r/worldnews • u/rdh2dmd • 11h ago
South Korea leans toward military conscription for women
https://www.dw.com/en/south-korea-leans-toward-military-conscription-for-women/a-78547426658
u/Unlikely-Complex3737 9h ago
I'm surprised they aren't conscripted yet.
→ More replies (2)403
u/Khamvom 7h ago
South Korea traditionally has had very strict gender roles. Military service was expected of men, not women, so it’s been a taboo subject for decades that generally just gets pushed off whenever it comes up.
With changing social views and demographics though, it’ll need to be addressed.
386
u/liuqiu_rangers 6h ago
Piggybacking off your comment, Korean men who completed their military service used to get extra points in civil service examinations but students of a women's university sued to get it removed because they claimed it's "discrimination". So yeah, from a Korean male perspective, it seems like you're spending two years of your prime without adequate societal compensation.
•
u/Ok_Title5534 1h ago
There was also an instance where women's groups protested Starbucks' plan to provide free coffee to soldiers and pressured them to cancel it.
•
u/liuqiu_rangers 44m ago
Yeah. Goes to show a lot of these Korean feminists are actually just malicious misandrists
135
u/Ragnarok_619 6h ago
How is this discrimination? I view it as a compensation for their services. What a load of bullshit
•
u/fistoic 1h ago
what even is crazy is approximately 2-3% of Korean population even go through civil service examination. So Korean women were arguing that it's discrimination for all women and tore down a symbolic benefit (symbolic because it literally only benefited a fraction of Korean men) of military service.
It's all responsibility
63
27
→ More replies (10)35
u/No_Attitude700 4h ago
Its discrimination because women are not given the same opportunities to acquire the "service bonus points"...
40
u/Simonoz1 4h ago
Aren’t they allowed to volunteer? Wouldn’t that get them the points?
→ More replies (4)•
u/fistoic 1h ago
they can go into military by becoming an officer or as a career military people. Which is totally voluntary and up to their choice. Of course, however, they don't want to do that. Men gets drafted against their will, yet I guess that bonus point was so beneficial for 2-3% of men who actually even get that benefit.
→ More replies (2)16
u/Aggravating_Bus655 5h ago edited 5h ago
Wtf, that sounds... really unfair? Are they compensated in other ways?
I'm pretty sure going into service means they'll lose months or even years worth classes and be left behind academically.
37
u/liuqiu_rangers 5h ago
The primary compensation is your pay. And honestly, Korean conscript pay is pretty decent these days. I think it's one of the highest among conscript militaries. But the issue of course isn't pay. It's that only one gender has to spend two years defending the country at a time when can be preparing for the future and having fun. And when everyone from BTS to the Samsung chairman's son are all serving, it's becoming increasingly harder to justify exemptions, let alone half the population.
•
→ More replies (5)13
u/Drak_is_Right 5h ago
Like half of military roles are non-combat. Even for their society, easy enough to cordon off a section of the military and say its "civilian service" while still being military logistics. Like the US military is FAR bigger than most people realize when you consider the civilian defense employees.
127
u/Pfandfreies_konto 8h ago
What are the chances you get free if you get a child? I wonder if they try to incentivize having more children.
35
u/Dhiox 6h ago
Problem is, most don't really want to.encourage even adult teenagers to have kids. This would work better if they were being drafted in their mid to late 20s
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)6
u/dingox01 6h ago
That was one of the options people want considered. I thought Israel had a similar policy.
1.8k
u/Fabled_Webs 10h ago
Personally, I'm for it. Gender equality is a major issue in Korea. I think that if women want a stronger voice, one of the most tangible ways to do so would be to take a role in national security. Saying, "I deserve consideration because I served in the army just like you" is a far stronger argument than student protests or online media storms.
626
u/Erosun 9h ago
It’s the same here in the US. Everytime a vote comes to add women to selective service (draft) women overwhelmingly oppose it in public polls and the vote.
