Male only conscription. Meaning no bodily autonomy for men.
pinkmuffinere 1 hours ago [-]
Why does male only conscription imply no bodily autonomy for men?
klipt 1 hours ago [-]
The government forcing you to put your body in harm's way is the opposite of bodily autonomy.
pinkmuffinere 47 minutes ago [-]
I think I disagree with the claim that this implies _no_ bodily autonomy. People are often compelled to do certain things -- you can be forced to go to court cases/jury duty/jail, to get a vaccines (if you want to attend public school), to stay seated on a flight, etc. These are reductions in autonomy, but I don't think they are complete eliminations. Mandatory military service for n years is a reduction, but I don't think an elimination of bodily autonomy.
That said, I do prefer true equality before law, and if mandatory service is required, I'd prefer to have mandatory service for _everybody_, not just men.
asksomeoneelse 33 minutes ago [-]
There is a significant difference between jury duty and military service when it comes to risks and bodily harm. Equating the two as both being "reductions" is absurdly missing the point.
pinkmuffinere 29 minutes ago [-]
I'm not equating them. Military service is a much bigger reduction. But it doesn't seem fair to call it a complete elimination of bodily autonomy -- that's my main claim.
ranger_danger 52 minutes ago [-]
They're not forcing you, you can register as a conscientious objector.
Rendered at 22:50:40 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
That said, I do prefer true equality before law, and if mandatory service is required, I'd prefer to have mandatory service for _everybody_, not just men.