Selective service - draft

[ThisIsTheDay]

What's that got to do with anything?

 

 

 

About as much as this thread has to do with anything! 

 

The likelihood of the draft being reinstated is as likely as everyone being forced to worship dancing bacon.  No offense to our own Sparkly Unicorn, of course!

[HRAAB]

I have my own ideas about feminism means to me personally.  Of course equal pay and opportunities, but feminism for me also means more.  I want to see women honored and respected for their unique abilities just as men should be honored and respected for their unique abilities.  For instance, I think motherhood should be honored and respected, and no, I don't think it is in this country.  I'm not sure how any of this would work out in reality, but I think women should be compensated somehow - tax credit - for staying home to raise children.  The job of raising responsible citizens is huge, and our country benefits from this.  Instead, making that choice hurts people financially.  On the other hand, I fully support women choosing to work in whatever career they choose, including the military.  Now this is probably where my sexist side comes out, but because women carry, give birth to, and nurse babies, I just can't get on board with them being forced into the military.  They want to volunteer, then go for it. I don't want women held back, but honored for their unique abilities.  Is this special treatment?  Sure, I guess it is, but I'm not opposed to men receiving special treatment in unique situation either.  Feminism for me isn't about being equal, but receiving respect and honor for our unique and different abilities.  I suspect many disagree.

 

Also, I don't believe in past wars that women didn't share in the responsibility or that men shouldered the burden alone.  I'm old enough to have parents that were adults during WWII.  The women that were still here had a huge responsibility in helping the war effort.  It took the men who were sent overseas and the women still at home to win the war.  My mil was left alone with a small child and the responsibility of working, paying bills, and paying the mortgage.  My aunt was an army nurse and stationed at Pearl Harbor when we were attacked.  My other aunt, with two children, worked in some sort of a factory (munitions??) in California while he dh was in the navy.  I can't imagine what men in combat went through, but I don't know that the women left home had it much easier.  They kept things running plus the worry about dhs, sons, brothers.

 

Two things I want to make clear: I do not support a draft for anyone, male or female, and I support any woman (or gay, transgendered person) who wants to be part of the military having the right to do so with no obstacles blocking their way based on gender or sexual orientation.  Voluntarily.

 

[Murphy101]

About as much as this thread has to do with anything!

 

The likelihood of the draft being reinstated is as likely as everyone being forced to worship dancing bacon. No offense to our own Sparkly Unicorn, of course!

Then why expand it?

 

If a government had a list mandating people had to sign up to potentially be called to worship dancing bacon, it would be a reasonable presumption that government had an expectation that at some point it might be necessary to use the list.

 

If the government didn't use it for a long time and then said they were expanding it, it would be a reasonable presumption that they still expect to use the list and also that they expect to use the additions on the list.

 

If this were genuinely a question of BOTH equality and no likelihood of a draft, then it seems entirely reasonable that rather than expand it, they would do away with selective service entirely.

[HRAAB]

I never said that.

 

What I said was stereotypical feminine behaviors don't tend to be celebrated among many feminists.  Many would like to see the pressures to conform to that ideal be done away with.  Not so much that they want to turn them into men, but that certain characteristics more often attributed to men are seen as more ideal.

 

If feminists cared so much about traditional issues facing women, then why have many feminist groups historically rejected to push for things that would help women facing issues more women than men face?  Such as affordable or free childcare?   Or protections from being discriminated against for being pregnant?  Etc.  Traditionally they have said we can't ask for "extra" if we want to be treated as equals.  My argument is if women are to be treated as equal then they need to have a more level playing field.  That isn't going to be the case if women choose to have children and there continues to be no protections in place. 

 

 

Exactly.  

 

And I'm not very worried about my girls being drafted.  It's not going to keep me awake at night. 

[HRAAB]

Then why expand it?

 

If a government had a list mandating people had to sign up to potentially be called to worship dancing bacon, it would be a reasonable presumption that government had an expectation that at some point it might be necessary to use the list.

 

If the government didn't use it for a long time and then said they were expanding it, it would be a reasonable presumption that they still expect to use the list and also that they expect to use the additions on the list.

 

If this were genuinely a question of BOTH equality and no likelihood of a draft, then it seems entirely reasonable that rather than expand it, they would do away with selective service entirely.

