Whitehouse petition To include women in draft - Mothering Forums

View Poll Results: If Selective service stay intack should womenhave to sign up forit just as men?
Yes 9 37.50%
No 15 62.50%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 63 Old 01-19-2013, 11:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
jadedahlia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

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.

jadedahlia is offline  
#2 of 63 Old 01-19-2013, 10:03 PM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


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

swede is offline  
#3 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 09:07 AM - Thread Starter
 
jadedahlia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

jadedahlia is offline  
#4 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 11:42 AM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
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.
swede is offline  
#5 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 01:43 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

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.)


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#6 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 05:18 PM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)

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

swede likes this.

Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#7 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 05:37 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

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?


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#8 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 09:29 PM
 
kblackstone444's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: MA
Posts: 3,837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)

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.

phathui5 likes this.

I pray for the day Family Court recognizes that CHILDREN have rights, parents only have PRIVILEGES.  Only then, will I know my child is safe.
kblackstone444 is offline  
#9 of 63 Old 01-20-2013, 09:57 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

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.


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#10 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 02:56 AM
 
onlyzombiecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Northeast Kansas
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.


Kim ~mom to one awesome dd (12)

onlyzombiecat is offline  
#11 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 11:28 AM
 
grahamsmom98's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
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.  

grahamsmom98 is offline  
#12 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 01:15 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
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.

Thursday Girl and Storm Bride like this.

If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#13 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 01:43 PM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

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...
 

transylvania_mom likes this.
swede is offline  
#14 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 01:59 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

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)?


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#15 of 63 Old 01-21-2013, 09:21 PM
 
swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I don't really hold that belief smile.gif. My dad was a conscientious objector during viet nam.
swede is offline  
#16 of 63 Old 01-23-2013, 03:03 PM - Thread Starter
 
jadedahlia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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

jadedahlia is offline  
#17 of 63 Old 01-23-2013, 10:46 PM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

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

transylvania_mom likes this.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
13yo ds   10yo dd  8yo ds and 6yo ds and 1yo ds  
phathui5 is offline  
#18 of 63 Old 01-23-2013, 11:12 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

meemee likes this.

Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#19 of 63 Old 01-24-2013, 07:08 AM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

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.  


 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is online now  
#20 of 63 Old 01-24-2013, 09:27 AM
 
revolting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago suburbs
Posts: 1,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

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.

One_Girl likes this.

Partner to Rbikenew.gif ('03); Parent to T read.gif('07), Aviolin.gif ('10), and E ecbaby2.gif ('13)

femalesling.GIFhomeschool.gifchicken3.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif 

revolting is offline  
#21 of 63 Old 01-24-2013, 10:49 AM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolting View Post

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.


I hadn't thought about this, but you make a good point. It's bad enough when someone wants to make the military their career, and is subjected to this crap, but drafting them into it almost seems like a double rape...

 

I'm Canadian, so my opinion doesn't really matter, but I don't support the draft...not at all. I have mixed feelings about removing the gender bias. From a biological standpoint, I don't think it makes sense to risk women to an equal extent as men (because of what Smokering referred to - one man can father many children, in a relatively short period of time, but it takes a large investment of time and biology for women...consider how long it would take to repopulate a society with a 1000 to 1 ration of men to women, vs. the other way around). However, on a planet with 7 billion people, I think that's really more of a theoretical concern than a practical one. The idea of having my daughters subject to a draft makes me sick to my stomach...but so does the idea of having my sons subject to one. So...kind of a wash, emotionally. I thnk revolting's point is a good one, though. Adding women to selective service, in the current military, seems like a government requirement to subject oneself to rape, and I'm not okay with that on any level whatsoever. If the military can clean up their act (including, emphatically, the culture of cover-ups), it might shift my views.

 

I'd love to see the draft equalized, but I'd prefer to see it removed.


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#22 of 63 Old 01-24-2013, 12:55 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
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.

