Is The The Draft Gender Discrimination? | Marc Angelucci
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 лют 2018
- A new episode of "The Red Pill: Raw Files" is released every Monday at 11am PST.
For at least $5/month, you will have early access to ALL upcoming episodes of The Red Pill: Raw Files. Please become a Patron and support future film projects: / cassiejaye
-
The Red Pill: Raw Files consists of never-before-seen footage from the making of The Red Pill documentary.
This footage is being released for educational purposes, to inspire discussion and debate on gender issues.
Each interviewee is speaking for themselves alone and the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Jaye Bird Productions or Cassie Jaye; views may also have changed since this footage was filmed.
This footage has been trimmed, but only minimally in order to create a more viewer-friendly experience. If the interview subject is seen in a favorable or unfavorable light, that is simply the viewer’s experience when listening to the speaker and is not a result of any creative or manipulative editing by Jaye Bird Productions.
Jaye Bird Productions is the copyright holder of this footage and this footage can only be used by others while in full compliance with the Fair Use doctrine, that is, explicitly alongside commentary or critique.
Jaye Bird Productions does not support or encourage harassment towards anyone and will not be held responsible for others' actions or critiques of this footage.
The release of The Red Pill: Raw Files is made possible by the supporters of Cassie Jaye's Patreon. However, Cassie Jaye maintains full creative control and authority over these videos and how they are released.
WHERE TO WATCH "THE RED PILL" MOVIE:
UA-cam: • The Red Pill
VIMEO: vimeo.com/ondemand/theredpill
Amazon Prime Video: amzn.to/2uCUVWa
Amazon DVD US: amzn.to/2vwaIm6 *
Amazon Blu-Ray US: amzn.to/2uCDcy0 *
Amazon DVD Canada: a.co/88bdB7f *
Amazon Blu-Ray Canada: a.co/92WKbUI *
iTunes US: apple.co/2l4MsWm
iTunes Canada: apple.co/2l0sOev
iTunes UK: apple.co/2lc4NBm
iTunes Ireland: apple.co/2jUQUTn
VUDU: www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/...
GOOGLE PLAY: play.google.com/store/movies/...
XBOX: www.microsoft.com/en-us/store...
Also available on Hulu in select territories.
Members of a school, university, or public library can watch on Kanopy: www.kanopystreaming.com/produ...
* All of the DVDs & Blu-Rays have Closed Captioning in English. The discs are Region 0 which means they will play on any player in the world!
www.theredpillmovie.com
Cassie Jaye on Twitter @Cassie_Jaye
The Red Pill on Facebook: / redpillmovie
Cassie Jaye's on Patreon: / cassiejaye
Make a one-time donation to Cassie Jaye via PayPal: bit.ly/2wcWVoA - Фільми й анімація
I have a twin sister.
When we turned 18 we went out and registered to vote, we bought lotto tickets and went clubbing with friends. It was a grand time.
Except when my draft card came. There was this sickening feeling - even if the draft hasn't happened since Vietnam. She asked my mom if she would get one as well. The answer was no, and I know she didn't mean anything by it to burn me but she sighed in relief saying "Ok good."
I asked if I had to fill it out. My family had no money, and college was right around the corner. If I wanted to go, I needed to sign. My brother had his and my friends all signed theirs too to go to college. It was an experience that I don't think women will understand, but maybe I'm wrong.
So yeah, when an 18 year old girl goes out to register to vote in the next election, just remember there's an 18 year old boy doing that and signing his body and morality up for potential destruction.
Baron VonPolity Damn, cutting a little deep with them words.
I signed willing when I first turned 18, and I believed it was something every young man should do. Only later did I realize that it was wrong of me to assume all other guys felt the same, and understandably so. There is no honor in serving by obligation. Honor only comes when you serve on your on volition. The draft is reprehensible, and no government has the right to call it's people "free" on compelled service.
whats really funny is now with all this abortion bull crap... her body her right.... shouldn't it be the same for men in combat.... his body his right to not to mutilated?
at least women will have medical care if you get hit by bombs bullets etc.... theres no help for you... not in the way they get help
Sad. I'll hide you if you like. But you really won't have to worry. The population will be culled back to 500 million before long and there will never be another ground war anyway. Its all psychological nowadays.
At 4:21 when Marc Angelucci brings up the Vietnam Memorial - here are the actual numbers on that:
- 25% of total forces were draftees, equalling 648,500 U.S. men drafted into the Vietnam War.
(During WWII, 66% of U.S. armed forces members were drafted)
- Draftees accounted for 30.4% of combat deaths in Vietnam. 17,725 men died that were drafted.
- There are 58,318 names on the Vietnam Memorial and 8 are women.
Sources:
history-world.org/vietnam_war_statistics.htm
thewall-usa.com/women.asp
This is one of many topics I wish could have been discussed more in "The Red Pill" movie. Since this interview took place, Marc Angelucci and the National Coalition for Men organization have been working on an extensive lawsuit against the United States Selective Service. Here's their latest update on that: ncfm.org/2017/08/news/selective-service/ncfm-update-on-our-suit-against-the-selective-service-for-their-refusal-to-require-women-to-sign-up-for-the-draft/
You can hear more from Marc Angelucci here in his presentation at the International Conference on Men's Issues in the Gold Coast, Australia (June 2017): ua-cam.com/video/TFwfdcPOVkw/v-deo.html
Whether there should or shouldn't be a selective service is irrelevant to the conversation, in my opinion. (It's an entirely separate conversation, that I think would be better had, and maybe even taken more seriously if everyone was subject to it, and not just half the population).
There IS a selective service currently, and the question is, should women have the same responsibilities to the country as men. And the answer to that is yes. I don't even care if they serve on the front line (provided they pass the requisite training benchmarks). And quite honestly, whether women want to be a part of it or not is irrelevant. Draftees had no choice either. You're an American citizen, it's your responsibility.