 

My dh turned 18 in the brief window between 1975 and 1980??? when there was no registration for selective service.  I do not understand why we still have it.  Like I said, I'm not losing any sleep over it, but I wish it would go away.

[Danestress]

I have my own ideas about feminism means to me personally. Of course equal pay and opportunities, but feminism for me also means more. I want to see women honored and respected for their unique abilities just as men should be honored and respected for their unique abilities.

.

Which abilities besides bearing and nursing children are truly unique to women? What abilities are truly unique to men?

[Murphy101]

Which abilities besides bearing and nursing children are truly unique to women? What abilities are truly unique to men?

It's a hard thing to describe but none the less is a factual thing too.

 

Men and women are not the same and not just physically.

 

I am sure someone does think the only difference between men and women is sexual physicality, but I think most would agree it is far more complex than that.

[ThisIsTheDay]

Then why expand it?

 

 

 

:huh:

Seriously. It's the U.S. government.  I don't even know how else to respond to that.  It's not as if something actually has to make sense just because Josh Earnest said so. 

 

Just as seriously.  Can you imagine the response if the draft were reinstated?  It's just not going to happen.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

:huh:

Seriously. It's the U.S. government.  I don't even know how else to respond to that.  It's not as if something actually has to make sense just because Josh Earnest said so. 

 

Just as seriously.  Can you imagine the response if the draft were reinstated?  It's just not going to happen.

 

While it is extremely unlikely, having the registration in law is simply being prepared, and part of the registration process is determining who would be eligible.  With the new rules with women in combat, young women will likely (and should) be asked to register the same as men. 

 

 

[ThisIsTheDay]

While it is extremely unlikely, having the registration in law is simply being prepared, and part of the registration process is determining who would be eligible.  With the new rules with women in combat, young women will likely (and should) be asked to register the same as men. 

 

Yes, but even if registration were to be expanded does not mean there is a "reasonable presumption" that they still "expect to use the list" (which was part of the comment to which I replied).

[Murphy101]

:huh:

Seriously. It's the U.S. government. I don't even know how else to respond to that. It's not as if something actually has to make sense just because Josh Earnest said so.

lol I agree with you our govt makes no sense but I propose citizens should still expect it to at least try to do so and should encourage it to not do things that do not make sense. I think it more than doesn't make sense for the govt to purposely create registrations and expect the citizens to just trust the govt has no interest in using those registrations.

 

I have no idea who josh earnest is.

 

Just as seriously. Can you imagine the response if the draft were reinstated? It's just not going to happen.

Many things I never imagined happening have happened. Even if they were senseless and the majority didn't want them to happen.

 

Likewise many things I always imagined would happen just bc they made sense never have happened.

[HRAAB]

Which abilities besides bearing and nursing children are truly unique to women? What abilities are truly unique to men?

 

I knew someone would ask that.  I admit emotions are involved in how I feel about this issue so I'm not working completely on logic, if I ever do.  Primarily, for women bearing and nursing children is what I'm thinking of in this instance.  Men have greater body strength, generally (I've never met a man who wasn't stronger than me unless he was very old) although that wouldn't apply to many jobs in the military outside of combat, and I do understand that is also changing.  Other than that, any other differences I see are only anecdotal and from personal experience so I won't go there, but I do think there are certain areas where either men or women are better suited, generally, not always.  Just personal observation over the years.  By the way, I used to adamantly believe men and women were absolutely equal given the same opportunities.  As I've gotten older, I see it somewhat differently.  Differences are wonderful and should be respected, and this is not limited to differences between genders.  Just as much as I see general differences between men and women, I feel just as strongly about men and women being stereotyped by their gender.  I've probably talked myself into a corner.  

 

On the one hand, women have been held back because they have the ability to  bear children (whether they choose to or not) and are, usually, physically weaker.  On the other hand, if a woman wants and chooses to be feminine, a mother, maternal, that can hold her back.  Maternity leave with pay, job security, accommodations for breastfeeding are a few issues. Leveling the playing field doesn't work because we aren't the same.  After my first two were born, I proposed to my manager that I work from home two days a week and come into the office the other days.  There was nothing in my job that couldn't be done from home.  The answer I got was no one else had ever asked for that type of special treatment (they were mostly men), and that I could expect the same treatment they got.  Level playing field, right?  I was asking for a special accommodation because of my gender (I was nursing the baby at the time, too).  I ended up quitting and losing over half our family income and they lost a good employee.  The same treatment didn't work.  I suspect now (20 years later) I would likely get a different answer.  

