Why is drafting for war used as an argument against feminism?

Question

It makes more sense to me to let the family choose who goes to war (if one person was asked for each family ). I am sure that in most cases it would still be the man who volunteers... or the son... i don't think a guy in his 20s or 30s would let his father or mother go to war while he stays at home... the most qualified person should go to war.

Just because women can't match men on the battlefield that doesn't mean women should be treated like slaves on a daily basis.

Women can be drafted for other jobs during a war if it is necessary. Someone needs to do the nursing, cooking, management of supplies and so on. Plus, someone needs to look after the kids, which can be even tougher during war. I don't see how women are priviledged here. Basically if men go to fight someone needs to do what they did before war.

Anpu23 · Accepted Answer

Here's the issue a person drafted becomes a slave to the state. Signing up for selective service is mandatory if you want any government help or say. A young man who chooses not to sign up, forfeits student loans, right to vote, welfare, etc.
When the right to vote was given to the common man in the US it was because of the draft, it was found to be inherently unfair to force someone to fight and die who had no say in the government. So in the 20s the right to vote and the draft were intertwined so much so that one of the arguments of the anti-suffrage movement was that women were unsuited for the draft.
Now a right that also has a responsibility if granted to another without the responsibility bevomes a privilege. (If you make one child clean their room for a candy, then give both children candy when the first child is done is unfair to the first child).
As for drafting women, it has been found under multiple attempts that coed combat troops simply do not work, and women are less likely to handle the trauma of combat. (Germany, Russia, Viet Nam & Isrial, are all countries that have tried it unsuccessfully).
As for drafting women for support roles, that leaves less support roles for drafted men, meaning if a man is drafted he will most certainly end up on a front line, while a woman will most certainly end up in a support role. Again a privileged situation. (Not being shot at is definitely a privilege).
Now how is this a feminist issue.
There are two unassailable and unchallengable feminist beliefs that this argument attacks
First is Patriarchy Theory (Patriarchy Theory as defined by such books as "The Second Sex" that society is made by men for men's benifits at the expense of women) if men really wanted to privilege themselves they wouldn't risk themselves in war. Further the idea that women have the privilege of voting without having to sign up for selective service shows that this idea is false.
The second argument that feminists use is that guys habe it better than women, that no matter how bad guys have ut, women must have it worse. This is inherent in feminist literature and actions. Further this idea is completely untreatable (as a man I have no way to objectively test my own privilege, and neither can a woman effectively test her own privilege). As voting without agreeing to servitude is a clear privilege it is a robust argument against the idea that women have it worse.
Lastly, historically feminism, or rather the suffragette movement was tied closely with the "white feather" movement (at least in England) where women would, as a type of sport, would find men who were unable to fight and publicly shame them into signing up for war. Not kidding while writing that "women are not suited for war, " these same women were finding other men not suited for war and shaming them into going to die.

Does this help explain it?

hellionthesagereborn · Accepted Answer

Its not. What is used as an "excuse" is the claim that women where some how oppressed yet every feminist ignores the fact that men where forced into war against their will i. e. forced conscription is the equivalent to slavery, something of which women never had to do. So in this regard feminist completely ignore male responsibilities and "oppression" in order to portray themselves as victims and men as oppressors (something that is provably false).

It is also used as an argument to point to how one of the main arguments made by feminists i. e. that women couldn't vote as evidence of oppression, is provably false as men could also not vote and only got the vote shortly before women due to forced conscription something women have never had to do. This shows that their was no oppression just different expectations (which you can argue where worth having or not but that is an entirely different argument then what feminists have made).

The third argument being made using this is that if feminist where truly for "equality" as they claim, why is it that feminists have NEVER actively sought to be apart of the selective service program? They have fought to have the right to join the military if they so CHOOSE but NEVER have they fought for the RESPONSIBILITY to join the military against their will in order for the right to vote nor have they fought to end conscription as a violation of mens rights (and in fact in many cases openly supported men being conscripted while women staid safely at home (for example the white feather girls)).

As for your claims that women where treated as slaves, this is laughable if it where not for the fact that so many believe it despite the fact that women have provably more rights then men and always have. Women where never treated as slaves, NEVER.

