When was the mandatory buzz cut instituted for the transferral of a recruit into the military? (It surely didn’t exist in the 18th or early 19th centuries, and I see no signs of its existence during the Civil War either.) I’m assuming it began during either WWI or II. They must have supplied a reasoning at the time.

You’re right, of course, when you’re discussing today’s miitary, but the military also follows tradition. Additionally, what began as a practice for one reason may well be found to be good for another reason. I’m inclined to agree with the sanitation cause as being the initial purpose for the buzz cut with the psychological depersonalization for the purpose of rebuilding the troop being a later use. I mean…really….how big a problem is having lice these days? But in WWI and WWII, personal sanitation simply wasn’t the non-issue that it is today.

When I was in high school, my best friend lived out in the country on a small farm. It was a big deal when they got a _second_ bathroom in the house. One of their neighbors recently died, and she told me that the first thing the wife did after her husband’s death was to get an indoor toilet and running water in the house. They’d had an outhouse and a pump in the house, but not running water. This was in the ’50s in Ohio – about 20 miles outside of Cincinnati.

I checked out your link and didn’t find it impressive. Your shortest haircut is usually at the beginning of your military career. You don’t spend much time in the field in basic training and all the barracks have showers and shower you will.

If it were about the hygiene, why would the females get a pass, because their naturally and always cleaner? Don’t think so. If it were about the tactical advantage (preventing hair-pulling), I think it may be time for a career change if, in this age of automatic weapons, you can’t keep your enemies at bay.

The depersonalization aspect is the most important. You’re in the military now, not back on the block.

The military haircuts are given to keep down conditions such as lice, which can be highly contagious and spread through the barracks. Long hair could hinder training and make some of the rigorous exercises unsafe. Some people mistakenly believe that women too must receive military haircuts but this isn’t the case. Though military haircuts are encouraged for women, they are allowed to keep their hair pulled back and off their necks.

http://www.ecolonel.com/military-haircuts.html

When the going gets tough, find somebody who is allied to your nation and ensure that you can get their women and send them to their deaths or to be captured (i.e. British Navy by Iran in Iraqi waters).

That’s the ticket right there, Book.

Nepal has a rather different culture, like the Kurds, compared to the West. It’s still a culture where men do all of the soldiering because it ain’t prosperous and decadent like Europe.

America pulls double duty as protector and nurturer for the rest of the world, why not protect those that actually deserve protection for once?

As to the “buzz cuts” question, my understanding is that the main goal was the uniform-ization of the troops at the start of their training. By taking away the individual creativity of one’s hairdo and dressing everyone the same, supposedly, group similarity, if not cohesion, was improved.

Your points probably are secondary, but, nonetheless, valid in a couldn’t hurt kind of way.

I’ve about given up on England. Lived there in the late seventiers: wouldn’t visit nowadays if it was across the street.

Repeat until you understand: equality is discrimination.