Firstly, I myself am a women. Therefore I cannot be labeled as a chauvanist pig for my following comments.
Women (this is a generalization, and I’m sorry), myself not included, consistently complain about their desire for equal rights and treatment. We can now vote, own property, and we are wholly accepted into the work force.
This just isn’t enough for some women. They are offended when they are referred to casually as “guys,” as in “Hey guys!” or “How are you guys doing today?” I myself refer to my girl friends as guys. They have no problem with it.
On to my point. Why haven’t women been lobbying for the right to be drafted? That would make them more equal to men, would it not? If I am wrong about this and there are actually women who lobby for this, I apologize for my ignorance. I realize that our military does not allow women to fight in the front lines or at all (sorry again, I’m dumb), but they could fight for that right, too.
Also, why is it so bad that we have never had a woman president. I hear people complaining about this often, saying they don’t think they’ll see it in their life time. I don’t have any problem with that at all. Let the men do it. Let them have absolutely no privacy and have their sexual life scrutinized by an entire nation. If some women wants to do it, more power to her, but she will not be elected. I personally think we’ll see a black man before we see a woman. BTW, what is the politically correct term for African Americans these days? I can never keep up. I think black is appropriate because nobody has any qualms with referring to caucasions as white. But I digress…
I would like to know other people’s opinions on the freaky women’s rights womyn. I consider my self to be an independent women, and I don’t like to be talked down to or put into classifications, but I am not a feminist.
In order to be consistent, any feminist who favors conscription for men should also favor it for women. This is a pretty small group, though; conscription is not particularly popular on the political left and feminism is. There are probably a few feminists, some conservatives, some not, who favor universal adult draft registration, but not many.
The only real group I would target for criticism are the feminists who want equal rights for women but tolerate the men-only draft because they don’t particularly care. I don’t think there are many “professional feminists” in this category - the intellectuals in the movement tend to have thought a lot about a lot of stuff. That’s not a very sophisticated way to put it, but it’s true - there is a feminists perspective, and possibly half a dozen feminist perspectives, on just about everything (e.g. artificial intelligence, infant nutrition, the Second World War, you name it). If they’ve thought about it at all, and they had any consistency, they would almost certainly oppose the draft, and draft registration, wholesale.
One the other hand, as a college student, I ran into tons of feminists of the less-deep-thinking variety. If I mentioned how un-thrilling my 18th birthday was (I’m an American male), I’d get blank stares. If I reminded them about draft registration, they’d point out that it’s not the same as being drafted. Thanks for clearing that up! Draft registration never crossed their mind as an issue because it wasn’t a “women’s issue”. And the sad thing is, in their own little worlds, that made sense; these women were shocked, or even incredulous, that I had thought at all about “women’s issues” (date rape, prenatal care, infibulation in East Africa), so why should they think at all about “men’s issues”? It was almost like the intellectual equivalent of a ghetto. (I’m glad that not all the women (or men) I discussed this stuff with at college were this narrow-minded.)
No we’re not all that narrow minded. I remember thinking a lot about this issue when I was eighteen and my (almost eighteenyearold) Jewish friend was considering becoming a Quaker because Jews aren’t allowed to be consciencious objectors. Why should this be something he has to wrestle with and not me? Defending the country, or conversly resisting participation in a war you consider immoral should hardly be a “men’s issue”.
I think that if we wish to have a standing military then we should make the job attractive enough not to need conscripts. I think that we should not discriminate in conscription if we do resort to it. I see no reason to. I think we should not discriminate on basis of race, sex, or sexual orientation. Being in the military means having the disipline to be part of a force that lives and works together. We should not accept the harrassment of any of our service personell by other service personell. There are rules against racist behavior and even most sexist behavior. Such rules can and should be expanded to cover homophobic behavior and the should be enforced.
