The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[Auzkhia]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

Welcome to womanhood cis women lol

Some women already had to sign up though, you know the women that were assigned male at birth. (Though I guess that would make it also easier for the men who were assigned female at birth to sign up, and many of those did try to especially if they showed up as unregistered men in certain cases where it might matter like federal student aid)

Ideally it should be abolished, that would be easier for everyone, and also, let's just ratify the Equal Rights Amendment already.

[Page]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

I am against this, not because I think there should be a double-standard based on sex, but because conscription is unacceptable and I don't think egalitarianism by way of more tyranny is desirable.

Are double-standards inherently problematic? Absolutely, but they should be resolved by bringing justice to the victims of discrimination, not injustice to those who have avoided it. Men getting disproportionately long prison sentences compared to women should be resolved but only by way of reducing mens' sentences, increasing womens' sentences makes the world worse.

For what it's worth, I believe conscription is unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment but I don't expect SCOTUS to rule as such.

[Thermodolia]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

I am against this, not because I think there should be a double-standard based on sex, but because conscription is unacceptable and I don't think egalitarianism by way of more tyranny is desirable.

Are double-standards inherently problematic? Absolutely, but they should be resolved by bringing justice to the victims of discrimination, not injustice to those who have avoided it. Men getting disproportionately long prison sentences compared to women should be resolved but only by way of reducing mens' sentences, increasing womens' sentences makes the world worse.

For what it's worth, I believe conscription is unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment but I don't expect SCOTUS to rule as such.

SCOTUS has already ruled that conscription is constitutional

[Stellar Colonies]

Oh great, the polar opposite of what we should be doing.

Agreed, but if it does have to exist then everyone should be subject to it.

I guess so.

[Alvecia]

Agreed, but if it does have to exist then everyone should be subject to it.

I guess so.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

[Stellar Colonies]

I guess so.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

Generally, it's best to resolve a contradiction like this by making it gender neutral.

Accomplishing that by abolishing it is far more preferable though.

[Sundiata]

Is this a genuine question? I don't understand, I'm steering towards the direction of "no," but I'm not sure what you're asking exactly.

Well, as far as the basic human rights go, sure. However, I do think that fathers and mothers should have unique legal protections that pertain to their status. Husbands and wives too. Men and women? Maybe.

Of course, men and women should be equal as should husbands and wives.

I believe in rights for men and women in instances that uniquely effect them.

[Giovenith]

Okay guys, since we're around the 400 mark, I thought I'd ask: Should there be a fifth thread, or should this thread finally be retired?

I know people like hanging around here, but the topics tend to go round in circles, and some may argue that discussion would be better suited to individual threads for individual issues. I don't mind either way. It's up to you.

[Punished UMN]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

I am against this, not because I think there should be a double-standard based on sex, but because conscription is unacceptable and I don't think egalitarianism by way of more tyranny is desirable.

Are double-standards inherently problematic? Absolutely, but they should be resolved by bringing justice to the victims of discrimination, not injustice to those who have avoided it. Men getting disproportionately long prison sentences compared to women should be resolved but only by way of reducing mens' sentences, increasing womens' sentences makes the world worse.

For what it's worth, I believe conscription is unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment but I don't expect SCOTUS to rule as such.

I actually have to disagree, mixed-sex units in the military are empirically worse than single-sex units.

[Kowani]

I guess so.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

more people subject to the draft means it's easier to build a political movement towards its repeal

[Ostroeuropa]

I guess so.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

This assumes 100% of the population would be conscripted, up from 50%. This is not a good view of it.

Instead, what happens is there is a target. Say, "We need 100,000 soldiers" and then those are called up based on a lottery.

100,000 people are going to be harmed either way. The change merely makes it so that it doesn't only happen to men. We're not doubling the number of people being conscripted because that's not how conscription works. We're doubling the pool of conscripts and ensuring equality.

Incidentally, in 2014, the USA tried to draft 14,250 men born in the 19th century due to a clerical error. After failing to receive adequate reason for their non-response, several thousand letters were sent out informing them of the legal consequences.

Only later did the government realize their mistake, once the post-office told them that these people were, you know. Dead.

[Stellar Colonies]

Okay guys, since we're around the 400 mark, I thought I'd ask: Should there be a fifth thread, or should this thread finally be retired?

I know people like hanging around here, but the topics tend to go round in circles, and some may argue that discussion would be better suited to individual threads for individual issues. I don't mind either way. It's up to you.