Its disgusting that feminists think its okay to equate responsibility with slavery but only when it comes to them (because the only thing feminists care about is getting privilege as fast as they can abandon responsibility (was it slavery that forced men to do grueling labor to provide for women? Was it slavery that forced men to take all their hard earned wealth and give it to their wives and family? Was it slavery that forced men to provide for their daughters until a man married them? Was it slavery that forced men to LITERALLY BUILD HOUSES to shelter their wives and children? Was it slavery that forced men to protect women? No, its called responsibility and once upon a time women also where expected to be responsible (many many decades ago before feminism came in and infantilized women across the world).

VIVANT · Accepted Answer

So much nonsense here , I’m just going to respond once , instead of repeating myself.

There is no draft. Men are not being forced to go to war. so this whole ting is moot, however to a dress the claim women must fight in war to earn equality...

100s of thousand of women HAVE fought And died and been tortured and lost limbs , in war , just not in the United States. Americans really are completely consumed with America as if that is the entire universe.

100s of thousands of women die in childbirth. More women have died in child birth than men in Battle, and war is not essential to life. Child birth is inextricably linked to the continuation of Society as well as the species. Without childbirth tye world falls apart. Literally.

War is pure torture destruction enslavement and evil. It turns good people into Maniacs And rapists. Many returning can not function and thus says nothing about those who are Not directly involved in war can not prudent themselves and life a tortured existence Bc of The war surrounding them. Most wars are wars of aggression noT self fetter therefore entirely immoral without justification.

instead of playing Games figuring out how to make murder equal, Or using lack of Equality in murder abroad, to justify inequality at home.. war should be unalterably apposed world wide. War only goes on as long as people agree to fight. War is destruction and murder..

No one is entitled to murder people it’s nothing to take pride in. Though it is understandable how poor people get tricked into it, it is still signing ones self into slavery instead of Apposing war and fighting for fair Pay in work.

Child birth is an essential part of life , without which there is no life. It is a risk every tine a woman becomes pregnant esp in poor developing countries. Every time a woman is pregnant she is facing Potential death to bring life into the world. Without That sacrifice that would be the end of the world.. and still women fight in wars. Just not in the United States. Historically women are likely to volunteer for wars of degrade against aggression not wars of aggression- except in the United States. Bc most wars are wars of stressing there is a sense of entitlement.

war is not natural nor essential. Instead of complaining about the burden why not say NO.

Anyhow it is poor ken who fight not rich men. Certainly rich men do not enjoy fewer rights than poor men. In fact, a poor mans rights are far more likely to be ignored obstructed violated or denied out right.

War has nothing to do with justice nor Equality.. . It’s A sick joke. and It’s a twisted logic that in Killing you earn the right to live as fully human.. Human rights do not come from death, They are for the living.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

In all fairness it's part of equality. We as women can't pick and choose how and when we want to be treated equally.

In recent times there has been a push to get more women into the frontlines and open up the special forces ( Seals , Delta etc) to women which , Feminist are at the forefront off. In 2017 senator Kristen Gillibrand went in front the house committee and question General James Mattis about this.

So should women be able to fight on the frontlines or you truly believe we are less capable than men on the battlefield and not be allowed to fight. That's the first thing feminist have to figure out.

OlderAndWiser · Answer

If "the most qualified person should go to war," then why would you ask the family to decide? And what sane person would want to make that choice?

"Just because women can't match men on the battlefield that doesn't mean women should be treated like slaves on a daily basis." Where is it that women are being treated like slaves?

