Why is it accepted that only men are disposable in the form of conscription?

lightning_palm · 2022-05-04T09:57:37+00:00

I also talked about this subject with some women last week and they thought that a man who fled/tried to flee is a pathetic weasel while implying that for women it’s okay.

There is nothing more pathetic than people who force onto another what they themselves feel too precious to impose upon themselves in order to retain their privileged status. These women should feel ashamed. In my eyes, there is nothing lower.

ralphswanson · 2022-05-04T18:56:45+00:00

There are no feminists in Ukraine.

Morgoth37 · 2022-05-04T16:51:55+00:00

If women are to be accepted in society as equal to men with all the same privileges, then they must shoulder all the same responsibilities!

jayval90 · 2022-05-04T16:10:05+00:00

How the hell does it make sense that a 40yo single dad of two cannot leave but a completely healthy 20yo childless woman can?

"Equal rights, equal fights" is a phrase of absurdity, not an actual suggestion.

Anytime a woman tries to claim that only men are responsible for most wars, I list the names of the female democratic congresswomen who all voted in favor of the Iraq war, and the fact that more women than men vote for all of these politicians.

Kindly-Town · 2022-05-04T08:59:18+00:00

Because men will defend politicians and politicians will take votes from women.

theskirata · 2022-05-04T19:30:10+00:00

Well, Israel is a great example of equality here. Granted, Women don‘t have to serve as long as men but they still have to serve, so it‘s a step in the right direction.

Terrible_Departure90 · 2022-05-04T16:55:36+00:00

The world is sexist towards men 🤷🏾‍♂️

ramao__ · 2022-05-04T15:57:47+00:00

About this, I've also seem people (men included) comment that taking in refugees from ukraine is ok because it's mostly women and children, and taking in refugees from islamic countries isn't because there are too many single men with no families among the refugees and that no one respects that.

Now, think what you will about taking in refugees in general, but the point that struck with me is that for most people, a man who wants to live isn't even worthy of respect. If he has a family, it's barely accepted, but only because this man is providing something.

Meanwhile like you said, young single women with no children, and that usually say that don't even want to ever have children? No problem at all.

montylittt · 2022-05-04T15:03:59+00:00

Men have been doing all the dying in war since the beginning of time. It's time for women to do their share. Female only conscription!

Warder766312 · 2022-05-04T23:41:50+00:00

Yeah, main reason why I'm not going if there is a draft. I'll sit back and sue the government for sexual discrimination, if that doesn't work there is always the tried-and-true method for Texans.

Man_of_culture_112 · 2022-05-04T12:31:51+00:00

[permanently deleted]

RecoveringCoomer · 2022-05-04T15:22:31+00:00

It is basically because if you live in a small tribe of 100 women and 100 men, if you send 99 men to their death in a war, 1 man left can still impregnate 100 women, and in a year you'd have 100 babies. But if you send 99 women to die in wars, and 100 men has sex with 1 women, you'd have only 1 baby in a year.

So that reproductive difference makes men disposable, traditionally.

However, in modern life, when we have 8 billion humans on the planet, no war has been fought with more than %3 of the population armed and willing to fight, it is pure bs. 97 ouf 100 surviving any conflict, then it doesn't matter if 3 dead is male or female. The tribe will still survive without a problem.

A woman can hold a gun and pull trigger to kill another human as easily as a man.

See this 13 yo girl shooting like a champ:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rXjgRd90BE

I think this girl can fight better than me in a war, since I have no firearm training, as a 50 yo male.

Mammoth_Cut5134 · 2022-05-04T16:45:18+00:00

Sperm is abundant and eggs are rare. Therefore men are more disposable and violent. It’s evolution.

You are right that the draft is totally immoral. It’s disgusting that we sacrifice men to brutes. Someday we will abolish the draft completely and it will be recognized as just as evil as slavery.

pnoecker · 2022-05-04T17:37:00+00:00

It's a conspiracy to get rid of small men. Notice how jody gets to be a big dick bastard back home.

Ecstatic_Wishbone_30 · 2022-05-04T18:39:48+00:00

Men are stronger than women. They make for stronger army. Female army would be weak and nobody wants to have a weak army. Such an army would lose quickly and the enemy would win. That's why.

TWR3545 · 2022-05-04T12:50:45+00:00

It’s the norm except is some places but even say Israel women who are drafted I don’t think are going into combat units generally. Sometimes women have been able to volunteer for combat say with the Soviet’s but generally making men soldiers and women home front workers was simple and easy while confirming to the social standards.

WeEatBabies · 2022-05-04T17:51:55+00:00

Second tier citizen, now go back to the plantation(child support/alimony field)!

DebieT14850 · 2022-05-04T19:29:30+00:00

About 30,000 Ukrainian women are fighting in their military right now, plus women off the street. Perhaps the women you asked are disgusted because they will be fighting for their homeland while you run.

heeroena · 2022-05-04T10:56:15+00:00

because our biology doesn't change at the same rate as society. It is called "genetic lag". we have evolved in a way where eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap

Njaulv · 2022-05-04T17:24:02+00:00

The simple biological answer is this. Many men can impregnate women regularly but women need to carry offspring for the better part of a year once impregnated.