If a fifth is initiated, perhaps it could be called something like the "Gender Rights Thread", no disrespect intended to the egalitarianism of the starting OP.

[Giovenith]

Okay guys, since we're around the 400 mark, I thought I'd ask: Should there be a fifth thread, or should this thread finally be retired?

I know people like hanging around here, but the topics tend to go round in circles, and some may argue that discussion would be better suited to individual threads for individual issues. I don't mind either way. It's up to you.

If a fifth is initiated, perhaps it could be called something like the "Gender Rights Thread", no disrespect intended to the egalitarianism of the starting OP.

Definitely a good idea.

[Proctopeo]

Okay guys, since we're around the 400 mark, I thought I'd ask: Should there be a fifth thread, or should this thread finally be retired?

I know people like hanging around here, but the topics tend to go round in circles, and some may argue that discussion would be better suited to individual threads for individual issues. I don't mind either way. It's up to you.

I think it should stick around. It seems easier to keep a bunch of closely related topics in one single thread.

I guess so.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

It's best if a bad thing doesn't happen, but if it does, I'd rather it be indiscriminate than specifically targeting half the population. Especially since the draft doesn't conscript literally everybody into the army when enacted, only some of them.

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

more people subject to the draft means it's easier to build a political movement towards its repeal

This too. It might motivate feminists to oppose the draft as a whole, for instance.

[Luminesa]

oh, sorry, that was really long. i didn't want to multi post. but look, now i've gone and done it...

I needed a place to bounce in and to address something that I thought was interesting (and was not respectfully responded-to)…

The school-to-prison pipeline is indeed a large problem due to our country overall being behind when it comes to discipline methods. Most teachers are taught to use conduct cards, shouting, suspensions, and eventually expulsions. Admittedly I was taught this way, and not given many methods of combatting this method. However, through my own experience and research, I have found a couple methods which are based on research and work:

1.) Conscious Discipline. Oftentimes education between young boys and young female teachers is perceived as a matter of, “I must defend myself from this student.” This negatively impacts how the interactions between students and teachers occur day-by-day. However, Conscious Discipline shows overall improvements for classroom management, classroom climates, and student-teacher interactions.

1.) Socio-Emotional Learning (SEL). Enforcing a tired standard that female teachers must expect boys to be emotionally illiterate, or that male teachers must be emotionally illiterate on the educational and emotional needs of female students, is simply not backed by general research. Socio-Emotional Learning is incredibly important for building communities, especially for male and minority teachers. On the flip side, SEL improves how young boys view schooling and education, as it addresses the whole child and not just their academic success.

Given that most of the people in prison, in the country with the highest number of incarcerated people, are male and black, these two approaches are crucial to building a new understanding of education, and one that builds our male teachers and male students rather than destroying them for the sake of denying building research. It is almost as harmful, if not as harmful, as denying the effectiveness of vaccines. The only way to avoid being ill is to get a vaccine, the only way to fix the school-to-prison pipeline is to stop disenfranchising our male communities in education.

[Fahran]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

Based and litty.

[Fahran]

Based, women get to finally see how glorious the patriarchy is and die in droves with us in the upcoming water wars!

All citizens should serve the community. It's only a shame our elected leaders do not serve the community by engaging in prudent and sustainable policy-making.

[Luziyca]

Senate Armed Services Committee votes to make women register for the draft

The Senate Armed Services Committee has approved language in its annual defense policy bill that would require women to register for the draft.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) approved by the committee behind closed doors Wednesday “amends the Military Selective Service Act to require the registration of women for Selective Service,” according to a summary released Thursday.

In the strictest sense, should this pass, it's better than the status quo.

But it would be better if no one had to register at all.

Absofuckinglutely: in an ideal world the draft would be abolished but drafting women as well as men is better than only drafting men.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Based, women get to finally see how glorious the patriarchy is and die in droves with us in the upcoming water wars!

All citizens should serve the community. It's only a shame our elected leaders do not serve the community by engaging in prudent and sustainable policy-making.

I actually disagree, there's a decent body of research from the US showing women in combat units leads to lesser results across the board. While I get the arguments made in favor of a gender neutral draft and at times might even have agreed with them it just seems to be a bad idea overall.

[Sundiata]

All citizens should serve the community. It's only a shame our elected leaders do not serve the community by engaging in prudent and sustainable policy-making.

