12 ms·

Equality should mean equality! :D

mc32 2y ago
I hear you. But women can continue the line —society. Men can’t bear children —society dies. Men get sent to war, women stay in the homeland, many of the men may not return and the women may have to persevere, with sacrifice but society can push on. If it were reversed, that society may well collapse. The Spartans didn’t send their women off and let the men stay back in the homeland.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  This sounds like discrimination. Only women can produce offspring? Too bad, so sad. Everyone serves if it is required.
  - throwaway22032 2y ago
    It doesn't sound like discrimination, it is discrimination, tautologically. The onus is on you to show that it is bad in this case. We discriminate routinely, children are exempt from working for example.
    - influx 2y ago
      Can’t men just identify as women to avoid the draft?
      - hashiyakshmi 2y ago
        No, changing your gender identity doesn't affect your selective service registration
      - raffraffraff 2y ago
        I'm not sure why you're getting downvotes for this because it's a pretty straight forward question with a non-obvious answer.
        mrguyorama 2y ago
        Ever tried to actually "change your gender"? It's not really a thing you can do any more than "becoming gay" if you are straight.
    - ohialehua 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - The_Colonel 2y ago
      I believe in the specific case of gender equality, the burden of proof is on the side which claims that discrimination is justified.
      - beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
        The genders are not equal, you're operating on fictional premise.
      - throwaway22032 2y ago
        Well that's a bit daft, as men and women are as different as green and blue.
- ok_dad 2y ago
  How many people do you think are in the military? It’s way below one percent in the USA. In the last war we fought, we lost barely any soldiers compared to the number deployed. It’s bad that we lost any, but your argument is logically null. Women aren’t just baby machines, in any case. Nothing is being “reversed” it’s just more equal if everyone is registered for selective service.
  - brianwawok 2y ago
    Ww2 killed 3% of the earths population. Our bombs are much worse now.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      > Our bombs are much worse now. Are you under the impression that we're still doing trench warfare, though? And any big nukes won't be aimed at soldiers.
      - xkqd 2y ago
        To everyone’s surprise, we still are engaging in trench warfare. Maybe the USA isn’t currently involved in a war where they’re digging and in the trenches, but Eastern Europe right now is proving that trenches aren’t going anywhere.
        hughesjj 2y ago
        Come to think of it, I'm unaware of any war over the last 100 years between conventional forces that didn't involve trench warfare. The biggest difference/innovation as of late is inverting the trench, bringing the dirt/sandbags above ground instead of the soldiers below ground https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesco_bastion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesco_bastion
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > I'm unaware of any war over the last 100 years between conventional forces that didn't involve trench warfare Anything involving modern combined-arms warfare. Iraq, for example.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  can but dont.
- 0xbadcafebee 2y ago
  No, but the Spartans did send their slaves, who outnumbered Spartan warriors 7:1. Spartan women were also somewhat more independent than the women of other Greek city states. Considering Sparta was not a particularly large city-state, and if they didn't control so many other city-states and have such a large cache of slaves, they might have needed to send their women after all. (bot that it matters as we're comparing a 2,500 year old society to a modern day one...)