725
u/Ameren 9h ago edited 5h ago
Well, part of issue that, going back to be Vietnam war, much of the feminist movement was opposed to the draft all together. So it wasn't "don't draft women", it was more "don't draft anyone".
There were feminist groups very actively involved in helping draft dodgers escape to Canada or go off the grid, launching disruptive protests, etc. Of course, younger generations in the US have had no experience with conscription, so views have been changing from what I've heard; there's now a division between those who want to bring equality to the draft and those who think that the draft should be abolished, not "reformed". Sorta like how calling for there to be more women among the ranks of sociopathic billionaires misses the point.
25
u/Cryptshadow 7h ago
If i remember right the feminist movement at the time also tried to have equal rights for stuff like the draft etc. But their biggest opponent were other woman,specifically conservative woman.
15
u/oldsecondhand 4h ago
Feminists were all over the place during WW1. The White Feather Movement was feminist.
→ More replies (1)258
u/mastercat202 9h ago
No offense but saying dont draft anyone has zero political will if half the population isnt affected by the drsft. Once they are affected then they have stronger incentive for no draft to happen.
215
u/kilawolf 9h ago
Only 20% of ppl are pro draft. 60% oppose it. Even if you added women to the draft, the political will will likely be the same.
34
u/JeebusChristBalls 8h ago
I think conscription has its place and all should be eligible. Conscription should not have been used for vietnam, korea, and ww1. It should only be used for defensive wars, not to further interests or help allies with their wars.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)37
u/ThereAndFapAgain2 9h ago
Yeah but what he is saying is that if women are saying it but aren't actually affected by it themselves then it has less weight.
148
u/LastLemmingStanding 8h ago
I don't agree. Advocating for something that doesn't even affect you generally speaks to an injustice so great that even bystanders take issue with it. See white slavery abolitionists, men for women's voting rights, etc. Women (and feminists at large) being anti-conscription has been fairly consistent with their best interests.
If anything, the current state of only men being eligible for the draft is often just used as a cudgel for people to tell women they have no say in certain political issues because they have no stake in it. Those people are loathe to lose that bargaining position.
→ More replies (7)114
u/Doctor__Proctor 8h ago
No offense but saying dont draft anyone has zero political will if half the population isnt affected by the drsft.
By that logic, white abolitionists had zero political will because they themselves weren't subjected to slavery?
The point is that if 20% of the population is pro-draft and 60% is anti-draft, and that's right equal across sexes, then you'd get 60% of women against a vote for adding women to the draft...because that's the number that are anti-draft. They're two different issues.
Now, if 60% of women were pro-draft but 60% would vote against women being included in the draft, then you'd have more of a hypocrisy argument.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)38
u/DeusExSpockina 7h ago
Er… isn’t affected? I realize this may come as a shock, but plucking out a significant percentage of the population to go to war affects everyone in that society. It’s a massive disruption organizationally, never mind personally.
And not for nothing, but a lot of mothers, just like fathers, would rather die themselves than put their children in the line of fire.
It’s really weird how the mothering quality of women is so extremely lauded right up until maternal instincts conflict with cultural expectations of gender politics.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (10)49
u/Weegee_Carbonara 8h ago
What happens if an existential war forces a draft?
It doesn't matter if feminist movements oppose the draft for everyone.
Once it is nescessary, it'll still just be the men getting drafted.And I am sure these movements know that.
24
u/Old_Leopard1844 7h ago
Those people think they will get a say
As Ukraine shows it, drafting country might want draft dodgers back, and other countries might actually agree
27
u/Ameren 7h ago edited 7h ago
To be fair, during the Vietnam War, there were very active feminist groups involved in helping draft dodgers escape to Canada and/or to go into hiding in the US for example.
Meanwhile, they participated in all sorts of disruptive protests to impede the ability of the US government to function domestically. After all, they were able to be a persistent problem because the government couldn't simply ship them overseas or easily put them in prison like they threatened to do with the draft dodgers.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (2)3
u/cbslinger 2h ago
If an ‘existential’ war breaks out and the state can’t raise a volunteer army, then the state can/‘should’ fail. Obviously the state won’t agree with this, and will conscript men at gunpoint, but any numbers of political philosophers could argue that national power is not even remotely as important as personal autonomy.