Women have proven their value in the armed service. So have gays and lesbians. I do not see that women have any special needs that would prevent them from being conscripted. Nor do lesbians and gays. I see nothing more abhorrent in the death of a young woman than I do in that of a young man.
I support registering women for the draft. If you are going to have one, it should be non-sexist.
I do not favor conscription in general for anyone.
I have no problem being referred to as “hey, guys.” My self-identified feminists friends call each other “guys” regularly.
I don’t think its bad we’ve never had a woman president. I think its bad that any woman who has considered running (Pat Shroeder) or run (Libby Dole) hasn’t been taken seriously. (or when taken seriously, it has been with a “we can’t be sexist, we must take this person seriously” attitude) I think its sad that more women do not run for high office. I, myself, would never run for office. I would never vote for anyone based solely on sex. In Minnesota we just had a senate primary where one of the candidates was female. Her platform seemed to be “vote for me, it’s time we sent a woman to congress” I voted for one of the men.
If you think women are now “wholy accepted in the workplace,” I suggest you get a a job at a Mitsubishi factory. Women are certainly more accepted in the workplace than ever before, but there is still a long way to go.
“I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is. I only know people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.” – Rebecca West, 1913
Well, the simplest answer as to why there is no crusade to get women onto the Selective Service roles is that being drafted is hardly a right. It is a burden, and even the most ardent idealists will take along time to get around to assuming burdens rather than seeking rights.
As has been said before, there is no good reason to draft one gender and not the other. However, having two young daughters, I am not eager to see women subject to the draft. They take precedence in my heart over philosophical consistency.
However, and someone will, I’m sure, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t soldiers get higher pay rates for being in combat situations? Aren’t we denying women the right to be paid equally to men?
I agree with you on pure logic that women should have to register for the draft, but being the sexist pig that I am, I don’t want my daughter to have to register. Why? I don’t know.
I grew up with two sisters and a brother. Now I am married and have a daughter. One thing I can tell you, and my wife would agree, is that although we are equal in importance and value, men and women are totally different. We have different strengths and weaknesses. I could never be as good a mother to my daughter as my wife is. We’re just made differently. And that’s not a bad thing, either.
An example of how this works in my family is that I run ideas by my wife all the time. First off, she is very smart. But she also often sees things that I would have never thought of and that most men would have never thought of. It’s the same reason that she consults me.
Maybe we don’t conscript women because men and women are different. Not better or worse, but different. Maybe men are more violent and better suited for war. Not better people, but better killers. Men sure do seem to commit more violent crimes and murders than women commit. I don’t know, I’m just brainstorming here.
BTW, which one are you going to send if both husband and wife get drafted? Is it a coin toss? Someone has to take care of the kids and make the mortgage payment. Not that this means you shouldn’t conscript women, but you need a plan.
When I signed up for Selective Service (to use the euphemism) online the form on the webpage let you select either male or female. It was defaultly set to male, and as soon as you clicked on female, you were sent to a page telling you that females are not allowed to sign up for Selective Service. I remember laughing at the absurdity of having the option that couldn’t be used.
I’m such a fossil that I remember when the form was on paper and all. But right near the top, there was a list of reasons why you, the hapless 18-year-old in question, would NOT have to register. The first box said, “I am a female.” Ho-kay. They gave me a letter about it when I turned the form in at the Post Office, which I had to use for my student loans.
When I registered there was no sex option, I picked up the form at the post office, filled it out and mailed it in…it was a long time ago - 1984 - and I have one of those “could be either” first names.
I figured if I ever got drafted, they’d throw me out. But I was big on principle at 18.
I don’t know about suitability for war being gender-related. My experience in the service was that this boy was born to be a civilian.
There IS a school of thought that all billets in the military services should be open to both genders on the sole basis of aptitude (I believe the Coast Guard works like this). I tend to agree with this, be the person male or female, gay or hetero. But better minds than mine have tried to tackle this and got nowhere.
