or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Whitehouse petition To include women in draft
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Whitehouse petition To include women in draft

Poll Results: If Selective service stay intack should womenhave to sign up forit just as men?

Poll expired: Feb 16, 2013  
  • 37% (9)
    Yes
  • 62% (15)
    No
24 Total Votes  
post #1 of 63
Thread Starter 

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/end-exclusion-women-united-states-selective-service-program-make-selective-service-gender-neutral/kj1cFkc8

 

 

Quote:

End the exclusion of women from the United States Selective service program. Make Selective Service gender neutral.

Discuss.

post #2 of 63


no.  I don't want my son to get drafted.  I am certainly not going to encourage my daughter to be drafted, too.  Yuck.

post #3 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by swede View Post


no.  I don't want my son to get drafted.  I am certainly not going to encourage my daughter to be drafted, too.  Yuck.

But as long as the program is around should equality be placed across the ground. Think of families who have 2 sons and the family that has 2 daughters. Would it not be more fair that for each of the families to only have one child drafted instead of the family with 2 boys to have both and the family with 2 girls none. This is all mute for the past 40 years but 18 year old boys are required under penalty of law to this day. no federal loans and a whole list of other repercussions.

post #4 of 63
I don't agree with the draft, so no,I don't think, adding more people to it is making it better. I would not want any of my children drafted. I am not going to offer my daughter up for slaughter just because I'm already required to do so with my son.
post #5 of 63

I'm not sure whether I agree with the draft or not, but yeah; if it's required for men it should be required for women. With equal rights come equal responsibilities.

 

My caveat to that is that there should be very clear exemptions in place that deal with the issue of children. It's no good if a baby has both parents suddenly drafted. (Ideally, neither parent, but I suppose in a draft situation that's just one of those "war is hell" things, right?)

 

It's worth remembering that "drafted" doesn't necessarily mean "cannon fodder". More women than men, on average, would make poor soldiers; but there are plenty of other things to do in the army. Translation, intelligence, maps, secretarial/administrative work, recruitment, advertising.... So it might very well not be "offering up your daughter for slaughter", but "offering up your daughter for a desk job". (Although that's a curious way to put it, to begin with.They'd be of age; surely it isn't about you "offering them up" at all? It's between them and the government; your permission or "offer" isn't required.)

post #6 of 63

I don't agree w/ the draft in general, so no, I wouldn't think it okay to do to women what I don't think it's okay to do to men.  To me, that'd be like saying it's okay to have my girls circ'd because it's okay to have boys circ'd. dizzy.gif

 

Sus

post #7 of 63

Not exactly. It's more like saying that if, for some reason, the government required 5,000 people to be circed, assuming circumcision were equally deleterious to boys and girls, both boys and girls should be in the lottery to end up circed, instead of only boys.

 

Governments don't draft more troops than they need - that would be a foolish expense. If they need 80,000 extra soldiers to win a war, either way, 80,000 soldiers will be drafted; the question is whether everyone has to run the risk of being chosen, or whether only half the (demographically relevant) population has to. If girls aren't drafted, sure, your daughter's safe; but your son has twice the chance of being called up. Why should he have to suffer that just because he's male? How is that not anti-equality?

 

ETA: After all, it would surely be deemed unfair if only Christians were called up for the draft; or only African-Americans; or only people with blue eyes; or anything along those lines. How is this different?

post #8 of 63

I don't agree with the draft and I thank God my 17 year old son has Asperger's, so he would be inelligible.  If someone wants to fight for and risk dying for their country (and possibly a cause they don't personally believe in), then they're welcome to sign up for the draft, for the army, the navy, the marines, whatever.  BUT, nobody should be forced to fight or die for any cause.  That being said, although both men and women's lives and rights are equally important, women are needed for something that men physically cannot do- carry future generations.  We should not cut off our noses to spite our faces.

post #9 of 63

Well, yes, but men are generally, ah, involved in the process of creating future generations, too. I mean yes, biologically one man could inseminate millions of women, etc, but in reality most women (especially in a post-war environment) aren't going to be flocking to the sperm banks - they'll be wanting to have babies, if at all, with a partner, the old-fashioned way. So in fact, an equality-based draft that left a greater number of men behind to have families might well be better for creating future generations. Not to mention, having an equal number of men and women disappearing from the workforce and society in general would surely be better for societal balance than having just the men disappear, wouldn't it? A lot of civilian professions are male-dominated; putting a greater drain on the men in those workforces would presumably be worse for the economy than balancing the drain between male-dominated, female-dominated and more-or-less-equal professions.

post #10 of 63
Quote:
End the exclusion of women from the United States Selective service program. Change the Selective Service program, in order for women to participate in the program, just as their male counterparts. With all the same requirements prescribed by law. Make this change retroactive to include women who are not too old to be drafted. End this dishonor on women, and allow them to serve their nation without an outdated law. Woman ages 18 through 25 and living in the U.S. would be required just as men ages 18 through 25 to register with Selective Service. This would help dispel the notion that women are of a weaker gender and would enhance gender equality.

