While all of it makes little sense in movies, short hair doesn’t. Reason why military cuts hair short is so your hair doesn’t get tangled in trees, bushes or fences, compromising you. It’s really of practical nature. But given how many cockups they make elsewhere in movies, I don’t think they were going for that kind of realism.
The Expanse has the justification of it meaning that they don’t have to deal with representing long hair in microgravity situations, but they still have variety like Camina Drummer’s ultra-tight braids and Naomi’s curls which solve the problem without everyone having a crew cut
Man, Cara Gee, the actress that plays Drummer is just so stunning. Aside from her being so much my type, I enjoyed her portrayal of the character. Very commanding on screen presence.
She’s the definition of perfect casting. I also liked how they just kept extending her role because Cara Gee is so good. Drummer’s role in the books is much smaller
In universe, short hair also makes sense in zero gravity. James S A Corey are just on another level when it comes to such details both in the show and in the books. They actually talk about female hygiene products in The Mercy of Gods.
Either short cut hair, or at the very least, done up in a very tight bun, or fairly short ponytail or braids or cornrows or something.
As you say, tangling with the environment or your gear… in a hand to hand fight, you do not want hair that can be pulled or wrapped up, you don’t want long hair getting in the way of reloading a gun, longer bangs blocking your view through binocs or iron sights or a scope…
These were all used before the tampons and pads, with some more … unique solutions beginning to be mass produced in the late 1800s, eventually leading to modern tampons and pads.
So… I guess uh, assuming a post apocalyptic woman’s ‘survival’ stat is high enough, presumably they would return to much more locally sourceable, less complex to produce, decent enough solutions, after the last box of tampons gets looted from the last dilapidated Walgreens.
So… if your character is a postapoc woman badass… you could just add this into your own headcannon as an explanation, of sorts.
… I wonder how many post apocalyptic movies pass the Bechdel test lol.
EDIT: Going a bit further, and arguably off topic…
Common ammunition calibers, cigarettes, condoms, and possibly bandage/compress packs, tampons/pads, bic lighters… maybe also small sewing needle kits?.. would be pretty good candidates as physical commodity psuedo-currencies…
Basically for the reason that they are small, light, easily transportable, roughly standardized, are generally durable if stored properly… and are no longer in mass production… and basically everyone would either directly have practical use for them or know someone who does.
Bottlecaps as a currency would represent some level of general social cohesion beyond and above that, lol.
EDIT 2: … having long hair could …probably become something of a status symbol, as it would only really make sense if you were not roughing it all the time.
Men would also presumably keep their hair and beards short generally as well, and longer hair/beards could also become something of a status symbol as well.
Bottlecaps as a currency would represent some level of general social cohesion beyond and above that, lol.
Yep. Currency is usually backed by something, like the US dollar used to be backed by their gold reserves, caps in the wastes are backed by The Hub and its Water Merchants.
As I understand it… this is somewhat theoretical, and somewhat backed by fairly scant historical, prehistorical/anthropological data…
Caps, being accepted … broadly, regionally… implies, as you say, the infrastructure of The Hub’s water merchants and traders.
This would be a greater level of … general social cohesion and trust… because the caps, a cap itself… is not really a directly useful commodity in and of itself.
Cigs and tampons and condoms… things like these often naturally arise as psuedo currencies in situations like prisons, PoW camps… and part of the theory on why that seems to fairly consistently happen is that, in addition to having other attributes of a good money, a good currency… is that they do have a generally applicable direct use as an actual good.
So basically, the more inherent trust and level of technological development in society… the more likely you are to find that society with a currency/money that is further removed from being a directly useful or consumable good.
There are a good number of historical exceptions to this though, so… just a theory hehe.
Nah it’s pretty well proven I think, barter and trade has always been an informal method of…well…barter and trade lol, when currency can’t be used for some reason (like prison, or trading rifles for land from the Native Americans, etc, many examples throughout history). Sure there’s exceptions, but I’d call it common enough that it’s true, personally anyway.