Oh there's plenty of positions in the armed forces to fill, my point was, if you have the physical and mental capacity to do so, I would have no issue w/ women serving on the front lines. Definitely plenty of soldiers out there who've never fired a round in conflict, though.
Brian Giddens - And to be honest, it's something women should want, and the lack of it _should_ make them feel like less of a citizen of the country. That's harsh, but it's how I'd feel if there were such a system that excluded me, and denied me a role in the service of the country (Even if I disagree with the existence of Selective Service, the system is there, so until it isn't, how I feel about it in the context of this discussion, is equally irrelevant).
+Brian Giddens - That falls back on my point that it's not relevant whether they want it or not. It's a law on the books currently, that half the population is required to do by law, under threat of various penalties. If the roles were reversed, I would feel less of a citizen because of it. But, that's just me, I don't assume anyone else feels/would feel that way.
Beyond that, not only will I not kill spiders in my home, I will and have threatened to kick people out who attempt to do so. I'll remove them from the house, but I won't kill them. (I live in a place where Mosquitos are everywhere, spiders are my friends lol).
But, you're absolutely right, there's always going to be some percentage of men who think less of women, because they do not rise to and demand the same treatment in ALL aspects, not just the rosy ones. And it's only exacerbated when statistics are improperly conveyed to suggest one thing, when in fact, they say something else entirely.
There's nothing wrong with being harsh on this subject, I think a little is due. Given how little effort has been made in some areas, while (arguably) too much effort has been expended in others.
While the wage gap as is presented by the media and activist groups is most certainly a lie, you remind me of a Bill Burr bit in one of his older standups:
"This girl gives me shit, she goes"
"Well why does a guy make more an hour to do the exact same job."
"I go, I'll tell you why, because in the unlikely event that we're both on a titanic and it starts to sink, for some fucked up reason you get to leave with the kids, and I have to stay. That's why I get the dollar more and hour. No, it's a dollar an hour surcharge. You hear a bump in the night, I gotta go check it out, like 'Yes, he does have a knife (making stabbing motions to his chest)." Anytime there's a hostage situation who do they negotiate for? "Well, at least let the women and children go." Well what about me?? You think I want to stay in the vault with those 20 other sweaty guys, sharing a bag of peanuts, praying to god I'm not the hostage who gets dragged out by the psycho. Gun to my head as he's asking the cops for a helicopter. Which I know he's not gonna get right? I know he's not getting the helicopter. So now I gotta make idle conversation with a .38 to my head, "Dude go for the rent-a-car, I think you should go for the rent-a-car"
The bit goes on for awhile, but you get the point lol.
I don't think it's a good idea to sue the Feds over the draft. You'll simply lose that argument. However, some social compensation needs to be made if only men are allowed to be drafted, while women enjoy the protection of the military. The problem is all that social compensation that western women used to give men has all been taken away, and they don't seem keen on giving it back.
To be honest, the thought that sticks in my mind is that women should not be allowed to vote until they've raised kids to adulthood that are not criminals. The reason this is fair is because men have skin in the game as soon as they turn 18, because as soon as they turn 18, they can be forced into a situation where they are killed in service to their country and society says there is nothing wrong with that. Women, until they have kids that can be killed/drafted, do not have skin in the game, and hence their vote does not consider what happens to people they care about, particularly if they're from a broken home.
So, in my "idealized, youtube-comment" version of America, until a woman has gotten one of her kids to 18 years old, with a spotless criminal record, she can't vote. I wouldn't even restrict it to male child, even though the argument could be made that daughters are not strictly "skin in the game" since they can't be drafted. I wouldn't discriminate based on child sex because thumbs-on-the-scales like that will force people to choose the sex of their kids, and that's a bad idea in general.
This is also good for another reason, it prevents young women who have no good male role-models in their lives, and are making very bad choices with their reproductive system from using their votes to simply vote themselves more social programs to make up for their bad reproductive decisions, it forces young women to negotiate in good faith with the men around them for support to raise good kids, rather than simply signing up for government welfare after a bad decision has already been made.
Not only is the draft discriminatory, but also the military promotional system. They always say how the bar is not lowered for women, but it almost literally is. Look up PFT and CFT scoring systems for the Marine Corps. These scores count towards promotions as well as meritorious boards, and women have MUCH easier tests. For instance: a perfect score for pullups for me is 22 while a female only has to do 8. Any man that can only do 8 pullups is considered a shitbag (this is common terminology in the USMC).
In addition to that I was personally discriminated against on a promotion board. There was a female competing on the board as well. I had her beat in EVERY possible measure the USMC uses, to including better performance on the board, and I was Marine of the Quarter; and yet she won. My SNCO was pissed, and looked us both up on MOL to check scores and asked the board about our performance on the board. When they wouldn't give him a straight answer he went to our captain and threatened to go to the EO (equal opportunity officer). They changed their tune real fast, but couldn't take the promotion away from her. So, they cancelled a board from another division and gave that promotion to me.
Basically, they screwed some other Marine out of a meritorious promotion to try and appease my SNCO. But the worst part of it all: this female Marine was going to pick up rank the following month regardless of the board results, so it was a totally wasted promotion.
Rest in Peace Marc
3:40 "And they can of course go to jail" ~ Which is specifically, if slightly indirectly, why men who don't sign up for the draft don't get the (legal) right to vote. Not signing up for selective service is a felony crime, and felons are not allowed to vote.
Males in the US have always had to meet some requirement in order to be _allowed_ to vote. At first, only wealthy landowners were allowed to vote, and then when all men could vote, they first had to sign up for the draft. Men have never actually had the _right_ to vote. Women only have to turn 18.
