TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Republicans move to strike Dem proposal to include women in the military draft

ABCAJB

October 12, 2022
342 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-move-kill-dem-proposal-include-women-military-draft
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

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Republicans move to strike Dem proposal to include women in the military draft
Author

ABCAJB

Upvotes 342
Comments 131
Date October 12, 2022 7:42 PM UTC
(3 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/y2dda8/republicans_move_to_strike_dem_proposal_to/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/republicans-move-to-strike-dem-proposal-to-include.1134022
https://theredarchive.com/post/1134022
Top posts by ABCAJB

Mike Pence's group urges GOP to oppose measure including women in future draft

163 upvotes
June 20, 2024
/r/MensRights

Top GOP senator opposes changes to expand military draft

32 upvotes
June 23, 2024
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Selective service gender inequality and a call to action for equality.

31 upvotes
March 3, 2022
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Gender inequality in the law and in the selective service system and a call to action for equality.

31 upvotes
February 27, 2022
/r/MensRights

Congress again backs away from expanding selective service system registration or abolishing draft altogether.

26 upvotes
December 9, 2022
/r/MensRights

Equality in the selective service system and gender equality in the law.

4 upvotes
February 25, 2022
/r/MensRights

Petition to Abolish selective service or to make everyone register

2 upvotes
February 23, 2022
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]McFeely_Smackup1 points 3 years ago [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link

FYI, people tend to accept the "Draft = women dying in combat" line that's used to justify the emotional motivation to exclude women, and it's 100% a lie.

In times of war, non combat support troops outnumber combat roles about 10 to 1. Even if we never put a single woman in combat, they could still be drafted to fill those 10 support roles.

There is zero legitimate reason to exclude women from the draft, it's all political theater and outright lies.

[–]redditthrowaway1478 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

How have countries that have long required all their citizens to enlist faired?

Isreal and south Korea come to mind - how's it been going for them?

[–]randonumero 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What exactly are you asking? FWIW while travelling I've met several young Israeli women who had finished their conscription. Most went through initial training and then had pretty mundane support jobs. One I met was a krav maga instructor. I say this with all due respect to everyone who was/is in the military but not everyone in the military, even in times of war, is going to see combat nor need to be in direct combat. If shit got really bad though there'd be no reason to not have and expect women to fight. The female Peshmerga were gaining ground while tons of men were fleeing and choosing not to fight

[–]elebrin -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Drafted people usually end up as infantry. At least historically in the US.

Maybe we need to draft women into having children so we have a next generation of soldiers, but drafting them for fighting is a mistake.

[–]PatriarchyEnjorer1 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

3 societies come to mind and I respect the hell out of each of them as a whole.

Israel, South Korea and the Kurds.

Thing with Kurds is I don’t think they have a central gov to draft an army but the women do voluntarily fight alongside the men. They’ve been a loyal ally in the Middle east for decades despite our relative indifference to their situation.

[–]redditthrowaway1478 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's purposefully vague because I don't know much about the topic

[–]PonderingMan33 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am confused as we don't have a mandatory draft in our country. Plus it's US foreign policy thats needs them to send troops everywhere.

[–]redditthrowaway1478 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

From what I understand, both Isreal and SK require 1-2 years military service from all its citizens - men and women.

It's not a draft, like when at war. It's required even during peacetime

[–]PonderingMan33 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In south korea women are not part of draft. While in Israel its men and women both. Though the time to serve is 30 months for men and 24 months for women.

Draft during war is called conscription ... But yes for these countries it is even in peace time and mandatory.

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

Oh wow. I never knew!

[–]forever2100yearsold 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just my take but there are other political reasons to not include women in the draft. We are currently dancing on the edge of WW3 and having the government legally allowed to just grab any citizen to feed the war machine might encourage war hawks to be more hawkish knowing this. Personally if I were the Republicans I would be making a huge stink about us escalating a potential WW3 and the almost certain use of nuclear weapons involved. I would then put forward legislation removing the draft saying that the American people are tired of fighting wars for the elite that don't protect America and actually put it in danger. But the Republicans are idiots so this won't happen. Maybe the libertarian party will get something done.

