FACT: There is not a single instance in any country on the planet where women have protested to be included in a Military Conscription Event.At no point in recorded human history has a woman, EVER, at any point protested to stop the blatant sexism and discriminatory selection process of Male Only Conscription.An All Male Conscription Policy is by definition discriminatory by sex against women, it deems the woman "lesser-than" simply due to their biological sex, this has remained the same for thousands of years and yet at no point in recorded human history has a woman ever protested this fact.Feminists will come to this thread and say>Feminists don't support a military draft AT ALL or>Feminists are Anti-War But those are not real arguments as a world without war and conflict is a utopian dream and a world without forced conscription due to those wars and conflicts equally as much.Feminists will come into this thread and pretend to not understand the concept of sexism and refuse to acknowledge that All Male Conscription is inherently sexist towards women.>Is an All Male Military Draft inherently sexist and discriminatory towards women?Answer: Yes.>Has there ever been a feminist protest against this discriminatory national policy that affects tens of millions of young women?Answer: No.When confronted with this reality the feminist only has two choices:1: Pretend to not understand what sexism and discrimination means.2: Agree that Feminism is NOT an egalitarian ideology/movement and that feminists would never sacrifice a privilege granted to their sex even if those privileges perpetuate inherently sexist and discriminatory policies towards women.
>>544163569Youre right but clown world will just pretend this is normal
>Not once in all of human history have "feminists" protested to be included in the Military Draftbut that's not true. They protested many times. Have you looked in the mirror recently? You might see some chud there
>>544163569wow this repetitive amerimutt bot thread totally steered away my attention from real politics to some vapid and symptomatic amerimutt regime approved distractionsplease share your thoughts in the comments section and dont forget to like and subscribe
>>544163569Some actually have, I've met someBTW:>utopian dream and a world without forced conscription due to those wars and conflicts equally as muchThat's what we've got right now
>>544163944Wrong, there are some instances where women have protested to END CONSCRIPTION IN GENERAL but at no point, EVER, in recorded human history have women protested to be INCLUDED in a conscription event due to the INHERENTLY SEXIST AND DISCRIMINATORY POLICY of ALL MALE CONSCRIPTION
>Feminism simply means equal rights!LOL
>>544164067I can personally attest that you're wrongWhich shouldn't be surprising since it's such a dramatic claim; you can find at least 1 example of a person from any group displaying just about any attitude
>>544163569the irony about that pic is that it's not even an actual photo. it's cg based on what "science says a black hole should look like."
>>544164420>I can personally attestnobody cares about your subjective experience with foids who may or may not actually be women. I am talking about reality ITT.Here is an example from the fallout of the Vietnam War (arguably the least popular war in American history) where prominent feminists of the day were protesting the Military Draft itself but not the inherent sexism that comes from an All Military Conscription Policy. >Prominent feminists and the leaders of various women's groups reacted cautiously yesterday to the prospect that women might be required to register for the draft. Most op- posed the idea of draft registration for either men or women >Phyllis Schlafly, the leader of opposition to the equal rights amendment, said she thought the plan would be re- jected by the American people and Congress. "There is no evidence in history that a unisex army is the way to win bat- tles or to defend the country," she said. "If we did not need to draft women during World War II, when fighting two tre- mendous enemies, surely there is no need to draft them today.'" >Eleanor Smeal, president of the National Organization for Women, took a similar position for different reasons. She said her organization was "totally opposed" to the draft for both men and women on the ground that “the draft is more sexist" than a voluntary army. Even at the PEAK of resentment towards a military draft (directly following the Vietnam War) women and the largest feminist organizations STILL refused to acknowledge the sexism and discrimination that an All Male Military Conscription inherently perpetuates, and instead the feminist organizations choose to take a stance of maintaining that inherent sexist policy in order to protect privilege held by females even if that privilege perpetuates inherently sexist and discriminatory policies towards Women.
>>544163569SEND GOY
>>544164317Yes, that is how feminists sell their slopthey call it "egalitarianism"but it is actually the furthest thing from itfeminism is a female supremacist movement and is ironically discriminatory towards men AND women when so long as it perpetuates a female privilege that is granted based solely upon ones sex.
>>544164715>She said her organization was "totally opposed" to the draft for both men and women on the ground that “the draft is more sexist">women and the largest feminist organizations STILL refused to acknowledge the sexism Should I just let you dig a hole for yourself? Am I superfluous ITT?
>>544164938>If we just oppose "War" then that makes it OKIt's an asinine position to take because war is never going to go away and forced conscription will always be a policy somewhere in the world (Ukraine right now for example)so saying you>oppose a military draftis not a real positionsaying you>oppose waris not a real positionbecause ultimately when it comes down to it the people who will be dying a ditch with their intestines hanging outside their body will be young males and the benefactors of their deaths will be females.This inherent privilege is the reality that all women desperately want to avoid and certainly never, ever, suggest that their privilege should be diminished or go away.
