@Beeman they are unless they have had their civil right revoked as part of the criminal justice system

Which can happen if they don't sign up for SS

That's an issue with the selective service laws

Look at that CERN scientist who was suspended after he pointed out that the STEM field is making an active effort to prefer women 2:1, which was confirmed by several studies.

Are you really telling me that FEMINISM giving women a 2:1 advantage, and MERITOCRACY which consistently favors men for being more stable in the field and stronger contributors, are not at odds?

It's a rights issue

But not an issue that women are at fault for

Women's groups aren't fighting to be part of the draft, for the most part

@JustTom, I don't argue that. But there are gradations of feminism.

Feminism, as a whole, must be taken into account. What they are doing en-masse. What the WHOLE of the group is considered doing, and how they are impacting society.

If you admit that a large portion of feminists are causing situations like that, then you are admitting that feminism and meritocracy are fundamentally at odds.

Let's back up here. @JustTom, can we start by agreeing that the 19th amendment was a good thing?

If it was just an outlier that society at large ignored and told them to STFU and GTFO, then I'd shrug them off and ignore them. But it's not. Society at large is bending the knee to the temple of feminists and abandoning meritocracy.

@Beemann , I suspect if you were to poll women in the US you'd find a majority would be willing to ditch the selective service.

I'm refering only and exclusively to your comment about "meritocracy and feminism being incompatible is like saying apples and alternators are incompatible. They have nothing inherently to do with each other."

So does the 19th amendment preclude decisions being made on merit?

I have nothing against the 19th ammendment in the initial spirit of it and the ideals it supports. In theory, it supports the merit that men and women can be equal, and are equally deserving of the right to vote.

If something else was said that fundamentally disagrees with my view, you'll have to repost it, because I'm not seeing where this particular line of discussion crosses with feminism vs. meritocracy.

My point is that 100 years ago suffrage was the epitome of feminism.

Yet suffrage has nothing against merit based decision making.

You're not going to get rid of the draft

@Beemann man, as a veteran myself I actually would advocate for women to be part of it.

But I'd be fine to end it, if that was the will of the people. My point is that the selective service need not be discriminatory.

Suffrage was a keystone of the matter due to it being an unequal starting point, which is in opposition of meritocracy, you're somewhat oversimplifying the whole situation though. Feminists of that era believed in a lot more than just the right to vote, even though it was a cornerstone of their rallying cries. And at the time, they rightly needed to be raised up and made equal to men.

How does that have anything to do with modern feminism vs. meritocracy though?

It is a starting point, Tom. If we couldn't agree on the 19th Amendment there's be no point in further discussion. I think in the end we'll be pretty close to agreeing, but I wanted to make sure we at least could agree that men and women as political entities and sovereign individuals had the same innate worth.

Fair enough. We probably do have the same end point, just alternate opening points of the topic.

or close enough to the same end point, as long as we both agree modern feminism has gone too far and their continued push to take more "rights" is absurd and clashes with the ideals of meritocracy.

So, next up. Do you believe that women should have equal access to the public school system? Again, it's been only in the last 100 years that this has been true consistently.

We do, Tom. I just want to make sure we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Equal access and equal rights. Of course. Meritocracy fully supports that. And 100 years ago, that meant more women needed a leg up. In modern society though, it has, again, gone too far, and now men are very openly being discriminated against.

Yes, discrimination is now happening both ways, which has been quite the surprise to some people.

That doesn't make it right

we need to stop fighting on federal level for a lot of these things and put that power back to the states

See, all this society stuff really sucks. Really should just go back to Paleolithic caveman times /s

Meritocracy, at its core, hates discrimination in all its forms. Because discrimination is the act of taking away that equal starting point that everyone deserves in a balanced, merit based society.

Oh, you mean there's a 10th Amendment, @Grenade123 ?

You'd never know it

XD

Yes, the 10th ammendment, that gives us all the right to go back to Peleolitich caveman times. 👍

we have a Constitution? Since when?

If you ever want to see how trucks can be driven through loopholes, just watch the traffic flying past the interstate commerce clause

Wait, so people haven't realized it's a false flag?

oh well