 

I don't feel able to express myself very well about this.  It goes far beyond selective service, the draft, or the military.  So, just my opinion.

[MercyA]

Nobody should be enslaved to go kill other people. Think of how many wars have been fought where most of the soldiers on both sides have been forced to fight. So much death and destruction.

 

:iagree:  :iagree:  :iagree:

[KungFuPanda]

Actually, that's not quite true. My sister was in one of the Air Force bands. When she joined her contract stated she (and all other band members) specifically could not see combat and the closest they could come to combat was moving body bags. About a year into her service, their contracts were amended. They were no longer qualified to move body bags either. They literally could play music and that was it.

 

Those contracts just mean that the military won't send them into combat. They don't guarantee combat won't ever come to them. It's the same with women in the military. Sometimes combat happens in unexpected places and everyone adjusts accordingly.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Yes, but even if registration were to be expanded does not mean there is a "reasonable presumption" that they still "expect to use the list" (which was part of the comment to which I replied).

 

Agreed,

[Bluegoat]

I think its very difficult to make the arguments many do bout women in the workplace, and to see families as separate people rather than a sort of team (with regards to work), and also NOT have the same requirements about this.

 

FWIW, women have been in combat roles here for many years, and that doesn't make a difference IMO.

 

I do think though that we don't think enough about the value of having a sort of standing population that is not in, not dependent on, full time paid employment, and that is perhaps even more true in war than at other times.  There is  whole non-monetary economy that produces a huge amount of value, and it doesn't necessarily perform as well when it is converted to the paid economy.

 

I know a lot of families where both are in the military.  They go to  lot of effort to make sure they aren't both away from home at the same time if there are kids, but it can still be hard for families.  In a war, I think one spouse would end up being designated for domestic tasks only.  In fact it might just be best to say that in families, only one spouse can be called up - the other stays behind to head the household.

[Danestress]

Men have greater body strength, generally (I've never met a man who wasn't stronger than me unless he was very old) although that wouldn't apply to many jobs in the military outside of combat, and I do understand that is also changing. Other than that, any other differences I see are only anecdotal and from personal experience so I won't go there, but I do think there are certain areas where either men or women are better suited, generally, not always.

I agree. There are differences we can see and measure. Men tend to be stronger, for example. Women tend to be more flexible. I just wanted to clarify because you were speaking about 'unique' traits. I couldn't think of many. Strength is not unique to men.

i can't think of much that is.

 

But I understand what you are saying and agree that your employer should have worked with you!

[OnMyOwn]

If you truly and honestly "have no one" with whom you could leave your children, then you would be required to choose (after interviewing, checking out, etc.) someone on the list of approved caregivers on the base/post. There is a rather robust list of people who are cleared (meaning, background checks, passed home inspections, etc.) to provide both short-term and long-term care at each military location. You would, of course, be financially obligated to them.

That seems harsh even for people who have chosen to join the military. I can't imagine what desperate measures I would have taken if I were forced to hand my baby and toddler over to the military due to a draft. But, honestly, I wouldn't have willingly left my children for any reason even though I have family who I know would care for them. That's one reason I am against including women in the SS.

Edited December 6, 2015 by OnMyOwn

[Tanaqui]

Men tend to be stronger, for example. Women tend to be more flexible.

 

When exercising, men tend to do more weightlifting, women tend to do more aerobics and yoga. As always, it's really hard to pick out how much of this variation is inherent and how much is cultural.

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

That seems harsh even for people who have chosen to join the military. I can't imagine what desperate measures I would have taken if I were forced to hand my baby and toddler over to the military due to a draft. But, honestly, I wouldn't have willingly left my children for any reason even though I have family who I know would care for them. That's one reason I am against including women in the SS.

 

Single fathers were exempt in previous drafts.  Often fathers with numerous children were as well, as being drafted would cause a hardship.

 

As far as the rules being harsh for those in the service, they are hired to do a job, and their units rely on them to be available. 

