Why aren't feminists fighting to equalize military law?

Question

In the US, women can't be in front line combat, and can't get drafted. This is sexist.

Nothing makes me less draftable than my male friends and my boyfriend. I merely lack a Y chromosome. If you're going to have a draft, pick your quota and have it be half male, half female. Then put women on the front lines.

We can't cherrypick what defines equality. I have seen no feminists trying to get rid of traditional female advantages.

I was told that women can't be in something specifically named a Direct Combat Operation, but are still being shot at and blown up.

Since I only have access to a computer for about five minutes in the morning and five at night, I thought it would be more efficient to ask on here.

No need to rip my head off.

Answer 1

Short answer: because they're hypocrites. Feminists don't want equality; they only want privileges.

Also, leaptad above obviously knows nothing about the military. As little as a couple years ago they were discussing plans to helicopter women out of units if combat were to come their way. This is obviously one of the most retarded ideas ever as it destroys any sort of unit cohesion, but it's how things work. Educate yourself.

Answer 2

Just enlist, putting women on the front lines is an expandable process. Right now men don't get drafted either, and I can assure you that women will be if they ever go back to the draft. Personally, I've never understood why it is that when social, supposedly "feminine" advantages have been rooted out, (when was the last time man opened a door, or helped you in anyway?)
why this wee bit of consideration should be paid for with our blood and sweat in the battlefield. Give me equal pay for equal work, standard consideration in the workplace for promotion, provision for a parenting tax break, and maybe you will have something there.
I'd just be really happy if you understood that many women have died in Iraq, although you would be hard put to see it in the news. Since there is no 'front line' they can all get blown up equally.

Answer 3

You're right in that you are no less "draftable," but you are wrong on the other hand... many feminists ARE fighting for the right to serve on the front lines. I think one of the main reasons women are not "draftable" (although technically, no one is, right now) is because we are not allowed to fight on the front lines. Give women who are ALREADY in the military the right to serve in EVERY military role, and selective service will follow. Why force women into the draft if they can't fight the real battles anyway? We all know the draft is not for "support roles," you have to have real training for that, the draft is there in case the military needs relatively untrained "cannon fodder," and if the government won't even allow women who have chosen the military as a career to fight on the front lines...well, you see my point. Again, let career military women on the front lines, the draft will follow. There is one problem though...what happens if you have a situation where the draft is reinstated, and a mother and father couple are called up.? Who looks after the kids? I think in a situation like that, the parents should decide who stays behind, and then file a petition...otherwise, we would put ourselves in the position of creating a whole generation of orphans that are dependent on the state...and we all know the state can't have THAT, right?
Oh, BTW, I am a feminist who firmly believes that we should "take the good with the bad"...and I haven't broken a sweat yet.
And "MacArthur"-do you have any evidence to back that up? Last time I checked, military rules drawn up by the Pentagon ten years ago banned women from fighting on the front lines...so why were women being sent into battle in direct contradiction to those rules? Sounds like a myth to me, please provide some evidence if it's not.
Here's evidence that NOW (THE Feminist organization) is fighting to remove the military ban on women in the front lines.
http://www.now.org/press/05-05/05-24-b.html

Answer 4

Many are fighting for this right. In fact, women are in the front lines in combat in Iraq even though it's against the military's rules. I know one female soldier who has been in several battles, but was denied a medal because she wasn't supposed to be fighting (despite the fact that her CO stated that she saved the lives of many of the men in her unit). My understanding is that the military is more willing to change the rules regarding women in combat, it's the politicians who are dragging their feet. In fact, a few years ago some members of the Republican party wanted to change the rules regarding women in combat and give women even less of a role, but the Pentagon refused because it would impact the military's ability to fight effectively. Progress will come, but it will take time.

Answer 5

actually, some have tried to fight it (a)
and what are the "traditional female advantages"? they are the same tradional roles that are being fought against, so they too are being fought against. it's the traditional roles that have not yet been changed that accounts for the remaining gender equality. i'm not saying that men or women have it easier, they have it harder in different ways. the main issue i see holding women back is the sexualtization of women (sexualization occurs when "a person's value comes only from his or her sexual appeal or behavior"). men have issues holding them back as well, mostly related to parenting.
BUT ALL INEQUALITIES ARE A RESULT OF OUTDATED GENDER ROLES that should be changed. including the draft.

Answer 6

1) Many women ARE fighting to be in combat (they're already on the front lines).

2) I'm not fighting for women to be drafted because I'm fighting for men NOT to be drafted. It's wrong to draft anyone.

Answer 7

In the first year of the Iraq War, 2003, the US military put women in combat positions. They were marines and really tough ladies. When a tank they were in ran over an explosive killing a few of them, the others in the tank suppossively broke down and refused to go into a combat zone again. That was the last time women were allowed in combat zone. To answer you question, feminists are wackos with boulder size chips on their shoulders. They just want to fight and defeat men because they suffer from intense hatred and pain caused by envy. They don't want to risk their lives for their country.

Answer 8

You are totally right, things like this make feminists sweat,... and the rest of females uncomfortable, if they really want equality, then all these things should be equal too..... but if they were put in front line combat, who would fight in these comfortable and nice streets, while men die outhere for reasons not even concerning to our country?

Answer 9

I didn't think that anyone could get drafted nowadays


They haven't had a draft since Vietnam and I don't really see one coming anytime soon (They have enough problems with a volunteer army in Iraq, NO ONE is dumb enough to start drafting people to go there)

Answer 10

"Wendy g" just added: "many feminists ARE fighting for the right to serve on the front lines'. "Rose D' wrote: "Many are fighting for this right. In fact, women are in the front lines in combat in Iraq even though it's against the military's rules..". Other posters made similar observations. Guess that de-bunks your unsupported theory. YOU see what happens when you talk off the cuff, WITHOUT having DONE THE REQUISITE RESEARCH? You wind up with egg on your face, that's what.

Answer 11

Even thought we are not considered infantry, do not think that we are not on the front lines. I spent 2 years in Iraq and I did everything the guys did. I did walking patrols, raided peoples houses, fired my weapon, and was invloved in several attacks.

Females aren't put in infantry jobs because of other countries views on women..among other reasons.

Just remember...we are out there!