Birth and Military

63daddy · 2024-06-14T22:07:45+00:00

Your post misrepresents a number of issues.

Selective service isn’t about whether we have a draft at this very moment, it’s about who will be drafted and who will be exempt in the event of a draft. Selective service isn’t just about being drafted. It can impact citizenship, federal training eligibility, federal job opportunities and more, that is, it can impact these things for men, but not women since women have the privilege of exemption.
Child birth like many things has risks, but these days it’s a risk that can be greatly reduced and even completely avoided. There are women who opt to never give birth. Men in contrast have no choice regarding selective service, it’s required and about to be automated.
You overstate the risk of childbirth compared to other things, you use different measures of comparison and of course omit relevant dangerous comparisons.

The incidence of death per childbirth is about 10 per 100,000. (1). Let’s compare that to the risk of these male dominated jobs: mining machine operators double that at 20.1. Truck drivers triple that risk at 30.4, construction workers at 38.5, roofers at 67.5 and loggers face 10 times the risk of giving birth with over 100 deaths per 100,000. (2)

Men in these jobs face a much higher risk of death than does childbirth.

1, https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/03/13/1238269753/maternal-mortality-overestimate-deaths-births-health-disparities

https://www.fvflawfirm.com/blog/the-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america/

applejackpatches · 2024-06-14T23:13:40+00:00

Not relevant but... Heaven help us if a draft becomes necessary. Used to be active duty, currently part time guard. We only want volunteers. Draftees would be a nightmare scenario.

Ok, relevant point now. We've been fighting insurgents with inferior equipment for decades now, not a near peer military. If we did get into a conflict with a near peer, it would be a bloodbath. You'd see combat deaths on a level not seen since WWII.

Secondly, all men are required to register for the draft. Not all women end up with pregnancies they want to terminate and there's at least ways of preventing that situation in the first place (i.e. birth control or abstinence). Men can't opt out of being men or vaccinate themselves against the draft.

Third, the premise of this post is a pointless pissing match over who has it worse. These posts and posts like it do nothing to heal the divide between men and women, which is what this sub should be about.

dugongone · 2024-06-14T21:09:09+00:00

Why did you post this shit again? Why are you making it about women vs men again? Why even taking the army as an example? This does not favor to your cause. (I'm also in favor of the right of abortion)

Conveniently you get US stats during peacetime and find soldiers don't die as often? Wow.

And you get US stats about birth giving, without considering that most women suffer from health conditions such as obesity?

No shit giving birth is more dangerous than being a soldier in the US.

Now do the same for Ukraine.

Or, just look at a country with decent level of fitness such as Italy: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.MMRT?locations=IT

Suddenly, the mortality for giving birth is a lot lower. Who would've guessed

Again, you're using the wrong arguments. Stop making this a case of men vs women. You're creating division, while what you really want is men to protest and vote WITH you for the right to abortions.

jimmothyhendrix · 2024-06-16T14:05:46+00:00

Most guys don't actually want women drafted, its just that if women are supposed to be made equal across society, its only fair they have to do this as well. As other have said, child birth in the developed world is significantly safer than its ever been and pregnancy is optional.

TheRedPillRipper · 2024-06-14T21:51:03+00:00

fund more warfare

And rightfully so. Safety supersedes all. It’s why right after Freedom, comes the right to defend that freedom.

The comparison would be valid, if childbirth wasn’t predicated upon national security. Unfortunately for OP, it is.

KentuckyCriedFlickin · 2024-06-14T22:07:40+00:00

I mean, this is kind of wonky to debate against, like comparing apples to oranges. But, I'll bite.

A talking point for men I keep seeing is that men have to get drafted into the military and the risk that it carries. I support women getting drafted and I honesty haven’t heard of a woman that disagrees with that. Fortunately we haven’t had to rely on the draft since 1973! Thus, I find it irrelevant to our problems right now.