Notice though I did not say the service should make a billet to fit this person nor go to full-coed operation at all phases. You have to compromise. And for some mission-critical billets I believe the physical and mental requirements should be absolute and not gender-adjusted. In this case, I would support a co-ed conscription if the need arose.
At this time, the main thrust of “military feminism” in the US is for women to be allowed into some of the “Combat Arms” (Army and Marine infantry, armor, field artillery; Submarine force; other billets I can’t recall and list fully off the toppa my head) since one of the key tickets to be “punched” on the way to promotion to a high post is service in a frontline combat unit (even if the most daring action in your tour was the neutralization of a truck of hostile beer kegs).
Oddly, I think in case of a return to conscription, the brass would prefer (though politically they’d never say it) to call for the induction of women while keeping them off the CA’s in order to channel more men to the grunt side. This kind of pick-and-choose draft I totally oppose.
jrd
On the other hand, my husband is a FAR better mother than I am. He’s quite masculine in most ways (right now he’s in the living room, cheering and booing a football game) but he’s very maternal, too. And I don’t mean paternal, either. When our daughter was younger, he used to love to watch over her and her friends. He volunteers to babysit. He’s just a sucker for little kids, and once they catch on to this, they play him for all he’s worth.
I think that we shouldn’t have a draft or registration…but if we DO have either, then both sexes should be eligible for it. Service members in combat receive higher pay, and have better chances for promotion. Plus, they earn points which can be used later life, in some way. Probably the majority of women would have no interest in going into combat. But there’s always a few who want to, and are good at it. Can we really afford to deny them the opportunity to defend us?
I agree with the argument that both should register, but any activist’s time would be better spent repealing the congressional prohibition against woman being slotted in combat units. After that is achieved, the “woman must sign up for the draft” bill should be easy to pass.
I have spoken to several females in the military on this issue and some don’t care about the prohibition. But if you’re trying to get ahead, it hurts to be locked out of the high profile jobs which lead to promotion.
jamesgluisif: You are right. In dual-military families, the service requires that there be a designated caregiver for the children in time of war. It usually ends up being a grand-parent.
IMHO, I would rather choose soldiers based on their experience and capability, but if I had to choose between an all female or all male team, I would choose female. With males, their is a higher probability that you will get someone who can’t carry his own weight.
Of course, in the end it is about economics. The reason the services have had to accept women is that there would be a personnel shortage without them. In the end, when Congress realizes that women are already on the front line in support roles, economics may again be the driving force for equality.
At the risk of sounding like a dinosaur, I think there is at least one semi-good reason: female POW’s would face a significantly higher risk for sexual abuse than would male POW’s. It would be one thing to allow women the choice to risk front-line duty, and another thing entirely to force them into it, realizing rape is a real possibility if captured. Full equality would make this a reality. Granted, men face potential violation as well, but only in relatively rare circumstances.
There is also the same reason you pick the strongest, fastest players for your football team; men biologically have advantages that can’t be denied, and in war, you take every little advantage you can get.
“At the risk of sounding like a dinosaur, I think there is at least one semi-good reason: female POW’s would face a significantly higher risk for sexual abuse than would male POW’s. It would be one thing to allow women the choice to risk front-line duty, and another thing entirely to force them into it, realizing rape is a real possibility if captured. Full equality would make this a reality. Granted, men face potential violation as well, but only in relatively rare circumstances.”
Thank you, that’s the thing that’s been runing through my mind while reading the posts for this discussion. It’s all good and equal on paper, but the hard fact is- not only do women have a greater risk for sexual abuse, but the consequences are greater for women than they are for men…in other words, pregnancy. The last thing POW’s need is a pregnant women amongst thier midst…(there is the arguement of providing women soldiers with abortion pills etc, but most POWs are stripped of all posessions when captured, even clothes)…POW’s stay months, even years in enemy prisons.
No, I’m not a man, and I know what can and is done to women in prison camps.