"The Amazon Women: Is There Any Truth Behind the Myth?" Topic

"…The fact that she isn't even getting billing in the title makes me suspicious. It wouldn't have pleased Wonder Woman's creator either. "Wonder Woman is psychological propaganda for the new type of woman who should, I believe, rule the world," declared the psychologist and comic book writer William Moulton Marston, offering a proto-feminist vision that undoubtedly sounded quite radical in 1943. "Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don't want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are."

Over the years, the writers at DC Comics softened Wonder Woman's powers in ways that would have infuriated Marston. During the 1960s, she was hardly wondrous at all, less a heroic warrior than the tomboyish girl next-door. It was no longer clear whether she was meant to empower the girls or captivate the boys. But the core brand was still strong enough for Gloria Steinem to put her on the cover of the first newsstand issue of Ms. magazine in 1972—with the slogan "Wonder Woman for President."

The creators of Wonder Woman had no interest in proving an actual link to the past. In some parts of the academic world, however, the historical existence of the Amazons, or any matriarchal society, has long been a raging issue. The origins of the debate can be traced back to a Swiss law professor and classical scholar named Johann Jakob Bachofen. In 1861 Bachofen published his radical thesis that the Amazons were not a myth but a fact. In his view, humanity started out under the rule of womankind and only switched to patriarchy at the dawn of civilization. Despite his admiration for the earth-mother women/priestesses who once held sway, Bachofen believed that the domination of men was a necessary step toward progress. Women "only know of the physical life," he wrote. "The triumph of patriarchy brings with it the liberation of the spirit from the manifestations of nature."…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

The majority of males have no interest in celebrating female warriors, nor accept that a female might be the equal of or superior warrior. Especially in this day and time when fewer and fewer arguments can be made to deny that females can pilot high-tech combat aircraft, captain cutting edge naval vessels and even are starting to qualify under male "rules" for ground combat roles (i.e., women who've passed various physical/skill tests such as Ranger school).

I'm sure it was even more difficult for a female in the past when she had to compete on a purely physical level, rather than use technology to even the playing board where physical strength is not the only grade. However, there are more than a few historical records of women standing forth on their own or in disuse as a male fulfilling combat roles.

When combat was all about physical strength, I am sure less women were able to compete. On average women are less strong than men. Yes there exceptions at either end of scale.

The other issue is you need females to breed. If we go back to earliest times, females are unlikely to have fought purely because childbirth was risky enough without expecting them to fight. Once you move away from tribes, more settled and the rise of warrior cast, then strength would have been main attribute required.

Maybe the fact that women didn't participate in violent conflict and personal combat as often as men is one of the best pieces of evidence that they are the smarter sex.

Horse archer women warriors were real. Just as women disguised themselves and marched with Napoleon or US Grant women have contributed.

Archery is a great leveler. The Parthians that were shooting down Romans were not all men.

link

Thanks!.

Amicalement
Armand

The Scythian warrior women, horse archers and light cav, were absolutely real, as archaeological and literary evidence attest. I actually wish more manufacturers did Scythian women.

Wargames Foundry has excellent Perry sculpts of Scythian women horse archers.

link

I hope this comes across as intended and not as "Your place is in the home, woman!"

However, the fact is gentlemen, you are expendable. In terms of the continuation of the species, only one of you is required, or may be a couple more, just for insurance.

Women are far more important!

No society during the course human development wanted to risk vanishing due to its inability to procreate. Encouraging women to go and get themselves killed would have been plain dumb!

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

"The Amazon warriors of ancient Greek lore were once considered mythical figures. But in recent years, archaeological work and genetic analysis have identified women buried with weapons, horseback riding equipment and other accoutrements traditionally associated with warriors."

link

Vikings also:
link

As well as the well attested Scythian and Sarmation women warriors, there are occasional guard units (eg India and the Khmer). It's also worth noting that the Hittites, unlike most other Bronze Age Middle Eastern nations, habitually shaved their beards and wore their hair very long, leading to the Egyptians (at least) to refer to them as 'women warriors'.