There is one major thing that annoys me about popular feminist rhetoric is the whole "Men are in positions of power". This type of grouping of people together by whatever factors, in this case it's sex, assumes that there must be some sort of collusion amongst the people in the given group. Just because trump is a man does not mean it makes life any better for me because I'm a man or just because Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg lead major tech companies does not mean it makes it easier for me just because I'm a man.
Stew i don't think there's any assumption of collusion, except perhaps on the part of those man-hating feminazis... ordinary feminists are simply stating that the ones in positions of power, are men... and that's true...
Caroline Smyth
_"ordinary feminists are simply stating that the ones in positions of power, are men... and that's true..."_
Could you describe an what an "ordinary feminist" is? Because I don't see "ordinary" behaviour in ANY feminist circles that I come across. It's all about "white privilege", "male privilege", "manspreading", "mansplaining", "patriarchy", "wage-gap", "positions of power", "gender balance", "diversity". It's all a bunch of ideological nonsense.
What I am still wondering is why feminists care about what gender the people in positions of power are. Here you ("you" as in, any feminist) are complaining about the number of men in positions of power, but instead of trying to get to the top yourself, you're just complaining.
It's been proven at this point that women are biologically predisposed to have an urge to procreate and with that comes child care which in turn means women cannot work as much, unless the father decides to stay at home while the mom works. It can all be explained logically without the need for making claims of sexism.
Sexism will always exist, just like racism or any other bad thing. It's just not as big of a thing as feminists make it out to be.
Stew yeah, so the capitalist (male ideology) isn't working for women unless they have a supportive partner... so things need to change because women have found they can't trust men either...
ps I'm not a feminist... incase you didn't know, it was hijacked by the male elite.
Caroline Smyth capitalism is a "male ideology" now? What? Not only is it not an ideology because it's actually a system, but how is it a male thing?
What type of system do you suggest will make it fairer for women?
P.S do you realise how unbelievably degrading you're acting towards stay-at-home mothers who WANT to be stay-at-home mothers?
Stew a system that takes into account the biology of women as well as men.
How am I disrespectful of women who want to stay at home?
Bill Burr - "There are no feminists in a house fire."
I have one question for women/feminists that are screeching that "the draft/selective service should be abolished for everyone!":
Do you want the draft abolished because it is unfair to men/boys OR because there are whispering of forcing women to register in order to vote?
and No Feminist discussing Gender Pay gap in the *PORN* Industry
Yes, of course Selective Service is currently discriminatory. Yes, of course it is a violation of human rights and bodily autonomy. The most moral solution is to eliminate it, but if We The People are going to keep selective service, then all citizens--male and female--should equally be required to sign up.
I don't think everyone should be allowed to vote. The average person doesn't have time and resources to look seriously into politics. And so they are too likely to fall into simply minded traps and empty campaign rhetoric.
I think if you are a land owner or a business owner, you have at least some understanding of how the world works. Than you should be allowed to vote.
And yeah, if you willingly sign up for selective services, you should have the right to vote too.
Selective services is not against human rights. You have to sign up for it of your own will.
@@pepelapiu2004 So you want to live under fiefdoms?
@@VogtTD What I am talking about is how the USA was originally designed. And no, I ain't talkin bout slavery.
A sort of democracy where you have to show some basic understanding of politics and evonomics. And land ownership or business ownership is a good yardstick for that.
And even than, those who can vote don't get to vote directly for the president. They get to vote for the electoral college only, whivh in turn decide to vote for the president.
That way, you get a representative government without the retarded slogans and sound bites that usually win the elections.
Thanks Cassie for the great job that you've done collecting these interviews and putting them online.
Paying for the vote by being drafted isn't part of Selective Service today, it was a bargain struck hundreds of years ago when commoners were given the vote, before that only landed gentry could vote. Failing to register for Selective Service doesn't free you from the bonds of conscription, it only makes it a little more difficult for the government to identify you when a draft is imposed. If you fail to answer a draft notice there are a number of additional penalties that can be placed upon you. Failing to register and then failing to show up when called is a double whammy. Neither of which women have to concern themselves about.
Well there's also the fact that not signing up for selective service is a felony, and felons are not permitted to vote.
Good point.
3:00 The 15th Amendment of 1870, which gave men (of all races) the right to vote, regardless of property ownership, was heavily motivated by the fact that hundreds of thousands of men were drafted and killed in the Civil War. So the draft is why men got the vote in the first place. When the draft was upheld as Constitutional in court, the right to vote was cited as one of the civic privileges paid for by being subject to the draft.
But one interpretation of that claim is the fact that failure to register for the draft is a felony, and in about half the states, convicted felons cannot vote. In the other half, you can vote, but only after a condition has been met, which varies from state to state: out of prison, out of parole, or out of probation. There are only two states where convicted felons can vote while in prison.
Even after 1870, there were tens of thousands of men drafted, sent overseas, and killed without every having had the right to vote, because it wasn't until the 26th Amendment in 1971 that the voting age was set at 18. Prior to that, men aged 18, 19, and 20 were sent to die in foreign lands, before they reached the voting age of 21.
Yes a one sex draft is discrmitory it's as simple as that if it was anything else that was bad and excluded men from doing it it would be considered discrimination
Stirgid Lanathiel hmm two answers back then when it happened it was wrong but sadly nessasary for me to be here today but the nessasity of it being only men was wrong no doubt
Stirgid Lanathiel 2 second answer I think in a time where a country is in danger of being taken over everyone should fight.....so in that situation id say it's not wrong not great but Not wrong... I also don't think the cut off age should be 40 seems like a waste of people who have lived longer lives then the 18 year olds we send to war I'd gladly take the place of my nefews or neice a stranger even that has not lived as long...
It’s very simple. If women want the same rights then they should have the same responsibilities. The end
RIP Marc Angelucci
Out of curiosity, and since there is much debate about the draft, How would people feel if the draft were limited to defensive forces that do no leave the country? Would that make the draft more acceptable to people who morally object to the political wars we've been having yet still show solidarity in defending their country?