The problem is it doesn’t scale well, eventually it gets to the point where you need bullets and have chickens but the bullet guy has chickens too and he needs more lead for casting and brass to reload, so you have to go find out what the lead and brass guys want, and it becomes a whole thing, where having something as an abstraction of value means we can all just get what we want easier. That and you eat/smoke/drink/consume your “money” somehow by necessity if it’s usable goods, or it rots etc, whereas if there’s an abstraction of value that is only used for that purpose it’s easier to save, transport, etc. It’s absolutely human nature to use trade/barter when money isn’t an option, but due to all that bullshit that comes with barter, money eventually gets reinvented by society because it’s just so handy, like The Hub using caps backed by water.
Everything you’ve said is generally true, but I say… not 100% or confirmed or without exception…
Because we keep finding exceptions.
Some cultures… actually do seem to have skipped the commodity-currency phase, and gone straight to things like specific shells, or beads, or something else that has no practical utility.
Some other cultures just… didn’t do currency. Basically at all. Gift economies, handled by frequent communal sharing events and/or parties/feasts/festivals.
You’ve got things like tally sticks, though those are ultimately backed by a formal social structure… they dynamics of how they work as currency is significantly different than most others.
I didn’t want to sound too certain about it because I’ve already made jokes about evo-psych in this thread.
A lot of economists like to project their modern worldviews backward, and are then slapped in the face by anthropologists/ancient historians/archaelogists, telling them the actual evidence shows that economist’s thought experiments are often overly simplistic, lack nuance, and functionally try to cram a limited framework onto what increasingly seems to have been a much more diverse and varied, and localized and unique actual human history.
Also I think beard hair is not permitted in military due to gas masks needing to have a good seal so perhaps it would he a good reason for not having long hair as well
That’s a little sexist. I also completely disagree. Short hair, especially in a military setting, is not about a borrowed appearance of strength, but utility and competence. Early episodes of Stargate SG-1 had some infamously awful commentary about emancipation, but Carter’s (Amanda Tapping) short haircut never compromised her femininity: she wore it like that because she was a frontline soldier and accomplished USAF pilot, and that’s what the circumstances demanded. It would have been weird and against her character to participate in missions with long hair.
Just for fun, this is the “”“improved”“” scene where Carter is introduced, without the part where she talks about her reproductive organs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gR-ouftevE
I think that’s what OP is getting at, that this attitude of “male” haircuts has been used in such a way. They’re not defending it, they’re pointing it out, alongside military doctrine.
Apologies I should have put an eyeroll or something to indicate tone. What I was getting at is that it’s seen as a man’s haircut so that’s why it’s given to the character.
I still firmly disagree with that point. Maybe it’s just a cultural thing that I’m not getting. I’ve never seen short hair as exclusive to men (other than as a result of male pattern balding because that’s just a weird thing the human body does), nor think that it makes women look masculine. I know and have known plenty of women with short hair and men with long hair, and never thought it anything other than a stylistic choice (barring other practical considerations).
This is something I’ve always found a bit perplexing - US female combat troops often have long hair, which they keep up and tight while working.
Both me and my other half often do physical work (I’m a volunteer firefighter, she does arbourist work on the side) and neither of us can stand having long hair … if I were doing military work, I can’t imagine how needlessly uncomfortable that long hair is!
Same goes for women MMA fighters.
In other news, my other half looks like Sinead O’Connor when she shaves her hair, while I look more like a Gulag escapee for some reason … so I have to live with a pixie cut or longer.
While all of it makes little sense in movies, short hair doesn’t. Reason why military cuts hair short is so your hair doesn’t get tangled in trees, bushes or fences, compromising you. It’s really of practical nature. But given how many cockups they make elsewhere in movies, I don’t think they were going for that kind of realism.