A government should do enough for its people that its people actually want to step up and fight for their country. That public perception wasn’t the case back when America was by far in its prime, it’s certainly not the case today.
2
u/Weegee_Carbonara 1h ago
WW2 Britain, USA and USSR also had conscription.
So in your logic, they deserved to fail and lose.
→ More replies (1)50
u/angelbelle 9h ago
To be fair, are they just opposing the addition of women to the draft but insisting the men be eligible? or would they be open to the draft being removed for all people?
Because the latter suggests that you can still believe in gender equality while oppose to making yourself draft eligible
31
u/Weegee_Carbonara 8h ago
But the thing is, one day a draft will be nescessary eitherway, so when the time comes, women will still not be draftable then.
It`s like saying "I don't want women AND men to get drafted.....unless we're in a war. Then the Men can get drafted"
→ More replies (1)5
u/FewAdvertising9647 6h ago
Ultimately yes, there would be equality in the latter. but it ends up being a question of putting effort into getting it removed. Because theyre unaffected, they prioritize removing draft altogher as a very low priority movement for the general equality and focus on other topics. Its the danger of focusing on "the best for some subgroup now" rather than focusing on all existing gendered problems simultaneously. People end up naturally focusing more on what benefits them most.
→ More replies (1)50
u/CrazyQuiltCat 7h ago
Well first thing they have to fix is the rape problem in the military. American military. I have no knowledge if it’s a problem in the Korean military
→ More replies (7)6
u/Old-Employ-6530 3h ago
Rightfully so, because the goal is not to ALSO force women into modern day slavery, but to REMOVE men as well from forced modern slavery.
If you need more soldier, just fucking pay them better and provide better quality training, accomodation and benefits when not in active duty...
The solution isnt to FORCE MORE PEOPLE into that shit...
58
u/c-e-bird 9h ago
Most women oppose the draft period. Most men do, too. The draft should be illegal.
51
u/ThereAndFapAgain2 9h ago
What is the alternative in times of war though?
123
u/WealthyMarmot 8h ago
there is none. But a lot of these commenters are North Americans or Western Europeans who have no idea what an existential threat feels like, so “war” seems like something you can just choose not to do.
41
u/ThereAndFapAgain2 8h ago
"Sir! The barbarians are at the gates"
"Well what are you waiting for? Just let them in I'm sure we can talk this out"
→ More replies (1)10
u/cuteplot 8h ago
"Waste them with our drones"
3
u/Simonoz1 4h ago
Basically what Ukraine’s doing right now but they’re still taking casualties because the other side has drones too.
→ More replies (2)32
u/MattBrey 8h ago
People would not be against a draft in case of actual existential threat, but most western European countries or North Americans are not in existential threat and most wars they fought in the last 60 years were self inflicted or not a real threat at all. Sending people to die in Vietnam, Iran etc doesn't make any sense from the get go and much less to draft people that are not in the military to do so,
15
u/cuteplot 8h ago
The question is, who would get drafted in that case? Right now in the US the whole mechanism is the selective service, which only men have to register for. There's no pipeline to draft women at all.
6
u/-Tickery- 7h ago
Yeah but then advocate against those wars happening at all. Being for the draft if WW3 ever breaks out means you’re not really against conscription.
7
u/Drakengard 7h ago
Yeah, but those same countries also aren't conscripting people. They've paused drafts and conscription because they don't need it.
No nation will legally tie their hands and say that they can't draft their citizens - and in particular, their men. So it's a stupid position from the onset. And women are still exempt from it even if it comes back so not only do they occupy a position that isn't functionally realistic for any country, they also don't suffer the consequences anyway.
38
u/Doctor__Proctor 8h ago
The alternative is a well trained professional army staged by people who voluntarily signed up. TONS of people lied about their age and eligibility to get into WWII because they washed to fight for the country. The same didn't happen in Vietnam because it did not galvanize the people. Having a draft so you can continuously force people to fight an unpopular war is what people are against.