It is a interesting feeling, that no woman experiences, the day you sign up for selective service. I'm sure it's not the same for every man, but no woman has to face it - though they won't hesitate to condemn a man if they object.
I remember getting my selective service card, and I considered very deeply if I was going to refuse - to hell with the consequences. I firmly believe now, as I did then, that you should never do something so serious, as agreeing to go to any war your country picks for you, without seriously considering what it means.
I was scared. I saw how our country was willing to throw bodies at problems, or worse - oil. How we would indescriminantly bomb civilians. And, how our country treats the veterans when they come back, who did chose (or were drafted) to fight. I saw my grandpa struggling mentally through life after war, but still running a business and fully supporting a large family on his own - having been a Ranger that helped liberate the prisoners after the batan death march. I saw my other grandpa live his life with major hearing problems yet still working long and hard enough to retire twice. I saw all of this, and much more, and decided that as a man this is what I had to do, because until we have something better this is the primitive life we live and the resposability we have to help keep it all afloat while we slog forward. I hated it then, and I hate it now, but some things have to be done regardless of how you feel about it.
If it's going to continue it should be both genders and in combat roles. Let women know the prospect of having thier life stolen from them, to kill people they don't know, and die for reasons they might not agree with. If women do hold up half the sky then start getting your hands dirty and stop criticizing from the sidelines.
BTW, Cassie you're a hero to me. I'm so grateful that women like you, people like you in general, have the courage to publicly discuss the taboos in social dogma even at your own expense - thank you so very much
The question of whether we should have a draft or not is irrelevant to this discussion (IMO). IF there must be a draft, and IF you want "equality" then, yes, women must register, and women must be subjected to front-line combat roles (because according to Feminists, anything a MAN can do, a Womyn can do *twice* as well).
As a combat veteran, would I want a woman next to me in combat? Hell. No.
But anyone who's been paying attention realizes that the Feminists don't really want *equality* - they want unearned, legislated superiority - i.e. *all* of the perks, but completely free from responsibility or requirements of competency. You will never see the pussy-hat-wearing crowd protesting the lack of female representation in front-line combat troops. That's not the kind of "equality in all things" they want.
RIP Marc Angelucci my friend.....
I'm from Boston and couldn't vote until I proved I Signed up , and couldn't take the Civil Service exam for Firefighter.
I've never heard of anyone having to prove that they had registered with SS in order to vote. I know that it's possible to be convicted of a felony and receive a prison term if you don't register. In that case, you would lose your voting privileges. So, what happened? Did you try to register to vote and the clerk asked you to show that paper they sent you after you register with SS?
Oh yes some places you could not get a Drivers License renewed until you registered during the Vietnam War , it was implemented arbitrarily and enforcement varied State to State. You needed to present a Registration Card.
They've alienated so many men I doubt many would voluntary fight for their county these days .
RIP Marc
Wow! I just learned something new here. So, rather than this being a case of men being allowed to vote and women not, it was more like men didn't have a choice but to sign up for the draft and being allowed to vote (possibly), as well as a bunch of other stuff, was afforded to them as basically a recompense for doing so. Women didn't have the choice to sign up for the draft, sure, but they didn't have to worry about getting drafted or suffering all those other consequences if they choose not to sign the draft. Well, I think I know fine well which one I'd rather have. Again, all I've heard my whole life was how bad it was for women when it came to voting, but it turns out the truth might in fact be the exact opposite--it's the men who've basically been entrapped all along. :-o
Good job !
Thanks for raising what has long been a settled issue. I am still for drafting men only but in an era where people don't want to learn from history and reinvent every wheel, despite the now obvious costs of relearning those lessons, this sort of discussion moves things along in the least damaging way possible. Keep up your courage, principles and work Cassie. Praying and wishing the best for you and all who limit neither topic nor argument. PG
Simple guys. Just say on paper you identity as a woman.
when 50% of the population can vote to elect someone who will send a good portion of the other 50% to die in a war, then that's a huge problem and hugely unjust and unfair. If all can vote, either all must be drafted or all are not drafted. if some are drafted then I think only some should vote or have any influence on such issues.
This guy was shot by a fellow MRA lawyer who became a nutcase in 2020. So sad. RIP Marc Angelucci.
I remember reading specifically that my right to vote could be taken away when I signed my draft card
Australia had huge protests against proposals (plural) to bring in the draft during WW1. There was so much public pressure it wasn't brought in. There is still an expectation that a man will fight and be willing to die to protect the country; a country safe holding the women and children.
It is my understanding that the link discussed is this: failure to register for Selective Service is a felony. In states where felons cannot vote, failure to register does lead to denial of voting rights.
It's been a long time ago now, but I'm pretty sure that when I registered to vote they asked me if I had registered for selective service.
As far as I know, I've read that drafting equals right of vote was a thing here in Europe, or at least in Italy, until a couple of centuries ago. But I might as well be wrong.
SHE DIDN'T KNOW THAT?
In The Netherlands (Europe) everybody (18+) can vote just because simply you are an official citizen, without any aditional registration.
