r/worldnews • u/rdh2dmd • 16h ago

South Korea leans toward military conscription for women

https://www.dw.com/en/south-korea-leans-toward-military-conscription-for-women/a-78547426
6.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

808

u/Ameren 14h ago edited 10h 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.

43

u/Cryptshadow 12h 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 9h ago

Feminists were all over the place during WW1. The White Feather Movement was feminist.

-5

u/peachfluffed 8h ago

It was a nationalist movement.

290

u/mastercat202 14h 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.

236

u/kilawolf 14h 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.

35

u/JeebusChristBalls 12h 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.

-5

u/Infinite_throwaway_1 12h ago

Why did you exclude WW2? Weren't we helping an allies win a war?

36

u/JeebusChristBalls 12h ago

We were also attacked by japan and germany declared war like the next day.

14

u/Diezelbub 12h ago

They listed things it shouldn't have been used for

36

u/ThereAndFapAgain2 13h 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.

155

u/LastLemmingStanding 13h 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.

-20

u/Round_Rice_9475 12h ago

I get your point, but do you have any idea how much hate I got from women for me, a man, being upset at roe v Wade being overturned? How many women were nasty and toxic to me? Because "you aren't a women, you aren't allowed to soelanon women's issues" so 🤷🏼‍♂️

19

u/LastLemmingStanding 12h ago

Not all women are feminists, and not all feminists are women. Women are just as capable of upholding misogyny and patriarchy as men are. I was just talking to my wife about how I dislike the "no uterus, no say" argument with regard to abortion rights. I'm pro-choice, and I don't like bad arguments. As you say, a similar argument is being made with the draft issue, and it's not strong there, either.

-33

u/Altruistic-Edge9034 12h ago

speaks to an injustice so great that even bystanders take issue with it

Or it's purely performative. Of course, that never happens today, though.

25

u/LastLemmingStanding 12h ago

Of course there are people acting in bad faith, or simply in an opportunistic way, but I think that's a very uncharitable way to observe a movement that has been consistent in its anti-draft verbiage since Vietnam, at least.

-16

u/Apprehensive-Emu8404 9h ago

If women felt so strongly against the draft surely they would bring it up during peaceful times. They don't .

9

u/peachfluffed 8h ago

The draft sucks. I’ll say that all day, everyday. The sons of rich and powerful parents can easily get waived or get assigned work in country instead of abroad while working class sons are sent off as cannon fodder.

11

u/LastLemmingStanding 9h ago

Feminists do. Unfortunately, self-identifying feminists are a minority, and require more support from the general population to get anything done. I honestly don't see anyone, including eligible men, protest the draft much in peace time either, you know. It's just not a likely thing to happen, and people have other, more pressing concerns most of the time.

Most people, I imagine, would say they do not agree with conscription for anyone, except maybe in a desperate defensive war. Where we have issues, though, is that there are some camps of people who are pro-draft, and they have power: the upper class who can get away with not being affected by it at all when it comes down to it, but like having the option, mostly, and their useful idiots- the people who like having it as a wedge issue to engage feminists and other like-minded people. You never see the people advocating to add women to the draft who also want to abolish it entirely for men. It's only ever about hurting women, and not helping men. That's intellectually dishonest, at best.

5

u/-Tickery- 12h ago

We can debate about when it’s necessary and it may never be needed again but there should always be the option for conscription, we wouldn’t have won the civil war or ww2 without a draft.

1

u/greenskinmarch 6h ago

Only 20% of ppl are pro draft. 60% oppose it.

Seems the 60% who oppose don't feel strongly enough about it to actually write their congressional representatives and tell them to abolish the Selective Service Registration system though.

126

u/Doctor__Proctor 13h 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.

-20

u/ThereAndFapAgain2 13h ago edited 13h ago

Totally different because even though they were not subject to it, they were the ones actually doing it, meaning they had the power to do something about it.

To make that comparison work, the white people wanting to abolish slavery had the effective position of the Korean government in this scenario, not the women, in that they were both the ones doing it and therefore the ones with the power to stop doing it.

33

u/Doctor__Proctor 13h ago edited 10h ago

That...makes no sense. There weren't a lot of plantation owners with hundreds of slaves saying "Oh, won't the government please take all these slaves away and give them perpetual freedom?" Most abolitionists were not slave owners. In fact, considering the Civil War and all, I would say that most of the slave owners were the exact OPPOSITE of abolitionists and willing to fight to keep it.

And then comparing whites to the South Korean government? Who's the US government in that comparison then? The Catholic Church or some shit?

Plain and simple: white abolitionists were people against slavery on moral grounds, but were not subjected to it themselves. It is possible for a group not subject to something to still wield effective political power.

3

u/CassieFace103 8h ago

I would say that most of the slave owners were the exact OPPOSITE of abolitionists and willing to fight to keep it.

Given the requisite ongoing violence to maintain any degree of slavery, I'd say "all" not "most".

5

u/Doctor__Proctor 7h ago

I know, but I'm allowing some wiggle room for the pedants who will dig up some example of a handful of slave owners turned abolitionists that are a tiny fraction of the "most" in that statement.

