Racial stereotypes

[95th Rifleman]

The recent discussions have got me thinking, how much do we subscribe to racial stereotypes? This effects many things, not the least the prosecution of war. An example is the Japanese in WW2, Americans considered them too weak and prone to poor eyesight and dismissed them as a credible threat in air to air engagements, yet the japanese proved to be some of the best and most skillful pilots of the war. Cultural attitudes and racial stereotypes play a huge part in our lives, whether we choose to accept the fact or not.

How does it play out in our games of T2K? Over the years i have been guilty of, rather unconscously, portraying NATO troops as more moraly sound than warsaw pact. When warcrimes or amoral acts have been commited by NPCs it is most often by the hand of a soviet. I was born in 1980, while Britain was not as focussed on the "Red Peril" as America we where brought up in a society that saw the communists as less moral, less "good" than we where. In the movies,literature and common perceptions of the time, this was accepted as fact.

Also common views and stereotypes regarding even our NATO allies had an effect and talking to veterans of the two Gulf wars, I've learned that they could effect relations between allied contingents. I'll list some common stereotypes that where common when I was a teenager, so you can see what I mean:

Russians (soviet): Cruel, ammoral fanatics who would willingly commit any crime for the soviet cause. Uneducated, barbaric and primitive. poor soldiers with poor equipment that is rarely cleaned or maintained.

Americans: Undisciplined, gung ho, poorly led. They have all the kit but not the training to use it. Arrogant, badly educated, convinced they won everything singlehanded.

Germans: Arrogant, by the book, no sense of flair. Poor at handling unplanned, unexpected situations. There was a general sense of distrust associated with the Germans when i was growing up.

Now when you look at the reality you notice that the stereotypes have a certain element that rings true but are overblown and inaccurate. I was wondering ow this plays out in other people's games, chcarcters and personal viewpoints.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by 95th Rifleman

Now when you look at the reality you notice that the stereotypes have a certain element that rings true but are overblown and inaccurate. I was wondering ow this plays out in other people's games, characters and personal viewpoints.

Not knowing a lot about a culture is probably what makes taking on stereotypes as easy or as common as they are. You'll almost always find a greater depth of different characters from your own "side" because of this IMO. When you simply don't know about them, it just makes sense to fall back on popular beliefs. It's also sometimes easy to forget that the enemy side doesn't just have to exist to be mindless drones to mow down if the opportunity to interact with them is limited - which unfortunately is often is.

It takes effort I think to break this habit. I've tried... in my game just about half of every NATO person the party has come across has been either uncooperative, untrustworthy, or a potential/real threat. I think there are a lot of gaming benefits to this and it breaks the concept that somebody is your friend just because of the uniform he wears.

I think I'm doing pretty good... this picture summarizes exactly how I think the average British person is like.


I'm just kidding of course. Britain is very awesome.

[simonmark6]

I think I might have taught that guy in the picture...

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

I think I might have taught that guy in the picture...

LOL!

Notice I didn't pick on the Welsh. I know better. Nobody in the world is as hard or tough as them which is evident by the fact that they've got a freaking dragon on their flag.

[TicToc]

Here are a handful of current stereotypes that I've run into and or have subscribed to both accurately and inaccurately. I would like to note that though stereotypes are very very rarely 100% accurate I believe they exist for a reason. Enough people from one demographic showed a trait, attitude, ect ect enough times that the presumption that others from the same demographic will act in a similar fashion is a reasonably safe assumption, or at the very least a reasonable thing to bear in mind when interacting with someone of that demographic. This is not always a great idea or an accurate way to view people and can have negative side effects. However there are admittedly pros to bearing them in mind.

(as seem from an American perspective)

Russian - poorly trained, harshly led, poorly equipped, poorly educated, well indoctrinated, mostly conscripts

English - one of our three closest friends and chief most of them, extremely professional, arrogant, trusted, difficult to work with at times due to being obstinate

Australians - Tough, proficient, drunks, one of the top three allies

Canadian - The last remaining of the top three friends, poor military due to lack of size and money

French - This one is hard to describe in a list, so I will suffice to say that militarily the French are the butt of the VAST majority of jokes and jabs that involve poor military prowess

Chinese - LOTS OF THEM!!!! HOLY SHIT LOTS OF THEM!!!!!! its like an ant hill of little red commie ants, other than that we think of them as quantity before quality in every way

