But they can't be commentary since they came afterwards. That's all I'm saying.

Right, but that is beyond obvious. For something to be allegory does not mean that it has to be intended as such.

But, all that is a tangent upon a tangent. In the meantime Black Knight Leader is trying to get us back on topic.

But, according to what was said earlier, Lucas said it was commentary; not allegory.

I completly disagree with this post. I have info that says diffrent things than you posted.

Okay, but are your sources of a more latter-day vintage? If so, does it matter that your more recent sources contradict earlier sources, on which Millennium Falsehood's interpretation may be based?

The question is if the EU portrayed the Empire as sexist in the late 80s/early 90s as opposed to this past decade, where it looks like the Empire is portrayed as more inclusive.

I was about to say something similar. Sure the EU expands upon the "speciesim", but was it there, or more correctly, was it intended to be there, in the movies.

I'd consult the novelization of EP IV if I had it with me. I'm at work and it's at home.

But I remember the author going on about Palpatine for a bit. He talked about his rise to power and so forth, and it certainly mirrored that of Germany in the 30s. I do remember, somewhere in my reading, seeing something outright stated about the "speciesim", but I don't know if it's there or not.

AND I don't know if everyone would accept the novel as "canon" or whatever as it relates to what we saw on screen.

Could be an in unviverse mistake or they were generalizing the situation the best they could. They for example felt that saying the Empire is specist pretty much gets the point across BUT they werent going to name off the alien races doing fine in the Empire ( the ones listed above in my first post) because then they will sound long winded and may confuse the people listening.

I'd consult the novelization of EP IV if I had it with me. I'm at work and it's at home.

But I remember the author going on about Palpatine for a bit. He talked about his rise to power and so forth, and it certainly mirrored that of Germany in the 30s.

The novelisation I recall said that palpatine was nothing more than a figurehead. Completely isolated from the galaxy at large and unaware of what was being done in his name by the imperial bureaucracy and military.

I'd consult the novelization of EP IV if I had it with me. I'm at work and it's at home.

But I remember the author going on about Palpatine for a bit. He talked about his rise to power and so forth, and it certainly mirrored that of Germany in the 30s.

The novelisation I recall said that palpatine was nothing more than a figurehead. Completely isolated from the galaxy at large and unaware of what was being done in his name by the imperial bureaucracy and military.

I'm not going to be able to look this up for several DAYS. Does anyone have a copy of the book handy, and can look it up?

It's also possible that I'm remembering this part from one of the other books or something.

But they can't be commentary since they came afterwards. That's all I'm saying.

Right, but that is beyond obvious. For something to be allegory does not mean that it has to be intended as such.

But, according to what was said earlier, Lucas said it was commentary; not allegory.

Hm, I'll trust that you're right about this. I don't want to belabor the point by going back, just to try to win the argument. I think we more-or-less understand one another now, and that's what's important, to the degree that any of it is important.

Its new, the sources I used, but I think he used some bad logic as well. One being that if Imperials are not flying TIE Avengers or Defenders then then are in a averge or baf squadron. I got old refrences and real world examples showing otherwise.

The other point he made was that the whole Imperial military is sexist just because female character that have only ever been in the NAVY have had bad experiences.

I dont think any Female Imp Army or Stormys have existed until recently to show examples of how those branches function with women in them.

I'll let MF defend his own logic. I don't see any flaw in the logic, even if it may be founded on bad information.

However, regarding that passage in the Essential Guide to Warfare, it does indeed say that the Navy may have more gender hangups than the Army, but at the same time it says that sexism is more prevalent in the Core. If that trooper's understanding of gender issues in the galaxy is correct (and it conceivably might not be), then the fact that the Core is more sexist is a telling one. The Empire is based in, on, and for the Galactic Core worlds at the expense of the Rim (exceptions like Eriadu notwithstanding).

In other words, the stormtrooper corps may be the exception to the rule in the Empire, even based on such a latter-day source as the Essential Guide to Warfare.

But they can't be commentary since they came afterwards. That's all I'm saying.

Right, but that is beyond obvious. For something to be allegory does not mean that it has to be intended as such.

But, according to what was said earlier, Lucas said it was commentary; not allegory.

Hm, I'll trust that you're right about this. I don't want to belabor the point by going back, just to try to win the argument. I think we more-or-less understand one another now, and that's what's important, to the degree that any of it is important.

Its new, the sources I used, but I think he used some bad logic as well. One being that if Imperials are not flying TIE Avengers or Defenders then then are in a averge or baf squadron. I got old refrences and real world examples showing otherwise.

The other point he made was that the whole Imperial military is sexist just because female character that have only ever been in the NAVY have had bad experiences.

I dont think any Female Imp Army or Stormys have existed until recently to show examples of how those branches function with women in them.

I'll let MF defend his own logic. I don't see any flaw in the logic, even if it may be founded on bad information.

However, regarding that passage in the Essential Guide to Warfare, it does indeed say that the Navy may have more gender hangups than the Army, but at the same time it says that sexism is more prevalent in the Core. If that trooper's understanding of gender issues in the galaxy is correct (and it conceivably might not be), then the fact that the Core is more sexist is a telling one. The Empire is based in, on, and for the Galactic Core worlds at the expense of the Rim (exceptions like Eriadu notwithstanding).

In other words, the stormtrooper corps may be the exception to the rule in the Empire, even based on such a latter-day source as the Essential Guide to Warfare.

I will be skiping around in my post. The GE has a larger holding in all the areas of the galaxy than the deep core and or core worlds. I am just pointing that out because it leaves alot of commands wide open for non-core / non-deep core Imperials to be in command of.

I will augment my point I made at MF in regards to judging a pilots skill level by the craft they fly.

As far as fiction gos I have examples above of ace pilots and units using fighters based on preference not skill level. Fel chose to use a Interceptor over a Avenger and Defender. Because he did that, that doesnt mean pilots flying Avengers and Defenders are better than Fel.

Heres a real life example.

These are USN squadrons and or USN organizations (mostly) that use / have used any version of Tom Turkey.

VF-1, VF-2, VF-11, VF-14, VF-21, VF-24, VF-31, VF-32, VF-33, VF-41, VF-51, VF-74, VF-84, VF-101, VF-102, VF-103, VF-111, VF-114, VF-124, VF-142, VF-143, VF-154, VF-191, VF-194, VF-201, VF-202, VF-211, VF-213, VF-301, VF-302, VF-1285, VF-1485, VF-1486, VX-4, VX-9, VX-30, VX-31, NAWC, NATC, NFWS, NSAWC, NASA, IIAF, IRIAF.

We faced with conversion to toy bugs and super bugs alot, but not all, opted to go into non-existance rather than fly with the **** bugs. I probably should have given the bug a chance BUT I sure as hell will not even touch the skin of a 35.

Now what I am pointing out here is does it make us any less skilled than drivers of bugs, flying pontoon boats, and bolts, just because they got the newer toys?

The answer is no for many reasons.

Take Dale Snodgrass aka Snort. He got the status of "Topcat" from Grumman. He had so many hours in the Tom that no one in any other craft could get him. 15s, 16s,18s, so on. I swear if 14s were still used in United States he would be putting fown 22s and when the time comes 35s as well as new allied craft if they were in the same combat exercise, as would I and others with a six shooter.