The Issue of Conscripting Women, By Richard Miller (Londonistan)
The Remix News article from March 11, 2025, titled "As Germany Debates Conscription, it's Clear Women Should Also be Drafted to Fight and Potentially Die for Their Countries for Gender Equality,"
argues that reinstating conscription in Germany should include women for the sake of fairness, given the country's military shortages and shifting security threats, such as the Ukraine. It cites Germany's Bundeswehr struggling with only 181,000 troops against a goal of 203,000 by 2031, alongside Latvia's gender-neutral conscription model, to push for equal obligation.I'll give an argument against conscripting women, although the article is probably trolling feminism and as such does succeed here.
Physical and Biological Realities Undermine Combat Effectiveness:
The article's push for gender equality in conscription ignores the practical differences between men and women in combat roles. Military service, especially in frontline infantry or mechanised units, demands physical strength, endurance, and resilience—attributes where men, on average, outperform women due to biology. Studies from the U.S. Marine Corps (e.g., 2015 integration trials) found all-male units consistently outperformed mixed-gender units in speed, lethality, and injury rates, with women sustaining musculoskeletal injuries at twice the rate of men. Forcing women into combat via conscription risks lowering unit cohesion and effectiveness, critical in a real war—say, against a Russian offensive—where Germany can't afford inefficiencies. Equality in theory shouldn't trump survival in practice.
Societal Roles and Family Stability:
Women disproportionately bear the burden of child-rearing and family maintenance, a reality the article glosses over. In Germany, where the birth rate is already low (1.58 children per woman in 2023), drafting women en masse could disrupt family structures further, exacerbating demographic decline—a strategic weakness in itself. If both parents are conscripted, who raises the next generation? Historical precedent, like the UK's WWII conscription of single women aged 20-30 without children, limited scope to preserve societal function. Latvia's model (11 months for men, voluntary for women) reflects this pragmatism, not discrimination. Forcing women into service risks a hollowed-out home front, undermining the nation's long-term resilience.
Ethical Disparity in Sacrifice:
Conscription implies equal risk of death, but the article's equality argument dodges the ethical weight of compelling women to die at the same rate as men. Men have historically been society's expendable defenders—biologically and culturally—due to their lesser role in reproduction. One man can repopulate a community; one woman's loss shrinks it irrevocably. In a hypothetical German conflict with Russia, losing 10,000 young women in combat would have a graver long-term impact than losing 10,000 men, given women's finite reproductive window. This isn't sexism; it's maths. Forcing women into that meat grinder under "fairness" feels more like ideological vanity than justice.
Volunteerism Suffices for Gender Equity:
The article points to Norway and Latvia as models, but Norway's gender-neutral conscription is selective (only 25 percent of eligible women serve), and Latvia's is still male-mandatory with female opt-ins. Women already volunteer in Germany's Bundeswehr—10.7 percent of active personnel in 2023—proving they can contribute without compulsion. The Remix piece admits 800 women volunteered in Latvia's first conscription year, suggesting motivation isn't the issue. If the goal is equity in representation, incentives (higher pay, education benefits) could boost female enlistment without the blunt force of a draft, preserving choice and avoiding the inefficiencies of mass conscription.
Public Resistance and Political Backlash:
Germans are lukewarm on conscription itself—polls like the 2024 Deutschlandtrend show only 52 percent support reinstating it for men, let alone women. Extending it to women, as the article advocates, could spark outrage, especially among traditionalists and feminists alike: the former see it as uprooting gender norms, the latter as coercive patriarchy in disguise. The CDU's push for male conscription already faces coalition hurdles; adding women could tank the policy entirely. In a democracy, forcing half the population into an unpopular war risks civil unrest, not unity—hardly the deterrence Eva Högl, Germany's defense commissioner, seeks against "potential aggressors."
Alternative Solutions Exist:
The article frames conscription as urgent due to troop shortages, but drafting women isn't the only fix. Germany could expand its reservist pool (currently underutilised at 34,000), enhance recruitment with better pay (starting salary for privates is €2,100/month, lagging private sector), or lean on NATO allies for burden-sharing, as Latvia does with its 4 percent GDP defence spending. Technological investment—drones, cyber defenses—could offset manpower needs, aligning with modern warfare trends Russia itself exploits. Conscripting women feels like a 20th-century solution to a 21st-century problem, sidestepping smarter options for ideological points.
The Remix News piece assumes equality means identical treatment, but fairness doesn't demand women die equally when outcomes (combat readiness, societal stability) aren't equal. Its Latvia example is overstated—women there aren't drafted mandatorily—and Germany's context (larger population, different threats) doesn't mirror the Baltics. The argument for women's conscription leans on principle over pragmatism, ignoring how gender differences shape war's brutal reality.
Conscripting women in Germany, as the article urges, falters against physical, societal, ethical, and political headwinds. It risks weakening the military with less capable units, destabilising families, and alienating the public, all while viable alternatives—like voluntary incentives or tech investment—exist. Equality in death isn't noble if it sacrifices a nation's future. Men have borne this burden not out of privilege, but necessity; lifting that from them shouldn't mean dragging women into the same trench.
This argument applies to women's conscription across the West, including Australia.
Comments