Edited December 6, 2015 by ChocolateReignRemix

[JumpyTheFrog]

Can you imagine trying to draft people with all the food allergies we have these days? I am gluten intolerant, possibly celiac, but never officially diagnosed. I don't do well dairy either, although I think I can finally handle dairy cross-contamination and dairy in small amounts if necessary. No military kitchen would prepare food safe for me to eat, and I don't even have anaphylatic allergies!

[Guest]

Can you imagine trying to draft people with all the food allergies we have these days? I am gluten intolerant, possibly celiac, but never officially diagnosed. I don't do well dairy either, although I think I can finally handle dairy cross-contamination and dairy in small amounts if necessary. No military kitchen would prepare food safe for me to eat, and I don't even have anaphylatic allergies!

 

You'd have to have it diagnosed, and then they won't take you. If it was undiagnosed, you're on your own.

[livetoread]

Regarding feminists not historically fighting for stereotypically female issues, I have to strongly disagree. The workplace protections women enjoy now weren't handed to us out of thin air by benevolent men.

 

My feminist views FWIW. Take almost any trait and plot gender on a bell curve. You will see some differences, but you will also see a large amount of overlap. What that means to me is that any one man or woman might have more or less of a given trait, and to restrict based on gender is ridiculous. There are more men than women able to meet strength requirements, but there are women able to meet them too. There are more women than men who might score highly on nurturing abilities, but there is a big overlap and any one man might be better at it than any one women. To tell that man he shouldn't take a nurturing role is ridiculous.

 

Gender is a lousy category to use to try and understand and predict the talents and abilities of people. Most of the feminists I know understand that and fight against people thinking gender is more limiting than it really is.

 

Also, those differences? Some may have some biological basis, but I think that should not be the default assumption. There is much we don't know yet, and the more we learn about the impact of cultural assumptions on gender, the more powerful we understand them to be, even on our biology. If we jump right to biology, we are placing artificial and incorrect limitations on ourselves.

[Murphy101]

As far as the rules being harsh for those in the service, they are hired to do a job, and their units rely on them to be available.

Applying and being hired, is far different than being conscripted.

[Murphy101]

I think you'd have a much tougher time teaching women how to kill. I think they'd resist the need to dehumanize the enemy to the point that they could shoot or drop bombs in places where they know for a fact that little children will be killed. I believe there would be an amazing number who would resist, go awol or become conscientious objectors. I realize Israel does it, but that's a topic I don't dare let myself discuss on a forum such as this.

 

ETA-- I have no idea what this young man thinks of women being drafted, but he is head and shoulders above the rest when discussing war. He has a speech that's been playing recently on LINK TV, as well as these articles. The one on The Hunger games would be great for teens, imo.

http://paulkchappell.com/articles/

I disagree about women being less violent. I have always considered women far more vicious than men.

 

But I did read a couple of the articles in the link you sent and I enjoyed them and agreed with much of he points. So thanks for the link.

[FaithManor]

Currently, single, custodial parents get called up from reserves and sent to combat zones. Active duty members of the armed forces who are also single, custodial parents also get sent to combat zones. I don't see that it would be any different were a draft instituted. 

Yes, they are required to have a care plan in place. In many cases this means an appointed guardian similar to how one designates for the future of children in a will. Often family take them, and of course in the case of divorce non-custodial parents who are considered fit can also then take physical custody as happened to my cousin when he had sole custody of his daughter after a divorce but during his deployment when his little girl was living with his parents his ex-wife completed her alcohol re-hab and then regained custody for the duration of his absence. 

 

Single parent situation is not an exemption at this time.

 

I think that in this day and age we should eliminate the draft. We don't fight wars any longer with large foot armies. But if we are going to have it, then it is only just that females be compelled as well.

[Danestress]

 

Single parent situation is not an exemption at this time.

 

.

Not an exemptions from registering for selective service, however, hardship to dependents is a statutory basis for deferral in the event of a draft. Edited December 8, 2015 by Danestress

[Danestress]

But, honestly, I wouldn't have willingly left my children for any reason even though I have family who I know would care for them. That's one reason I am against including women in the SS.

So women should get a free pass because they might be mothers. And men should shoulder the full burden and duty of military service because they aren't parents? Or they are less important parents?