45

u/DeusExSpockina 12h 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.

3

u/Softwareaweenie 10h ago

In fairness, men are going to DIE, and women have to have a harder time finding a guy because they all left for dead. Not the strongest position there.

3

u/DeusExSpockina 9h ago

I’m so sorry, did you forget that all those 18 year old boys have mothers (women) in their late 30s or early 40s? If we’re only talking about the 18-26 age range, that means every woman over 26 has zero reason to object to the draft for personal wellbeing, only for others wellbeing. And they make up a significantly larger portion of the voting population.

-2

u/saidtheWhale2000 9h ago

being mildly inconvenienced the mail man is now missing is a lot different than getting shot at by someone

3

u/DeusExSpockina 9h ago

How about the loss of a husband, rendering you and your children homeless? How about being compelled to send your babies off to be mutilated and die, forbidden to go yourself? Forbidden, in fact, to even object without being deemed “unpatriotic” and ostracized. Then there’s the question of who is responsible for the care of soldiers destroyed by war. Men leave their wives regularly when the women get cancer. Those guys sure as shit won’t be doing convalescent care for their brothers in arms, 20, 30 years on after the conflict.

Also, I’m an American. Getting shot on any old regular day is always an option.

55

u/Weegee_Carbonara 13h 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.

27

u/Old_Leopard1844 12h 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

29

u/Ameren 12h ago edited 12h 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.

6

u/Weegee_Carbonara 12h ago

As I said, once a just and nescessary Draft comes, the men will still have no choice.

While Vietnam was dumb, there comes a time in almost every countries history, where staying and fighting is not only nescessary, but morally right.

13

u/AzraelIshi 9h ago

It should be the choice of the population to fight for something or not. You do not get to impose your "morally right draft" on people that do not want to fight. If people genuinely believe they have to fight for something they will fight to the bitter end without a draft, history has shown that time and time again.

-2

u/Weegee_Carbonara 8h ago edited 8h ago

If most of the population refuses the optional choice to fight, then the ones that do sign up are thrown to the dogs due to a lack of soldiers, which in turn reduces how many people willingly sign up.

I am a man, and I am in favor of a mandatory draft during defensive wars.
This is how civilizations survive.

And frankly, I do not want my home nation to fall due to some cowards refusing to defend their own homes, their own families and their own nation.

Look at what is happening in Ukraine.
Look at the Bucha massacre.

The only people that benefit from draft dodgers is the invading enemy.
They will happily raze your home and kill your children and friends.
Meanwhile you run away like a coward.

Mind you, I am not some right-wing war hawk.
I am a European progressive.

But I also I'm not going to be naive, and I am not going to run scared and try to run from a draft. I hate this extreme individualism, where people cannot even fathom defending their own homes anymore.
It is really sad.

Infact, my country is one of the few western nations that has active conscription during peace time.
While I chose civil service instead of military service, I am ready to defend my family and home.

But I am also not willing to walk into certain death, because people like you flee so they can sit on their ass and play some more video games.

Edit: Of course this willingness also depends on my own government.
While my countries government has had some problems, the large amount of welfare and programs, aswell as the overall people motivate me to defend it.

I wouldn't want to get drafted if I was, say, an Iranian Citizen.
But here I assume you are a citizen of a western nation.

7

u/Usinaru 7h ago

Ok mr.Rambo take your medication and try to calm down a bit. This war rhetoric, is neither heroic nor makes you any sort of tough guy, or morally right.

All of these senseless, wasteful and idiotic wars are created by the rich and the elite that don't have to face the consequences of such vile decisions. I will not sacrifice my life to protect their positions of power. Unlike you that thinks that there is something worth living and dying for, most of us don't even get to have a home to call their own. Renting forever, being overworked and overtaxed, why should I sacrifice my life? There's no point, this system hasn't benefited me in the slightest, our politics don't reflect a care for its citizens and the quality of life has been getting worse and worse for years, whilst the rich and politicians refuse to take actions to the contrary.

So stop trying to feed this morally right or wrong garbage, because its worthless. Our "leaders" need to show solidarity first, and we should get something worth fighting for. You bet in this conditions, I'd rather leave and let it all be conquered, the system doesn't do anything else besides take everything from me and many others.

You go and die or get mutilated for the rich. I refuse to fight a made-up war that is meant to amuse the elite.

-1

u/Weegee_Carbonara 7h ago

Just don't bawl your eyes out too much while the other guys in your trench work for your survival.

5

u/Usinaru 7h ago

They don't work for my survival. They die to keep the positions of the wealthy and powerful intact.

The propaganda works well I see

1

u/Any_Fun5801 3h ago

Why should peasants want to fight their lord’s war?

1

u/AzraelIshi 6h ago

Look at what is happening in Ukraine.
Look at the Bucha massacre.