Re. the bolded: Yes, there's more to being a combat soldier than strength, but strength is a non-negotiable bare minimum. It doesn't matter how plucky, good at tactics, brave, mechanically apt, good at camouflage etc a recruit is - if he or she can't run X miles carrying Y pounds and perform similar feats of STRENGTH, he or she won't make it through basic training.

 

I just did a spot of research, and it seems a basic rule of thumb is that the average woman has 40-60% of the upper body strength of a man, and about 75% of the lower body strength of a man. Yes, bell curves, exceptions to the rule, yada yada, but that does mean that fewer women than men will be strong enough for combat roles. And there's plenty of research along those lines. If you don't "buy into it", do you have any competing research, or just anecdata about a few strong women you know?

 

There's also the issue of training time in a draft. Presumably your farmer girlfriends didn't start lifting heavy loads from Day 1. Given years of training, sure, most women would gain appreciably in strength; but in a draft situation, there won't be years of training. A few months, maybe.

 

Quote:
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.

I've often thought that if I were a fascist dictator, I'd institute a "social draft". New Zealand has problems with dole-bludging, directionless young adults, delinquency and all that jazz - just like most First World countries, I suppose. I'd make it so that if a teenager, after finishing school, didn't have a very specific plan (along the lines of starting medical school, going to Uni and so on), he'd be "drafted" into some form of social work. There'd be a ton of options - it could be planting flowers on roundabouts, cooking or delivering Meals on Wheels for the elderly, childcare, building, farm work, physiotherapy, art therapy, Riding for the Disabled, the SPCA, soup kitchens, wildlife preservation, law clerking... with on-the-job training, pay and the prospect of developing a career in that area if it were a good fit. Just for a year, or two years - a rite of passage to responsible adulthood, a taste of earning, and an (enforced!) chance to make the world a better place.

 

Quote:
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.

Is that assault mostly within combat situations, or women in other areas of the military (intelligence, maps etc)?

 

I read a book by a US female soldier called "Love My Rifle More Than You", and it sounded like the verbal sexual abuse was pretty constant, and physical abuse wasn't unheard of. Part of the solution to that is presumably good command - it sounded like the officers looked the other way a lot. But it's an argument in favour of women-only battalions.

 

DH, who's in favour of women in the military, is actually against women and men going into combat together. He says research has shown that discipline tends to fall apart, because women and men alike are much less likely to leave a wounded/fallen female comrade than a male one, even if that risks their own lives or the success of the mission. I haven't done my own research on it, but it's an interesting thought.


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#23 of 63 Old 01-24-2013, 10:20 PM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

Smokering at this time i dont have time to go find the research and my grey cells are not finding where the research i have read years ago is. 

 

there is a lot of data on the average man and women strength today. but is that always true. yes i would agree 'generally' men are stronger than women.  but then just like there are some men who dont make the cut, just so there are women who DO make the cut too. i mean historically we have had front line women leaders like joan of arc, queen boudicea (sp) etc. women have disguised themselves as men and lived in the combat zone. even today in the US army women DO fight in the front lines when needed. i think some countries even had women units. i recall reading something like that in the ex Soviet Union. also there have been women's units in ancient history - in africa, in india, in asia, in china.

 

i mean what strength are we talking about. its mostly removing the dead and the wounded right? and moving equipement. if anything its height that matters there rather than strength while dragging a heavy object?!!! we have women firefighters and EMT too right both of which need to lift heavy weights too?!!! if you look at migrant labour around the world there are women there as well as men doing the same heavy labour. 

 

so maybe out of 10 men maybe 6 will make the cut to be in the combat zone. with a women it would be maybe 3 or 4. is that reason enough to keep them out? i mean we do see women weight lifters and women wrestlers right?!!! for that matter even women sumo wrestlers. so why not on the front line. 

 

to me harrasement is not enough reason to keep the woman out, but it does have its own set of unique problems. or that men might lose sight of the mission to rescue a woman combatant. i vaguely remember Santorum saying something about what your husband said Smokering. its a fine line that divides a hero from an idiot on the front lines anyways doesnt it? all heroic deeds are risky deeds that succeeded isnt it? history does not really record the failed ones unless they were monumental.