With a few exceptions (Germany, The Netherland, Norway, and I'm sure a couple others that I cant think of right now) most European countries are viewed as having poor militaries, with governments weak in conviction

Anything in South America is viewed pretty much the same - corrupt, poorly trained, poorly led, poorly equipped, poor education, just poor in general, not worth consideration unless someone tried to seriously rock our boat

[simonmark6]

Especially today. It's a good day to be Welsh: we won the rugby. In fact we beat all four other nations in the game so we feel really smug, at least until we get our arses handed to us by Australia, New Zealand or South Africa

I actually put down British rather than Welsh in any official documentation, independence for Wales is pretty much a one way ticket into the third world. We need to suck the English dry of their taxes to live our lives of luxury and maintain our keen abilities in close harmony singing.

[95th Rifleman]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

Especially today. It's a good day to be Welsh: we won the rugby. In fact we beat all four other nations in the game so we feel really smug, at least until we get our arses handed to us by Australia, New Zealand or South Africa

I actually put down British rather than Welsh in any official documentation, independence for Wales is pretty much a one way ticket into the third world. We need to suck the English dry of their taxes to live our lives of luxury and maintain our keen abilities in close harmony singing.

Are Wales, a fine country where men are men and sheep are scared.....

[simonmark6]

It's never been scientifically proven that the sheep don't like it...

[TicToc]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

It's never been scientifically proven that the sheep don't like it...

Epic awesomeness

[95th Rifleman]

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern ireland is an interesting social experiment. Four nations who have very good reasons to hate each other, united by a common hatred of France.

[Medic]

Originally Posted by 95th Rifleman

Are Wales, a fine country where men are men and sheep are scared.....

On that topic, I take it you know why they came up with the idea of kilt in the first place? The damn sheep hear the zipper from too far away.

[95th Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Medic

On that topic, I take it you know why they came up with the idea of kilt in the first place? The damn sheep hear the zipper from too far away.

I'm from Lancashire, the finest county in England. The good Scotts under William Wallace had the good sense to invade Yorkshire and sack York, as a mark of respect for their good sense I refuse to engage in insults against such fine, Yorkshire-invading, folk.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by 95th Rifleman

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern ireland is an interesting social experiment. Four nations who have very good reasons to hate each other, united by a common hatred of France.

But it didn't really start that way, although maybe it's that way now. What about all those centuries during which Scotland's biggest ally was France? Matter of fact, Scotland would have been utterly crushed and incorporated much earlier into a greater England if it hadn't been for France's support of the various Scottish royal houses. Really the UK is the result of a Scottish king becoming the king of England too.

I'm of Scottish decent through the male line (there are records of Sempills in Scotland going back to the early 1300s and my current clanhead is a baron) and it brings me great joy to think that, for a while at least, a Scottish king ruled England.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by 95th Rifleman

Are Wales, a fine country where men are men and sheep are scared.....

The American version is: "Texas, where men are men, the women are strong, and the sheep are scared..."

[Webstral]

Let's not even get started on the prejudices regarding the local nationals in Iraq and probably Afghanistan: they're dirty, corrupt, dishonest, and lazy. We used to say that the only Iraqis who got anything done were with the insurgency. Oddly enough, no one ever mentions the commitment to hospitality.

[Medic]

Well, here's pretty much what Finns have for stereotypes:

Swedes - in all Finnish jokes, Swedish men are gay and stupid, but in military matters, the Swedes are considered too democratic (if you try to make decissions in a multinational force with Swedes involved, they want to put everything to vote regardless of what the ranking officer says)

Russians - boozed up, corrupt slackers, who cut the lines. Also, some of the noveau rich own fancy cars and come to Finland for shopping. The 'ancient enemy'. Most Finns know three phrases in russian: "Stoj!", "Ruki vehr!", "Idi tsuda!"

Americans - ignorant, bullyish, loud. Stick their noses in to the matters of other nations, feeling all high and mighty. 'Bringing democracy' to other nations, but can not even run elections in a democratic manner (referring to the Bush vs. Gore elections).

Danes - Swedes with speach impediment.

Irish - Our brothers from abroad. Love to drink, sing and fight when drunk, just like us.

Finns - quiet and brooding. Always bickering about something. In a fight with the Russians, one Finn is equal to ten Russians (the only question is what happens, if the eleventh Russian arrives the scene?).