>>544164996>somewhere in the worldCome the fuck onIt doesn't count if a single country anywhere in the world still has conscription, even if your country doesn't?What other policies do you apply this standard to?
>>544165258Every nation state on the planet has a forced conscription policy in the even that a foreign invading army enters their borders. This has been a reality in human civilization for at least 10,000 years. Were you not aware of this? Very few (less than a dozen) nation states on the planet conscript women 10,000 years later.
>>544165415>I am talking about reality ITT.Now you're talking hypotheticallyReality is you're not being conscripted
>>544163569That's because every sane normal person inherently understands that women obviously shouldn't be conscripted into war.Sorry retards, but young women do objectively have far more value and are much more important to society than young men. Literally all Gen Z males could be conscripted and killed in war but society would be fine because Millennial men could still knock up the Zoomettes and produce the next generation.But if all or even a significant percentage of Gen Z females were killed in a war, it would mean the collapse of civilization.I know you don't want to hear this, but the majority of young men are expendable. Especially if you are some kind of NEET unemployed adult virgin incel young man.
>>544164528Yeah, making it orange was a bit on the nose.My favourite part about the fiasco is the turbo cuck dudes on the teams defended her. Even though she intentionally assured that she'd be getting all the credit from normies. She can use it on her resume and people will lap it up, the rest of them will just be glossed over because they didn't realise that credit academia needs to be fought for, or someone is going to take it from you.
>>544165569No, reality is that the Selective Service still exists and on December 18th every male and ONLY MALES (not including FtM trannies either btw) will automatically be put into a system that in the event of a national conscription event they will be drafted.
>>544165861>every sane normal person inherently understands that women obviously shouldn't be allowed to vote.and yet here we are.
>>544163569We can all transition protest for it and then de transition when we get what we want
>>544167375Every male in the US has been legally required to register with Selective Service when they turn 18 since 1940, other than a brief period from 1975-1980 when it was temporarily suspended.The only thing that is changing is that the registration will now happen automatically to prevent retards from unintentionally committing a federal felony.
>>544163569Dont try to logic being a cunt.
>>544163569Yjk that bald nigga in the back did all the work and didn't get any credit for it
>>544163569To be fair most feminists argue that no one should be drafted. Which is better than everyone being drafted. War is lame
>>544169208A world without war is about as possible as a world without hunger or drought or conflict.
>>544170041Yes, sadly
>>544169208Unless caucasian male but here..https://youtube.com/shorts/XdsYp8SxvaI?si=Sm6wGxz_d_tt77O_
>>544168606>make breathing illegal>look goy, we're only trying to keep you out of trouble with the law
>>544170041Is it possible to have tax-funded healthcare in your world?
>>544165569If conscription is so unlikely then why is it such a big deal to have women register for Selective Service in exchange for their "right" to vote?
While I disagree with the clear openly stated misogyny of OP, I agree with his statement; but with a twist. "I don't believe in sex differences whatsoever, because you're all meat to me." Some meat is shooty meat, some meat is breed meat. Some meat is the meat that teaches, that leads your state, that works the shop; regardless. All of you are meat, and what you consider role and subjective doesn't really matter, I am going to eat you because you are meat and am one of the reasons you have shooty meat in the first place.
>>544165861Thats fine, but then women should lose their "equal rights". Without any responsibility to the nation, women have not earned any so-called "rights", they are just privleges at this point. Also the biggest problem with your argument though is that you act like all these Gen Z women are just going to automatically settle down and have kids at some point. Theres no reason to assume that is the case today however. Fact is, there is a demographic more expendable and worthless than working age, skilless young men and that is childless women, especially childless women past the age of 35, they bring nothing of value to society, they just angrily sit around and eat, shirt and fart and steal jobs that men could otherwise do (while doing better no less) . Spinster women without kids are even more expendable than men, they even beyond expendable, they are leeches and a net drain society, who do nothing but take from others without giving anything in return, and unlike men, there is no job a woman can do that a man can do (and has done in the past), making them by and large worthless if they do not have any kids. At least a childless incel man can work on drilling rigs and other jobs that make society function, a childless woman cannot, so they should at least be drafted overseas along side men for logistics support in military campaigns should the need ever arise. They can be cooks or sanitary personnel. Otherwise they should lose their "right" to vote.
>>544165861Where did this delusional idea that you could just off a significant amount of men and everything would be fine come from? Reality doesn't work like a hypothetical where so long as you have 1 man he can still impregnate all the women, without men doing the fighting, building, planning, engineering, and so on society collapses. These are non negotiable, irreplaceable roles. It's why in China when they had the 1 child policy they aborted the girls. You can only afford to lose men when you have a surplus, but that's true of anything. Why do you think more men are born in the first place? It's precisely because they're not expendable that more men are born in the first place. They live riskier lives so you can't afford having a significant shortage of them, even if you could technically bear the next generation with a few men that doesn't mean society would be able to sustain and protect itself.
Nobody should be enslaved by a draft, male of female. It's slavery, plain and simply. A nation which is not worth voluntarily fighting for should be doomed to extinction.