 

the thing is if you read women veteran stories - there are a few on the web - either news articles or bulletin board postings - they were ALREADY serving in the front position whether there was a ban or not. 

 

as a woman i'd like my dd to have the choice no matter what she chooses. 

 

oh and btw in the US the number of women farmers is on the rise. doing all the heavy work that once the men did. 


 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is online now  
#24 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 01:49 AM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

You're basically agreeing with what I wrote several posts back. :) That statistically, fewer women will have the necessary strength to become combat soldiers than men. As I said before, I don't believe in keeping women out of combat positions; I just suspect that were draft equality laws passed, most of the drafted women would end up in non-combat positions, partly for reasons of physical strength.

 

Quote:
i mean what strength are we talking about. its mostly removing the dead and the wounded right? and moving equipement. if anything its height that matters there rather than strength while dragging a heavy object?!!! we have women firefighters and EMT too right both of which need to lift heavy weights too?!!! if you look at migrant labour around the world there are women there as well as men doing the same heavy labour.

From what I read the advantage men have with strength mostly is related to size - ie, they're stronger because they're bigger (on average, obviously). Apparently inch-for-inch women's muscles are just as strong (which makes sense, really - I mean, they're made of the same stuff, why wouldn't they be?), but in terms of absolute strength, men just have more muscle mass and therefore more strength.

 

For soldiers, the issue wouldn't be so much the dead and wounded as the equipment. In the (relatively rare) instance a soldier would have to carry a wounded comrade, there'd likely be others to help and at least there'd be a huge adrenaline rush. But carrying an eighty-pound pack, a heavy rifle and ammunition, maybe extra water and rations, maybe a radio or other technical equipment - and carrying it, very likely, through harsh terrain, and for ten or twelve hours a day - that's when strength would become a real issue. Again, some women would certainly be able to do it, but not all; nor all men.

 

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't - in fact, I'd make a terrible combat soldier in almost every conceivable way. I'd be infinitely more useful in a draft scenario doing something behind the scenes, probably with writing or heck, even cooking. I don't think that that's in any way demeaning, unpatriotic, anti-feminist or otherwise ghastly; it's just how it is.


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#25 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 07:42 PM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

it certainly sounds like we are saying the same thing arent we?

 

yes statistically all women are not as strong as all men. however i feel combat deployment does not reflect that. i think combat reflects biases - even in the israeli army. and in some areas of the israel army, its more sexual issues that keeps women out of the combat zone. its just too volatile to have both sexes in extremely high stress areas. not their strength. 

 

so its not always strenght that will keep women out of combat zone. but other factors. 


 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is online now  
#26 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 08:16 PM
 
Smokering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,610
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
so its not always strenght that will keep women out of combat zone. but other factors.

Yes, I agree. I'd be interested to read some research on what's keeping women (mostly) out of combat roles in Israel - women have been allowed to serve in that capacity for ages, so you'd hope biases would have faded to some degree by now. I wonder how much of it's a religion/modesty thing? DH used to know a girl in the Israeli army (drafted), who worked in some kind of intelligence, and her attitude was basically "Ehhh, I could probably be a soldier if I wanted, but why would I?" Which is certainly an understandable attitude. :p According to DH, she said that most girls she knew in the army felt the same way - combat just wasn't seen as a desirable option - but that's just anecdata, of course. It makes psychological sense to me, though - men seem on the whole more likely to be swayed by the glory/bravery/testosterone vibe of combat than women, just as men are more likely to do dangerous, extreme sports like racing.


If decomposition persists please see your necromancer.

Smokering is offline  
#27 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 09:36 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by meemee View Post

as a woman i'd like my dd to have the choice no matter what she chooses. 

 

I agree about this, but I'm not sure what it has to do with the draft. That's not about choice.