[–]Acousmetre78 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How can society lie and say that we treat men as more valuable when we literally knowingly would draft men to die no problem. In school, women could say anything to me. Hey would even sexually assault me and teachers would laugh. We have no value to society. We’re mules.

[–]Grizzleswitch 42 points43 points44 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry, but equality of benefit should come with equality of responsibility.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 76 points77 points78 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Tradcons and feminists, name a more iconic duo.

[–]Pillery 34 points35 points36 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This article shows the difference between advocating for Men's Rights vs. just being a conservative or traditionalist.

[–]Imdefender 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Tradcons and feminists, name a more iconic duo.

stealing this for my Facebook page

[–]Wafflebot17 100 points101 points102 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Abolish the draft entirely conscription is slavery I don’t want women drafted or men drafted.

[–]Schadrach 45 points46 points47 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, but that ain't happening unless it's pushed. Requiring women to register on equal protection grounds creates an impetus to remove it because it makes Selective Service a women's issue.

Likewise, as soon as women become required to register, it's time to sue in every state that has laws requiring proof of registering if male to get access to anything (for example you cannot attend any state funded college in my state at all if you are male and haven't registered, or receive state student aid or hold a state government job) and the federal government over FAFSA.

[–]disayle32 23 points24 points25 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A nice sentiment, but it's not going to happen. The government will never give up its power to send its citizens off to war when it's deemed "necessary". If the powers that be were ever forced to choose between equalizing the draft or abolishing it, they would pick the former, no contest.

[–]blaizken_420 13 points14 points15 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Imagine supporting political parties.

[–]rsa1x 76 points77 points78 points 3 years ago (43 children) | Copy Link

Like I said many times before: conservatives are not men's allies. They are just differently bad compared to feminists

[–]Anih1list 28 points29 points30 points 3 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

Worse, actually. Feminists help women regardless of what happens to men. Tradcons make things worse for everyone all the time. Unlike feminists, tradcons never implement policies that accidentally help men too.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

Y’all are looking at this all wrong. The differences in expectations in government services (police, firefighters, military) is already bad enough as is. Women get into these services with literally half of the physical expectations as men, but are to be expected to perform the same duties, in which they are PROVEN to be unable to do. So when one person is unable to perform their required duties, that requires the others around them to pick up their slack.

As a combat veteran, i can tell you that too many women in combat roles is already a problem. Being unable or unwilling to take the same risks or perform the same activities as men is already making things more dangerous for the men deployed in dangerous areas. I’ve seen it first hand myself. Groups being to “afraid” to fight their way out of dangerous areas, which requires others to go in after them.

What do you think females will be like that DIDNT volunteer for those dangerous roles? Women drafted into the military will make the military MORE dangerous for men. Hell, even dudes who have been drafted care less about the mission and can out right refuse to follow orders they deem too dangerous. What do you think drafted women will do?

So rejecting women as draftees is a BENEFIT to men and the military. Think of some of the women you know in your own life. How many of them would you want to share a battlefield with?

[–]TurbulentFlow7145 24 points25 points26 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

If that is the case then I believe we need to eliminate the draft altogether. It’s the only fair and ethical solution.

[–]TAPriceCTR 22 points23 points24 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The only way to end the draft is to subject women to it. As long as only men are being harmed by a social program, no one sees the program as a bad thing.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I agree, slightly. But i can assure you, that if they are drafting folks who aren’t veterans and reservists, we are all dead and normal citizens are the last line of defense.

[–]tritisan 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I would whole-heartedly support the draft if it was ONLY used for defense of our Nation's soil. Not to be sent off to kill brown people someplace else.

Also, up til after WWII, as you are likely aware, the US did not have a gigantic standing military. The Military Industrial Complex didn't exist yet. Drafts were only used when threats were truly existential. (See: Ukraine c. 2022)

I wish we could go back to those times; but alas, America is the hegemon. And nature sure does abhor a power vacuum.

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

The reserves are supposed to be defensive too. They belong to the state but can be used nationally.

[–]Poseidon8264 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How would you feel about the draft being used to defend other countries being invaded unprovoked?

[–]tritisan 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not great.