 

I can see deferring pregnant women and post-partum women. But this alone does not seem grounds for a blanket exemption of women. Almost half of women in the US between the ages of 25 and 29 have never had a child.

[Pam in CT]

As a tactical matter, I truly can't imagine the US re-instituting a draft.  As several pp with military experience noted, one of the lessons of Vietnam was that to have a sizable contingent of soldiers who really really don't want to be there is a bad idea.

 

(As an operational matter, I agree as well that the Vietnam-era college deferments were unfair on a SES/class basis and made a bad situation worse.)

 

______

 

As an ethical matter, I also believe that the government does not have right to require of its citizens, Thou Shalt Kill.  This to me is about as fundamental as it gets.  (I'm uneasy as well with government-compelled Thou Shalt Offer Thyself Up to be Killed in the Event We So Need You To... but at the level of ethics, the former is even more troubling.)

 

______

 

As an ethical matter, I am far more comfortable with a volunteer military than with compulsory service.

 

However, I am troubled by the very disproportionate racial and SES demographics we currently have.  I think it does lead to a risk that too many people in governance are too far from the risks and realities of war.

 

_______

 

As an equity matter and also as a legal one, I can't see a justification for requirements that are different for men v women.  It cuts both ways: it's not fair to oblige men to do something women do not have to do (as the SS registration currently does, even if it's just putting a name on a register... and immensely more, in the event that a draft were ever re-instituted)... and it's also not fair to preclude women from opportunities and benefits that would correspond to service were ever re-instituted.

 

I have no problem at all, though, with the idea that there are obligations as well as benefits to citizenry... and although I have very, very deep reservations with the idea that the government has standing to demand Thou Shalt Kill OR Thou Shalt Be Killed If We Deem It Necessary, I have no problem at all with the idea that we owe the government time in return for the considerable benefits of citizenhood.

 

So I end up netting all these differently directioned, arguably incoherent (!) ideas as... I think we should have a universal mandatory government service program, for men and women, in peacetime and in war, with both a civil program and a military.  Americorps-ish for those whose circumstances keep them tethered closer to home or who are not comfortable with military service; military for those who are willing to do it; with perhaps a longer time requirement in the former to keep the numbers balanced.  

[Pam in CT]

re: Paul Chappell

...

ETA-- I have no idea what this young man thinks of women being drafted, but he is head and shoulders above the rest when discussing war. He has a speech that's been playing recently on LINK TV, as well as these articles. The one on The Hunger games would be great for teens, imo.

http://paulkchappell.com/articles/

 

Thank you very much for this link, Dot... I've never heard of Chappell before ("West Point graduate and Iraq War veteran Paul K. Chappell, author of Will War Ever End?, The End of War, and Peaceful Revolution"), but I thought the first two of these articles were terrific and will look out for more of his work.  I see he also just did a new book, riffing of Sun Tzu, called The Art of Waging Peace....

[Chess Dad]

And I do wonder if those who have served would vote for women being in the front lines or on the draft. I know no one in my family on either side would. I know two women who served who say they would not be for it and would be extremely upset if their daughters were drafted.

 

It is rather easy for people who have not served to say "everyone equal!" But war doesn't give a widget about equality ideals. Brain matters for sure, but the need for brawn is no small thing either and there's just no denying it rare the woman who can physically compete to the same level as a man with the same intense training and exact same requirements.

 

And yeah. Rape and pregnancy during war is not the same level of concern for men either.

 

I wonder how many drafted women would get pregnant to avoid the draft or get out? Another reason I'd think it harder to draft unwilling women.

 

:iagree:

 

Some very good points.  When I was in Iraq from 2002-3 I was shocked at how many female soldiers who got pregnant and were sent home.  There was another non-pc occurrence that the Army continues to hide.  Female and Male soldiers reported that they were raped.  When you report a rape, you go home but in 2002-3 many innocent soldiers were accused of rape that were not guilty, the so called victim lied to go home.  To you and I this sounds crazy, but people are not thinking straight in war zones.

 

I'm all for women in the military.  I'm not sure about them serving in the infantry.  imho.

 

The bottom line in all this is that politicians have been pressured by the PC police and have caved for better or worse.  Time will tell where this all leads but there will always be babies and rapes when you have males and females working close, especially in a war zone.

