GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN THE U.S. DRAFT

5 July, 2004 | David W. Behrens

[PersonalLiberties]

Oh and just to make sure that I can be called a xenophobe or a racist yet again let me thrown in that affirmative action is especially dangerous when we have a virtual open border combined with low native birth rate.

[Watery Tart]

I wouldn't want this man (and his fellow party members who sponsor this bill) to have any say in what happens to my kids (I don't have any, but if I did....). And from what I gather, the gist of his philosophy is to get the "rich kids" of both genders fighting.

From the article, "For those who say the poor fight better, I say give the rich a chance.... According to Rangel's office, minorities comprise more than 30 percent of the nation's military." Isn't the country at least 30% "minority"? I don't have any figures at hand.

I don't understand him.

[Nick Danger]

none of this changes that the draft is not fair no matter who it applies to.

I was 18 years old once. I got drafted. I didn't think it was unfair. I knew that there were guys whose parents could afford to send them to college who were getting out of it. Mine couldn't, so here I go. But that was my reality, and I lived with it.

It never even occurred to me to think that women could or should be drafted.

But that was a different era. In the interim, women have become men's serious economic competitors. That changes everything. Men take that competition very seriously. We are used to doing it against each other, and we understand what the rules are. Now comes a new class of competitor that has a blanket exemption from something that can strike any of the rest of us, that has the effect of giving them a two-year head start on their jobs and any promotions that are on the way. These are people that men are going to have to compete against for their livelihoods for the next 30 years. So young men today are going to have a very different view on this subject than I did.

I would bet that most young men would be happy to have the women drafted off into the Peace Corps or something. Kick-ass GI Janes aside, we don't really want women around when we're trying to kill people and break things anyway. But what we can't have is a class of Brahmins who get a free head start on all the good jobs back home, while the guys are off getting shot. That's not gonna fly. Not with all the other preferences women already claim.

[arthurus]

Rangel and Hollings want a draft because they envision protesters and rioters in the streets and bringing down a Republican administration with it. They see a triumph of The Revolution to complete the partial success of the 60s/70s.

[arthurus]

A useful draft would be universal male at a given age- 16 up to 19, with only medical exceptions and would be short term- 6 months, maybe. A It would consist of only basic training and training equivalent to army AIT and no posting to duty stations at all. A draftee would not be eligible to enlist until some specified time period had elapsed after the completion of his draft training, at least a month.

There would be then a very large pool of basically trained talent who will have lost the fear of the military as something unknown. Familiarity would eliminate the worst of the reluctance to enlist and the needs of war would bring an abundance of manpower from which to choose.

Including women is much too expensive. Uniforms have to be manufactured in several times the number of size and shape configurations; pregnance is an expensive extraneity for the military and uses up facilities and assets better deployed for the main military ends of killing and breaking things.

[arthurus]

The vast majority of females are in the service as a result of significantly reduced height/weight/physical fitness standards. The English and Canadians have found that there are so few females capable of performing as infantry it is pointless to try

Thank you for that. I was beginning to think that FR had been overrun by screaming feminists, the ladies who live their lives in resentment of their failure to be born as males and the "men" who would push their wives and daughters out in front of themselves to take the bullets first.

[arthurus]

Kerry will need a draft in order to bring the military up to 50-50 male-female which I'm sure he would need to do. That would be a good Democrat justification for the draft. Fighting a war or national defense is never worthwhile Democrat justification for a draft or for anything else.

[leadpenny]

I want you to run for Congress.

Oh, and thank you for doing your duty when you were called.

[leadpenny]

Including women is much too expensive.

Then should they even be in the military in the first place?

[arthurus]

BTW, you need us to procreate as well...Wrong, at least in the eyes of the feminists. All they need is a government takeover of the existing sperm banks. When stocks begin to run low then some male babies would be allowed from which to replenish the sperm banks, a few hundred or a few dozen. But the government that can do that will take over the female reproductive function, too. Pretty soon that woman who rents out her womb will be superseded by a cow.

[PersonalLiberties]

Man, I did not know this was an outsourcing thread.

[arthurus]

I would bet that most young men would be happy to have the women drafted off into the Peace Corps or something

That Peace Corps female draft would turn into a government paid boost into those air conditioned offices for women to push them ahead of the military men.

Actually the men who do military time have their own advantages in the entry into the workplace in that employers like the training they have received at someone else's expense and the maturity and attitude adjustments that have come from the military training.

[Meldrim]

You left out the part about requiring the same height/weight/physical fitness standards for men and women, thereby disqualifying 85%+ of the females. The vast majority of the gals are there only by virtue of grossly reduced requirements.

[arthurus]

Then should they even be in the military in the first place?

There is a place for them in those air conditioned offices (and I do not begrudge them that)in the States and in Europe where they can be treated as employees nrather than as warriors. The men need to use their superior physical abilities on the battlefield, not in the administrative offices except in those jobs where combat training and/or experience bestows the outlook that is required to do the particular office job. Women would be cost effective in the "traditional" female military occupations.

[exnavy]

Thanks for the info.

[independentmind]

I would bet that most young men would be happy to have the women drafted off into the Peace Corps or something. Kick-ass GI Janes aside, we don't really want women around when we're trying to kill people and break things anyway.

If you wanna talk about something that really isn't gonna happen, this is it. Rest assured that if women are included in the draft, they will be placed in positions that expose them to combat--which is every feminist's dream. Many feminists in the past have speculated openly that making women susceptible to the draft would significantly hinder the country's willingness to wage war. That is precisely their goal.

[arthurus]

I was referring, of course, to domestic cows.

[Meldrim]

A kid who gets drafted at nineteen is liable to hate it, resent it, and count the days until he gets out.

Millions of young men were drafted for four year tours of duty in the fifties and sixties: most did just fine afterwards without any deeply harbored resentment against the military. The military did fine because they could raise the bar for enlistment to the extent that over a third of young men were rejected as unsuitable for service.

You'll note during that period the the military was able to maintain very tough standards and operate highly technical equipment...they just did it with a force largely comprised of conscripts: just as the Israeli's and South Koreans do today.

[Meldrim]

Regardless of the Israeli Supreme Court, the Israel Defense Forces are not fielding sex integrated units and maintaining standards high enough to bar the vast majority of females from the front lines. You could expect about the same number of females to make a male high school sports team as you'd expect to make honest combat standards...probably less to be honest.

Do a "Fred Reed" "Women in Combat" google search for a good start on this subject.

[Meldrim]

It takes less than six months to train an Army MP and deploy him to Iraq. Most Army MOS training does not last beyond six months.