Just a day or two before my 18th birthday my dad drove me to a post office and walked in with me to sign the selective service form, which were in every post office, and then drop it in the mailbox. He told me that it was part of growing up, showing responsibility, becoming a citizen and a part of, "becoming a man". A few days after my birthday a got a letter from the Federal government telling me that I needed to sign this form for the selective service and mail it back to them. The letter stated I was required by Federal Law to do so. I showed my dad and he thought it some mistake but told me to sign it anyway and mail it off to not have any worries about it. Some weeks later I got a second letter from the same office telling me I needed to sign this form and mail it in. I thought it to be a mistake since I had already done it twice, so I discarded the letter. A few weeks after that I received a third letter from the same office but this one was much more "authoritative" if that's the correct word. In this letter it informed me that they had not received my selective service registration form and that the Federal Government was making a case to have me prosecuted in a federal court if this issue was not, "resolved immediately" as they put it. Now, as an 18-year-old who was in his senior year of high school and on the delayed-enlistment program to join the U.S. military after graduation this letter, and their threat, scared the shit out of me. This letter informed me what could happen: I could be prosecuted as a felon since the punishment, if convicted, could land me in a Federal Penitentiary for "no less than one year and not to exceed five years," I could also receive a $250,000 dollar fine, my rights to any government jobs/grants/scholarships or anything else the Fed government provides could be blocked for me. My right to vote could be suspended since a convicted felon cannot vote while they are in prison or on parole or probation. Not only will consequences befall me at the Federal level but the state I reside in could also impose consequences on me and this could be the case in any state I moved to. It was my mother who arrived home from work first and I showed her the letter. She called the main office and "rudely" told them that I had already signed the form twice and mailed it in. Turns out it was a mistake in their computer system that keeps track of all this information. Their computer thought that I was two different people given my legal name that appeared on my birth certificate and other documents I had signed in my past just putting my nick name. Even though it showed these "two people" to have the same birthdate, address, and same social security number. This is how I found out what consequences could be brought upon a young man for failing to register. And it would follow you for years to come. Well after all that crap was settled I ended up joining the U.S. Military in 1999 and served for over 12 years. Military service was an important thing in my family since most men in my family (close and extended) had served at some point and one female family member. Anyway, that's just my example of how the selective service is tied to voting. Thank you, Cassie, for making this film. I found it very informative and plan to watch it again and get my own copy of it if that's possible.
Looking back on it I see where I made mistakes but I was just ready to get that little novel done.
In Canada, the very first women who gain the right to vote in 1916 were doctors and nusrses coming back fron the war. The right to vote were giving to the ones who serve. Mostly men, it goes withouit saying. Then women got that right for free... In state it was different, tax payers had it first and 80% of tavern in Boston were own by women. Most of the bordel in the wild west were own by women. In Cajun country many business were run by black women but that's is a different sad story... So, some had responsability with no right and some had right without responsability. Sad history period.
I love Marc's approach to the topic and how, he too, believes that men's rights and women's rights could and should be discussed in important forums like media and also in the halls of power. I was a feminist for most of my life because I believed in women's rights. Once I was betrayed by feminism and I left, I never stopped believing in women's rights. I found the MRM and now understand that I am not alone in being harmed by a system that denies men certain basic human rights that it grants women, exclusively. This made me choose to become and MRA but I still believe that there is room in our society to treat women better, I just don't believe, any longer, that feminism (especially the corrupt feminism orgs) has any intention to help these women. I focus on men's rights but when there is an opportunity to help women, children, or anyone else, I do my best to help. I think there are a lot of us MRAs that are like this.
that is a very good question. I understand that the whole point of these videos is the search for truth,equality,fairness, and I respect that. I would like to point out however that under the old system the unequal system during any military action our enemies only faced 1/3 of our actual strength as a nation. also our enemies acquired exactly none of our natural resources. any legislative change now would just compromise our national security. I personally would like to keep that advantage.
Has anyone in here commented on the fact that Marc Angelucci was murdered? RIP Mr. Angelucci.
After reading the book Starship Troopers, I'm leaning towards mandatory service for the right to vote. I think there's a solid argument to be made that people willing to give of themselves in this way are in a better position to do what is in the best interest of the country.
Is there something up with Mr. Angelucci's neck, or is he just sitting at an odd angle/posture?
The draft is military slavery.
A draft has been reinstated in our country, however as far as I know women are not being drafted, however, they are volunteering. The way it works here is that there is a limited ammount of draftees that are taken at a time. I did not look up the numbers, but let's say the draft for the year is 10000 people. If your name on the list is #9800 and 200 people volunteer (regardless of their gender), you are no longer drafted. I think during the initial point there were ~1000 women that volunteered
The right to vote is, in fact, legally denied to men who fail to register for the draft.
Many lefties, center lefties and progressives favor mandatory military conscription - provided there are no deferments or exceptions. An all volunteer army makes the military disproportionately of poorer men who have fewer opportunities outside the military.
Mandatory military conscription, in a democratic society, would serve to hold the government more accountable for its foreign policy. If the military is consisting only of volunteers who are sons of people who have little political influence the government is less likely to be called on irresponsibly warlike action than if the sons of all were being required to carry it's lethal and dangerous policies out. It is believed by many that opposition to the war in Viet Nam would not have been nearly as strong if there hadn't been a draft then and that the public would not have so easily acquiesced to the invasion of Iraq if there had been then.
Incidentally, conservative politicians in executive policy making positions, e.g., Dick Cheney, tend to oppose reimplementing the draft, quite possibly, for that reason - i.e., they might be held more accountable for their military actions and not be able to use the military so irresponsibly if there were a draft.
That should be taken to court, since the 19th Amendment says the right to vote cannot be denied or "abridged" on account of sex.
I am against a draft, but since there is one, everyone should be subject to it. Weaponry these days is such that a woman can be just as effective in many combat capacities as a man is.
You have to be trained for advanced weaponry.
Lol, you're not going to be doing drone strikes as a drafted civilian.
Sure, as long as there's a man to carry the equipment and weapons, then women can be 'just as effective'. If you have to lower the minimum requirements for women to qualify for a role, whether it be fireman, police, or soldiers, you are acknowledging that they are substandard as recruits. So far, no woman has met the minimum requirements for males in the US Marines.
In Israel women aren't just allowed to retire earlier (62 versus 65), they're often forced by the employers.
It's very unfair for women economically and needless to say puts extra stress on their husbands.
