In which Civilizations in history were female warriors common?
this isn't google you gay fucking queer
>>520981354Non Cope rape maidens
>>520981354Dunno, but I do know they all collapsed.
>didn't read>didn't expand thumbnailCompadre Padre penis companion status???? What's your next move??
>>520981354I'm gonna say virtually zero but I'm sure some researchers have pointed to one or two debatable instances as evidence that it was a regular thing
>>520981354>common none. Even in the civilizations where women could be warriors, they'd usually stay at home while men did the fighting
>>520981354The ones that collapsed and were never heard from again
>>520981354That's like asking in which countries women play in men's sports leagues and keep up with male athletes.
>>520981354British had Boudicca among others
>>520981354The conquered ones
>>520983045Led a force of men against the romans, outnumbering 10 to 1. It ended up to be easy and decisive roman victory, the leader was not even famous general.
>>520981354memeflag, timewasting question.thanks for posting faggots, sage.
>>520981354Only horny ones.
>>520981354Wakanda
>>520981354None. Even where they were common, they would still only be 15-30% of the total soldiers. As it turns out, men are genetically stronger and make for better fighters.
>>520984728>Even where they were common, they would still only be 15-30% of the total soldiers.>15-30% of the total soldiersWhat the fuck are you talking about?
>>520983045>1>common
Anon looks happy now
>>520981354Women were commonly the last line of defense.They would stay close to home and fight to protect the household if need be, but only if the menfolk were either away or had already died.Since women need to spend nine months creating children inside of their bellies, their primary concern was avoiding danger so that the next generation can come to be.If a tribe loses its women it's done for. If a tribe loses its men, the women can join a neighboring tribe.Even back then, people were far more open and welcoming towards large groups of single women compared to large groups of single men.It was quietly understood that large groups of foreign men brought more trouble than their labor could ever be worth.
>>520981354The irish
>>520983045>boudicca>could only talk shit and got fucked by the romansLol lmao
>>520985348>FAL>Cute skirtabsolute kino
>>520986255>>FALAR-18
>>520981354Every feminist in the west is a warrior.
>>520981354It seems that young, unmarried Scythian women would sometimes accompany the men on raids. It's hard to judge how common this was as almost everything we know about them comes from foreign writers who were just amazed at the concept of female warriors at all, but the Scythian style of warfare was mounted archery, so it's not hard to believe that women might have participated in a form of combat that emphasised manoeuvrability and accuracy over strength and close-combat fighting. And this would have been in small skirmishes rather than pitched battles. This gave rise to the legend of the Amazons, incidentally.Japanese women of the samurai class were trained in the basics of archery, swordsmanship, and particularly with polearms. The naginata was considered especially suitable for women as it allowed them to overcome the large reach advantage a male opponent had, and its thrusting technique required less strength than a slashing weapon like the katana. Although they wouldn't accompany the men into battle, they were expected to defend their homes while their men were away at war, and otherwise defend their honour.The most recent TV adaptation of Shogun had some good examples of samurai women using the naginata:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddJ8wvIIunwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsONPIdluYUOther than that, female warriors have historically been very rare. There are a few references to women in Viking raiding parties but it seems like it probably wasn't very common. Other than that, most cultures have either not encouraged women fighting or have outright forbidden it. >>520983045Boudicca was a queen, not a warrior. And as >>520983580 points out, not even a particularly good one; her successes were slaughtering civilians and isolated garrisons, then she got btfo by the first real field army she came across.
>>520981354Women of the Samurai class in feudal Japan were given martial training so that they could form a garrison and defend a stronghold if the men were away fighting or dead when they fell under attack. This was a last resort contingency and in no way made them soldiers in any real sense nor did they participate in front line combat. Same thing goes more or less for Viking shield maidens. It was the equivalent of you teaching your wife how to fire your guns so that she can protect herself when you're not home. Kike feminist historians just bring this shit up and pull these facts out of context to blow even more smoke up women's asses so they can pretend like women could survive without men prior to judeao capitalism and the modern welfare state when they couldn't.
>>520983045Boudicca has been mythologized by liberals to an absurd degree. The actual accounts are much less remarkable and indicate she was a political figure that was mostly just the face and not even actually a political let alone military leader or operative.
>>520982909This. 14 year old boys demolish women's Olympic soccer teams. Imagine the game was played with spears and swords. It'd be a bloodbath. Even having one woman on your team woild put you at a serious disadvantage.Imagine having some complaining woman with you as you march into battle, lol.
>>520988652To be fair, it didn't start with liberals. Boudica's use as a symbol of British resistance against continental rule goes all the way back to the 16th century; the idea of a warrior queen was particularly popular during the reign of Elizabeth I. The romantic nationalism of the Victorian era also loved Boudica.
>>520981354Some experts think neanderthals had women warriors which ended up being a major influence on their extinction.