 

:patriot:

[ocelotmom]

Single mothers are in the military now. They have to have a "plan" for when they are deployed. Not sure why that would give them a deferment.

 

Because a mandatory draft and voluntary enlistment are very different things. Like I said in another post, I'm basing this on current posted policies and historical precedence, not random speculation.

[OnMyOwn]

So women should get a free pass because they might be mothers. And men should shoulder the full burden and duty of military service because they aren't parents? Or they are less important parents?

 

I can see deferring pregnant women and post-partum women. But this alone does not seem grounds for a blanket exemption of women. Almost half of women in the US between the ages of 25 and 29 have never had a child.

 

 

i have a son and a daughter.  I wouldn't want to see either of them drafted, to be honest. I'm not even thinking about this in terms of fairness.  I don't think it's fair to draft men either.  It just appalls me further to think of women being forced to leave their children during a war.

 

I do think women often have a more significant role as primary caretakers.  My husband is a wonderful father, but his role with our children is not anything on the scale that mine is.  He loves our children, but he does not revolve his life around them like I do.  When they were little, that was particularly true.

 

ETA:  Honestly, I can't even imagine the majority of the population complying with a draft at this point. 

Edited December 8, 2015 by OnMyOwn

[Joker]

i have a son and a daughter.  I wouldn't want to see either of them drafted, to be honest. I'm not even thinking about this in terms of fairness.  I don't think it's fair to draft men either.  It just appalls me further to think of women being forced to leave their children during a war.

 

I do think women often have a more significant role as primary caretakers.  My husband is a wonderful father, but his role with our children is not anything on the scale that mine is.  He loves our children, but he does not revolve his life around them like I do.  When they were little, that was particularly true.

 

I've already stated I have a problem with women in the draft (even though I have no good reason) but I felt a need to respond to the bold. That's not at all true for all men, though. So, I don't know why that would be used as a reason.

 

My dh has always been just as involved and has moved his career in such a way that he is home and a part of our lives as much as possible. When I home schooled, he did all read alouds, worked with them on math and science, and was invested in what we used. He now works from home so he can continue to be as involved as possible. He takes them to school and picks them up (even though I'm also along for the ride). He makes them breakfast and helps with homework.  He's a huge part of their lives. He's not the only father I know who does the same. 

[cera2]

It seems unfair to me to insist that women should have equal opportunities but not equal responsibilities.  If we are equal to men we should be equal in all areas.

[HS Mom in NC]

I agree that if you want equal rights for women and men, then you have to have equal responsibilities when it comes to the draft.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on the draft because I haven't given it much thought. 

[frogger]

If you are going to draft men then yes you should draft women. That doesn't mean they have to be a Ranger or a SEAL. Men have to pass tests for particular positions anyway. There are so many ways around the whole "my daughter isn't cut out for combat" argument.

 

That being said I think there should be no draft for anyone. I don't believe in slavery. If you believe in what you are fighting for then you should sign up whole heartedly. I'm somewhat of pacifist too though I believe in some defense of the weak, child kidnapping for example, I would do what I could to stop it but I don't believe our nation has the authority or ability to police the world. If anyone should be drafted it's the politicians who get us into these messes.

Edited December 9, 2015 by frogger

[Sneezyone]

Currently, single, custodial parents get called up from reserves and sent to combat zones. Active duty members of the armed forces who are also single, custodial parents also get sent to combat zones. I don't see that it would be any different were a draft instituted.

Haven't read the responses but, this is only true of people who became single parents after voluntarily obligating themselves. Single custodial parents aren't allowed to join.

[OnMyOwn]

I've already stated I have a problem with women in the draft (even though I have no good reason) but I felt a need to respond to the bold. That's not at all true for all men, though. So, I don't know why that would be used as a reason.

 

My dh has always been just as involved and has moved his career in such a way that he is home and a part of our lives as much as possible. When I home schooled, he did all read alouds, worked with them on math and science, and was invested in what we used. He now works from home so he can continue to be as involved as possible. He takes them to school and picks them up (even though I'm also along for the ride). He makes them breakfast and helps with homework. He's a huge part of their lives. He's not the only father I know who does the same.

I'm not saying that men can't be just as involved as women. I haven't experienced it as the norm, though. My husband is very involved with our children, but he plays a different role in our family than me, and I think that's okay too.