I actually disagree, there's a decent body of research from the US showing women in combat units leads to lesser results across the board. While I get the arguments made in favor of a gender neutral draft and at times might even have agreed with them it just seems to be a bad idea overall.

Well obviously, they produce less testosterone and have lower bone density. It's a horrible idea to have them in combat roles when compared to men but it doesn't even matter now because men and women are basically interchangeable to a modern person. We're deluding ourselves in the name of egalitarianism and we're too afraid to just call a spade a spade. Nowadays men are women, women are men, it's all relative depending on how someone feels.

[New haven america]

Based, women get to finally see how glorious the patriarchy is and die in droves with us in the upcoming water wars!

All citizens should serve the community. It's only a shame our elected leaders do not serve the community by engaging in prudent and sustainable policy-making.

Someone's been reading Heinlein.

And it was a bad idea there, it's a bad idea IRL.

[New haven america]

I actually disagree, there's a decent body of research from the US showing women in combat units leads to lesser results across the board. While I get the arguments made in favor of a gender neutral draft and at times might even have agreed with them it just seems to be a bad idea overall.

Well obviously, they produce less testosterone and have lower bone density. It's a horrible idea to have them in combat roles when compared to men but it doesn't even matter now because men and women are basically interchangeable to a modern person. We're deluding ourselves in the name of egalitarianism and we're too afraid to just call a spade a spade. Nowadays men are women, women are men, it's all relative depending on how someone feels.

It's interesting how you spend years going on about how "Women re amazing and perfect beings" and then the moment they get equal treatment as men you're going "Women are women, they're not as good as men!"

FFS, pick a side and stick with it.

[Sundiata]

Well obviously, they produce less testosterone and have lower bone density. It's a horrible idea to have them in combat roles when compared to men but it doesn't even matter now because men and women are basically interchangeable to a modern person. We're deluding ourselves in the name of egalitarianism and we're too afraid to just call a spade a spade. Nowadays men are women, women are men, it's all relative depending on how someone feels.

It's interesting how you spend years going on about how "Women re amazing and perfect beings" and then the moment they get equal treatment as men you're going "Women are women, they're not as good as men!"

FFS, pick a side and stick with it.

Women aren't males.

We shouldn't put them in harm's way for ideological reasons. Death is an equal opportunity killer.

[Page]

I think I disagree.
I'd rather have a bad thing only happen to half the population where possible rather than having it happen to the whole population.

Equality is great, but I don't know that I'd strive for "equal amounts of harm" by causing more harm.

This assumes 100% of the population would be conscripted, up from 50%. This is not a good view of it.

Instead, what happens is there is a target. Say, "We need 100,000 soldiers" and then those are called up based on a lottery.

100,000 people are going to be harmed either way. The change merely makes it so that it doesn't only happen to men. We're not doubling the number of people being conscripted because that's not how conscription works. We're doubling the pool of conscripts and ensuring equality.

Incidentally, in 2014, the USA tried to draft 14,250 men born in the 19th century due to a clerical error. After failing to receive adequate reason for their non-response, several thousand letters were sent out informing them of the legal consequences.

Only later did the government realize their mistake, once the post-office told them that these people were, you know. Dead.

Even though making women eligible for conscription does not mean twice as many people are enslaved, this change is still worse than the previous inequality because now it's going to be harder to get rid of conscription than ever before. The unequal burden on men was a powerful weapon in arguing that conscription is wrong and now that weapon is gone.

[Page]

I am against this, not because I think there should be a double-standard based on sex, but because conscription is unacceptable and I don't think egalitarianism by way of more tyranny is desirable.

Are double-standards inherently problematic? Absolutely, but they should be resolved by bringing justice to the victims of discrimination, not injustice to those who have avoided it. Men getting disproportionately long prison sentences compared to women should be resolved but only by way of reducing mens' sentences, increasing womens' sentences makes the world worse.

For what it's worth, I believe conscription is unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment but I don't expect SCOTUS to rule as such.

SCOTUS has already ruled that conscription is constitutional

Seeing as it is a 100 year old ruling, I hope it will be revisited.

I did a little research into this ruling and found the rationale was that the Constitution says Congress has the power to raise armies and SCOTUS interpreted that as including the power to have a draft. That's a big stretch, I've never heard of a state having the power to build roads being viewed as it being acceptable for the state to force people to build them.

There is absolutely no reasonable logic for claiming that military service is not labor.

I'd also point out that 1918 was peak jingoism, so maybe there is a chance this ruling is overturned someday.