It may seem irrelevant to bring up Selective Services because of the unlikely scenario of a war. However, a lot of male integration of society comes with the responsibility of registering for the selective service. It is actually illegal for men to not register in the US, and they have faced serious penalties for doing so. Although it is often rare to be incarcerated for failing to register as it has not happened since the 1980s, it is still technically possible for it to affect a man's life. Not registering could affect your ability to vote, apply for a loan, a house, jobs, and participate in other activities.

Women miss out on this requirement, all they have to do is turn 18 years old before they can do those things.

I haven’t seen men lose any rights at all legally. Their bodies aren’t legislated. Their bodies have been studied a lot more extensively and have been funded consistently. They don’t even care and have even applauded and supported the overturning of Roe. Regardless of the statistics and facts.

I have problems with statements that assume that everything is men vs. women. There are a huge number of men that are appalled by the turning of Roe vs. Wade, especially of younger generations. Although I can understand why they decided to rule for this, a lot of men think that the ruling was a bit too far and potentially dangerous for society. Even if they are apathetic or could care less about actual abortions, this would reduce their opportunities to have casual sex with women in some states. So, men have a reason to compare about abortion rights despite it may not seem like it.

Men’s problem is not being able to get a girlfriend or get laid. Women’s problem is getting our rights to our bodies stripped. One of these things are not nearly as important as the other. Women are frustrated with men’s lack of care and understanding of how women’s rights are getting taken away. Instead, they are vocal about criticizing women’s independence. How do they expect women to sympathize with them when they don’t rise up and protect our own rights. That in itself gives the “Ick” to women already. There’s a hard disconnect of priorities here.

Okay, I'll try to thread lightly here.

I believe it is crucial for more men to be empathetic and understanding of how the overturning of Roe vs. Wade directly impacts women. Criticizing women's independence reflects a lack of understanding of basic human rights, and such criticism is often misguided.

At the same time, it's important to recognize that abortion is a complex issue with many facets. It affects not only women but also potential children and the men who are involved in the process. Additionally, it can have broader implications for birth rates and future generations. My point is not to advocate for either a pro-life or pro-choice stance, as I firmly believe that women should have the freedom to make their own choices.

However, I have noticed that discussions on this topic sometimes lack mutual consideration. While women rightly should have their autonomy and control over the direct impact on their own lives, there can be a tendency to overlook or dismiss the perspectives and concerns of men, as well as the potential life involved. Being dismissive in the same way can make it harder to foster mutual understanding and support that they demand.

the maternal mortality rate is significantly higher than the on-duty soldier death rate and comparable or higher than the off-duty soldier death rate

It is probably not fair to compare military deaths to maternal mortality, especially since these wars do not have people drafted. This is what I meant by the apples to oranges comparison:

There are more women in the U.S than total combatants in the military, like far more. More people will die if there are more people to suffer from the same thing, if that makes sense. I don't how many women in America are capable of birthing, but comparing roughly ~3 million soldiers to at least 30 million women is going to change what those statistics mean.
Again like some other commenters mentioned, American combatants aren't currently in wars right now and when they do, it's typically not a major war like ones going on Ukraine and Israel. They are typically in places where they have a higher advantage, and the mortality rates will reflect that.

Independent-Mail-227 · 2024-06-14T21:20:51+00:00

This garbage again, there's a fell places more safe than a fucking army base, everyone knows everyone, no rush for resources, no enemy to worry about because america has not to fight a country with a modern military since forever, everyone know first aid, you get smoked if you don't follow basic security procedures.

If you want to make birth safe, start asking women to not have geriatric pregnancies and to lose weight.

kongeriket · 2024-06-14T21:29:44+00:00

Fortunately we haven’t had to rely on the draft since 1973! Thus, I find it irrelevant to our problems right now.

Who tf cares? Women on this sub bring issues from 1773 or earlier to argue garbage points in 2024.

By comparison, the draft is very current and relevant since it's still the law today.

The maternal mortality incidence is at its lowest it has ever been in known human history. The same is not true about on-duty soldier rate. Talk about female solipsism, smh.

