From Draft NOtices, January-March 2021
The following is a slightly abridged version of an article that appeared in a special “Women and Militarism” issue of Draft NOtices, published in April 1986. It originally appeared in The Objector, a journal produced by the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (disbanded in 2009). We are reprinting it now because of its relevance to Women’s History Month in March, and it raises points that are still important to consider as we face a real possibility that women will soon be required to register for any future draft.
A Feminist Perspective on Broadening the Anti-draft Movement
— Ann Wrixon, former staff member of the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors
As a feminist I believe sexism is the model for all other oppressions. I am not satisfied, nor do I think it makes sense to let this issue take a back seat to others. This world view is frequently referred to as radical feminism. So as a feminist, in fact a radical feminist, many people are baffled as to why I work in the anti-draft movement, which appears to be mainly of concern to men. I think this is a dangerous misconception, however, that desperately needs to be corrected. I would like to take this time to examine how the draft directly affects women, and also the crucial links between this issue and other movements for social justice.
To begin with, women may actually be facing a draft in the not-too-distant future. In 1980 President Carter wanted to register women for the draft, but Congress rejected this. Over the past five years there have been repeated calls for a draft registration of health professionals (including women). Most recently, this past September, General Quinn, the Army Surgeon General, asked Congress to consider a peacetime draft registration of health professionals.
It is also easy to forget that although men usually wage war, women are frequently its victims. Women often serve in combat zones, as health professionals and other support personnel, and these units frequently suffer casualties. Also, both women and men are killed and injured when civilian populations become engulfed in a war (and women are often raped as well). It is important to remember that large numbers of women, as well as men, die in wars. A draft is used to support U.S. wars throughout the world.
War, of course, is dangerous for everyone involved. More subtle, however, is the danger to women of military training itself. Violence against women is both an overt and implicit part of military training. An article in the summer 1985 issue of Policy Review, a publication of the Heritage Foundation, stated, "Many of the traditional [military] techniques for instilling courage and a fighting spirit might be regarded as sexual harassment." Other observers have stated the problem in even stronger terms. For example, an Army psychologist interviewed by the Army Times several years ago explained, "We take these men (in basic training) and ask them to get in touch with their aggressiveness and their violent tendencies . . .then we tell them (after basic) they must hold it all in check until we ask them to release it in war. It's no wonder that it spills over when we don't want it to -- into fighting and brawling -- and raping women." Obviously, it is dangerous for anyone -- especially women -- to support drafting young men into an institution that teaches violence against women as a normal part of its training.
This is not to say that I support the present all-volunteer military, which is primarily reliant on the poverty draft to maintain its strength. The poverty draft targets the poor and minority members of our society, who have few other economic alternatives. Thirty-two percent of enlisted service members are minorities, which is a much larger percentage than their representation in the society as a whole. Not only will these service members face discrimination and harassment, and possibly war, but most will also not learn a marketable civilian skill, as most military jobs have no civilian application.
But it is a mistake to think that a draft would solve the poverty draft. Exemptions and deferments would be available to those who were educated and informed enough to present clear, sophisticated answers to confusing questions. Education (and draft counseling) are frequently denied to minorities and lower-income youth, and so they will be the ones drafted to fight the next war.
Clearly the draft is not just a "men's" issue, nor is it merely an issue of conscription, as illustrated by the current poverty draft. Why, then, has it come to be seen as such? Part of the problem is that the perceived leadership of the movement has been white men, and as a result the movement has tended to focus on their concerns. This tendency has been heightened by the media which generally focuses on individual resisters as spokespersons for the entire anti-draft movement.
It is particularly important to break the stereotype of resisters as white, college educated men, as most non-registrants (and therefore a source of tremendous potential support for the anti-draft movement) do not fit this mold. According to a Selective Service mandated study, less than 20 percent of draft non-registrants are white, middle-class, or college educated. It is vital that the anti-draft community make links between conscription and issues that concern these young people, such as unemployment and the poverty draft.
The concerns of women in the anti-draft movement must also be addressed. At the grassroots level women appear to compose fifty percent or more of the anti-draft movement, but repeatedly express frustration at their role in anti-draft activities. Last April women from throughout the East Coast met to discuss this problem. They made several suggestions for developing a non-sexist resistance movement that affirms the risk and commitments of all those involved. These included linking the draft to other issues, such as war tax resistance. They also encouraged activists to plan anti-draft actions that did not tie into an individual resister's case, and to initiate workshops or speakers on the draft at multi-issue/coalition events.
Linking the draft to other issues is perhaps the first step in broadening and
strengthening the base of the anti-draft movement. It is essential that the concerns of women and people of color be given serious consideration within the anti-draft movement. In turn, the issue of the draft would be revitalized. The draft is not a dead issue, but it has been isolated. A serious effort must be made to include women and people of color at both the grassroots and national levels of the movement, and this can be done by addressing their concerns.
This article is from Draft NOtices, the newsletter of the Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (http://www.comdsd.org/index.php/draft-notices).
Please consider becoming a $10 per month supporter of The Committee Opposed to Militarism & the Draft
Our investigations and advocacy are an important contribution to the national peace community in the USA.
Donate through the Project on Youth & Non-military Opportunities
###