[–]Poseidon8264 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why not? What's different about the draft being used to defend another country being invaded by a hostile power?

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

Or we could just use them as cannon fodder and medics

[–]Anih1list 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Women can be put in non-combat roles. But the draft should be altogether abolished anyway.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The draft should remain, but be used ONLY as a defensive force, much as we use the National Guard now. As in, defending home turf. Because, frankly, if the war has reached the shores of the US, our military is dead, and civilians will have to fight for their own lives.

[–]Darkwolf90 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The draft is an unnecessary ineffective solution to this. We already have military reserve forces and the national guard. The main issue is mostly how despite spending more then the other 9 in the top ten military spending countries, our soldiers get paid sub min. wage to an absurd degree. To put it bluntly people don't want to actually pay for people who risk their lives to kill. It's always seen as a hypothetical that may or may not happen, while dismissing the fact that our military has and can have expanded non-combat roles.

[–]rsa1x 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is very good point of view. It actually seems things will get more dangerous for men if women reduce the combat effectiveness. However, conservatives are likely doing that because men are disposable in their view

[–]Fearless-File-3625 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago* (21 children) | Copy Link

The Department of Defense has acknowledged that extending the registration requirement to women carries many benefits. See 2017 Defense Report, supra, at 17-19. The Commission has concluded there is no rationale for continuing to exclude women. See Inspired to Serve, supra, at 116. And addressing the issue now—when there is no threat of the draft being reinstated—leaves time for Congress and the military to remedy the issue. Any reliance interests that may exist, moreover, do not “outweigh the countervailing interest that all individuals share in having their constitutional rights fully protected.” Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 349 (2009).

From NCFM's petition in the supreme court.

So according to Department of Defence there is no rationale to exclude women from SS.

But of course 5 star arm chair generals like you know better.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=URGhMw1u7MM

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-marines-women-20150912-story.html

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/marine-corps-study-women-in-combat-at-disadvantage-men-perform-significantly-better/

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Seems other studies prove the DoDs findings are wrong.

Not to mention, accounts from people who actually fought in wars should actually hold more water than what actual 5 Star generals have to say…

[–]Fearless-File-3625 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

You didn't cite a single study that said DoD is wrong about including women. An obvious fact that completely eludes you is that women being weaker doesn't necessarily mean they shouldn't be drafted. That is total fallacy in logic.

​

Yeah I would rather listen to 5 star generals than some rando with unverifiable credentials on the internet.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Clearly you didn’t look at ANY of the sources i posted. The research was done by the Marines and Department of the Navy themselves. This isn’t hard to understand. The findings are clear and irrefutable. If you disagree, feel free to take your cognitive dissonant ass away from me:

[–]Fearless-File-3625 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

"An obvious fact that completely eludes you is that women being weaker doesn't necessarily mean they shouldn't be drafted. That is total fallacy in logic."

None of your sources say that women shouldn't be drafted.

Learn to read before talking about "cognitive dissonance", sounds like you are suffering from cognitive impairment.

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

No, my resource are about the effectiveness of women in combat, and the effect also have on men in combat. Not one of my sources says ANYTHING about the draft.

[–]Fearless-File-3625 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

"Not one of my sources says ANYTHING about the draft." -> that's what I am saying for last 4 hours.

None of sources contradict DoD's report.

[–]Efficient_Creme_30671 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

But they do. WTF!? Lol. Jesus Christ…

Research/test done by the Marines and the Department of the Navy:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=URGhMw1u7MM

That’s just one of the sources i have now posted THREE TIMES…

[–]Fearless-File-36251 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tell me how does that contradict DoD's report that women should be conscripted?

[–]Efficient_Creme_30671 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

WATCH…THE FUCKING….VIDEO…

[–]Fearless-File-36251 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tell me how does that contradict DoD's report that women should be conscripted?

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Since you can’t seem to find the information yourself…

Women fail the Army physical requirements test WITH A 60% FAIL RATE. Meaning, less than half of all women in the Army can pass a basic physical fitness test…

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/05/17/more-female-soldiers-are-passing-acft-their-scores-still-trail-mens.html/amp

In the Marines, when fail the basic jobs course, at a rate of 84%. Meaning, only 16% of female Marines pass basic tests…

https://amp.thestate.com/news/local/military/article85009717.html

Hear it straight from the female soldiers mouths…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=URGhMw1u7MM

Not only that, ask yourself why there are ZERO female only combat units. Why would that be? There are male only combat units. Why is there not even one single female only combat unit?