The Expanse has the justification of it meaning that they don’t have to deal with representing long hair in microgravity situations, but they still have variety like Camina Drummer’s ultra-tight braids and Naomi’s curls which solve the problem without everyone having a crew cut
Man, Cara Gee, the actress that plays Drummer is just so stunning. Aside from her being so much my type, I enjoyed her portrayal of the character. Very commanding on screen presence.
I absolutely love basically every scene she’s in. Especially with how much she committed to the Belter accent
She’s the definition of perfect casting. I also liked how they just kept extending her role because Cara Gee is so good. Drummer’s role in the books is much smaller
Fa sho, beltalowda
Same. Swoooooon much.
same same
In universe, short hair also makes sense in zero gravity. James S A Corey are just on another level when it comes to such details both in the show and in the books. They actually talk about female hygiene products in The Mercy of Gods.
Either short cut hair, or at the very least, done up in a very tight bun, or fairly short ponytail or braids or cornrows or something.
As you say, tangling with the environment or your gear… in a hand to hand fight, you do not want hair that can be pulled or wrapped up, you don’t want long hair getting in the way of reloading a gun, longer bangs blocking your view through binocs or iron sights or a scope…
Also… for tampons and pads…?
The ‘old ways’:
Lint wrapped around wood. Knotted ropes. Papyrus. Paper. Moss. Animal skins.
These were all used before the tampons and pads, with some more … unique solutions beginning to be mass produced in the late 1800s, eventually leading to modern tampons and pads.
https://cora.life/blogs/blood-milk/what-did-women-do-before-tampons-a-brief-history-of-period-products
So… I guess uh, assuming a post apocalyptic woman’s ‘survival’ stat is high enough, presumably they would return to much more locally sourceable, less complex to produce, decent enough solutions, after the last box of tampons gets looted from the last dilapidated Walgreens.
So… if your character is a postapoc woman badass… you could just add this into your own headcannon as an explanation, of sorts.
… I wonder how many post apocalyptic movies pass the Bechdel test lol.
EDIT: Going a bit further, and arguably off topic…
Common ammunition calibers, cigarettes, condoms, and possibly bandage/compress packs, tampons/pads, bic lighters… maybe also small sewing needle kits?.. would be pretty good candidates as physical commodity psuedo-currencies…
Basically for the reason that they are small, light, easily transportable, roughly standardized, are generally durable if stored properly… and are no longer in mass production… and basically everyone would either directly have practical use for them or know someone who does.
Bottlecaps as a currency would represent some level of general social cohesion beyond and above that, lol.
EDIT 2: … having long hair could …probably become something of a status symbol, as it would only really make sense if you were not roughing it all the time.
Men would also presumably keep their hair and beards short generally as well, and longer hair/beards could also become something of a status symbol as well.
Yep. Currency is usually backed by something, like the US dollar used to be backed by their gold reserves, caps in the wastes are backed by The Hub and its Water Merchants.
As I understand it… this is somewhat theoretical, and somewhat backed by fairly scant historical, prehistorical/anthropological data…
Caps, being accepted … broadly, regionally… implies, as you say, the infrastructure of The Hub’s water merchants and traders.
This would be a greater level of … general social cohesion and trust… because the caps, a cap itself… is not really a directly useful commodity in and of itself.
Cigs and tampons and condoms… things like these often naturally arise as psuedo currencies in situations like prisons, PoW camps… and part of the theory on why that seems to fairly consistently happen is that, in addition to having other attributes of a good money, a good currency… is that they do have a generally applicable direct use as an actual good.
So basically, the more inherent trust and level of technological development in society… the more likely you are to find that society with a currency/money that is further removed from being a directly useful or consumable good.
There are a good number of historical exceptions to this though, so… just a theory hehe.
Nah it’s pretty well proven I think, barter and trade has always been an informal method of…well…barter and trade lol, when currency can’t be used for some reason (like prison, or trading rifles for land from the Native Americans, etc, many examples throughout history). Sure there’s exceptions, but I’d call it common enough that it’s true, personally anyway.
