The draft, feminism, and men's rights
One of the things "men's rights" folks seem to frequently toss out there is: "But WOMEN are privileged, too... look at the DRAFT ferchrissake! Women are PRIVILEGED because they won't ever get DRAFTED!"
Here is one feminist's perspective on that topic.
(excerpted from middle of article)
Let's look around. It is usually not Teh Feminists who are the ones advocating a male-only draft. When it comes to such discrimination, it is more likely that feminists and MRAs are fighting a common opponent: Those who insist that men and women have "proper" gender roles and, therefore, women are biologically and naturally "unsuitable" for military combat. Where feminism can be valuable to the MRA argument is that it recognizes that the concept of "proper gender roles" is largely a social construct and, therefore, denying women the right to serve in combat on that basis is illogical.
A related problem with the draft/combat "gotcha" is that feminists, of course, did not create the draft. Men did. And those who promote the "traditional gender roles" mythology perpetuate it. Yet MRAs often argue as though it were women, feminists especially, who created a draft and combat positions that exclude women. I don't know where the MRAs have been over the years, but many feminists have been actively trying to get the military to allow women into combat positions in the military. The National Organization for Women, for instance, passed a resolution in 1980 opposing the male-only draft as unfair sex discrimination. Like I said before, if the MRAs were to actively push for a policy in which women were drafted into combat positions, they would find that they would come up against many of the same adversaries that feminists face: Anti-feminist men and women who promote the Woman as Fragile mythology. Good luck, boys. Glad to have you as part of the "team."
Third, not only is a male-only draft unfair to men, it is also unfair and harmful to women. The policy is "rooted in benevolent sexism (ie. the idea that women are too precious/fragile to participate)." On the flip side of the female privilege "gotcha" coin there is almost always some sort of "benevolent sexist" claim. In the case of the draft, it's "yeah women don't have to join the military" because "women are inherently weak/not brave/not tough like men" argument. To be seen as weak, cowardly, and uncourageous is not a privilege, my friends. I don't know many feminists who would argue that it is "Woman's" inherent nature to possess these qualities.
Fourth, military duty comes with benefits. Many people view serving your country as one of the highest honors in life. For the many men who returned home from war after having been drafted, they were given benefits for education, preferences for federal jobs, home loan assistance, and other benefits that women necessarily were excluded from because they were excluded from the draft. "The truth is, when looked at more carefully the idea of women being restricted in their participation in the military is not an advantage, but rather a disadvantage. It hinders women’s ability to protect their country and their families, as well as hurts their chances of advancing because they have fewer venues than men to show off their skills."
Linky here: The Draft Doesn't Prove Feminism Wrong
And the follow up:
(excerpted from middle of article)
We don't want to be treated like "goddesses" and told that we are too fragile, precious, and weak to engage in the serious business of living non-domestic lives. We are quite willing and able to be soldiers, presidents, CEOs, writers, and intellectuals. What we want is for people to stop perpetuating the lie that we, as women, must live within the claustrophobic confines of the feminine gender role and that men must live within the confines of the (superior) male gender role. What we want is for you to recognize that while significant gains have been made, the last few decades of progress have not completely erased the fact that for thousands of years men have excluded women from the public sphere.
In short, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And if you're not part of the problem, feminism isn't fucking talking about you.
Linky here: Feminism and the Draft, Take Two
I would like to repeat that last bit for emphasis:
"In short, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And if you're not part of the problem, feminism isn't fucking talking about you."
= new reply since forum marked as read
Thanks for posting it! 
"It is usually not Teh Feminists who are the ones advocating a male-only draft."
And the other simple statements of obvious fact. 
I often ran into this argument as a case for the state being entitled to regulate/deny access to abortion, for example in alleged rebuttal to my case that denying access to abortion is a violation of the right to life, since pregnancy can kill.
But men can be drafted and that's a violation of their right to life!
Damned right it is. It's the state sending individuals into life-threatening situations against their will. Same difference.
The problem with the argument is that it's an argument from "what is" rather than from "what's justified".
It may be justified for the state to require individuals to assume risks to their lives.
The draft is about the only place where modern states do it. We don't compel people to donate organs or even blood, for others' benefit. And we don't compel people to jump into freezing rivers to save another who is drowning.
And if it is determined to be justified for the state to draft individuals into life-threatening military service, then any exemption for particular individuals (be they grad students studying poetry or women) has to be justified too.
And there is no justification for exempting women.
Duh.
illiterate typo fixed