 

I honestly can't take seriously any assertion that women are as strong as men. Yes - I'm sure that there is overlap, and that the strongest women are stronger than the weakest men. But, I grew up around furniture movers - maybe not the strongest men around, but they're up there - and there is simply no way that most women could work their way up to what these guys were/are capable of. The few women I knew who tried it ended up either injuring themselves (and, yes - the men do, too) badly or simply giving it up. Are there women who could do it? I'm sure there are. But, they're far from the majority.


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#28 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 10:04 PM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

 

I agree about this, but I'm not sure what it has to do with the draft. That's not about choice.

during world war two many women wanted to go to the front but werent allowed to. when the nation is burning with a need to serve the country women did not get the choice to be a soldier. 

 

I honestly can't take seriously any assertion that women are as strong as men. Yes - I'm sure that there is overlap, and that the strongest women are stronger than the weakest men. But, I grew up around furniture movers - maybe not the strongest men around, but they're up there - and there is simply no way that most women could work their way up to what these guys were/are capable of. The few women I knew who tried it ended up either injuring themselves (and, yes - the men do, too) badly or simply giving it up. Are there women who could do it? I'm sure there are. But, they're far from the majority.

storm bride i think this is a cultural issue. i have seen in some countries in my travels where the women are right there next to the men laboring. and these are poor countries where women did not have many choices if they refused labor that required strength. like women working in construction carrying bricks on her head or vegetables - about 70% of their body weight if not more. 


 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is online now  
#29 of 63 Old 01-25-2013, 10:48 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by meemee View Post

storm bride i think this is a cultural issue. i have seen in some countries in my travels where the women are right there next to the men laboring. and these are poor countries where women did not have many choices if they refused labor that required strength. like women working in construction carrying bricks on her head or vegetables - about 70% of their body weight if not more. 

 

I've done labour involving 70% of my body weight, or more, more than once. But, I'm not talking about 70% of one's body weight.  I'm talking about 200% or 300% of one's body weight.

 

I've swamped as a mover a couple of times. It's what I wanted to do when I graduated from high school, but the company I wanted to work for only hired women - rarely - as packers. I was strong - very strong. I outlifted guys in the weight room in high school (early high school, though - these guys hadn't reached their full growth or strength). I had a male roommate express surprise at the weight I used to use for weightlifting workouts, because he couldn't even curl it once. DH and I carried a very heavy stove outside and around the house when I was four months pregnant with dd1. My mom used to haul all kinds of heavy stuff (some of it easily 70% of her body weight) on a regular basis. I have very little cultural bias about women being weaker than men. I have yet to ever meet even one woman who is anywhere near as physically strong as some of those movers - not even close.

 

For a lot of reasons, I'm not anywhere near as strong, physically, as I once was. But, back in the day, I was a pack mule. I wasn't even close to being as strong as most of these guys.


ETA: I missed this

 

Quote:
during world war two many women wanted to go to the front but werent allowed to. when the nation is burning with a need to serve the country women did not get the choice to be a soldier.

 

I'm aware. But, this is about expanding the draft, as it is now. Women's ability/rights to work in the military have been expanding for a long time, and I read...yesterday? before that?...that they're going to be allowed front line combat roles. So, if they want to join the military, they can. That's a completely separate issue than whether they should be included in the draft (ie. denied the choice).


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#30 of 63 Old 01-27-2013, 08:19 PM
 
Sarah W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Dupont, WA
Posts: 1,128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I don't support the draft and I certainly don't support women being added to the draft. I think it's fairly unlikely that the draft will be used again, it is too easy to get people to enlist. I don't want either of my girls in any branch of the military. I'm not sure how opening jobs for a volunteer military translates into women being drafted.

 

There is a difference between women being in combat units and women serving in combat MOS such as Infantry. They are two completely separate things. Women have been attached instead of assigned to combat units for both Iraq and Afghanistan and this is finally acknowledging the fact. I'm not sure how opening combat MOS will be.

Sarah W is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off