The problem is it doesn’t scale well, eventually it gets to the point where you need bullets and have chickens but the bullet guy has chickens too and he needs more lead for casting and brass to reload, so you have to go find out what the lead and brass guys want, and it becomes a whole thing, where having something as an abstraction of value means we can all just get what we want easier. That and you eat/smoke/drink/consume your “money” somehow by necessity if it’s usable goods, or it rots etc, whereas if there’s an abstraction of value that is only used for that purpose it’s easier to save, transport, etc. It’s absolutely human nature to use trade/barter when money isn’t an option, but due to all that bullshit that comes with barter, money eventually gets reinvented by society because it’s just so handy, like The Hub using caps backed by water.
Everything you’ve said is generally true, but I say… not 100% or confirmed or without exception…
Because we keep finding exceptions.
Some cultures… actually do seem to have skipped the commodity-currency phase, and gone straight to things like specific shells, or beads, or something else that has no practical utility.
Some other cultures just… didn’t do currency. Basically at all. Gift economies, handled by frequent communal sharing events and/or parties/feasts/festivals.
You’ve got things like tally sticks, though those are ultimately backed by a formal social structure… they dynamics of how they work as currency is significantly different than most others.
I didn’t want to sound too certain about it because I’ve already made jokes about evo-psych in this thread.
A lot of economists like to project their modern worldviews backward, and are then slapped in the face by anthropologists/ancient historians/archaelogists, telling them the actual evidence shows that economist’s thought experiments are often overly simplistic, lack nuance, and functionally try to cram a limited framework onto what increasingly seems to have been a much more diverse and varied, and localized and unique actual human history.
Also gas masks really don’t seal that well with too much hair in the way.
Also I think beard hair is not permitted in military due to gas masks needing to have a good seal so perhaps it would he a good reason for not having long hair as well
Yep i agree! In movies it’s a way to make a woman look strong, because obviously a man’s haircut gives us some of the magical powers of a man.
That’s a little sexist. I also completely disagree. Short hair, especially in a military setting, is not about a borrowed appearance of strength, but utility and competence. Early episodes of Stargate SG-1 had some infamously awful commentary about emancipation, but Carter’s (Amanda Tapping) short haircut never compromised her femininity: she wore it like that because she was a frontline soldier and accomplished USAF pilot, and that’s what the circumstances demanded. It would have been weird and against her character to participate in missions with long hair.
Just for fun, this is the “”“improved”“” scene where Carter is introduced, without the part where she talks about her reproductive organs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gR-ouftevE
I think that’s what OP is getting at, that this attitude of “male” haircuts has been used in such a way. They’re not defending it, they’re pointing it out, alongside military doctrine.
Unless I can’t read…?
Yep that’s what I meant
Apologies I should have put an eyeroll or something to indicate tone. What I was getting at is that it’s seen as a man’s haircut so that’s why it’s given to the character.
I still firmly disagree with that point. Maybe it’s just a cultural thing that I’m not getting. I’ve never seen short hair as exclusive to men (other than as a result of male pattern balding because that’s just a weird thing the human body does), nor think that it makes women look masculine. I know and have known plenty of women with short hair and men with long hair, and never thought it anything other than a stylistic choice (barring other practical considerations).
OK thanks for giving me your perspective
This is something I’ve always found a bit perplexing - US female combat troops often have long hair, which they keep up and tight while working.
Both me and my other half often do physical work (I’m a volunteer firefighter, she does arbourist work on the side) and neither of us can stand having long hair … if I were doing military work, I can’t imagine how needlessly uncomfortable that long hair is!
Same goes for women MMA fighters.
In other news, my other half looks like Sinead O’Connor when she shaves her hair, while I look more like a Gulag escapee for some reason … so I have to live with a pixie cut or longer.