[–]Fearless-File-3625 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

"An obvious fact that completely eludes you is that women being weaker doesn't necessarily mean they shouldn't be drafted. That is total fallacy in logic."

I guess I need to keep quoting myself until this simple statement gets into your thick ass skull.

[–]Efficient_Creme_30671 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’ll speak slowly…

Women….are less combat effective….than men….which makes it more dangerous…for men…

More dangerous for men…..means we shouldn’t draft them….

[–]Fearless-File-36252 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"An obvious fact that completely eludes you is that women being weaker doesn't necessarily mean they shouldn't be drafted. That is total fallacy in logic."

I guess I need to keep quoting myself until this simple statement gets into your thick ass skull.

[–]Efficient_Creme_30671 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’m just gonna assume you were cursed with an over abundance of logic and intellect. So I’m just gonna go talk to the adults and leave you at the kiddy table, talking to yourself, as you repeat the same thing over and over.

[–]Fearless-File-36252 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah you should consult adults.

[–]Efficient_Creme_30671 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Again i ask….if women in combat is “perfectly fine”…..and aren’t so ineffective…that they are a danger to those around them……why isn’t there a single all women’s combat unit? Not even one?

[–]Efficient_Creme_3067 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even the two females that passed Army Ranger school, were found to have received special treatment in order to pass, including getting multiple chances to pass, which men do not get.

https://people.com/celebrity/female-rangers-were-given-special-treatment-sources-say/

[–]TAPriceCTR 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The difference between feminists and tradcons is feminists hate men regardless, tradcons respect men who fill their role. And tradcons will grant men rights ALMOST commensurate their responsibilities while feminists give women all rights and men all responsibilities.

[–]Anih1list 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Feminists are actually about evenly split between anti-men, pro-men, and man-dismissive. It’s difficult to be pro-trans if you’re consciously misandrist: either you believe men are culturally inferior and thus trans men are evil, or you believe males are born inferior and thus trans women are not actually women. The cognitive dissonance is higher than most people can handle

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

Feminists can handle any level of cognitive dissonance.

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

How does the Republican's actions here negatively affect men though. We still have to sign up for the draft one way or another.

[–]TAPriceCTR 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because the only way society objects to the draft is if women are subject to it.

[–]Nacht_Waya -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Were you ever military?

[–]ABCAJB[S] 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

For those who don't know the current selective service system discriminates based on gender making the current system unconstitutional violating the 14th amendment of the constitution and the equal protections clause.Please consider signing my petition that calls on congress and the senate to either abolish the selective service system or expand it to everyone to have equality in the law.

Link to the petition: https://chng.it/mtgBd6yn

[–]DavidByron2 40 points41 points42 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

It's all a pantomime. "Both" sides oppose it.

And the USSC who has the job of declaring the existing law unconstitutional refused to act on the basis that Congress said it would - which was a lie as everyone knew. And now it's proven a lie the USSC is still refusing to act. Again "both" sides (Congress and the Supreme Court this time) oppose it.

[–]ABCAJB[S] 22 points23 points24 points 3 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

Conservatives are the ones who oppose this as they are the ones who took down the provision last year to make the selective service equal and this year they are trying to do the same.There is currently a provision in this years NDAA from democrats to expand the selective service to achieve equality in the law.The best thing we can do right now is call on our senators to support the provision from the democrats to finally have equality in the law.

[–]DavidByron2 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

It was one of the most "liberal" justices who made the call to throw this to Congress. Sotomayor is her name I think?

Yes the red hand puppet says stuff a little different from the blue hand puppet. That's how a puppet show works. If the Democrats wanted this they could easily have it regardless of what the Republicans did.

[–]ABCAJB[S] 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The supreme court is a conservative majority plus Sotomayor was one of the few justices who voted to hear the case.