AutoModerator · 2024-06-14T20:56:36+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2024-06-14T20:56:36+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

8mm_Magnum_Cumshot · 2024-06-14T23:33:16+00:00

Men who are drafted are forced to do something under threat of criminal prosecution. Who is prosecuting women for not having babies?

tiddermacss · 2024-06-15T01:48:21+00:00

here we go again.. a women tooting her own hornsfor pumping out a unit.. stfu already its no bid deal

BowelMan · 2024-06-15T06:42:54+00:00

I love it when women compare sending men to war with women giving birth to children, because it's such a dishonest take.

You know what would be the equivalent for women forcibly participating in defending/rebuilding population after the war? Forcibly giving births.

The government comes to your house, kidnaps you, drives you to the clinic and impregnates you. Then you are monitored for the entire pregnancy against self harm or harm to the baby. You might die, you might get a PTSD, you might suffer a lifelong condition as a result of the pregnancy. Just as men do as a result of war. Then the government thanks you for your service (or not, depending on the government), and off you go living the rest of your life.

And no, this isn't some sort of sick fantasy of mine. I don't want this. But can you name even a single country that does? I don't think there is one.

Closest example of this disparity is Ukraine. Ukrainian men had to go to war and they are forbidden from leaving the country. All this is written in their constitution. Meanwhile Ukrainian women are fucking around in Europe or America or wherever. No responsibility for creating more life whatsoever.

See the difference?

It comes down to this. When your country is invaded, you have a choice to get pregnant. Men don't have the option to not go to war.

9guyKguy9 · 2024-06-15T06:44:50+00:00

The one is mandatory (in my country) the other isn't

The proof would be the collapsing birthrates

I am all for giving benefits honour etc to women who give birth same or more than service men unironically it's going to be needed

balhaegu · 2024-06-15T11:51:46+00:00

Take South Korea. All men get drafted but not women because "women need to give birth".

Try to draft women too, and you get womens groups protesting that "women already have too many responsibilities like being a mother"

Yet still the lowest birth rate in the world.

abaxeron · 2024-06-15T22:08:50+00:00

Comparison - On-duty soldier deaths: 1.3 per 100,000.

Per year.

Off-duty soldier deaths: 6.3 per 100,000.

Per year.

Maternal deaths: 20-30 per 100,000.

Once or twice in a lifetime.

(Thus, the maternal mortality rate is significantly higher than the on-duty soldier death rate and comparable or higher than the off-duty soldier death rate.)

No.

Before Basic Training, you'll agree to an initial eight-year service commitment, which typically works out to about four years of active duty and four years of IRR.

Freethinker312 · 2024-06-14T22:30:58+00:00

I haven’t seen men lose any rights at all legally.

What about men in the USA who refuse to register for selective service? How would they not lose rights legally? And how is it not a violation of human rights if the government can legally force you to fight?

Women are generally not forcibly impregnated, so that's not similar to being forced to register for selective service. I'm sure you would complain if you would obliged to register for selective broodmare for the governments potential need for cannon fodder or work force or whatever, even if chances were very small you would actually have to be that in the end.

I support women getting drafted and I honesty haven’t heard of a woman that disagrees with that.

Well, then now you do. I'm against draft for both men and women.

Men’s problem is not being able to get a girlfriend or get laid.

Well, I can agree that not being able to get casual sex is not a real problem. But being lonely and having trouble finding a reliable, compatible partner, is not something to bagatellise (whether they are male or female). The pain is real. Would you bagatellise the pain of a widower who lost his dear wife of many years? Would you bagatellise the pain of women who want to have children, but struggle with getting pregnant? Why then bagatellise the pain of people who desire a partner to spend their life with, but who are (still) alone, maybe forever?

Women’s problem is getting our rights to our bodies stripped.

No, you are not living in Afghanistan. You are responsible yourself for not getting pregnant if you don't want to be pregnant.

Proudvow · 2024-06-14T23:20:47+00:00

The audacity of our mostly male politicians legislating and taking away the freedom of choice will cause a rise in the death rate.

Most voters are women, they could fix this if they wanted to.

Men’s problem is not being able to get a girlfriend or get laid. Women’s problem is getting our rights to our bodies stripped. One of these things are not nearly as important as the other.

If not getting laid isn't as big of a problem as the abortion laws, why don't the women who are afraid of them just not have sex?