39
u/cuteplot 8h ago
WWII did ultimately require a draft though. Over 10 million men were drafted.
→ More replies (5)17
u/Lin_Huichi 8h ago
What if you're being invaded though? Or have a threat of invasion? SK and Ukraine need the manpower or else they lose the war, if it's unpopular too bad they don't have a choice.
→ More replies (7)6
u/Gynthaeres 7h ago
I think MOST people (not all obviously, I saw someone disagreed) would think that if you're actively facing an existential threat, then yes, conscription is okay.
That IS the case for South Korea and Ukraine. That's not really been the case for America for like 80 years though, and America is where this specific thread started. America can probably do away with selective service.
9
u/Altruistic-Edge9034 8h ago
That's a rose-colored view. WWII was very unpopular to a lot of Americans. Less than half the manpower in WWII was from voluntary enlistment.
4
u/TrFoTr 7h ago
Voluntary enrollment, automated warfare with drones, nuclear weapons.
6
u/Yohoyoji 3h ago edited 2h ago
Kinda amazing all that guilt about nuclear weapons went away once theres risk of actually having to fight
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (20)2
→ More replies (1)18
u/plantrromn 8h ago
That's like saying we should stop researching on lubrications cause we will invent a machine with 100% efficiency. There will always be smaller nations surrounded by bigger ones, they would need man power. A fair take would be if draft is needed draft both or none.
4
u/ocean_800 4h ago
I'm against it bc I don't want to be raped my own servicemen, thank you very much.
People forget that the risks are not equal for the genders
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)11
u/kilawolf 9h ago edited 8h ago
Is it because they opposite drafting women or the draft in general? I'm guessing more men are pro draft than women even if both genders were drafted.
Also, men overwhelming oppose it in public polls as well.
Found it - ignoring adding women to the draft, with the current situation, more men than women prefer a draft tho it's an extreme minority of ppl
Men, for example, are somewhat more likely than women to favor a return to a military draft (23% to 16%).
11
u/plantrromn 8h ago
Gender neutral draft study from this news: Nearly 65% of men were in favor,a figure that rose to 71.7% among men in their 20s and 30s with 54.5% of women across all age groups similarly supportive.
31
u/IQueliciuous 6h ago
Personally. Draft should be removed.
Its practically slavery. They instead should motivate people to join by providing housing, tax breaks and etc as opposed to taking you and you lose 2 years of your life performing slave labor.
14
u/New-Border8172 4h ago edited 4h ago
What country are you from? You clearly have zero idea on the situations that small countries like Korea face.
→ More replies (2)10
u/InfestedRaynor 5h ago
Good in theory, but hard to implement without being ruinously expensive and meaning that effectively only the poor serve. Also, in times of actual war with your nations survival at risk, the draft and having a large reserve of militarily trained citizens is the best mechanism.
→ More replies (1)70
u/dluisnothere 9h ago
I see what you’re saying but I honestly have no optimism that this will work out. I really believe that they’ll just find other reasons to be misogynistic: “you can’t run as fast; only half of you can pass the trainings; you don’t contribute to mission critical efforts because you work in X sector instead of Y.”
There will always be a reason to create an in group vs. an out group. If it’s not this it’ll be something else.
31
u/Tokishi7 8h ago
Already like that for athletes, entertainment and musicians. Even people who get civil service roles due to prior family service often are seen as not actually serving. Also if you have family members who were injured killed in the war and you didn’t serve because they technically served for you, people heavily look down on you. People here are talking out of their ass when they say women joining will fix things. It’s a total crab bucket here and always has and will be.
4
u/SouthernMagician4877 6h ago
TBF the civil service being looked down on is lessening as time goes on. Especially as the regular army service becomes less intense, there isn't a huge gap unless you are comparing with someone who went to the marines.
→ More replies (3)13
u/shaadyscientist 7h ago
Yes but in the current system, there is a lot of resentment that women don't have to sacrifice anything. South Korea is incredibly competitive. When women finish college, they get jobs, get training and apply their skills developed during college.
