Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!aero-c!nadel From: jym@mica.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: The Draft (was: Sexism vs. Men's Oppression) Message-ID: Date: 10 Jun 91 19:40:25 GMT References: <675716975@lear.cs.duke.edu> Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator) Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line Lines: 28 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org In-Reply-To: gazit@cs.duke.EDU's message of 31 May 91 20: 08: 49 GMT Originator: nadel@aerospace.aero.org > Somehow, the feminists who try (and sometimes succeed) to give women > more opportunities in the army have very little to say/do/change about > the men-only registration for draft. Sheer fiction. I suspect I'm better read on feminism than Hillel Gazit, and I can honestly report that I've not seen one feminist document that supports a male-only draft. Radical feminism sprung out of the civil rights and anti-war movements, and most radical feminists oppose the draft altogether. Even so, most of them have made statements that if there is to be a draft, it should include both sexes. Liberal feminists (the traditional types, like NOW) have been mostly anti-war, but also agree that if there is to be a draft, it should include both sexes. Cultural feminists are divided between the majority who view war as a male venture and don't like the idea of having heavily- armed men and oppose the draft altogether; and the minority who think women should be just as heavily-armed as men and say, again, that if there is to be a draft it should include both sexes. The issue was last brought up for the public at large when Jimmy Carter re-enacted draft legislation. At that time, all three camps reiterated the above stances. <_Jym_>