 

I disagree strongly that women are not allowed to serve their country if they are not required to register for the selective service. Many women voluntarily serve in the military.

I disagree that women are dishonored or believed to be weaker if they are not required to register for selective service as well.


I don't disagree with a change in the law to require all people, regardless of gender, to register for selective service- or a change to eliminate selective service for everyone. I think in this day and age it should be all or none.

 

I do disagree with the petition as it is written though and would not sign it.

post #11 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post

I'm not sure whether I agree with the draft or not, but yeah; if it's required for men it should be required for women. With equal rights come equal responsibilities.

 

My caveat to that is that there should be very clear exemptions in place that deal with the issue of children. It's no good if a baby has both parents suddenly drafted. (Ideally, neither parent, but I suppose in a draft situation that's just one of those "war is hell" things, right?)

 

It's worth remembering that "drafted" doesn't necessarily mean "cannon fodder". More women than men, on average, would make poor soldiers; but there are plenty of other things to do in the army. Translation, intelligence, maps, secretarial/administrative work, recruitment, advertising.... So it might very well not be "offering up your daughter for slaughter", but "offering up your daughter for a desk job". (Although that's a curious way to put it, to begin with.They'd be of age; surely it isn't about you "offering them up" at all? It's between them and the government; your permission or "offer" isn't required.)

(BOLD mine)

 

So, let's just send the little ladies back to the 1950s, in strictly inferior roles (you forgot to mention serving coffee and dusting the war room)??  Why, exactly, would women make poor soldiers, in your opinion?  What an insult to the women currently serving in combat in branches of the military around the world.  Are they poor soldiers?? 

 

Nope, if there's a draft (which, I sincerely hope there isn't), women should be completely eligible and should serve in combat situations, as well.  There are no reasons they can't fight right alongside men.  

post #12 of 63
Quote:
So, let's just send the little ladies back to the 1950s, in strictly inferior roles (you forgot to mention serving coffee and dusting the war room)??

How are translation, intelligence, maps, secretarial/administrative work, recruitment and advertising inferior to being a combat soldier? Some of those jobs are highly specialised and technical. I'd hardly equate working in military intelligence with dusting the war room. And all the jobs are necessary in wartime. Winning a war requires a heck of a lot more than soldiers.

 

Quote:
Why, exactly, would women make poor soldiers, in your opinion?

What I said was "More women than men, on average, would make poor soldiers". And that's true. Women have, on average, less physical strength than men. Soldiers have to be strong. If a soldier needs to carry a 100-pound pack for twelve hours a day, and many do, plenty of men in the US will simply be too slightly-built to be able to do it, even with training; but that will be true for a considerably higher percentage of women.

 

That's not an insult to women; it's just a biological fact. There's a reason sports tend to be divided up by sex. Men are generally better at brute strength, and that's a rather vital component of being a soldier.

 

Quote:
What an insult to the women currently serving in combat in branches of the military around the world.  Are they poor soldiers??

No; if they've successfully completed the training, they obviously number among the minority of women who are physically strong enough to serve in combat roles.

 

Quote:
Nope, if there's a draft (which, I sincerely hope there isn't), women should be completely eligible and should serve in combat situations, as well.  There are no reasons they can't fight right alongside men.

I agree. When did I say the draft for women should be limited to non-combat situations? I didn't. Women who have the potential to successfully serve in combat soldiers should, and presumably would, be drafted into combat roles (assuming their other skills weren't considered more valuable). Those lacking the physical strength and endurance, just like men lacking the physical strength and endurance for combat roles, would end up in non-combat roles. I imagine that would be a higher percentage of women than men, because of certain biological bell curves. So what?

 

Israel is a good example - the country drafts women and allows them in most of the same roles as men (88-92%, according to Wikipedia), but only 3% of combat soldiers are female. The rest of the women are doing other jobs - operating radios, training course instructors, driving, administrative work and so on. Would you call them "little ladies" in "inferior roles"?

 

I mentioned alternative war roles in response to a PP who mentioned "offering her daughter up for slaughter", which I felt misunderstood the likely reality of a draft involving women (or indeed, men). I never suggested preventing women from serving in combat roles if they were capable and qualified.

post #13 of 63

I wouldn't want any of my children to participate in war.  period.  I would never support adding women to the draft.  It's bad enough there's a draft for men.  Even if my child wasn't slaughtered, I wouldn't want them to take part in the slaughtering of others, even as operators, etc...
 

post #14 of 63

But the question isn't the morality of the draft; it's the equality of the draft.