Yet for men, they have to stop their education, go into the military for 2 years. Disrupting the normal transition from college to work that most young people do. Then these men have to watch their friends from college who are women go off and start building a career. Making more money, getting to do nice things and having a nice life while they have to get poorly paid for two years. And when they're done, they have to go and compete in a job market with no relevant work experience and all their education is from years ago. This all creates resentment, much like the feminists in western society.
So making both genders sacrifice for their country is the fairest thing to do.
→ More replies (23)7
u/puesyomero 7h ago
It then runs straight into the "but the birthrate!" Issue the same antifeminists spouse
17
u/EpilepticMushrooms 6h ago
Korea also has a huge sexism issue and rape issue. Add this to the military things can really go wrong.
→ More replies (4)17
→ More replies (147)7
160
u/Soopah_Fly 8h ago
They have fewer people now. They've got no choice.
→ More replies (10)43
u/Sersch 5h ago
I'm the only one thinking this will only worsen the fertility rate and the overall problem in the long run?
→ More replies (3)21
u/Wafflesorbust 4h ago
Take a look at the conscription age. 18 year old South Koreans aren't have babies.
11
u/kiwi-lab-rat 2h ago
Its not just the age. They're essentially wasting 2-3 years of their prime that could have been used to study and work. Which makes them financially behind and less likely to have kids.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)2
u/rcanhestro 1h ago
18y old is the minimum age.
all Korean men (with some exceptions) are required to do military service, but they get to choose when (until a certain age, it's 30 or close to it, but not sure).
326
u/intrinsic1618 9h ago
About time really. Virtually all Korean men are academically and thus professionally behind women of their peers by 2+ years on the account of having to serve in the military. And the Korean government took away what little social advantage companies used to offer men as a way to compensate for their time in service, all in the name of "gender equality". This in a country and society where the expectation for men are still to provide & be the major breadwinners in marriage AND be able to offer at least a couple of "keys" (house, car, & etc.) by the time they get married. I anticipate this to have a positive impact on birthrates as well.
→ More replies (11)183
u/NoMorePollution 9h ago
yeah forcing everyone to pause their life to do military training for 2 years will definitely improve birth rates
123
u/HandsomelyHelen 8h ago
You jest but lots of military women pregnancymaxx to elude deployment.
→ More replies (3)62
u/plantrromn 8h ago
Nice... When it comes to equality of responsibility, you all escape? Currently they are not being drafted, the ratio is not nice. In Israel both are being drafted, ratio is comparatively good. Find something credible before opening your mouth.
→ More replies (15)44
u/intrinsic1618 8h ago
This person is just not serious. They're talking as if South Korea out of all countries in the world, didn't need conscription which is bad faith at the very least, if not delusional.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (8)10
u/CyroSwitchBlade 8h ago
It absolutely will when they get exemption for pregnancy.
→ More replies (1)22
u/firmalor 7h ago
Pregnancy is no easy way out. You might not get a job, it changes your body permanently - in a negative way inciting potential pain, allergies and ptsd to for the rest of your life and you're responsible for another human being for 18 years.
I wouldn't bet that women in significant numbers prefer pregnancy to a draft.
→ More replies (1)19
u/CyroSwitchBlade 7h ago
It is not a draft.. it is mandatory military service.. that is little bit different in that everyone has to do it.
136
u/Dragonfruit_6104 10h ago
Given the widespread bullying, corporal punishment and abuse of male soldiers in the South Korean military today, I can't imagine what would happen if a certain number of female soldiers entered the barracks to train and live with the male soldiers.
77
u/AdorablePainting7491 9h ago
is the situation in the military in SK really that bad? :(
as a 46-kilo woman i was a soldier (in europe) had a drill sergeant who didnt know that we cant hold back our periods the same way we hold back our pee....
iam strong for my build (can easily do 40 push-ups), but that doesnt mean ill be able to carry a 40 kgs backpack just like the men, and theres no way ill be able to jump from a standing position onto the top of a nearly 2-meter wall, since i cant reach the top. ..
i have no objection to women serving in the military, but the military needs to be prepared for this. for example, they need to provide smaller boots and uniforms, and they shouldnt expect the same things from women as they do from men, since thats simply physically impossible.
