~ archived since 2018 ~

Congress punts decision on draft registration into 2022 or 2023

JannTosh12

December 28, 2021

16 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Congress punts decision on draft registration into 2022 or 2023
Author	JannTosh12
Upvotes	16
Comments	27
Date	December 28, 2021 5:30 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/rqkz1m/congress_punts_decision_on_draft_registration/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/congress-punts-decision-on-draft-registration-into.1212143 https://theredarchive.com/post/1212143

Comments

[–]Razorbladekandyfan 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108218 points 4 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Razorbladekandyfan 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108215 points 4 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]throwaway202108212 points 4 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]JannTosh12[S] 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108213 points 4 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

They don't agree strongly enough with making selective service registration and conscription gender neutral but it hasn't been democratic politicians voicing support for keeping selective service registration and conscription male only. This lack of enthusiasm and effort in making conscription gender neutral or abolishing it altogether is indeed a problem, showing the problem with the 2 party system in America and the lack of regard both parties have for men's rights.

But as far as vocal support for keeping discriminatory laws against men like this and not even allowing for the possibility of doing away with conscription altogether? It's been all republicans so far. If there are any democrats that voice the same sentiment, they would probably be from more conservative states if anything else.

And these aren't so-called conservatives. They are conservatives, the conservatives that are the tradcon type above all else. Conservatives as a whole have always campaigned on the issue of putting responsibilities on men, encouraging men's sacrifice and protecting women (often dressed up as for the good of the children).

Similar emphasis on helping women and telling men to take responsibility for others and not expecting anything close to equal treatment has grown with liberals too because of the rise of identity politics from inter-sectionalist feminism, but that is a more recent development.

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108213 points 4 years ago [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

> I made a post about it a few weeks back where I went over a half dozen or so feminists that I found commenting about it and they all supported the so-called conservative position. 100%.

Okay but were they politicians that were voting on this issue?

In terms of the blame for this issue no doubt some can go to the liberal Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor, who made the decision to refuse to rule on this issue and politicize it by sending it to congress.

> this characterization of the desire to keep SS sexist as Republican is false

It was republican politicians that came out most vocally in support of keeping selective service conscription male only. Can you find any democratic politicians that voiced support for the sexist status quo in such a way? I haven't found any yet, it's all been conservative republicans so far, just as in the 1980s when they opposed the ERA because of the possibility of women having to sign up for selective service.

> Where are the feminists or Democratic politicians sounding off about how sexist the Republicans are for doing this? They don't exist.

It's a problem that they are silent and show that both parties see men's rights as a non issue. However, a lot of blame (past liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor) goes to republicans here. If not, why is the recent result called a "conservative victory" by conservative publications and republicans credited with ultimately getting the provision dropped from the NDAA bill?

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-conservative-victory-against-the-push-to-draft-women/

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/06/ndaa-women-draft-dropped-523829

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/19/senate-democrats-propose-women-military-drafts-500153

[–]DavidByron2 -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108214 points 4 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

> As such it's only Republicans talking about this issue. Now among non-politicians you can find some feminists talking and they are saying they agree with the Republican position.

Yes but that is true on any issue. Those people that agree however are voters, not politicians that have direct control over what provisions go into what bill and what laws to pass.

Considering politicians, it was republican politicians that came out most vocally in favor of keeping male only conscription in place and made a concerted effort to strip the gender neutral conscription provision from the NDAA bill. It was not mixed. It was overwhelmingly republican.

Democrats were hesitant to do anything except pay lip service to equality and just accepted whatever outcome. That's bad.

Republicans went out of their way to cheer on the idea of male only conscription being kept in place and some republican running for congress in Florida outright tweeted that he considers men to be expendable. That's worse.

> Because "both" sides are the same and they both hate men.

I agree and that is shown very clearly with this recent issue, but the right wing has no ground to stand on when they claim that the left has a problem with men. What they are hoping is that men don't realize that the right is just using them for their culture wars battles and hope that by blaming the left, they can distract men from their own anti-male policies.

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

[–]DavidByron2 -3 points-2 points-1 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]throwaway202108215 points 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Noise. The Democrats actually pulled the plug twice.

It wasn't noise. Republicans like republican representative Chip Roy (R-TX) and republican senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) made a concerted effort to get the gender neutral draft provision dropped from the NDAA bill. They didn't just talk, they actively tried to get the provision dropped and bargain with other politicians to get this done.

The democrats merely agreed to the proposal of dropping the provision because they wanted certain other proposals in the bill, but those republicans were insistent that they would not allow for that unless the gender neutral conscription provision was dropped. So democrats were apathetic and showed how they consider this a non issue or secondary issue at best, but the republicans were the ones actively pushing for this provision to be dropped in the first place. Democrats merely agreed to the conditions republicans put on them. This again shows a failure of the 2 party system in America when it comes to men's legal rights.

However, because of the active efforts of republican politicians to get the gender neutral conscription dropped from the NDAA bill, legislative branch-wise, the republicans were mainly responsible for getting the gender neutral conscription provision in the NDAA bill dropped.

Both sides are right wing in the USA.

When I refer to "left wing" and "right wing" I mean socially, not economically. Socially, the democratic party is more left wing than the republican party, as the democratic party today pushes inter-sectionalist feminism and social justice, while the republican party pushes traditionalism and social conservativism.

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

[–]Razorbladekandyfan 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]LorainneSin -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

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

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

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

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

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

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

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