- blue_dragon 2y ago
  Would you be ok with mandatory draft registration for women if conscription began with only women aged 36 and above? National fertility would be unaffected, since women of that age rarely have children anyways. Then the draft would be gender-balanced and the war hawks would get more bodies for their machine. Everybody wins.
  - mc32 2y ago
    Not really, a society that sends women to war is more or less a cowardly society dressing it up as equality. What sort of male sends the female to check on the noises that sound like an intruder in the wee hours of the night? Do they set turns and when it's her turn she's gotta check out the noises? Any gal married or shacked up with a guy like that should kick him out before night is over. Can you imagine Paul asking Nancy to check out the basement noises in SF? Also, those war hawks should see duty in the front lines. None of this sitting behind "green zones" directing grunts. Get out there, get in the line of fire. Imagine Washington, Nimitz, Yamamoto, Zhukov, etc., let's just phone it in.
    - The_Colonel 2y ago
      > Not really, a society that sends women to war is more or less a cowardly society dressing it up as equality. Israel is likely the most prominent country sending women to war. I'm eager to call Israel many bad names, but "cowardly" is not one of them. I think it's a worthwhile discussion, but your argumentation seems to be mainly based on stereotypes (women are weak) and some old chivalric ideals.
    - xkqd 2y ago
      I mean, when things go bump on our farm my wife won’t hesitate to grab the rifle and haze a black bear or coyote. I’ll lay down my life for my wife and kids but I assure you she can be as dangerous as the next guy; in general much more. It usually comes down to proximity and appetite.
    - tsimionescu 2y ago
      This blatant mysogyny is shocking so out in the open. There's nothing "cowardly" about asking a woman to protect her country, or her husband. Not that I support the idea of drafting civilian populations as soldiers in general: it's mostly a way to get innocent people killed and not much more.
- scheme271 2y ago
  Besides Sparta the starkest example of a slaveholding society and the brutality needed to enforce that, they weren't even all that great militarily. They had a run of one to two centuries where they dominated militarily and then they tended to be mediocre at best. Sparta ended up as a tourist spot for romans to see people in funny costumes and hats.
moomin 2y ago
Ask anyone with half a brain who sincerely believes in gender equality if men should take a pay cut and they’ll say no, women deserve what the men are paid. The draft should work the same way.
- xkqd 2y ago
  I think that’s what they were saying but their comment was so low quality it’s hard to be sure.
- exe34 2y ago
  i thought the "gender pay gap" was due to different jobs and amount of time worked - otherwise companies would hire only women and have to pay out way less in wages.
  - juliushuijnk 2y ago
    This assumes companies are rational actors.
    - jajko 2y ago
      Market forces, spread over long enough time, are usually a strong force of rationality. So on average, across long time, yes. At least according to the level of contemporary wisdom.
      - danaris 2y ago
        That assumes that there aren't strong psychological/cultural forces acting against rationality. Like not wanting to hire non-white people. Like not wanting to hire people who are "too old"/"too young" for the field. Like not wanting to punish men who harass women. Like not wanting to make sure that your employees are well-treated, satisfied with their jobs, and healthy enough mentally and physically to concentrate on the job regularly. The idea that The Almighty Market will solve all problems and be perfectly rational is notably unsupported by evidence.