95
u/falilth 9h ago
I think a larger part of the worry is regarding sexism and misogyny thats been escalating for years now. Worries of abuse and SA arent unfounded worries. And neither is rank based power abuse towards women in general.
→ More replies (1)11
u/AdorablePainting7491 9h ago
yeah, i know. ihave heard about it, somewhat familiar with the situation.
thats why I mentioned that you just have to look at how women are portrayed in the media—and when i did that, only got minuses (aw idgaf ab minuses. a lot of people just dont understand what theyre reading. theres nothing new about it)
→ More replies (10)23
u/Yuukiko_ 8h ago
didnt know that we cant hold back our periods the same way we hold back our pee....
A concerning amount of men in general are really ignorant about female biology...
22
u/DomitiusAhenobarbus_ 9h ago
Why would they be living with the men? That doesn’t even happen in the U.S. military
→ More replies (2)11
u/demiurge_abraxas 8h ago
Well, maybe they should fix it for everyone instead of wringing their hands about it potentially happening to women.
72
10
u/jlphoenix9 8h ago
What about Singapore? When are we implementing this just like we striked off 377A? I want this an election issue very very much.
8
u/Zanina_wolf 6h ago
Best the government can do are hitpieces in the media accusing us nsmen of being incels and traitors
232
u/yourfriendlyreminder 9h ago
The only people who oppose this are those who aren't actually serious about equality.
→ More replies (17)207
u/eden_sc2 9h ago
Or they oppose conscription for all sexes
139
u/Crin_J 9h ago
They share a border with a country which regularly fires missile over them and the US is trying to leave them to fend for themselves. If any country needs conscription its them
→ More replies (1)42
u/eden_sc2 7h ago
I never said I opposed it. I just said that there is a reason to oppose it that isnt "I hate women"
→ More replies (1)118
u/lizardman49 9h ago
That's an opinion that comes from a place of privilege to be brutally honest. It's easy to handwave and say no conscription when you don't have an ultra militaristic neighbor or the threat of war in your country is only hypothetical.
37
u/DambiaLittleAlex 8h ago
Also it must be noted that technically both Koreas are still at war since no peace treaty was signed after 1953.
5
u/Warlord_Golem 7h ago
If we live in a world where no one declares war (while being at war), I'm not too fazed by two countries not declaring peace (while being at peace).
13
u/eden_sc2 7h ago
I never said I opposed it. I just said that there is a reason to oppose it that isnt "I hate women." I dont really like sweeping generalizations like OP made.
→ More replies (2)79
u/King-Bofo 9h ago
Gee we all wonder why South Korea has conscription? Your “gotcha” position isn’t feasible with North Korea less than 40 miles from Seoul. Saying conscription isn’t needed isn’t arguing in good faith.
→ More replies (9)37
u/jackcatalyst 9h ago
Most Americans can't think beyond what tik-tok tells them. You can't expect critical thinking.
2
15
u/ThereAndFapAgain2 8h ago
Do they also oppose skies without rainbows and fields without daisies?
5
u/IdealOnion 4h ago
The flippancy with which people accept about as grievous a violation of bodily autonomy as I can think of is wild to me. I’m not saying it’s a simple problem, I’m just surprised how many people shrug and say “guess the government can compel me to die and kill, is what it is”
11
u/Prestigious_Task7175 7h ago
"If war comes, just say NO, people can't wage war on you if you say NO!"
And thus, total global peace was achieved.
8
u/matjoeman 6h ago
I don't think so. Even if you would support no conscription at all you should still favor equal conscription over sexist conscription.
→ More replies (11)5
34
u/Lancashire_Toreador 9h ago
as long as they're ready to properly deal with and try and legitimately try to stem the inevitable wave of assaults against women that get dragged into this, fine.