Women are frustrated with men’s lack of care and understanding of how women’s rights are getting taken away. Instead, they are vocal about criticizing women’s independence. How do they expect women to sympathize with them when they don’t rise up and protect our own rights.

If women love freedom and liberation so much why aren't they getting with the submissive male feminist allies who support it instead of various patriarchal assertive macho dudes that don't care?

See the problem is women's actions not matching their conscious desires. They expect the things they want to just happen, regardless of how contradictory their actions are to those goals.

Tywinlol · 2024-06-15T00:29:29+00:00

There are a lot of problems with your arguments.

US had not fought a peer/nearpeer foe for quiet some time. Everytime it did in the past casualties were massive far in excess women's mortality rate at birth. We all have been blessed to be born at the time, actually tailend, of remarkable peace and prosperity, it is very atypical for human society. So you data is referring to a statistical anomaly. Very unlikely to last. Let me give you numbers for Ukraine, which is far more in line with human experience:

Maternal deaths: 17 out of 100,000. Note less that US, America is generally speaking terrible at delivering healthcare to people in need. Here is a link: https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/economies/ukraine

Soldiers death: according to the report to US Congress they are around 120,000. Link: https://www.congress.gov/118/meeting/house/116768/documents/HHRG-118-ZS00-20240130-SD002.pdf

Taking into account size of Ukrainian army that is 1 in 10. And keep in mind that this estimate is both outdated and fairly low and according to it there is another 170-180 thousand injured. Long story short risks are orders of magnitude different. You don't have an argument here.

Regarding rights. Lets get something straight you and I have no natural rights, regardless of what political ideologies claim. We only have what rights society is willing to enforce on our behave. If America as a state collapses tomorrow and you will end up in the situation were someone stronger, better armed then you, who wants to enslave/rape/kill you, screaming you "rights" at this person will accomplish exactly nothing. You are not independent, you are protected, learn the difference.

Which is why it is extremely stupid for women to not have children. The society which doesn't replace itself will collapse, both economically and security wise, and women will be more affected then men because they benefit from society then men. But more on this later. All do I think that far more likely scenario is that society will simply turn on women in this case and then "reproductive rights" will be the least of your worries/losses. Women in modern Western society are incredibly privileged, their social status can only be compared to that of nobles in Medieval society, if you think that next version of society will be even more gynocentric you are simply deluded.

Now lets look at this from men's point of view. While we are also going to be negatively effected by social collapse we are far more likely to survive it, escape it and also were are far less favored by current Western system. In fact we are outright discriminated against. Things are likely to improve for us in such a scenario then for you.

So in conclusion, go ahead, stop reproducing, stop fulfilling your major social function, it will only get worse for you not for us.

AdEffective7894s · 2024-06-15T03:12:05+00:00

So you want to find someway to make.things more fair?

I am not opposed to it.

Sure women should be more worried about their pittiful rights and the fragile state of their lives. But you don't get to blame men for that.

Those politicians and govts are supported by conservative women too. I don't see why men should shoulder the responsibility for that.

And since you want equity everywhere i don't see any one supporting legislation to make retirement age less for men, seeing as mentioned die earlier and are not even able to enjoy the fruits of the labour they slaved over all of their working lives.

My solution is to lower the retirement age for men by 2-3 years compared to women to adress the biological reality that we die 5-6 years earlier

CraftyCooler · 2024-06-15T13:06:26+00:00

These numbers are irrelevant for situation when US would be forced to draft people, that is - once going to the war with equal opponent or even with any developed country like Russia. Current deaths on both sides of Ukr-Rus war are in the range 50-100k each side. Considering around 1-2mln(?) of active soldiers it is 2.5-10%.

This gives you 2500-10000 deaths per 100000.

Only country willing to challenge US is China, and war with China would be a meat grinder for US soldiers.

Title	Birth and Military
Author	Abysswalker55117
Upvotes	15
Comments	144
Date	June 14, 2024 8:56 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1dg1301/birth_and_military/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/birth-and-military.1521572 https://theredarchive.com/post/1521572

Comments