How are you explaining to your boys about only men being conscripted in Ukraine?

[MiniDaffodils]

I have both girls and boys. We have always brought them up to understand that whilst boys may be physically stronger, girls can undertake the same roles in anything as boys can.
My boys are upset at the thought that only men are being made to fight in Ukraine and not women. They think it’s very unfair.
I think they are imagining themselves in that same situation. Obviously I have explained in this country both men and women would be called up to fight. My boys are gentle souls and the thought of only men having to kill others is disturbing them.
My girls are relieved at the idea that women in Ukraine are not called to fight despite usually them being very vocal about the fact boys and girls are equal in all things.
My main question is how to explain this to my sons, rather than my daughters (who don’t seem as bothered by the issue).
Thanks

[quote BigOlDingleSlinger69]@SirSamVimesCityWatch

Perhaps - but why is the horror of women being raped something to be avoided over the horror of men being killed, maimed, tortured or left to die in pieces?[/quote]
Because this will happen to women as well of course. And more often as they are easier to capture and kill. Plus the rape is an added and particularly despicable bonus.

@ChocolateMassacre

And you still didn’t answer the question. Why is rape of women where you are drawing the line amongst so many other horrible things happening?

@Calandor

Someone has to look after the children.. can't just send them off while all the adults stay behind. The men are bigger and the women may be pregnant so it just makes sense that the women go with the children.

Any women who WANT to stay and fight are allowed to.

But any woman who doesn't have children and isn't pregnant can go if she wants to.

Kudos to the women who choose to stay, shame men can't have the same option.

I confess I wouldn't want one of my sons or grandsons fighting but I accept that some of them would probably choose to. Granddaughters are a bit young for me to guess what they'd do. It runs in the family, both my GF's joined up under age for WW1, my father joined up the minute he could for WW2. My mother worked in munitions (so not safe by any means) one GM was an invalid and one had 2 babies during the war so she would have been one who couldn't fight/do war work.

Also since when was running through a war ravaged country with children (possibly babies) and barely any supplies in winter to get your kids to safety any less dangerous and admirable than going to fight?

They're both incredibly dangerous and scary. Both take incredible strength of will.

Where is the OP? I’d really like to know how fair her children think it is now that Putin is shelling a maternity hospital.

@MrsPsmalls

“Particularly despicable”? Why? Why more than torture or dying slowly without hope?

It seems flimsy justification. If the country is worth defending and the possibility of death, torture or maiming isn’t enough to deter that defence then rape shouldn’t be either. But like I said, it is an easy justification for women not being there.

All I’m saying is it’s irrelevant. Women are not, not fighting because they might be raped. They’re not fighting (as much) because they’re worse at it and are more inclined to avoid it. Or do you think if the men thought they may be raped (and some may be) they should flee too?

@ancientgran yes as the last sentence of my post said. Women can choose to fight if they're not needed for kids, elderly, pregnancy etc.

If they gave men the same option there might not be enough people who would stay to fight. And then you've lost the war. So they give the option to one and make it the group that is less use in war and more likely to be pregnant/ a carer/physically smaller.

Conscription isn't fair on anyone, but I know most men given the option of - you fight or your wife/sister/mother/girlfriend fights would stand up and agree to go immediately.

I'd like to say I'd stay and fight as a young, fit woman with no young children. But alas, I pass out as soon as I see blood so I'd die within seconds on the front line. So there's no point me thinking about conscription. It's a death knell if it ever happens to me unless they listen and put me on comms or something.

[quote BigOlDingleSlinger69]@Stompythedinosaur

Why is it that the solution is to push men into roles which relieves the burden on women but not the opposite? That seems like awfully convenient reasoning.

You say men can not complain about not being privileged 1% of the time if they are the other 99%, and that might ring true if not for the fact that the people saying it were fighting against them being privileged that (supposed) 99%.

Men could easily counter this and say that women can’t complain about them being privileged 99% of the time when they are expected to suffer the worst percentage of inequality and women will not join them in it willingly.

You can’t have it both ways.[/quote]
Women are the oppressed gender. Men undertaking caring roles frees them to be more fully involved in all aspects of society. I am in no way opposed to women fighting, but I think gender equality will be achieved by the oppressors (men) changing their behaviour. Woman cannt just decide not to be oppressed.

There is a correlation between families where men take a more equal share of parenting and housework and women engaging as part of the workforce. There's a correlation also with the daughters of more equal families achieving better paid careers. We know women do the roles traditionally allocated to men when they are freed from some of their caring responsibilities.

I suppose men could say woman are privileged 99% of the time, but they would be clearly talking rubbish. There is an abundance of evidence that this is not the case.

[quote BigOlDingleSlinger69]@ChocolateMassacre

And you still didn’t answer the question. Why is rape of women where you are drawing the line amongst so many other horrible things happening?[/quote]
If you can't see how rape (as compared to other violent crimes) is so inherently terrible, then I'm not sure there's a lot more I can say to you.

[quote BigOlDingleSlinger69]@Telebonn

Perhaps you should read more carefully. The point is that the men fighting and the women leaving isn’t based in something logically thought out - it is pure instinct which makes sense practically, hence it being instinct.