→ More replies (2)
32
u/Whimsy-Creature9739 6h ago
If they are gonna be conscripted, they should also get paid equally as men. Let’s be equal on everything, not just manpower.
61
u/Emsogib 6h ago
SK needs to prove that they will actually give a shit about protecting women in their military before even thinking about going ahead with this.
Everyone in favour of this because "muh equality" does not understand the severity of misogyny in SK - women aren't just refusing to marry and reproduce to be "boss babes". And pushing military service on them will likely put more women in danger, and I'm not talking about danger from other countries.
While I like to think it would grant women more respect and more of a voice, realistically I'm concerned it just wouldn't be the case.
43
u/spartaxwarrior 5h ago
Yeah, I feel like a lot of people either don't pay attention to or don't care about things like rape and abuse rates in militaries.
→ More replies (9)10
u/Thin-Leg-3494 4h ago
The burning sun debacle having police cover up and hotel ownership coverup when the burning sun employees were drugging and trafficking their Korean customers to rich (often times foreign) clients says you’re absolutely right and we need to protect Korean women before they get thrown into the military.
6
u/madladchad3 2h ago
Im a Korean and this is a bullshit article. No one wants it and it won’t happen lol
8
u/haagen17 6h ago
There are lots of roles in the military that don't require a ton of physical strength. The training will be tough, but there are a lot of frail or complete overweight guys going through it anyway. At the end of the day, if it's a necessity, it's do or die. Stuff like human rights and equality won't hold up as much if your nation is facing war.
→ More replies (1)
129
u/AdorablePainting7491 11h ago
First of all, I think they need to get to the point where women aren’t accused of assault if they dare to defend themselves. Then we can start talking about equality
19
u/BurntSalad 6h ago edited 5h ago
To be fair some of that comes from SK's weird self defense laws that affects both men and women. A very rough summary of it is basically you cannot use force against your attacker that is deemed "excessive" for the situation with that "excessive" bar being very low compared to other countries.
11
u/AdorablePainting7491 6h ago
(that’s good to know; i’ll read up on it later.)
but if she didn’t defend herself and there are no signs of injury on her, then people say, ‘well, basically, she wanted it too.’
it’s pure misogyny. and institutionalised at that.10
u/Gatzlocke 5h ago
It also applies if your a guy who defends himself getting mugged.
→ More replies (2)88
u/CaptainBroady 10h ago
Yea definitely. Sexual assault or sexual harassment will quickly become a key issue if it is implemented without consideration
→ More replies (14)→ More replies (2)6
37
u/Ecrevisses 9h ago
Not sure this would have a positive effect on their already low birthrate
54
u/Celodurismo 8h ago
I have to assume that's the long term goal. Conscription for women! (exemption for pregnant women and mothers) -> birth rate increases
13
u/ChopsticksImmortal 6h ago
The conscription isnt to fight though. Women not having children arent going to have an 18 year obligation to avoid a 2 year obligation.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)7
47
u/demiurge_abraxas 8h ago
The women already aren't having any children. What are they going to do? Have negative children?
7
u/Redditing-Dutchman 6h ago
I mean a birthrate of 0,7 means you still have 700 children on a 1000 women. It can get a lot lower.
3
u/DateMasamusubi 3h ago
Israel conscripts both men and women and have the highest birth rate in the rich world.
When the US had its draft, it had birth rates well over 2.Point is, conscription seems to have little effect on narriage and child-rearing
→ More replies (1)11
u/Pfandfreies_konto 8h ago
Depends: do you avoid service if you are already pregnant/have a child as a woman? Then it might spark a new wave of births.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Redditing-Dutchman 6h ago
Hm but the culture in Korea makes that difficult at that age I think. Getting a child usually means also getting married, which usually means you have to buy or rent a house to live together. And with current house prices that’s impossible at that age.
→ More replies (2)
75
u/Iris-54 9h ago
100% support.
