By way of introduction, I am the chairperson of the CPCCS (Committee for Politicaily Correct Controversy Simulations). You may know us by our previous title, the Committee for Politically Correct Battle Simulations. However, upon reflection we eliminated 'battle' from our title because that word suggests winners and losers which is inherently detrimental to the maintenance of positive self-esteem. Our group is dedicated to bringing to controversy simulations a new awareness of terms and practices which are intrinsically sexist, ageist, racist or in other ways discriminatory. I am pleased to say that we have been following Lone Warrior with interest and have suggestions which will enhance inclusion while eliminating modes based upon male-dominated, class-ridden, euro-centric tradition.

Let us address the issue of sexism. An extensive survey of your text shows an imbalance toward the male gender. Most of your articles and letters are written by males and most illustrations appear to depict male figures. This will not do. Therefore we recommend a goal that 50% of your membership be made up of females and that 50% of articles published be written by females. As a further recommendation, illustrations should either be gender-neutral or that numbers of male illustrations be balanced by equal numbers of female illustrations. And no more renderings of nude figures (male or female) which create a false image of "ideal" body proportions and may hurt the feelings of those readers unable to "measure up" to these standards.

Too many of your articles refer unnecessarily to class distinctions. Your rules portray 'elite' units which achieve higher levels of success than 'less elite units.' These 'elite' units, as it turns out, start from an elevated base and receive additional points when rolling for morale and combat effectiveness. This has created large classes of disadvantaged units which begin play at lower levels of efficiency and will usually be less successful.

I am sure you see the basic unfairness in this situation. Let all units start on the same level. let grenadiers and militia enjoy the same morale and combat effectiveness ratings.

A similar situation applies to national distinctions which show a flagrant disregard for the sensibilities of the troops concerned. Why do Russians enjoy higher defense factors while French receive better odds when in the attack? Why does the Spartan unit demonstrate greater cohesion than the Hittite? This certainly traumatizes the young Hittite members of your organization. We must insist that all rules purge themselves of national distinctions which encourage divisiveness in favor of nationality-neutral rules.

The distinctions between branches of service are likewise inherently segregationist. Why do only cavalry persons ride horses? Should not infantry persons and artillery persons also ride horses? And why just horses and the occasional elephant or camel? This specie-ism needs to be addressed. We suggest that other species be brought into the game. Consider, if you will, units composed of mules, zebras, ostriches, rhinoceroses, and condors - the list is endless. Fantasy gamers have seen the advantages in this arena for many years now.

Uniforms are another area which begs for attention. Your grenadier guards sport bearskin headgear! The killing of animals for their fur merely to add embellishments to martial attire is an offense against nature. The differentiation of uniform between unit types can only be considered exclusionary. For example, American Civil Conflict [we dropped 'war' for the same reason as 'battle'] zouaves are dressed in brightly colored uniforms adorned with gold and silver trim while their adversaries sport ragged butternut. This is a monumental demonstration of insensitivity. We recommend that all figures be retroactively modified and repainted. Each figure should be as unisex as possible [no facial hair to offend the sartorially-challenged for example]; and wear nondescript clothing with no distinctions of rank or branch of service. It would be permissible, indeed laudatory, to clothe half in pants and half in skirts. We can foresee vast increases in numbers of Roman legionnaires and kilted Scots persons.

The multiplicity of weaponry is, at its very core, discriminatory. How would a figure armed only with an edged weapon feel when confronted by one sporting a firearm? Not very good we should think. We recommend that all figures in a given scenario be armed identically. As for uniform colors it would be best to use two colors only, perhaps black and white [other color combinations put the color-vision impaired at a disadvantage]. Then, in order to create an environment of equality, after each game, the black figures can be painted white and the white black. There are many more issues to be dealt with but we will leave you Lone Warriors to address those outlined above.

This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com