[–]DavidByron2 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

She wrote the decision AGAINST hearing the case.

Update: on June 7, 2021, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari. In denying the petition, Justice Sotomayor issued a brief statement, joined by Justices Breyer and Kavanaugh, acknowledging that "the role of women has changed dramatically" since Rostker was decided, but explaining that it was declining to review the case in order to allow Congress more time

https://www.aclu.org/cases/national-coalition-men-et-al-v-selective-service-system-et-al

And if we are supposed to believe that they really thought Congress would fix the problem then why are they silent a year and a half later and nothing by Congress in sight? Not to mention since when does a judge say "Oh you're guilty as fuck but I'll just give you a few years to fix things instead of actually doing my job".

[–]Schadrach 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

a year and a half later and nothing by Congress in sight

At the time the denial was written, there was a clause in the defense bill to make SS gender neutral. It got torpedoed shortly after SCOTUS refused to hear the case.

It's back in this year's bill, placed there by Democrats and it's mostly GOP vocally opposing it. It still won't pass on just Dem voters because Dems passing anything at all requires they all vote for it, and not all Dems are for it.

[–]ABCAJB[S] 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Just because Sotomayor came out along with a few other justices to explain why the supreme court as a whole decided to not hear the case does not mean that she herself voted to not hear the case because she did vote to hear the case.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No you don't understand.

She was the one who blocked it. Specifically when a case comes up 3 justices look at it and in this case they all three agreed to block it and Sotomayor was chosen to write the decision. The other two agreed so much with her argument that they didn't bother to write separate comments.

She blocked it. She did it.

[–]ABCAJB[S] 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You are the one who's not Understanding. Sotomayor and the other justices that came out with her in the joint statement all suggested that the current system does discriminate therefore they would have voted to declare the current system as unconstitutional in the law.

[–]Schadrach -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They suggested that, but they didn't do it. They refused to hear the case, after admitting that if they did hear it they probably would have decided in favor of NCFM claiming that SCOTUS doesn't like to get between the military and Congress if at all possible.

[–]TrilIias 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Congress could have done this last year. They were supposed to. Congress is currently controlled by Democrats. Yes, Republicans were the ones who vocally opposed a gender equal draft, but they didn't actually have any power. Democrats simply let Republicans take the fall, and Republicans were happy to oblige.

[–]nofaploveit 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Bingo. Left babies women and doesn’t want anyone but men dying in wars and the right is traditional and babies women but wants them in the kitchen.

[–]DavidByron21 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Well in the USA the left is the right. Democrats are a right wing party.

For fucks sake the Democrats are paying Nazis to kill ethnic minorities in Ukraine right now. and both parties have been paying Nazis there since the 1950s.

[–]nofaploveit 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Either way no side has men’s interests in mind especially young men like myself. I don’t support anyone other than myself.

[–]dw87190 44 points45 points46 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Feminists: "Of course men support right wing parties, right wingers serve men"

Right wing parties: ...

[+]ImperialEvidence -8 points-7 points-6 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How is this bad for men, though. It's good for women, but changes nothing for men.

[–]Fearless-File-3625 18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It is bad for men because only men have to bear the responsibility of defending the country WITHOUT any benefits.

[–]Woozuki 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Nuh uh, we defend the country in order to come home to our beautiful women who weren't getting killed on the front lines.

"Beautiful women": blue hair, obese, tattoos, masculine, insubordinate, drug abusers.

[–]OwnerAndMaster 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hence why men aren't exactly lining up to defend their nation anymore... no families worth defending

[–]OnThatSigmaGrindset 24 points25 points26 points 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

tradcons are against men's rights activism

who would've guessed?

[+]Outrageousirish -16 points-15 points-14 points 3 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

I need people to go kill other people. I’m going to choose men. What’s wrong with that?

[–]OnThatSigmaGrindset 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

if men have more responsibilities, shouldn't they have extra rights?

[+]Outrageousirish -8 points-7 points-6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a all around, always true statement. I don’t know. The world is grey. It’s situationally dependent.

[–]NetNeutralitee1 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

What rights did you have in mind?

[–]disayle32 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would like to have the right to an intact body at birth. That would be a nice start.