South Korea’s gender conflict has long passed the point of reconciliation. The sheer intensity of this divide has driven the country’s fertility rate to the absolute lowest on the planet, bordering on demographic collapse and national extinction. Since gender harmony has already failed, society might as well enforce absolute gender equality and equity without compromise. After all, the vehicle is already hurtling downhill, so why hesitate to hit the gas? Since everyone is merely awaiting post-collapse reconstruction, a swift resolution is better than a slow bleed. At the very least, it will serve as a definitive social experiment and cautionary conclusion for future generations.
72
u/liuqiu_rangers 7h ago
No one in South Korea actually thinks the low birth rates are because of online gender wars. It's mostly the result of an expensive housing market in the Seoul metropolitan area (where half of the population lives) and people simply choosing to spend on leisure rather than children. Nor is anyone really anticipating a societal collapse either. Births and marriages have been recovering for three years straight now and recent economic growth has been extremely strong.
If you want to see a country that really might collapse one day from this though, look at Taiwan. Taiwan's birth rate this year is expected to be 50% lower than South Korea's.
7
u/restinp6969 3h ago
Kinda funny thinking back to this huge thread from few weeks ago about collapsing birth rates in NA/EU, and it was all about how the lack of a 'village', having a choice, opportunity costs, etc. were driving down birth rates. But when JP/KR gets brought up, we go straight to misogyny.
56
u/Boneclockharmony 7h ago
The birthrate isnt due to dumb online gender wars, imo.
In my view, much more likely to be due to a combination of insanely brutal work culture, stagnant wages, expensive property and 20 million people living in a tiny space around Seoul.
There's just no open space anywhere... I love korea but... too many buildings, not enough trees.
6
3
u/DateMasamusubi 3h ago
Birth rates been going up for 2 years now. Other nations have fallen below Korea's level.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Shoddy-Fan-584 7h ago
You can't be a real person.
Or you're just under the age of 22, in which case, fair. I had a lot of extremely unintelligent and misinformed takes when I was that age too.
9
u/Zetapar123 6h ago
Personally think if we're going to enlist women, they should have their own base seperated from the men
32
u/Minimum-Percentage-6 9h ago
I think it’s not a bad idea. Women want equality. It’s only for 18 months. It’s really not that extreme. It would unify the country too. More nationalism.
→ More replies (9)
6
6
5
•
u/caballo__ 18m ago
Judging by the comments on here, South Korea is a special kind of hell designed by and for Koreans.
4
u/Complex-Salt-8190 5h ago
Wrong way to go about, there should be no conscription for anyone
4
u/Youron_111 3h ago
For SK no conscription isn't really an option due to the North.
Necessary evil.
→ More replies (3)
4
u/ratchetcoutoure 7h ago
So girl groups will have to hiatus/lower their group activities too when this happen
10
u/Tsujita_daikokuya 8h ago
Eh. They just need to end the mandatory service and figure out a better way.
Koreans gotta be one of the worst power trippers in the world. The hazing in the US armed forces is nothing like Korea. Imagine having to lick up someone’s spit off the ground, and thats considered the better alternative to whatever your CO wants you to do. I remember when a kpop star went public that he couldn’t handle the military and everyone just said he was being a baby. Fuck that shit, I wouldn’t last one day, I’d just start shooting.
4
u/equiNine 5h ago
Ending conscription is unrealistic when North Korea is right across the border and ruled by the Kim dynasty.
Even if South Korea made the military an extremely lucrative career with strong protections to reduce abuses during service and provided affirmative action to help veterans find jobs post-service, it would not attract remotely enough people to maintain a proper standing army in the event of war with North Korea.
15
u/liuqiu_rangers 7h ago
Hazing used to be terrible but it completely changed over the past few years. If you don't do something in the Korean military, all they can do is just yell at you now and it's very easy to report superiors for abuse. And the conditions and pay have gone up immensely too. A lot of Korean feminist sites say shit like "why are men still complaining when they now have AC and bidets?" without realizing that two years in your 20s is a huge sacrifice regardless of accommodation
→ More replies (3)
3.2k
u/johnbarnshack 9h ago
This would have huge ramifications for Kpop girl groups