[B.T.]

First of all: I'd prefer to call it "national stereotypes". We do not see many Asians or "coloured"* people in Germany (At least not as many as in several other countries.).
I can imagine, that this may be different in other countries/armed forces. But I'm not jumping on that train!
The attitude towards people with another skin colour/racial background has never been issued in one of our T2k-sessions. We have two non-caucasian characters in my player group, a black former ballet dancer (PC), and an Amerindian medic, James "Dancing Crow" Travis (NPC). They have been added to add a little flavor to the game, but their background is not a big issue.

I think, national stereotype or prejudice would depent on the situation: It makes a difference, if you (being part of an American unit in Poland) had friendly encounters with people from other NATO forces. They may say:
"All Greeks are >Insert your favorite prejudice on Greeks!<, but Venizelos is pretty cool. He's a real good shooter and never let one of us down! Very hard-working and allways sober!"
Having been in contact with someone over a longer period may change your perception!

But, off course, I use some cliches:
Soviet: Brutal, poorly equipped (even to T2k-standards), determined to do a good job in the eyes of their leaders.
A Soviet unit would not bother to wreak havoc to a cottage or settlement and it's inhabitants, if they think, this action would help their plans.

Polish (military): Hard fighting and professional. In contrast to a lot of other forces, the Polish soldier is aware, that he fights in his own country. He will try to be "frienly" towards civilians, because these are his brethren.

American: This is strange. The players in my group portray Americans. In certain situations the Americans in my game behave like real-life Germans. Given the distribution of Hollywood movies (and American TV shows!), this is not a problem. Just watch TV and you will find a lot of American cliche-types to copy for the game.

Germans: I tend to portray rear echelon types or staff members very bureaucratic. They are more interested in formality or discipline than most other forces. But I think there would not be too much difference in behaviour, if you look at the front line troops.


* No offense intended: I have to admit, I'm very uncertain, how people with black skin are called nowadays. Are they "Afro-American", "coloured", "black"? Hm, I don't know.

[95th Rifleman]

I hadn't given much thought to black/white/asian attitudes. I think it's because while racsim does exist in the UK, it's not such a major issue in the military. This is both historical and cultural since we did not have slavery in the UK (we had indentured servitude which made slaves out of white criminals) and in many of our Empire territories we relied heavily on native levies which, over time, created a sense of rspect for non-white fighting men. Even today we have a large number of non-white soldiers from commonwealth territories serving in the British armed forces (Fijians in the RLC and line regiments and the Royal Ghurka Rifles being two very good examples).

[weswood]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

The American version is: "Texas, where men are men, the women are strong, and the sheep are scared..."

Don't you mean cows?....Wait, that doesn't sound good either.

[Sanjuro]

For the British, add sneaky (since summer 1918, anyway).
The 1918 summer offensive opened with the usual massive artillery barrage, when it ended the Germans came out or their dugouts and waited- only for the attack to come fifty miles down the line, with prepositioned tanks etc (brought up at night, with the roads covered in straw to conceal their tracks- and the straw swept up before dawn so the Germans reconaissance flights had nothing to see). We've stayed sneaky ever since- both the pre D-Day "Pas de Calais" bluff, and the GW1 "attacking straight into Kuwait" bluff were laregly British creations.
They used to say the sun never set on the British Empire. This was because God didn't trust us in the dark!

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro

They used to say the sun never set on the British Empire. This was because God didn't trust us in the dark!

Based on the Argentine experience outside Port Stanley, God has good reason not to trust British infantry in the dark.

[95th Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro

For the British, add sneaky (since summer 1918, anyway).
The 1918 summer offensive opened with the usual massive artillery barrage, when it ended the Germans came out or their dugouts and waited- only for the attack to come fifty miles down the line, with prepositioned tanks etc (brought up at night, with the roads covered in straw to conceal their tracks- and the straw swept up before dawn so the Germans reconaissance flights had nothing to see). We've stayed sneaky ever since- both the pre D-Day "Pas de Calais" bluff, and the GW1 "attacking straight into Kuwait" bluff were laregly British creations.
They used to say the sun never set on the British Empire. This was because God didn't trust us in the dark!

Heh, yeah, I've always been fascinated by the way the British military used misdirection and obfuscation during WW2, especialy in the desert where they built dummy units and hid entire tank squadrons in plain sight.