lines, I'd rather be the oldest guy in my company than the youngest. But, as a rather more famous Michael once said, "You can't always get what you want."

I may not have the best impression but I am new at this and am still working on it. That is what we all do. If a woman wants to portray a soldier she better be ready to handle higher standards (and ridicule) than the rest. I am lucky to be a part of such a welcoming group but that does not mean I get a free pass. Women who wish to do this (regardless if it is for history, ancestry, fun, burn powder, family, etc.) and do not take their role seriously offend me.

[wilber6150]

I am using the 'hobby' argument as tongue-in-cheek to point out the hypocrisy you now complain about. So you want women in the ranks, but complain about doing 'whatever we want'?! Are you for guidelines or not? If you are then you would not want 'obvious' women in the ranks. It sounds like you spew Bull S..T all over the place to justify women in the ranks.

And NO I don't need to go to a men's symposium for male bonding. My reenacting group works just fine for me because we don't allow 'obvious' women in our ranks!

Jim Butler


First,
if you could quote a line of BS I have spewn it would be appreaciated... I am not for obvious women in the ranks, if someone regardless of sex or color wants to be in the ranks and does their best to blend in, and wants to join for the right reasons then I am all for letting them join the unit. But, if they make no attempt to blend and just do it for fun and frolic then they dont belong there. But, I will not keep people out who have a love for history just so that you or people around can feel good about peeing whereever you want and bonding with other males.

[wilber6150]

Bernard,
I've read it very slowly and waited a moment on each letter :) I agree that it is a hobby and there are many reasons for doing this, but each of us who wear these uniforms or civilian garb honor our ancestors in our own way.. It might be a quite moment of reflection at a monument or standing in the sunken road trying to picture what the brave men on each side must have felt; or it might be in the care people take in trying to be authentic as possible. We might not be obvious in our honoring but it is there, and to say its just a hobby I believe takes a little bit away from all of us..

[bulletsponge]

Don't throw that 'public funding', politically correct crapola in my face either. I have organized events at NPS sites and raised money as well at the effort. At the same time, obvious women were not allowed in the ranks at this effort. Could someone have called their lawyer. I am sure they could have. Then my volunteer efforts and money raised stops so some women with a personal agenda can make her point. Does that sound like a good trade-off? Does your lawyer follow you around looking for people to sue when you are offended as well. A women can come to a public site and portray history as a women of the 19th century. If she can pull off fooling everyone by appearing like a man then more power to her. And as far as puchasing public facilities, I could argue that only 52% of Americans pay income taxes and that not EVERYONE actually paid for it (but that would be another discussion/issue).
Next thing you know we will have Title IX for friggin reenacting!

Jim Butler

If you accept public funding, you have to abide by the "crapola" rules that come with it. Too bad for you.

[Huck Finn]

Bernard,
We might not be obvious in our honoring but it is there, and to say its just a hobby I believe takes a little bit away from all of us..

In the past three years I have served with women in the company. In each case it took two days of observation to even hazard a guess. They were three different women, doing it up right. In one case I did feel a mild attraction. ;)

There are many who do not share the "honoring" thing. We have a host of reasons that just do not happen to be similar to yours. Why does the "why" matter? Really?

Good try Doc. Good try.

[Jim of the SRR]

If you accept public funding, you have to abide by the "crapola" rules that come with it. Too bad for you.

But, I don't! So, it isn't too bad for me. So, call a lawyer.

Jim Butler

[Memphis]

Jim,

This charade is not about history. This is a cram it down your throat agenda.

Expect an infestation at your next Shiloh living history, because it is on federal land. Some of the fine men who have fallen in with you at times are making the long and expensive trek to Antietam next weekend for a living history at the Dunker Church after a year of research, preparation, and purchases, so they may full well be forced to manage their expectations as their hard work for history is suddenly diluted, polluted, and turned into a farce. Even a dullard can imagine a number of highly creative ways to send a distinctly unpleasant message to such an invader, and they would be well within their rights to do so. Connect the dots.

More and more top end events will go underground, and "invitation only" will once again become a far more literal interpretation rather than "just ask." What a shame.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Jim,

This charade is not about history. This is a cram it down your throat agenda.

Expect an infestation at your next Shiloh living history, because it is on federal land. Some of the fine men who have fallen in with you at times are making the long and expensive trek to Antietam next weekend for a living history at the Dunker Church after a year of research, preparation, and purchases, so they may full well be forced to manage their expectations as their hard work for history is suddenly diluted, polluted, and turned into a farce. Even a dullard can imagine a number of highly creative ways to send a distinctly unpleasant message to such an invader, and they would be well within their rights to do so. Connect the dots.

More and more top end events will go underground, and "invitation only" will once again become a far more literal interpretation rather than "just ask." What a shame.

I'm sure all the really really good events are already secret. At least, I've never known any discussed on the OTB that didn't have some element of farce about them.

[Jim of the SRR]

Jim,

This charade is not about history. This is a cram it down your throat agenda.

Expect an infestation at your next Shiloh living history, because it is on federal land. Some of the fine men who have fallen in with you at times are making the long and expensive trek to Antietam next weekend for a living history at the Dunker Church after a year of research, preparation, and purchases, so they may full well be forced to manage their expectations as their hard work for history is suddenly diluted, polluted, and turned into a farce. Even a dullard can imagine a number of highly creative ways to send a distinctly unpleasant message to such an invader, and they would be well within their rights to do so. Connect the dots.

More and more top end events will go underground, and "invitation only" will once again become a far more literal interpretation rather than "just ask." What a shame.

Actually, if you are not part of the host unit for an event (even at NPS site), I have seen the NPS ask people to leave. So, I am not so certain you can just show-up and say I am a taxpayer and I demand to take part.

Jim Butler

[tompritchett]

I think that this subject has been beat to death from several different points of view now and all that is happening now is that the different sides are just getting their blood pressure up at each other. Because of this, and the unwieldly length of the thread, I am now closing it.