"I don't see how women are priviledged here." I am not surprised that you do not see it. Men go to war and many do not come home while women wait at home but, in this situation, there is no advantage in being a woman? You have lost credibility with that claim.

weldaboi · Answer

Comparing being drafted into combat with having to work and looks after kids (aka job of most single mothers and fathers) is ridiculous sure life wouldn't be easy but the sacrifice of blood, danger, physical and mental traumas, not to mention your life is incomparable. Women and men are not equal and never will be it's the reason men used rule the world for so long because they took what they wanted and where willing and capable of fighting for it. Why you would think the sacrifices made are even is also why modern feminism is no longer taken seriously and no longer needed, equality is everyone gets the same and right now nothing's preventing that. feminism now is about getting revenge not being equal. If you think they are the same I encourage you to watch documentaries about past and current wars or just combat footage in the middle east right now and tell me it's the same when your watching men bleed crawling for their lives running away limbless to get to cover while bieng showered in lead

Antelope · Answer

I think the main problem is that going to war is one of the most hellish fates someone can be subjected to, especially if it's not something they wanted to do. The thought process that men should sacrifice themselves because they have penises is arrogant at best.

The bigger problem is obviously that a selective service system forces people to fight, and that could lead to a discussion about the morality of war, as well.

Of course I support equal rights (people love that disclaimer, don't they?), but I don't think the draft point is irrelevant.

You see many feminists use the point "The draft hasn't been used since Vietnam". Yeah, but it's still in place. If we don't need it, why do all males register with the selective service when they turn 18?

Your argument that "the most qualified to do the job should go" well alright is there a reward for being the most qualified? Or are men just worker bees while women are simply the concubine bees? Like seriously?

I'm a big believer in "equal rights = equal responsibility". Also, the notion that secondary roles such as those involve nearly as much sacrifice as putting your life and your friends' on the line each and every waking hour is ridiculous. They're crucial jobs, but they can be fulfilled by both men and women.

I'm under no illusion that men have less privileges than women. But they are discrepancies on both sides. #MeToo, the divorce problems, there are many gender discrepancies plaguing America.

Danny_dan92 · Answer

People are idiots if they think the military is gonna pull women to fight in combat. Maybe pull women to fill support roles like admin and logistics...

But NEVER for combat.

There are a lot of things people are not educated about the military and it’s that. There are other roles in the military besides being an infantryman

worldscolide · Answer

It's an argument against feminism because women get the right to vote automatically at the age of 18 by virtue of vagina.. Men must sign up for the selective service, the draft, in order to have the right to vote, failure to do so eliminates his ability to get financial aid for college, lands him with fines, and a prison term, and a felony.. Which strips him of his right to vote. Maybe think about that.. This idea that men are disposible is why I fight against feminism...

lucas262 · Answer

Gender equality.

If men go women go.

Just cause you can't Run, lift a wounded person, or fight like a man Dosn t mean you can't fly a helicopter, or do Intel and comms.

The argument is lot of guys in the red pill community see women wanting the right kind of equality, that suits them but not total equality. As in they want high paying cushy jobs, how many women clean sewers? ,, oh but that's no job for a woman,, they will say. Same with the draft but so these guys are inclined to sit back and watch the double standards role out.

Celtero · Answer

Essentially women get to make decisions that they won't have consequences for.

Let's imagine that Hillary won 2016 solely on the female vote and she then starts a war that requires a draft. Hundreds of thousands of men march to horrific deaths because of the political ambitions of women.

That wouldn't be very fair to men, would it now?

And that's one of the core tenets of the US, to not let people rule over you who have no investment in your lives or future.

But the truth is it's a bad argument up until the point where there actually is a draft.

Massageman · Answer

Your explanations really have very little to do with your question, not that the explanations have any logical basis either. Plus, I've never heard it used as an argument for or against any personal bias, etc.
If a family were to choose "who goes to war", they would either A. say "no one from this family" or B. pick the "omega" of the family, which would mean that the armed forces would get the dregs of humanity. Not a pretty picture.
Perhaps Israel has the right answer - all able-bodied 18-year old adults serve a stint in the army- 3 years for guys, 2 for gals. Ooops! There's that privilege thingy again. The bottom line is that in the Israeli Defense Forces, each soldier, male or female, will be assigned to the task where their contribution will be the greatest. Period.

genericname85 · Answer

The point of draft is forcing people... If the family could decide, nobody would go to war. And if forcing is applicable in an equal society then why should only one gender be forced?

Sure you argue women can be drafted for other things but then the same argument goes for why should women be allowed to be CEO or in leadership? They can do other things right?