...Shooter McGavin?
I for one still believe that “women and children first” into the lifeboats is the *right* rule. Men should and will take the dangerous and dirty jobs.
Just don’t spit on us as you go by.
Men should have increased authority and social power commensurate with the increased risk and responsibility that men take.
There's meme doing the rounds right now along the lines of "If you didn't sign up for the draft in exchange for your vote, you should have no say in how war is conducted". Pretty apt I think, but how do you discriminate against women in a referendum?
There currently is no draft, but there is mandatory selective service registration. It *is* tied to voting rights. Just read the selective service website.
Can you explain to a non american how it is not the same?
Forced registratorn for military services its what it is no matter what you call it
@@MrSinEon - A draft is when they actually call you up and require you to report for military duty. Registering for selective service just puts you on the waiting list.
Historically yes the draft was tied to voting which is why back then alot of women didn't want the right to vote because they thought it would come with being drafted like the men and in my opinion it should have because that would have been true equality.
Would the general public be ok with the US still fighting the GWOT if the draft was used post 9-11?
"The tender years doctrine says that in the younger years, women should automatically get custody" I wonder if that has to do with breastfeeding /sarcasm
Cassie Jaye did you find an answer to men needing to sign for conscription to get the vote. I keep hearing it and have been happy to accept its truth. I have not looked it up and as a British fella don't really understand USA politics so wouldn't know where to start. You all talk about signing to vote, what does this mean in reality? In the uk each household is sent a form periodically to inform the local council who lives in the property so those over 18 can be added to the electoral role and then cards are sent to each prior to an election. You can't vote if your not on the electoral register, but I don't think there are other consequences if you are not listed. From my memory we are not agreeing anything on that paper other than who lives at the property and their date of birth. Is this similar to your system in the states, is there a box to tick to add yourself to the draft as people keep stating?
Just reading down the page, does the very act of registering to vote as a male automatically add you to the draft. I can't believe the American government would have a problem weeding out people not registered if they needed to raise an army. Is this a theoretical argument? No dog in the fight, I am genuinely interested.
As a man, you dont get anything from the law if you dont get registered
The draft is horribly backwards
I have a question for women and in particular feminists:
For those of you who say there shouldn't be a draft at all, do you believe that because you think it violates basic human rights OR are you only saying it because women are being threatened with having to register?
IE are you actually ok with the draft as long as it's only men?
It's not that they're okay with it necessarily. Many would probably prefer men not get drafted. When it comes to actually standing up to advocate on men's behalf though? They won't lift a finger, and tell us to solve our own problems. But when the draft might affect them? That's the only time they will start to do something about it, and they'll demand the help of men to do it. They will passively accept inequality until they think it's effecting them directly. It's like all the talk about toxic masculinity, they don't actually care about men's mental health, they're just worried about stopping men from abusing women.
Why I recognize that the currently morally bankrupt state of every western democracy in the world creates a dilemma with regard to the premise of mandatory military service; in any decent and just democracy it should be seen that given the state of the world as it exists today, mandatory military service for everyone is necessary and just, and should be sought as proof of worth to society that raised you.
@Cassie Jaye
M.Angelucci claims he doesnt know whether voting and the draft are tied.
They are. Not explicitly in law, but in practice
1) There is NO point to selective service other than to have a ready pool/count of eligible males to draft when needed. So registering for selective service is making yourself eligible for drafting.
2) It is not a choice. If you have a penis, you must register. The law is quite clear about this. You MUST register shortly after making 18, or its a FELONY. Yea.
3) You cant get loans, other forms of federal aid, state ids or even drive (getting a drivers license) without registering for SS.
Because of this, often the process is intertwined so that if you get a drivers license or request federal aid for example, you get automatically enrolled for SS.
4) The process to register for voting & SS are "technically" separate.
However the two are tied together in theory; the gov ruled explicitly in court that the draft is a responsibility in exchance of citizenship "rights" (such as voting).
Additionally the two are also tied together in practice; not registering for SS is a felony ....& felons cant vote in most states
So yea... For men in the USA, voting isnt a "right", but a privilege resulting from volunteering their bodies to be disposed of at the discretion of the Gov.
Good times.
MaRK, Women can vote, but are not required to ever go to war to defend the right to vote. Since only men have to register with the SS, they have to earn the right to vote by signing up to possibly defend that right with their lives.
One reason I can never be an MRA is the disavowal of gender roles. Gender roles are there for a reason. It's called the survival of the species.
The argument about how we got the right to vote. Yes for men it was connected to the draft. Previously only property owners and some other classes were allowed to vote. Eventually the argument was made that since men were bond to conscription that they deserve the right to vote. Women as a whole didn't have the right until women's suffer age.
As a male, most government forms ask whether or not you enrolled in the selective service aka the draft. In most states you can't get your drivers license if you don't enroll
My state (as many do) that ties the right to vote and drivers license to the draft
If there is to be a draft, women should have to register, and not be used in combat units.
In addition to a host of introduced acillary inefficiencies - like large numbers of women in the infirmary with joint injuries, or the resentment male soldiers rightly feel when women are granted special privileges like extra showers (the SMELL) - the Military's tests have shown that mixed-sex units are not as effective in two-thirds of tasks commonly required of infantry units in the field .
When you are setting-up a machine gun with desperate urgency, you don't need laggard women in the rear handing-up their back packs to laden men who have already scaled the wall the women can't manage.
Women should serve in combat no ifs or buts
draft em equal rights!men have to do it.
I wish Marc would've just left it at "I don't know". Karen already spoke eloquently about the British side of things. I wanted to chime in on the US side of things: according to www.sss.gov/ not registering for the draft is a felony. I'm certain it varies by state, but in general, having a felony makes you ineligible to vote.
