Male only conscription. Meaning no bodily autonomy for men.

Why does male only conscription imply no bodily autonomy for men?

The government forcing you to put your body in harm's way is the opposite of bodily autonomy.

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.

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.

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.

They're not forcing you, you can register as a conscientious objector.

We should indeed make conscription equal. In the US, that means eliminating it. We have no use for conscripted soldiers.

Or we could make women sign up for the Selective Service. That would be a small waste of time for both men and women, since a draft is a bad idea. But if we can't eliminate it, making it equal would be fine with me.

Reading between the lines, your comment sounds a bit like "because of the draft men have no bodily autonomy and therefore women shouldn't have it either". I don't think that reasoning holds, but nonetheless, I agree that the draft should be made either universal or nonexistent.

> Reading between the lines, your comment sounds a bit like "because of the draft men have no bodily autonomy and therefore women shouldn't have it either".

More like hallucinating between the lines, since they didn’t say or imply anything like that.

It is a sentiment I have heard before, so I made the inference. If that is not their intention, then there is no problem.

> One in ten are women, who are under no obligation to serve.

Still don't understand how this can fly in EU, it's clear sexual discrimination.

Because radical feminists have spread the idea that men deserve to be discriminated against.