Should we even have the Selective Service?

I've gotta say, I'm kinda getting sick of the red pill, men's rights arguments about how men have to register for the Selective Service.

This should only be a philosophical exercise to have on occasion. Yeah, a lot of the reasoning behind why women didn't have the right to vote in this country until the early 20th century is that voting was a privilege afforded in exchange for men having to risk getting shot or blown up in some other country. At a basic level, if you take pragmatism out of the equation, if you want equal rights you should have equal responsibility, and women should have to register for the draft.

It's still not an argument that we should be having as often as we're having it. This shouldn't be anything more than a philosophical exercise. The better, more practical question is whether or not we should still have the Selective Service. Still, we haven't had a draft since Vietnam, and that was a war that we never should have been involved in.

As a practical matter, no, absolutely not, women should not be subject to the draft. Even if WWIII breaks out, and we finally need to force men into combat again, we shouldn't draft women.

We can talk about being subjected to the possibility of being drafted as a legal duty, or a duty to one's country and all that. But, if you wanna talk about being assigned at birth, the obligation to fight a fight when it needs to be fought is a biological imperative that's assigned to men.

That's what we're built to do.

The recent DOJ lawsuits claiming that some police departments were discriminating against women showed that, at least one of the departments being sued, found that only 43% of the women passed the physical fitness requirements. Those requirements were less rigorous than basic training for the Army. I mean, my big sister is career military, and she's a badass, and she even attempted to go through paratrooper training -- that's where she found her limit.

Ranger training is much harder than that. SEAL training is much harder than that. GI Jane wasn't based off of a true story for a reason.

Can women be effective soldiers? Yeah. Of course. A lot of them are. But, they're all volunteers with a certain mindset that's conducive to the nature of engaging in warfare. Also, most of the women who I know who are in the military, or ex-military, had some kind of a desk job. If we're drafting people, most of those people are gonna be on the ground, with a rifle, fighting.

That's the final point. Men who get drafted have traditionally been placed in those combat zones. Even if you've got swaths of women who we draft who are performing equally to the men on the battle field, women are still the more valuable reproductive resource.

Russia lost more men than any other country in WWII (mostly because socialists view people as disposable property of the state), and the population bounced back. Why do we talk about the Baby Boom in this country? Million of men were put through a meat grinder while the women stayed home. The men who got back had women to go back to. If you want to cause a society to collapse, you start a campaign of "equity" in regard to the sex of the people that you send into the meat grinder.