Latvia is restoring male ONLY conscription from 2023!

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 59 points60 points61 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]GltyUntlPrvnInncnt 42 points43 points44 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 41 points42 points43 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]bxzidff 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's true, but Denmark has male only conscription and what they have in Sweden is, as far as I know, based mostly on volunteers. Though if they would restore conscription, which is possible, it would most probably be gender neutral.

But Finland is quite conservative when it comes to things related to the army and defence. I remember my shock, when I was in Finland and people told me that those who haven't served in the army are treated as cowards and/or traitors. And it's smth you absolutely shouldn't brag about. I don't say you can't ever hear such opinions in Poland, but in my country they are hugely associated with nationalists, the far-right or uneducated people from little villages. In Finland it seems to be quite a common way of thinking. I'm sorry if I generalise too much, but this is what I've experienced while being there.

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]peanutbutterjamsleft-wing male advocate 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 112 points113 points114 points 4 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 46 points47 points48 points 4 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 23 points24 points25 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 22 points23 points24 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]az226 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lorarc 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Apart from USA there is not such thing as registering, you just get a letter when you're 18, you get a commision that determines if you're fit for service or not and if you are fit and didn't get an exemption you get a letter to report for service.

But even then the army chooses who they want to draft and who they don't want to. I wasn't drafted because I continued my education. I finished University when I was 24 and although I was still eligible for the draft and there was a discussion that the army should go digital by forcibly drafting people with my education (in hopes they would stay in the army) they officially left me off the hook a few years later.

The people eligible for draft are young men, even with equality in draft most armies wouldn't bother in drafting women and older people are not illigible or they already served. So the whole referendum comes down to asking young men if they would like to be drafted or not, what's the difference between that and volountary service? And what about people who were too young to vote?

[–]34T_y3r_v3ggi3s 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bojuric 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheSpaceDuck 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheSpaceDuck 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]redgarnetamaranth10 points 4 years ago [recovered] (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deadlocked02 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It’s either extremely naive or a way of arguing for the status quo to be maintained without saying it. There’s only so much a country can do to improve itself. You don’t get to choose your neighbors or influence their policies to such extent. How could countries like South Korea or Ukraine ever afford to abolish the draft?

When someone uses the “no draft is the only option” argument, what they’re essentially saying is that world peace is the only way of correcting this injustice. What’s more ironic is that a lot of these same individuals will otherwise defend policies like affirmative action arguing that even though quotas are unfair and not the ideal solution, it wouldn’t be right to disenfranchised wait until the system is fixed. But when it comes to male conscription, they won’t accept anything other than the ideal solution.

[–]Bojuric 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

You make it seem as though there were 2 options. The draft or no army.

There are professional armies and in case of Latvia there is also NATO. Even Ukraine, although it's not part of the alliance, which makes its situation harder, is currently engaging mainly professional soldiers. It even planned to make the army fully professional not long time ago, before this war. And that although it actually already was under attack since 2014, (it wasn't a full scale war back then, but people were fighting and dying on the front).
Why? Because it seems to be more effective to have a professional army. What interests me more however is that it is the only morally justifiable one to have as well.

This is not only a gender-related problem. It's also about, whether a state has the MORAL right to dispose over the life of its citizens and force them to kill other people. My answer is no.

I'm not a hippie. I'm ready to pay for the army and support it. I'm ready to pay for the veterans and heroes. But I don't support any form of slavery. And as to the gender aspect of it all: whenever you expect or at least accept people to be disposable and forced to anything for the greater cause, you will always end up with men being absolutely disproportionally affected, because of the obvious reasons all of us know ranging from the biological to the cultural ones.

Ofc having slaves is both cheaper and easier. I think the states are responsible for creating the best and most modern possible army and to make its citizens ready to deffend their culture and way of life or support the military effort in other ways of their own free will. Thus should the states be aware that they would lose the war when they fail to do THIS,not in the moment,in which they lose their enslaved cannon fodder and have no more people to mobilize.

[–]lorarc 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bojuric 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ExchangeLegitimate21 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lorarc 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

For many of us, equality means fifty fifty. It means proportionality.

To many of us here, it doesn't.

When it comes to legal obligations, sure, the obligations should be equally applied to all. But it is also important to look at requirements for the actual jobs (e.g. you don't want people who can't pull their weight in combat roles in the field).

And we want to maximize freedom of choice in lieu of equality of opportunity. If more women want to go into nursing, they should be able to do so, as long as there are no barriers to men who also want to go into nursing. If more men want to go into IT, they should be able to do so, as long as there are no barriers to women who also want to go into IT.

Forcing proportionality or equal representation in cases where free choice should apply is a recipe for disaster, as it necessarily leads to discrimination.