You can't demand the good thing by the same token that you reject the bad thing.

However this entire discussion has nothing to do with draft being n "anti feminism" argument xD

soleil2666 · Answer

Which part of it is not obvious?
If you want equality you fight equally. And considering women are woefully late to that party, affirmative action would be the ONLY women get drafter or sent to conflicts for the next, what - 10000 years.
But even just 10 years would demonstrate just how much harder it is to be a man. To be under a 'protect others' worry most of the time - while females are busy figuring out their feelings and taking said protection for granted - without even a thank you (and quite often with some anger - like spoilt brats)

Anonymous · Answer

I agree with the user who posted it being about women wanting rights without the responsibilities that go along with those rights. If they want the right to decide to fight in war, men should also have that right. But men get the added responsibility of being forced to fight in the case of a draft, where women do not. If you don't think women can qualify for military service, look at the Israeli Defense Force. Gal Gadot even served 2 years. Men have just as much chance of being out of shape as women do. but the men will still get drafted. The military would get them into shape, the same as women, so that's not a valid excuse. But there's no reason to really fight over this, because contrary to popular internet memes and the fear mongering of the political left, the draft will never be used again.

LordJesus5Ever · Answer

What you described there are the traditional gender roles, which is what third wave feminists are fighting against.
The joke is that "go make me a sandwich" is only offensive until the draft letter arrives, then it suddenly becames a perfectly fine request and I find it hilarious.

Anonymous · Answer

"Just because women can't match men on the battlefield that doesn't mean women should be treated like slaves on a daily basis."
Not slaves, but it does mean something. Even if they took non-combat jobs.
It's a risk and a sacrifice men are making which you are not.

"I don't see how women are privileged here."
Wow, really? You're not walking into a meat grinder, that's the privilege!

"Basically if men go to fight someone needs to do what they did before war."
And where do you think the men would rather be? Getting shot at or working their day job and seeing their families? ... especially if they were forced into it through the draft?

This makes me so mad. I'm sorry, but you have a genuinely awful opinion on this matter. I urge you to think things through.

Anoniemus · Answer

It should be equal. The draft should include everyone. That is what Feminism is about (equity).

The issue is though that there shouldn’t be a draft and it was instituted during a time when women weren’t allowed in combat roles. I think it should be done away with all together. Men can face a fine and prison time if they don’t sign up for selective service which is completely unfair.

How is having untrained people in an army going to make it better?

Doctor_Strix · Answer

“Women can’t match men on the battlefield?”

Your knowledge of this topic is a mile wide, and a inch deep. Know what that makes you? A poser.

Dude, there are women on the front lines as we speak. They wear their body armor, and pack their rifle just as good as men. They fight just as hard. And give their lives just as valiantly as men.

So before you fart up an idea, and vomit out nonsense about a topic you have zero knowledge in. Stop, get some help.

dmgstarfleet · Answer

Other nations draft females and use them in combat positions. The US currently drafts no one but since females are now used in combat int he US Forces it is almost certain that any draft would include women for combat roles. Equality is double edged, huh? Don't worry, you still won't have to pay for dates.

Jjpayne · Answer

To say that women are not physically fit or preferred in battle does create a gender difference and divide. To say that women should not be on the battlefield but be nurses, mothers and cooks instead while it is practical, it does force women into traditional roles.

DanOh2018 · Answer

No idea, a draft is barbaric and I would refuse on principle.

AynonOMouse · Answer

Hundreds of thousands of women need to go to war and get shot before they have earned any sort of equal rights. They want the benefits without putting in the work as usual.
Feminists are always hypocritical liars that want benefits and not responsibilities.

The draft is just ONE example of their hypocrisy.

SuccessfulHornDog · Answer

I'm sorry but if females want to be treated equally then we really need to do that. You propose a solution which will end up with more men being killed than women. That is unacceptable. The exact same number of women need to die. That means they are all drafted and serve in combat on the front lines. Let's see how well they do afterwards with an amputated arm and leg

Why is drafting for war used as an argument against feminism?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Why is drafting for war used as an argument against feminism?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.