Comments by "Evan" (@MrEvanfriend) on "Did Roman Soldiers Get Buzzcuts? (Ancient Army Regulations)" video.

Soldiers being clean shaven is a very modern phenomenon, stemming from the First World War. At the beginning of the war, the British Army required soldiers to wear a mustache. However, the war completely upset the military paradigm in a number of ways - including facial hair. And the reason for that is simple, and practical: facial hair, specifically beards, sideburns, or handlebar type mustaches, interfere with the seal on a gas mask. If you have a beard, your gas mask will not form a proper seal to your face, and will not afford you much protection. Of course, from that practical origin, it's gotten stupid, and become little more than an excuse for senior enlisted to pester the troops. And there's a reason that virtually every veteran I know, myself included, wears a beard.
242
@slyninja4444 Head shaving prevents lice and is about hygiene more than anyone else. Anyone who mentions "gender equality" in a military context is an absolute moron and does not have anything to say worth listening to. Bye bye.
56
The British Army required them as well. Until gas became a thing. Facial hair interferes with a good seal on a gas mask.
42
@user-ue6iv2rd1n That is entirely false. It's done largely for hygiene purposes - same as it is in prison.
22
Officers have no more leeway with grooming standards than enlisted troops in any army I've ever heard of. Modern armies generally do not allow beards because a beard will prevent a proper seal on a gas mask.
13
@paddy1389 Navies don't need gas masks for the most part. And most European armies today seem to realize that gas generally isn't a threat most of the time. As for firemen, I've never met one who had a beard. And one that I know specifically said he shaved his beard for that very reason. The only gas mask I've ever worn was the M40 Field Protective Mask that we had in the Marines (I was in 2003-2007). A beard absolutely would have interfered with the seal.
8
@mondaysinsanity8193 This is a new experiment that is failing miserably. Stop being willfully stupid.
6
Allen Iekanjika Female "soldiers" are a remarkably new innovation.
5
@Alias_Anybody Any beard on the cheeks and chin will prevent a seal. A mustache will not, provided that it doesn't go out too far past the mouth.
5
@slyninja4444 Very few are given an exception. Beards do indeed hinder the wearing of gas masks, you need a seal against the skin, and hair in the way would prevent that. However, gas masks are not generally a relevant piece of equipment in almost any environment. Since we took down Saddam in 2003, the US has not faced a chemical threat (though arguably Syria could be considered one). Even in an environment with a chemical threat, a gas mask is unlikely to be of any use unless you're already wearing it. For that reason, I think that beards should be allowed, at least in the field and on deployment.
5
@SomeBody-rm6hf You absolutely do have to get a haircut every week in the Fleet, unless you're in the field. And when you're in the field, you don't always get a chance to wash your hair regularly.
3
Literally everything you said about hair and the modern helmet is entirely false. A properly fitting helmet won't shift on your head regardless of hair. The only Marines who get high and tights are boots who haven't spent much time in the field and POGs who never go to the field at all. Seasoned infantry Marines never get high and tights, because they look ridiculous. And on deployment, you sometimes go a month without a haircut. And it never has any effect whatsoever on how the helmet rests on the head. Marine Corps haircuts have zero to do with practicality. It's about a look that the Corps wants to show to the world.
3
@chickai25 Making everyone uniform in appearance certainly has something going for it, but if that were the case, then they wouldn't allow for a range of haircuts or for mustaches. Contrary to stereotype, very few Marines actually wear the ridiculous high and tight haircuts, and most of us have more normal looking hair, which can be grown out to three inches in length, provided that there is a fade in the back. Mustaches are allowed provided that they do not extend past the corners of the mouth, and are popular on deployment (and decidedly less popular stateside). If the regulation against beards had to do with uniformity, why is it that such variations in hair is allowed? Why are mustaches allowed (and why are mustache regulations such that a mustache that would interfere with a gas mask seal are not)?
3
@InvictaHistory This guy has no idea what he's talking about. The idea that a high and tight keeps your helmet from moving is absolutely ridiculous, and has no bearing whatsoever on reality. For one thing, high and tights are popular with inexperienced boots and the kind of Marines who don't spend any time in the field - you look at experienced infantry Marines, you won't find any high and tights there. Second, the helmet is held in place by the chinstrap and the suspension system (or pads) inside the helmet. If your helmet is shifting on your head, it means that it doesn't fit you properly. I never got high and tights, because they're ridiculous, and I never had a problem with my helmet shifting, because my helmet fit me properly.
2
There's always that guy who thinks he can cut hair. In my experience, they never can. Every barracks cut I ever got looked like absolute shit.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg He objectively did, but hey, if you don't wanna believe that despite the wealth of information that says so, go right ahead.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg Look it up. Even the New York Times finally admitted it.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg Right. The evidence is readily available everywhere. But feel free to believe the old debunked myth if you'd like.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg Look it up. This is common knowledge that all but the most determined leftist partisans and conspiracy theorists acknowledge. I'm not gonna go find citations for a fool who is unwilling to acknowledge truths that are common knowledge.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg Right. This was a major news story for several years. The onus is on you to disprove it, not the other way round.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg Yip yip yip. The onus is on you to show that your thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory is correct. Not the other way round. Bye now.
1
@JohnSmith-sk7cg You are peddling an outright lie that has been entirely debunked. It is a conspiracy theory repeated by fools who want to peddle anti-American nonsense. You should know better. You are wrong, your yipping like the neighbor lady's small lap dog is irritating, and you lack any leg to stand on. Bye bye conspiracy theorist.
1