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

are you therefore ok with male only conscription in countries without the option of eliminating the draft, ex: living next to Russia?

No. I am not okay at all with male-only conscription.

But my point is that eliminating the draft is always an option, and is the right thing to do, because it progresses human rights.

If there is to be any obligation, it should be gender-neutral. But requiring anyone to put their literal lives on the line goes against human rights. That should be a voluntary decision.

If you're a country and you can't attract enough people to volunteer for a professional army in the face of a concrete threat like Putin, you need to ask yourself what you're doing wrong.

After all, their argument is that men are physically superior soldiers

That argument is based on a generalization that doesn't hold up when you start looking at specifics. There are definitely some women who are more capable than some of the men who would be conscripted.

And are you ok with domestic labor and childcare being primarily by female partner instead of split evenly with her male partner?

That should be the free choice of each couple. They should be mature enough to mutually agree on how they want to arrange things.

I ask because based on the voting patterns in this sub, my opinion seems to be the majority. At Least that's my impression

My impression is that equal opportunity would by far be the more popular position, but maybe there's a more recent influx of people thinking differently. But to know for sure we should put it to a vote.

When it comes to the draft or conscription specifically, there are many people here who opportunistically support the law to include women, because they see no realistic change of the draft being abolished. That doesn't mean that's not generally considered the ideal.

Side note: Some poster is going thru our comments upvoting me and downvoting you. Just wanted to let you know it wasn't me.

Since you got upvoted, that would have been my conclusion as well. It doesn't really matter, as I'll make my case anyway.

[–]AvoidPinkHairHippos 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pasolini123 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bojuric 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Just_RandomPerson 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Harsimaja 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grow_peace_in_Bedlamleft-wing male advocate 43 points44 points45 points 4 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Based on the traditional gender roles underlying conscription, wouldn't the female equivalent of male conscription for war be forcing women of childbearing age to be impregnated during periods of low or negative population growth? Obviously, this would rightly provoke outcry from human rights organizations all over the world, no matter where it was done, but no one gives a damn when a government appropriates men's bodies to be beaten up and mangled for its own ends.

Once again, it's progressivism, liberation from traditional gender roles, and human rights for women, but the same old traditional obligations for men (with none of the privileges, gratitude, reciprocity, or respect that ostensibly came with them under the old order, which, no, I am not advocating that we go back to; rather, I want it to be abolished for both halves of the population).

And feminists in the wake of the overturning of Roe v Wade have the nerve to say that men never have to worry about threats to their bodily autonomy!

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]peanutbutterjamsleft-wing male advocate 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]omegaphallic -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]peanutbutterjamsleft-wing male advocate 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]omegaphallic 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Motanul_Negru 20 points21 points22 points 4 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fearless-File-3625 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Motanul_Negru 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]omegaphallic 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

NATO's strategy is to let the Baltics get invaded though, as they lack any capacity to properly defend it. The approximation is that it would take 180 days for them to be liberated because that's how long it would take for the other armies to mobilize and organize.

NATO is very unlikely to use nukes if Russia invades, and Putin is so unpredictable at this point that the threat might as well be real. Keep in mind they're making gains in Ukraine without any mobilization and only with (supposedly) about a quarter of their army numbers. It may look like Russia is losing but they're really not.

Today, people living in liberal democratic countries are actually a minority in the world, and some of the few that remain are starting to ditch it too (Hungary for example). As good as the idea of peace sounds, it's becoming less and less likely and we have to be prepared to defend ourselves one way or another. One good way of that is by deterrence through denial. Finland has one of the strongest armies because of conscription and it seems at least to be part of normal life for most people, though they give people the option to choose between civilian and military service, which doesn't seem like a bad idea.

I do agree it's shit though and they should at the very least ensure their system isn't as shit as Russia's, where some people legitimately get PTSD from the training. Considering they're in NATO though, they probably aren't like that.

Of course, the real issue here, at least for me, is that it's only men. How can we pretend to be equal when men still have to face their traditional obligations that they don't even get the benefits for?

[–]omegaphallic 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Just_RandomPerson -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]omegaphallic 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Motanul_Negru 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]peanutbutterjamsleft-wing male advocate 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]peanutbutterjamsleft-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]omegaphallic 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]M27saw -15 points-14 points-13 points 4 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]M27saw -10 points-9 points-8 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan[S] 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]caramellocone 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]M27saw -13 points-12 points-11 points 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]M27saw -6 points-5 points-4 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bojuric -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MelissaMiranti 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Bojuric -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]caramellocone 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]Just_RandomPerson -6 points-5 points-4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]caramellocone 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Comments