201–210 of 799 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a re-instatement of a cold war era law that was suspended in 2011.
The main point was that they changed it so instead of being activated during crisis now it applies anytime, including in peacetime. Making it similar to the cold war provisions doesn't make it sounds better.
How does feminism survive if this becomes the norm? If young men feel like they're expected to give more to their society it's natural to expect renumeration financial, socially or politically. Nordic countries don't seem to have this problem, but their conscription laws are quite relaxed compared to what the future will likely hold. A declining youth population almost certainly means greater youth repression (higher…
Why would this affect feminism? If they want to fight for equal rights to conscription nobody is stopping them, and if they don't nobody is going to force them to. These gotchas don't really have any reflection on reality.
The risk to feminism would be that this becomes so blatantly and obviously not true that no one can take it seriously. I don't think the continued draft of men would impact this because it's not a change to the status quo, and it isn't changing opinion in Ukraine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Setting aside arguments over biology, avoiding getting sent to war to be blown to pieces wouldn't be a "light" reason to consider claiming gender diversity.
SBGG has an exclusion carved out for people who share this opinion (not me). https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sbgg/__9.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trans women are not male, including biologically if you assume HRT. This is overcompensating rationality to shit on a group of people that are functionally intersex for "biological" distinction. And we're not even talking about a context where biology matters. You just wanted to vice signal. If you want to make this an SBGG criticism, I'd love to see you even get close to proving abuse beyond singular instances. Even…
What are the consequences of changing the marker? Does it impose legal requirements on people or is it a matter of identity alone? Just curious why people don't take it lightly. Identity is important so that will suffice as an explanation. EDIT: I'm rate-limited on comments, so if you come back here and read this, thank you for sharing from experience.
You will still have to deal with a ton of bureaucratic overhead and little moments where this is disclosed. For instance, your health insurance (and doctors) will usually know (the marker, not that you're trans, i get endometrial cancer screening recommended to me) and start to bicker about non-standard healthcare (i.e. I can get my estradiol tested at my GP, but for testosterone I need to see an endocrinologist) and your social security / employer will know (I also have at least 3 aliased social security numbers at this point).
Pure gender marker changes absent a name change are a lot less common, so it's not exactly well known territory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All nation states are like that. They monopolise power and violence, and will defend that monopoly by sacrificing their citizens' lives if another state tries to infringe upon it. I think it's clear that the interests of citizens and their state typically do not align. Unfortunately, most states have cultivated and propagated a different idea for decades, which is why so many people have a different perception of the…
No idea why you single out nation states, all states are similar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, you see, if men stay alive, but women are killed, society collapses eventually as not enough new people are born. It sucks being a man in this scenario, but it is what it is.
And if you include women (well, all genders) directly in the war efforts you double the amount of soldiers you have, which would increase your chance of winning and not needing to repopulate.
If you all agree to refuse to fight, you win.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma
The key here is to refuse fighting. Nobody becomes a hero by becoming a murderer whose goal is to defend the political power of Stalin, Napoleon, Bush, or whoever.
Question for German friends: What do you think about the production level of military equipment? If Russia does move (which I think is unlikely in the near future), how many days does the ammo last?
NATO doctrine is basically air superiority against any invading force, with the ability to wreak destruction far behind the front lines.
Conveniently the Iran war has depleted stockpiles of almost everything.
The reality is NATO is vulnerable on two fronts.
The first is that NATO has no defences against the kind of drone and missile waves Russia has been using against Ukraine. A surprise attack could easily take out a large part of NATO's air superiority and do significant damage to arms factories.
The second is more serious - capture of the independent nuclear deterrent. The US is clearly giving up on defending Europe, the UK's deterrent is barely functional, and only France has a truly independent deterrent.
Russia has spent a lot of time and money trying to get a puppet government elected on France, along the lines of the governments in Hungary, Slovakia, and the US.
If France stops being a deterrent Russia would be able to nuke Brussels - and perhaps a few other capitals to make the point - and likely force immediate surrender.
The question is really whether Russia can hold on until the French elections next year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can it be challenged under the European constitution?
I wouldn't trust the European Union to be the one that will challenge that German mobilization register at all. COVID-19 has proven that if anything, the European Union tends to spread national initiatives among other countries (and Germany is often a leader in EU). In this specific case, the EU is more likely to be the type of organization that would think about how to create a unified permit -> as they did with the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it would take a change to the constitution to do that while reinstating the old draft laws only takes a regular majority in parliament. The draft is a severe limitation of personal freedom, so you can't just do that by law. The draft for men is already enabled in the constitution, the draft for woman isn't. At this moment, changing the constitution is not possible, there is no majority for this. So that prett…
Can it be challenged under the European constitution?