 

So, OK, you're a pacifist. Your children might not be. In which case, why should your son have two chances of ending up being slaughtered/facilitating the slaughter of others, rather than your son and daughter having one chance each? How is that fair?

 

Or, suppose your children do turn out to be pacifists. In the event of a draft, your son would either have to go through the hassle of being a conscientious objector, or the risk of being a draft-dodger. Why should he run twice that risk so your daughter could avoid it? Just because he's male? Again, how is that compatible with belief in equality (assuming you hold that belief)?

post #15 of 63
I don't really hold that belief smile.gif. My dad was a conscientious objector during viet nam.
post #16 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post

But the question isn't the morality of the draft; it's the equality of the draft.

 

So, OK, you're a pacifist. Your children might not be. In which case, why should your son have two chances of ending up being slaughtered/facilitating the slaughter of others, rather than your son and daughter having one chance each? How is that fair?

 

Or, suppose your children do turn out to be pacifists. In the event of a draft, your son would either have to go through the hassle of being a conscientious objector, or the risk of being a draft-dodger. Why should he run twice that risk so your daughter could avoid it? Just because he's male? Again, how is that compatible with belief in equality (assuming you hold that belief)?

To add to that. Just today as per the Equality issue women are now going to serve in combat roles

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/23/16664507-defense-chief-panetta-to-clear-women-for-combat-roles?lite

post #17 of 63

No, I don't think women should be drafted. Honestly, women aren't the ones starting wars.

post #18 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post

No, I don't think women should be drafted. Honestly, women aren't the ones starting wars.

 

 Neither are the men who are drafted, as a rule.

post #19 of 63

yes i fully support women being called up in the draft. i may not support the draft, i may not want my child to be drafted, but i do support equality in the draft. i may not want my dd to be slaughtered, but if my dd desired to i'd support her. if she wanted to join the police academy i'd yikes2.gif but i would support her. for me personally the army and police are the same thing. any profession using a gun which by the way my dd knows how to shoot and how to never touch one lying around - which they could use anytime would not be ok for me - even a bank security guard who does have a gun. however i think i would be ok with a park ranger position. 

 

however i wonder if it would make the draft more complicated. what about single families with no extended family? who would take care of the children? i guess one parent would be called and not the other. 

 

right now there are many children who sign up for the armed forces against the wishes of their parents. the key here is to realise what we want for our 18 year old might not be what they want for themselves. 

 

many join the armed forces for the perks - mainly education, along with the serve our country notion which is very very strong during the draft. 

 

however i do wish it would do our country to have a mandatory two year draft like say france has (not sure if that is called a draft or service). you either join the armed forces or do two years service somewhere else (kinda like the peace corps). in my romantic view of the world gosh i'd have a full expenses trip to a foreign country and back and get to do some neat stuff in those two years. i think that would definitely help the apathy i see all around me. though i'm not sure if that is a solution.

 

while i do get what you are saying smokering but i have a visceral reaction to women make 'poor soldiers'. i think the example you gave of the israel army has more to do with generally male dominated profession than women being poor soldiers (and i think also of the bias of allowing women in such roles). like u dont see many women in most congresses or parliaments including the US. i think massachusettes has had maybe 2 or 3 women in congress in all these years 230 or so years. i dont buy into the strength thing. mainly coz i saw a documentary on women soldiers from israel that opened up my eyes. yes women with training can be strong and lift a hundred pounds just like the men. but u r right - that is not the norm. however a soldier - even a combat soldier does many things. so i dont think there is a gender aspect to that at all. just like farmers too. i volunteer at a farm. i have girlfriends who are farmers without men in their lives. girlfriends who lift heavy loads and catch their own sheep and slaughter them herself. they are right there. so women are not as strong as men - i am not sure if i buy into that anymore. 

 

watching that documentary "to see if i am smiling" was quite an eye opener to me. along with befriending a bunch of young veterans. turned me more into a pascifist than any book or movie did. 

 

btw - slaughter is the least of my worries. i'd rather my dd be dead than live with PTSD and nightmares for the rest of her life. i can live with teh pain. i dont want her to live with it. the emotional cost of war is what concerns me - not death.  


Edited by meemee - 1/24/13 at 7:41am
post #20 of 63

Considering the huge rate of sexual assault of women soldiers in the military and the scandals about cover-ups that have made headlines recently as well as a recent presidential candidates openly refusing to support women in combat roles,  I see being drafted into the military as a greater burden on a woman than a man.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Talk Amongst Ourselves
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Whitehouse petition To include women in draft