But you still haven’t answered why the killing, torture and slow death of men (and potential rape) is more acceptable and less horrible than the rape of women. Which was your moral justification for women not being on the front lines in the first place.[/quote]
Its not my moral justification, I haven't said anywhere that it is. But it's definitely an element that shouldn't be downplayed. I don't don't think it's more acceptable, but I don't think things are as simple as you are saying, or that the actions of men should be put down solely to instinct and so remove the responsibility from them.

@LizBennet

Physical strength is not the issue for today’s soldiers as they use weapons rather than brute force.

It is an issue.

The OP has clearly never picked up a M80 or any gun of substance. They're bloody heavy, I'm confident my toddler weighed less.

I can’t get on board with the whole “girls are such delicate flowers they cannot fight on the front line like the men” as that’s blatantly not true. Physical strength is not the issue for today’s soldiers as they use weapons rather than brute force.

Why did you start this thread if you weren't going to read any of the responses?

I guess for the same reason you told your kids that women are never restricted by periods in any way.

@EmpressCixi it isn’t, everybody in the army must have that as minimum fitness. It changed recently, it’s called ‘Fitness to Fight’. My husband isn’t in a combat role but is still expected to have those as minimum.

[quote BigOlDingleSlinger69]@MrsPsmalls

“Particularly despicable”? Why? Why more than torture or dying slowly without hope?

It seems flimsy justification. If the country is worth defending and the possibility of death, torture or maiming isn’t enough to deter that defence then rape shouldn’t be either. But like I said, it is an easy justification for women not being there.

All I’m saying is it’s irrelevant. Women are not, not fighting because they might be raped. They’re not fighting (as much) because they’re worse at it and are more inclined to avoid it. Or do you think if the men thought they may be raped (and some may be) they should flee too?[/quote]
Because they also get the other crap plus the rape! Come on you know this stuff. Men who are taken prisoner are for the most part roughed up and dumped in a pow camp That doesn't happen for women. I know it's hideous to take on board what men will do to women Not a few bad apples. Many many men to HUGE numbers of women.. I know it's really hard to believe it. But it does happen in war. It really does. Look it up for yourself. Men to do not do this to men.

@Thereisnolight

Still don’t think being in a ship is the same as front line infantry.

Tell that to the 260 navy crew who were on the HMS Coventry when it was blown up during the Falklands war

@ChocolateMassacre

Again you are dodging the question. I didn’t say rape wasn’t inherently terrible - I said it wasn’t more inherently terrible than torture or leaving someone to die in pieces. AND that the fear of it happening to women as opposed to those other things shouldn’t be the one thing that keeps women from fighting.

After all some men will be raped, if men were also just as likely to be raped should they just flee as well and give up the country? If fighting for the country is that important then their really shouldn’t be anything that can keep women from doing it.

It's also not the weight of the weapons, but the recoil - which can be a bitch.

@MrsPsmalls

Men are dying right now. I’m sorry but I can’t see being raped as inherently worse than cruelly being killed and dying with parts of your body spilling on the ground in front of you. Or than being tortured.

Men historically have gone through all sorts of terrible stuff after losing war, yet they still did it. The possibility of rape to women isn’t more inherently horrible that it should keep them from the battlefield if they truly believe in the cause and in their capacity to fight for it.

@LizBennet

Physical strength is not the issue for today’s soldiers as they use weapons rather than brute force.

It is an issue.

Rubbish, all Armed forces have to meet a minimum level of fitness to fight no matter what role they have

I don’t know why you’re so convinced conscription would be equal if it happened here. I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be actually.

Firstly, you’d take out women who are or might be pregnant, you’d then exclude those with infants. Then you’d be pretty much looking at exempting primary carers for the under 10s which would predominately be women. By the time you’ve done that you’re probably left with women over 50 and potentially those women who are childfree but of child-bearing age so risk of getting pregnant. From a logistics perspective it would be much easier to start with the men.

@Telebonn

I didn’t just say men staying to fight was instinct - I also said the women leaving was. And why would you think I was trying to remove responsibility from the brave men who are fighting against hopeless odds against Russia? Unless that struck some other kind of nerve that you thought it would lead to all of men’s behaviour being excused as because of instinct?

Cmon now we’ve seen this play out all throughout history and it will always be this way. It’s really very simple. I just think people are making this more of a conscious choice than it really is on the whole.

@MrsPsmalls

I know the women will be raped horribly. What I’m asking is if the cause is so important then why should that stop them fighting for it? Men have fought wars knowing they would be tortured or crucified and that loss was inevitable. And some Ukrainian men will have a relatively easy time in camps - others will suffer far far cruelly.

Again if women really believe in the cause shouldn’t they brave anything as men have?

Frankly, women didn’t make the rules regarding the draft. This is just what happens when you shove people in boxes. I don’t tend to agree with any kind of draft, it sounds like a horrible position to be in.

@Stompythedinosaur

I see you are coming to this through the “opression” lens and discussion will be useless. However you misunderstood one point of my post - I was not saying men would say that women were privileged 99% of the time - what I said was if men agreed that they (men) were privileged 99% of the time but that 1% of time were women were privileged and wanted to remain privileged (this kind of war situation) was the worst percentage to not be priveleged in and saw that women who were supposedly all for equality and wanted men to give up that other 99% privilege were indignant at being asked to give up their privilege - then why should men be understanding or accommodating to the women asking them to be so, in giving up their privilege and take on more caring roles? - given that those exact women asking the men to do that are not willing to give up their own privilege and risk their lives?