If they don't register for the draft they don't vote the next man that gets drafted because of how women vote opens fire on his unit I don't blame him for that decision now if women are there on the front line with him that would be fair and no reason to retailate
#120db
UA-cam banned my comment.
It's not brainwashing, it's scheidenfreud. Seeing the shoe on the other foot is viscerally satisfying.
There is no draft. It's only a registration for a possible draft. Either way, to treat one differently base on gender is gender discrimination.
He is wrong - there were links between voting (US citizenship) and military service. In the US civil war volunteer immigrants could get instantaneous citizenship (and the vote) if they volunteered for the Union Army. Also if deserters and people who evaded the draft could be stripped of their citizenship (not that many were) and lose the vote. Of course, all of this only applied to men. No women were required to serve and suffer the consequences. The Enrollment Act was the legislation that enacted these citizenship restrictions.
If you don't register for the draft as a man. You are not able to receive the following benefits. Disability, social security, welfare, food stamps, medicare, Medicaid, pretty much the use of any government program. You will however still be required to pay into all of those systems.
You can vote though!
Men and women are different. I have four sisters. I don't want them signing up for the draft. If there is going to be conscription into war, I think it should be only men drafted. Still, I think this should be equalized by drafting women into medical roles to treat the men when they suffer injury from war.
So you support male slavery. Gotcha. If you like fighting wars, go sign yourself up.
Tiberius Kirk I do have four brothers. I am one of nine kids. I think war is sometimes necessary and men are more fit for that work due to physical and social differences between the sexes. I am not eager for combat, but the traditional view of men and women in this instance is correct.
Bora Bosna Voting is only valuable if our votes make a difference and the oligarchy who pays for legislation has all the power, so women voting does them no more good than men voting at the moment.
Bryan Chua We are a part of a society to which we have an obligation and duty because it has provided us with a great many things for which we should be grateful. I do not think it wrong to serve to defend the country if there is real peril.
Unfortunately, war is too often a racket rather than a legitimate exercise in defense. I oppose such wars. Still, the principle concerning legitimate war exists, and the draft may be necessary. If it is, it makes more sense to send men than women. First, because they are stronger and faster and more aggressive generally. Second, because of the biological differences in reproduction in human beings. Birthrates can be sustained when there are more women and a few men, but not as easily the other way around.
Wrong. The "great many things it has provided us" are paid by our taxes. It's not wrong to serve your country if you want to, so if you want to sign up, go for it. Nobody is banning you from serving.
The draft isn't necessary. Only people who think they're entitled to other people's lives support the draft. Once again, you're using an argument of nationalism to support slavery.
"Second, because of the biological differences in reproduction in human beings. Birthrates can be sustained when there are more women and a few men, but not as easily the other way around."
Yes, because women are forced to give birth. Newsflash: women aren't.
If you love your country so much, go fight for it, but don't use it as an excuse to force other people for fight for your selfish interests. I do not owe anything to your sisters, much less my life.
I really would like to know from Cassie, What kind of backlash from Feminist organizations and her feminist friends? I’ve seen how some feminists have acted towards people on UA-cam and it’s pretty nasty. But what did Cassie experience?...
Tiberius Kirk oh I saw the smear campaigns and news interviews but what about her close friends? Did she get pushback from them? Did they go off on her and ridicule her or did they have an open mind about her decision?
Women make great snipers and great psyops agents, amongst other things... just an observation :/
personally, I think anyone, male or female should be able to fight for their country if it's what they want to do and they're good at it... (to each their own, according to their particular skill)... I don't think it should be required by law though, just voluntary.
Wars are getting less and less about hand to hand physical combat and more akin with computer games... we're all capable of playing those... well, nearly all...
The whole "war" thing needs to be reconsidered... we live in very different times when compared to the times when wars really were about self-defense only... I'm talking WAY back, when it was territorial... It's much more about big business/contracts etc now...
As it stands, the draft is sex-discrimination. It needs to go.
The draft was the prime driver in passing the 18 year old voting age during the Viet Nam War in 1971 because young men were conscripted without the right to vote.
Should there be a draft? Yes. Should women have to sign up? Yes. You've had equal rights for decades, but still aren't held to equal responsibility, in society and for your actions. It's what's led to so many women having the spoiled child, entitled as hell attitude they do and it needs to end!
I believe there should be a draft for defending American soil, but not for operations in other countries, IMO.
Defensive draft = okay
Foreign affairs draft = not okay
I'm just saying, there's a reasonable compromise for the draft issue. It doesn't have to be a yes/no question.
No, there should be no draft. Conscription is slavery. Forcing other people to fight against their will is the highest form of an entitled as hell attitude. Not to mention that, if you support the draft, you're no better than the white-feather campaigners from a century ago.
How can one in truth have authority over someone else. I can tell you its your responsibility to die in a war you did not create, fight against someone you do not personally have a quarrel with and go harm someone because someone else to me to? This is delusional!
If women want equality then YES they should have to register for the draft.
Oh but maybe men and women aren’t equal.
I can't help but think that if feminists just abandoned the word feminist, and stopped talking about patriarchy as a tangible thing... This would all get a lot further. I hear many feminists make this exact "helping us is helping them" point, but then they turn around and ruin it by insisting on using outdated prejudicial terms to conduct the discussion. I agreed with feminism when I understood it to be about equality of opportunity and agency for all. I don't understand how it got so twisted into putting men at the root of all problem. Patriarchy, toxic masculinity, feminism, men's rights... These are all prejudicial terms. Why can't we just adopt "egalitarianist" and have done?
Its essentially all down to wanting gender roles to not be constraining, but it's turning into gender roles themselves being wrong, and men's role being outright evil. It's awful.
I don't think that's what the majority *felt* they wanted. Even if some did, and even if it is effectively what the outcome is, and even if many were initially attracted to it for reasons of grievance, as many mens rights activists are now.