[–]B1G_Fan 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Nothing except for the fact that men having obligations AND rights implies that women also should have obligations AND rights

And if women can’t or won’t perform the same obligations as man, then maybe women shouldn’t have the same rights as a man…

[–]Outrageousirish -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

If everything falls apart yeah you’ll find yourself running around with a riffle and people trying to kill you. Women will find themselves changing bandages and cleaning up bodily fluids. I know where I would rather be. So what’s the difference?

[+]B1G_Fan -9 points-8 points-7 points 3 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Will a woman be able to fight off a violent enemy soldier?

Nope

Women should not be serving in combat because the second place trophy in combat is a body bag

And if women can’t perform to the same standards as men in combat, then they don’t have the same responsibilities as men

And if women don’t have the same responsibilities as men, why do women have the same rights as men?

[–]Outrageousirish 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I agree with you on the combat. I’m just unsure about the right. That only men should be able to decide to make war?

[–]B1G_Fan 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote because they can’t serve in the military in the same capacity as a man

The end

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

Someone has to go around pickup all the nasty uniforms, undershirts, underwear. Drag all that back and throw it in a commercial washer.

Someone has to drive that fuel truck around and make sure all the tanks are full.

Someone has to get that big pot of food and stir the pot with a row boat oar.

Who does that?

[–]OnThatSigmaGrindset 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

it's better than literally dying

i agree with the commenter above. if draft is going to be a thing, then people that aren't drafted shouldn't really be able to vote

[–]Outrageousirish -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

“2,709,918 Americans served in uniform in Vietnam.”

“58,148 were killed in Vietnam, 75,000 severely disabled, 23,214 were 100% disabled, 5,283 lost limbs and 1,081 sustained multiple amputations.”

That means you’ve got a better than a 90% of getting out of there. And Vietnam was a tough one.

[–]KitsuneCreativ -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You know, not all women are weak ass frail fucks mate

[–]B1G_Fan -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Venus and Serena Williams would be bench warmers on a high school male tennis team that routinely competes for its respective state championship

The women’s national soccer team routinely loses to 14 year old boys

Terrance Popp had a great video that showed multiple studies going back to the 70s that showed that only 3% of female applicants for frontline combat can meet the same standards as the males

So, yes, to an extent, you’re right.

One woman isn’t necessarily frail, but the vast majority of women have no business being in a physical competition with a man

[–]Donut_of_Patriotism 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So republicans don’t want equality between men and women? Got it.

[–]Fearless-File-3625 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For anybody who is saying including women would harm the military, Department of defence in their 2016 report concluded that their is no reason to not include women in SS, other than of course tradcon man hating.

From NCFM's petition in the supreme court.

The Department of Defense has acknowledged that extending the registration requirement to women carries many benefits. See 2017 Defense Report, supra, at 17-19. The Commission has concluded there is no rationale for continuing to exclude women. See Inspired to Serve, supra, at 116. And addressing the issue now—when there is no threat of the draft being reinstated—leaves time for Congress and the military to remedy the issue. Any reliance interests that may exist, moreover, do not “outweigh the countervailing interest that all individuals share in having their constitutional rights fully protected.” Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 349 (2009).

[–]hawkeyepitts 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The Republican platform consists of one main goal: oppose anything that Democrats support.

The Republican Party is NOT men’s friend. They want us to be soldiers to go die in the wars that make them rich. They want men who do hard or dangerous jobs to have limited worker’s rights and no job benefits, so their CEO friends can pocket more money for themselves instead of paying employees enough to live comfortably. They want men to struggle to afford healthcare, so we can die when we’re no longer perfectly healthy to keep working for their benefit.

Republicans want men to marry, have 4 or 5 kids they can’t afford, and be locked into their job they can’t afford to leave so the oligarchs can make more money off him. If you don’t marry/kids, conservatives will call you weird/gay/loser/weak. They do NOT want men to be human beings with individual rights.

Their other main goal is to make sure we keep being fodder for them to stay rich. Gays, guns and abortion is just smoke and mirrors to keep people from realizing how much they’re fucking the average man straight up the ass.