Viable sperm is basically less valuable than viable womb space to put it bluntly.

Remember, we are animals that formed tribes that depended on exponential population growth. That is one of the problems the current world is facing is societies are built on exponential growth.

obesetial · 2022-05-05T00:08:01+00:00

As a veteran. Men are not disposable, they are the only ones that can do the job. Some women can do the easier stuff like border patrol but you need men to do the hard stuff. Asking a woman to be in the navy seals is the equivalent of asking a man to give birth.

2022-05-04T11:48:09+00:00

Watch the first part of this for answers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbex70s2bCA Please realise they murdered this guy for his beliefs.

omgwtf56k · 2022-05-04T15:15:27+00:00

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/15/congress-might-require-women-register-draft-where-do-republicans-democrats-stand/

ih-shah-may-ehl · 2022-05-04T15:31:25+00:00

Because historically, men WERE disposable.

If your village goes to war and loses half the men, but not women, then as long as the village wins, their next generation is not impacted. The same amount of women can have the same amount of children with half the number of men.

The equation doesn't work the other way around.

Neat_Zookeepergame99 · 2022-05-04T08:40:59+00:00

From the perspective of a ruler, sending women to die in battle isnt a worthwhile investment. It's simply not a practical solution.

The same goes for why women and children are saved first.

It's all about what value they can contribute to the cause, as well as the supply and demand of said value.

And trust me, the same people who see men as disposable and send them to battle, also see women as disposable for the purposes of breeding.

History isn't a dicotomy between the struggles of men and women. The tyrants of past present and future would use and abuse you regardless of who you are.

Nightwynd · 2022-05-04T13:06:03+00:00

Edit: So I'm being down voted to hell, and in some ways I get it. If my observations are wrong, if my opinion is wrong... Please tell me what's correct or provide information to go on. Simply downvoning, claiming pseudo science, and the like doesn't help me learn or improve my outlook on this one particular issue. I'd actively love to be taught here. I'm leaving my original comment up in the hopes of meaningful and informative information, but fear it'll just get down voted to oblivion. Such is Reddit sometimes.

People talking history without accounting for biology and the realities of war in the past...

Before modern medicine, a scratch was potentially lethal. A cut or musket ball would mean amputation and/or death regardless of where you got hit. The further back in time you go, the more true this gets. There's a reason people didn't live long a few hundred years ago, we didn't even know there were germs, or what a virus was, or the difference between viral and bacterial infection. I believe it was vikings that invented the first form of penecillin, even then it wasn't a liquid (a poultice packed into wounds to stop infection sometimes).

Also important was the odds of children surviving. It wasn't high. Quick google shows about 1/5th of kids not surviving past 5 years old in the 1800's. Again, worse the further back you look. C-section weren't a thing, and mothers dying in childbirth more common as well.

Here's the rub then. Historically, if you sent women to battle, you'd be decimating your own population. A woman dying meant no more kids from her. You could have a population that 4 women to each guy, and still be able to recover, but a population decimated equally is going to recover much more slowly. So in the numbers game of historical war, where whoever could send the most troops had the better chance of winning a fight it made a lot more sense to protect the women and children. It was always a pragmatic survival choice to keep your population level ok even in the event that you lose nearly all men of fighting age.

Some cultures around the world did have fighting women. Some still do. With medical advances being what they are, and wars having evolved the way they have the old attitudes of needing to protect women and children can start changing somewhat. It's going to be a slow process though, and any society is going to resist a big change.

Tldr: men can't produce babies. Repopulating an entire population can be done with men too old or young to be sent to war. Therefore as a population whole, males are more disposable. This applies historically much more than it does today however due to medical and technological advances.

throwaway295421 · 2022-05-04T13:32:12+00:00

[permanently deleted]

heeroena · 2022-05-04T15:24:57+00:00

You are confusing firmware with installed software. Let's see if you get the analogy

PS. Corrected

SnooMarzipans5669 · 2022-05-05T01:42:12+00:00

And welcome to this sub.

KayleeSinn · 2022-05-30T16:55:35+00:00

As a woman, I think it's mostly men's own fault. If the situation was reversed and there was a women only 6-12 month slavery as well as a follow up if a war broke out, you can bet your socks that we'd bitch and moan and if nothing changes, I'd personally join the enemy out of pure spite.

Men in general don't seem to fight against unequal treatment and injustice much. If you want things to change, you gotta protest, keep suing the state and make their life difficult like we did with voting rights and other things.

Title	Why is it accepted that only men are disposable in the form of conscription?
Author	throwaway295421
Upvotes	231
Comments	190
Date	May 4, 2022 6:48 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ui0kjl/why_is_it_accepted_that_only_men_are_disposable/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-is-it-accepted-that-only-men-are-disposable-in.1115620 https://theredarchive.com/post/1115620

Comments