It just feels like somewhere, something got lost when it came to the stated goal.
Either way, I don't really care how we got here, unless its pertinent to sorting it out. Looking back and seeking redress instead of balance is partly what poisoned the well in the first place, I reckon.
Elvick there is a disconnect here. Most women and men I know who identify as feminists do not think that's what they want, they think they want equality and have come to *believe* that people who don't like the term are against equality. In the same way you seem to have become convinced that someone who calls themselves a feminist actively want inequality in favour of women. I think both narratives are incredibly flawed - but I think they're heartfelt. Again, this can only be solved by actual dialogue, and understanding our commonalities are stronger than our differences really. What I find truly mystifying - and I've really got no idea how we break this particular barrier down actually - is that a philosophy such as feminism which puts so much stress on microaggression and careful inclusive language can have such a blind spot against their own.
Also I have watched the videos you mention (or at least I'm familiar with both individuals you mention. I really like Camille in particular - but I don't agree with everything she says at all). I accept there are some in each movement who want unpleasant things. I just don't accept that this equates to everyone involved actively wanting to be unpleasant.
I also agree that "patriarchy" is used as an invisible never ending enemy, and agree that this is frankly heinous behaviour.
It is rare for me to agree 100% with anyone, is what I'm saying - but rarely do I 100% disagree.
Elvick I think I have perhaps miscommunicated, sorry about that. I'll think about how I can rephrase more clearly but you seem to me to be reading motivations into my words that I don't have. I also have no idea about Tumblr I'm afraid or why you think it might be influencing my views. I'm 40 years old, observant, and have little tolerance for ideas of active conspiracy involving large numbers of people. That doesn't mean the current state of feminism, and the directions that the arguments used by that political movement are taking us, don't worry me greatly. Because they really do. I would however like to find a path of reason to bring more women and men to the side of actual equality, without label, blame or attack. If possible. I rather think that makes me the opposite of the problem, actually, but I also think that you might have already made up your mind about me, which is certainly your right.
Elvick yes but you're talking about it like there's some secret club meeting, exactly how they talk about patriarchy. I simply view it as a philosophy that's got way out of hand, and believe it's time to rebalance. I think you and I do want the same thing.
Bora Bosna ok so 1 - calling me names isn't an argument. 2 - you misunderstand my desire for us to talk about these things as one subject for both genders as an attack on the points made by MRAs. 3. Predictably when I say similar things to feminists, they react just like you. 4. I read the article. I'm not what you think I am. I can't prove it to you in a comments section.
So continue to use abuse and anger if you wish, I hope that gets you the change you're looking for.
Been having a very similar conversation on Facebook: MRAs and feminists should communicate more with and listen to each other if we are to establish true gender equality.
Regarding the draft: if you can afford to keep able-bodied people out of the military who *want* to be there, on the basis of arbitrary characteristics like gender and sexuality, then you clearly have zero need for any kind of draft.
Of course it is discrimination... but it is meaningful discrimination. Now if we could just get feminists to admit that there is meaningful discrimination against women in other areas in the workplace. Employers should not be forced to hire women for positions where a 6 month maternity leave would put the company in a bad position.
I agree, but that choice should not be forced on a company that must make ends meet.
I'd like to see the same amount of promotion and striving and corrective measures taken and constant crying out for
- the death gap to be closed...
as there currently is for
- the wage gap to be closed.
Think I'm silly? What would you rather be? Working at a job of your own choosing, that is not as high paid as others? OR DEAD!!!!!
I think draft should be only in the event of war on our country
TheBoosteddub this is the whole point of the draft. Sign a piece of paper that forces you to comply with governmental demands of conscription in the event that a war occurs.
Do you honestly think anyone would sign the draft voluntarily if a war was going on?
Wesley Chapman when you disrespect someone, prepare to get disrespected back. Calling someone a coward is not something I take lightly.
NWOG
There should be a draft and everyone should be drafted, male, female, trans, gay, lez. If you are between the ages of 18 and 50 you should be requried to Serve and Protect the country you live in.
zenbright in a dyer need you mean? Or as in like each person should spend a certain amount of time in the army regardless of a no war threat level? Just curious
No you shouldn't have to do that. Especially if you did not vote for the current party in power. No one should be able to force you to obey the commands of a high ranking officer who does nothing but send out disposable men to their deaths whilst he sits in peace sipping expensive whiskey.
Talk about freedom.
I absolutely agree. A volunteer army allows the public to disconnect from geopolitics because the soldiers want to be there. If you, your neighbors, and your children can be called up at any moment you will probably be much more invested in where they might be sent and why.
What if your country wages war for reasons you don't agree with? You're still forced to fight, even when your country is in the wrong. No thank you.
I'd never wage war or be a soldier because I fundamentally disagree with such a degree of senseless violence. I would only consider fighting "for my country" when everything I believe in is at stake. For example, were I to live during the 40s, draft or no draft, I would probably sign up and fight against Germany. Not to "serve my country". But to serve the ideals I believe in. Those were ideals worth fighting and dying for. But make no mistake, fuck my country if they were the oppressors. This type of blind allegiance is irrational and breeds only tribalism and more tension. No, I'm by no means a globalist... I'm just saying, I would like to know what I'm fighting for, before I decide whether or not I even want to fight.
zenbright wrong
this is such a stupid question- the real question is dicrimination in this case a good thing?
no its not.
Angelucci shows his ignorance on the subject of the draft in this softball video, in that he does not know that the right to vote is tied to the draft for men, and is how black American men got the right to vote before white American women did. He shouldn’t have taken this subject for the interview if he wasn’t knowledgeable on the subject.
In exchange for the right to vote the state has the right to conscript men. Women have the right to vote because we value their opinion.
AlmostSober Are you saying that women shouldn't register for the draft?
Women should, and eventually WILL register for the draft.