ThE dEMoCrAtS aReN’t PeRfEcT eItHeR, but at least they’re the party who’ll occasionally (try to) throw a bone to the working class majority and the party who will even pretend like men are individual human beings who deserve an equal chance at life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

[–]OGMol3m4n -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The feminist movement is a leftist movement. Not sure what this revisionist history is about.

[–]hawkeyepitts 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn’t a square. You can be on the political left and denounce feminism.

Conservatives don’t give a fuck about men. We’re fodder to make the rich richer and socially, so-called “conservative values” are nothing but chains to keep us in our role as disposable pawns. Conservatives also act like women are weaker and have designated roles for them too that cause inequality and major burdens on men. For example, opposing an equal draft.

It’s not revisionist history or whatever buzzword you want to call it - the Republican Party has done an excellent job of convincing people to vote against their own best interests.

[–]OGMol3m4n -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll just agree and disagree. Politicians are not your friend, I don't care if I get a "crumb" from either side. Trash talk the Republicans all you want but I'll never act like the democratic party has my interests in mind. They're all in this together.

[–]FUCK_IDEOLOGUES 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Kinda interesting how MRA gets painted as right wing fanatics and here’s the Dems trying to vote in one of the major complaints to level the playing field and the conservatives are… being conservative. I get it though, in a modern world it should be fair, but if your goal for the world is a return to traditional values and traditional nuclear families… I agree with Mcfeely though, it’s definitely not as dangerous as it’s being made out to be. War is not what it was in the early 1900s. We had less than 2,500 deaths in Afghanistan over 20 years, just over 1,800 civilian contractors.

On another note, how about being paid a reasonable wage for putting your life on the line. If It was life changing money it may be a different story. Especially when so many of the guys come back to an uncaring cold civilian world, end up working shit jobs because none of the training was relevant.

[–]OctaviaPinfold3 points 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I bet this time no feminist or woman will freak out that "old white men" are making decisions about them.

Forcing our daughters, mothers, wives and sisters to fight our wars is wrong

Funny how they imply that "our" means "every man's" as if the average man had any say in when a country goes to war. Really the only thing the average person can do is to vote for politicians, so unless they acknowledge that wars are politicians' wars and not the people's, they essentially are saying that only men's votes count (although the average man being able to vote is a very young phenomenon compared to drafting men to wars). If feminists (or the wokes) wanted equality, they'd jump on such an easy target of a statement to claim either that it's not the people's wars--draft should be illegal--or that it's women's wars, too--women should be drafted, too.

We should celebrate the women who have volunteered to serve our country and thank the women who played a vital role in defending America at every point in our nation’s history

And forget the men who were forced to fight and died, or went home just to become forever ostracized or even ended up homeless - they only matter in the context of a family (if they had one) they can't support anymore and that's where empathy is directed, not towards the men. They get a "day" in the calendar and that's enough of a restitution for a life permanently ruined.

[–]Harpua81 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know the subjects are often intertwined and that's unavoidable, but one of my favorite things about this sub is that we rarely get info left v right political debates and which is better for men's rights.

[–]St-Germania 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Well kinda stupid since they probably could help in various sectors of the military and free up man power for other projects

However they should instead concentrate on getting other men’s rights as well as stopping victimizing women for something that isn’t happening(for example Pay gap)

Republicans are probably against it since it came from the Democratic Party (in Germany the AfD(rightwing party) is doing the same)

[–]patxiku93 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a surprise... Tradcucks are not allies, they are the ones that set the system that exploits men.

[–]Ok-Dragonfruit-1924 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't draft our daughters but your sons are lambs for the slaughter

[–]ERiC_693 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The draft needs to be removed completely. Not adding women to it. US has enough volunteers anyway.

[–]WeEatBabies 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Dems put it forward as a show!

​

They know the Republicans are just going to block it and even if surprise, they don't then ...

They know no woman in the history of ever is going to be drafted to the front-lines.

​

And if one ever is, she is gonna be pregnant in no time! Suddenly she will be carrying an embryo that's alive!

(I'm pro-choice btw, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy).

The father however, will be sent to the war, as a reward he will get to pay child support when/if he comes back!