mc32 2y ago

I hear you. But women can continue the line —society. Men can’t bear children —society dies. Men get sent to war, women stay in the homeland, many of the men may not return and the women may have to persevere, with sacrifice but society can push on. If it were reversed, that society may well collapse. The Spartans didn’t send their women off and let the men stay back in the homeland.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
This sounds like discrimination. Only women can produce offspring? Too bad, so sad. Everyone serves if it is required.
- throwaway22032 2y ago
  It doesn't sound like discrimination, it is discrimination, tautologically. The onus is on you to show that it is bad in this case. We discriminate routinely, children are exempt from working for example.
  - influx 2y ago
    Can’t men just identify as women to avoid the draft?
    - hashiyakshmi 2y ago
      No, changing your gender identity doesn't affect your selective service registration
    - raffraffraff 2y ago
      I'm not sure why you're getting downvotes for this because it's a pretty straight forward question with a non-obvious answer.
      - mrguyorama 2y ago
        Ever tried to actually "change your gender"? It's not really a thing you can do any more than "becoming gay" if you are straight.
  - ohialehua 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - The_Colonel 2y ago
    I believe in the specific case of gender equality, the burden of proof is on the side which claims that discrimination is justified.
    - beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
      The genders are not equal, you're operating on fictional premise.
    - throwaway22032 2y ago
      Well that's a bit daft, as men and women are as different as green and blue.
ok_dad 2y ago
How many people do you think are in the military? It’s way below one percent in the USA. In the last war we fought, we lost barely any soldiers compared to the number deployed. It’s bad that we lost any, but your argument is logically null. Women aren’t just baby machines, in any case. Nothing is being “reversed” it’s just more equal if everyone is registered for selective service.
- brianwawok 2y ago
  Ww2 killed 3% of the earths population. Our bombs are much worse now.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > Our bombs are much worse now. Are you under the impression that we're still doing trench warfare, though? And any big nukes won't be aimed at soldiers.
    - xkqd 2y ago
      To everyone’s surprise, we still are engaging in trench warfare. Maybe the USA isn’t currently involved in a war where they’re digging and in the trenches, but Eastern Europe right now is proving that trenches aren’t going anywhere.
      - hughesjj 2y ago
        Come to think of it, I'm unaware of any war over the last 100 years between conventional forces that didn't involve trench warfare. The biggest difference/innovation as of late is inverting the trench, bringing the dirt/sandbags above ground instead of the soldiers below ground https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesco_bastion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesco_bastion
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > I'm unaware of any war over the last 100 years between conventional forces that didn't involve trench warfare Anything involving modern combined-arms warfare. Iraq, for example.
Log_out_ 2y ago
can but dont.
0xbadcafebee 2y ago
No, but the Spartans did send their slaves, who outnumbered Spartan warriors 7:1. Spartan women were also somewhat more independent than the women of other Greek city states. Considering Sparta was not a particularly large city-state, and if they didn't control so many other city-states and have such a large cache of slaves, they might have needed to send their women after all. (bot that it matters as we're comparing a 2,500 year old society to a modern day one...)
blue_dragon 2y ago
Would you be ok with mandatory draft registration for women if conscription began with only women aged 36 and above? National fertility would be unaffected, since women of that age rarely have children anyways. Then the draft would be gender-balanced and the war hawks would get more bodies for their machine. Everybody wins.
- mc32 2y ago
  Not really, a society that sends women to war is more or less a cowardly society dressing it up as equality. What sort of male sends the female to check on the noises that sound like an intruder in the wee hours of the night? Do they set turns and when it's her turn she's gotta check out the noises? Any gal married or shacked up with a guy like that should kick him out before night is over. Can you imagine Paul asking Nancy to check out the basement noises in SF? Also, those war hawks should see duty in the front lines. None of this sitting behind "green zones" directing grunts. Get out there, get in the line of fire. Imagine Washington, Nimitz, Yamamoto, Zhukov, etc., let's just phone it in.
  - The_Colonel 2y ago
    > Not really, a society that sends women to war is more or less a cowardly society dressing it up as equality. Israel is likely the most prominent country sending women to war. I'm eager to call Israel many bad names, but "cowardly" is not one of them. I think it's a worthwhile discussion, but your argumentation seems to be mainly based on stereotypes (women are weak) and some old chivalric ideals.
  - xkqd 2y ago
    I mean, when things go bump on our farm my wife won’t hesitate to grab the rifle and haze a black bear or coyote. I’ll lay down my life for my wife and kids but I assure you she can be as dangerous as the next guy; in general much more. It usually comes down to proximity and appetite.
  - tsimionescu 2y ago
    This blatant mysogyny is shocking so out in the open. There's nothing "cowardly" about asking a woman to protect her country, or her husband. Not that I support the idea of drafting civilian populations as soldiers in general: it's mostly a way to get innocent people killed and not much more.
scheme271 2y ago
Besides Sparta the starkest example of a slaveholding society and the brutality needed to enforce that, they weren't even all that great militarily. They had a run of one to two centuries where they dominated militarily and then they tended to be mediocre at best. Sparta ended up as a tourist spot for romans to see people in funny costumes and hats.

moomin 2y ago

Ask anyone with half a brain who sincerely believes in gender equality if men should take a pay cut and they’ll say no, women deserve what the men are paid. The draft should work the same way.

xkqd 2y ago
I think that’s what they were saying but their comment was so low quality it’s hard to be sure.
exe34 2y ago
i thought the "gender pay gap" was due to different jobs and amount of time worked - otherwise companies would hire only women and have to pay out way less in wages.
- juliushuijnk 2y ago
  This assumes companies are rational actors.
  - jajko 2y ago
    Market forces, spread over long enough time, are usually a strong force of rationality. So on average, across long time, yes. At least according to the level of contemporary wisdom.
    - danaris 2y ago
      That assumes that there aren't strong psychological/cultural forces acting against rationality. Like not wanting to hire non-white people. Like not wanting to hire people who are "too old"/"too young" for the field. Like not wanting to punish men who harass women. Like not wanting to make sure that your employees are well-treated, satisfied with their jobs, and healthy enough mentally and physically to concentrate on the job regularly. The idea that The Almighty Market will solve all problems and be perfectly rational is notably unsupported by evidence.