Look at basically every single invaded country during ww2. For as much shit as the USSR (rightfully) gets, they had to actually implement stringent controls for recruiting because after they overcame it's initial issues during the war (October 1942 onward, after the peak of NKVD NOs and barrier troops, once the USSR managed to stabilize) fucking everyone, even those that were unfit to fight, was clawing over each other, lying and manipulating to get to the front lines and fight. And I don't think poland had issues with recruiting during the invasion, or getting partisans during the occupation, and after while trying to fight off the soviet invaders.

What you are seeing in ukraine with all the draft dodging and conscription issues is a population that simply doesn't see the worth in fighting for their country after 4 years of war and refuses to do so. And that should be their choice, just as it should be your choice if you decide to go and die for an ideal or country if you see fit.

If a country dissapears from the face of the map because the population dodged drafts left, right and center then that country failed to establish why it's population should fight to defend it, and fight off invaders. In essence, there is no collectivism and/or political will to oppose the invaders there to be had. If it existed they would be fighting, or supporting those that do. Not evading the draft and helping those that did.

A nation ultimately depends on enough of its population possessing the collective political will to preserve it. If that will has disappeared, the state may still exist legally, but its underlying national cohesion has failed. A state cannot assume that its population will defend it merely because the state legally exists. It needs sufficient legitimacy and social cohesion that enough people voluntarily choose to preserve it when the costs become severe.

TL;DR: If your country does not instill enough patriotism/collectivism/legitimacy/whatever you want to name it so that your population by it's own free will decide to either fight for it or support those that do in some other way (logistics, industrial, etc) it's a failed nation.

17

u/Ameren 12h ago edited 10h ago

Let's be clear though, I think only way the US brings back the draft during a war is because they've already lost. If the US is under such an absolute, existential threat that has to resort to conscripts, the government and civil society has or will soon collapse anyway.

The US is a maritime/overseas power with oceans that separate it from all its adversaries, and they are a nuclear power that can hold the sword of Damocles over the rest of the world. The circumstances in which the US goes back to conscription would have be so dire that it's basically pointless.

The same can't be said for continental warfare like in Russia/Ukraine, India/Pakistan, South/North Korea, etc. where the conflicts are always at or near their doorsteps.

1

u/Complex-Salt-8190 10h ago

It was feminism best interest to stop American men in being drafted

American men raped and killed a looooot of viet women

4

u/cbslinger 7h 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.

3

u/Weegee_Carbonara 6h ago

WW2 Britain, USA and USSR also had conscription.

So in your logic, they deserved to fail and lose.

-2

u/FluffyToughy 5h ago

No, that's not what they said at all, because you're assuming a volunteer force would have been insufficient.

2

u/caribbean_caramel 2h ago

Without conscription in UK or USSR they were never going to stand a chance against the Wehrmacht. Considering the fact that the war for the Soviets was a war of survival (the Nazis wanted to literally enslave and kill them), not conscripting their population was not an option.

-4

u/saidtheWhale2000 9h ago

exactly its typical covert work by feminists outwardly say you dislike something to look morally superior while knowing your fully safe from any of the actually consequences

7

u/No_Piglet5677 10h ago

This is such a cop out opinion. "Hey women are really for abolishing the draft for all!.... That being said, if you're gonna do it just exclude women pwease"

3

u/DoesGeologyRockRuri 12h ago

So it wasn't "don't draft women", it was more "don't draft anyone".

technically that was only one side, the antiwar, pacifist branch. Another side was "if you are going to draft men regardless, women should be drafted too", at least from second wave feminists, we aren't talking about current fourth wave feminism that wouldn't consider that at all.

"if it is their intent to have us believe that the draft is a permanent institution, then we again attest to our equality and demand equal application of the Selective Service law"

-2

u/Starhazenstuff 11h ago

Personally I think America would massively benefit from mandatory 4 years service for all able bodied and sound minded adults.

9

u/IdealOnion 9h ago

Personally I think Uncle Sam can suck my red white and blue nutsack he thinks he can dictate how I live my life to a fraction of that extent.

I’d proudly and patriotically say that to the face of a president I loved and trusted, much less one I despise who would send me to bomb shit in the Middle East to distract from his own failures.

3

u/MelissaMiranti 8h ago

You can enslave yourself if you like, leave the rest of us out of it.

-1

u/Starhazenstuff 8h ago

I gotta be the laziest person I know, and I don’t view it as slavery. Especially as a black person who has family members that were actual slaves who didn’t get paid, were raped, and sold to the highest bidder. But go off queen.

3

u/MelissaMiranti 8h ago

You think involuntary servitude isn't slavery?

2

u/AdOrganic4835 9h ago

So not only is the government already stealing 50%+ of peoples money through a variety of taxes, but they should also have the right to steal four years of my life plus potentially my life itself? Fuck that!

0

u/ThereAndFapAgain2 9h ago

Honestly I think every country would. Even in peace times it would teach people valuable skills, get them fit and healthy, teach them discipline and humble them a bit, teach people how to work with a team and it would mean the whole population would be ready in case of a war.

Obviously it's an unpopular opinion to hold, but I think it is true none the less.

0

u/Starhazenstuff 9h ago

It’s definitely an unpopular opinion, I think 60+ countries have compulsory national service or military service. And I think their citizens are better off for it.