[–]darthmadeus 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why vote against women to be drafted? If you can vote, you can fight. Equal rights, equal fights.

[–]Ok_Razzmatazz_1751 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They want babies born . Literally why Republicans are voting against this.

[–]somethingneet 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't believe TradCons don't think women should be in the military

[–]Throning 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

it's a blessing and a curse.

The curse side is obvious; men are required to sign up for the draft, women aren't. It's an insane inequality.

The blessing part; if I get wounded in combat and bleeding out, and my survival depends on some woman that had a fraction of the pullups, pushups, and other physical requirements, then I'm already dead. Chances are less in my favor that she'll be able to pick me up and move me; or even if she can, that she'd be able to get as safely far away as a man.

Same style of argument of why if I'm unconscious in a burning building, and they send the petite lady to rescue anyone, chances are less in my favor that she'll be able to pick me up and get me out. I would much rather prefer it to be someone I could depend on, and in terms of physical strength measuring capability, that is overwhelmingly not a woman.

[–]pappo4ever 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Is not about putting women in the front lines. You might as well put a 14 year old there, its useless and dangerous for them and for others.

But women can work behind front lines, supply lines, infirmary, etc. The ratio of support personnel to soldiers is about 10:1

[–]MBV-09-C 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If a draft ever has to actually be enacted, your biggest worry shouldn't be whether or not the woman draftee could perform as well as the man one. Your biggest worry should be the fact that they are sending you, and every other draftee, to a potential war zone with limited, if any, military training prior to deployment because they're that screwed on personnel.

It wouldn't matter which sex your partner is at that point, if they weren't a volunteer prior to the draft, they're more or less going to be a glorified meat shield, and your survival would be scuffed as fuck anyway.

At that point, why not uphold total equality? If you're that concerned about it, we can work towards abolishing the draft once everyone starts feeling the weight of what it means to truly want equality, instead of just the benefits.

[–]dungeonmonkey69 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really do feel sorry for USian men for the draft. It's fkn barbaric. So thankful we have equality of front line service in my country but no draft or conscription

[–]elebrin -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Drafted people end up as infantrymen. I'm not sure recruiting the people we need to have making babies to carry a rucksack and get shot at is a good idea.

Also, men can be trained to follow orders. I'm not so sure women can be. The military needs you to hear and execute. If you do anything else between those it'll be too long and you'll have missed your chance.

[–]Commercial_Invite_84 -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Guys I hate the draft with a passion and hope for a world without war. Nonetheless I can't support putting women in combat positions against their will as its overall a bad idea and more spite than anything else.

As I told my daughter, men face the risk of dying in combat, which is significantly less today. Women run the risk of dying in childbirth, which is significantly less today. Maybe I'm wrong but why hurt women for generations to come just for the sake of equality? Is that really in men's interest, or societies? Expectjng that women can ever become good soldiers is just wishful thinking. Even proffesiobal soldiers, which have better training and equipment than conscripts, face serious medical issues front deployment, including bone density loss and overall poor health, whereas men return in pretty good physical shape. This is assuming no conflict related injuries.

We should not stoop to feminists level, but rather be the responsible, bigger person.

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

The first good thing republicans do for women

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

It’s ironic that they talk about their bodies but don’t care or consider that men have had to give their lives for thousands and thousands of years. But nope all they think is men are bad, abusers and worse

[–]DesertVeteran_PA-C 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Nooooo. Let the Dems draft women. The feminists will love them for it.

[–]ABCAJB[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Conservatives are the ones throwing a tantrum over this.

[–]DesertVeteran_PA-C 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don’t matter to me, I’m just thinking about the entertainment value of watching hoards of feminists panicking.

[–]Decent-Ordinary-4047 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am a board member for the draft board. More specifically the SSS.

I do not think women should be included in a draft, if there ever were a draft again. WW2 is a good example to draw from as to why you would not want to have your population decimated by sending both genders en mass.

I'm conflicted because I do believe in the equality aspect justifying why women should be included.

[–]Acceptable-Garbage17 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Send everyone since gender and age no longer exist.

[–]Ok-Dragonfruit-1924 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the ironic thing is more women voted for biden then men you think theyd wanna please there base

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter