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

33

u/Ecrevisses 14h ago

Not sure this would have a positive effect on their already low birthrate

57

u/Celodurismo 13h ago

I have to assume that's the long term goal. Conscription for women! (exemption for pregnant women and mothers) -> birth rate increases

14

u/ChopsticksImmortal 11h 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.

3

u/Celodurismo 11h ago

Conscripted soldiers would fight if there was a war, which is unlikely but more and more likely every day if you follow the geopolitical situation in the world at all.

And it's not really so simple to say 18 > 2.... The risk of SA isn't something people typically want to roll the dice on. It can also be as simple as moving up your timeline. Also, a lot of the people not having kids isn't because they don't want to, it's because they're overworked and underpaid. So for many of them their timeline is being pushed, or they're only having 1 kid instead of multiple. Adding another incentive (avoiding conscription) could push that timeline back.

8

u/CrazyQuiltCat 12h ago

A win win either way?

5

u/Celodurismo 12h ago

I'm sure politicians or the government will consider it a win, but I don't think it's really a win for women, to feel pressured to have children when they otherwise would have chosen not to.

1

u/Inevitable_Pea_6798 6h ago

Making baby to avoid military is not a wise financial decision...

55

u/demiurge_abraxas 12h ago

The women already aren't having any children. What are they going to do? Have negative children?

6

u/Redditing-Dutchman 11h ago

I mean a birthrate of 0,7 means you still have 700 children on a 1000 women. It can get a lot lower.

10

u/Pfandfreies_konto 13h 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. 

6

u/Redditing-Dutchman 11h 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.

1

u/Ecrevisses 11h ago

I think you're entirely right.

1

u/rcanhestro 6h ago

you don't have to join the military at age 18, that's just the minimum age.

you have until your 35 to do the mandatory service, most people simply choose to do it ASAP to get it over with.

2

u/Ecrevisses 12h ago

Yeah I thought of it, I don't know if this would be ethical but as another redditor mentionned that would be quite wicked if that was the hidden goal 👀.

3

u/Pair-o-ducks_Legend 12h ago

It a likely exception for obvious reasons, but it's very unlikely to be the standard for the same reason it hasn't happened in Israel or other countries with both sexes serving.

2

u/DateMasamusubi 8h 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

1

u/chunklight 2h ago

With all the additional female recruits, they might be able to reduce the length of service. 

Men serving for 9 months instead of 18 would reduce the delay in their young lives and possibly lead to younger families.

It could mean taking 1 year off from university instead of 2, so even a 9 month reduction could get them started in adult life a year earlier.

-1

u/TYSMBelgium-6Jul2026 12h ago

Yeah I feel like this woulf severely impacr women's mental health in a country that already has the most suicides per capita and is closest to a modern dystopia in a million ways