Swiss voters on Sunday decisively rejected a call to require women to do national service in the military, civil protection teams or other forms, as all men must do already.
Official results. with counting still ongoing in some areas after a referendum, showed that more than half of Switzerland’s cantons, or states, had rejected the “citizen service initiative” by wide margins. That meant it was defeated, because proposals need a majority of both voters and cantons to pass.
Voters also heavily rejected a separate proposal to impose a new national tax on individual donations or inheritances of more than 50 million francs ($62 million), with the revenues to be used to fight the impact of climate change and help Switzerland meet its ambitions to have net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
Is Switzerland full of sexist people who think “someday I’LL be rich so I don’t want to tax MYSELF more, hypothetically maybe in the distant future”?
Sexist is debatable but… yeah
But everyone worshiping the rich? Yeah, that is Switzerland in a nutshell. A decade or so ago I spent a week in Switzerland on holiday and… even the state funded museums kinda felt like “And then so and so developed a really cool technology that saved countless lives. AND THEN THEY GOT RICH!!! FRANCA FRANCA BILS Y’ALL!!! And here is what they bought with it and the house they lived in and how much paper it takes to print out their monthly statement and… Oh, the tech? Whatever, nobody cares about that”
Afaik, Switzerland is a very conservative place. So that pretty much aligns with what you said.
They are so conservative that women got the right to vote federally in 1971. In one Canton they only got the right to vote at the local level in 1990 after a Supreme Court decision. They were the last Western Democracy to do so.
Native Americans didn’t get the right to vote until 1975… unless you are counting the 1990 thing they weren’t the last.
I want to be part of a normal species
Yes. Europe isn’t the magical forward thinking land it’s made it to be lol. Well, most of it isn’t, anyway. Still a great place to spend some time though.
That’s a statement at the level of Trump statements. Congrats, you now stand shoulder to shoulder with the pedophile in chief in sweeping statements based on a minority of people.
If men have to sign up for the draft then it is only fair that women have to too. It’s unfair that only men have to risk being drafted and losing so much of their life to war.
As a general rule, I oppose gender roles codified into law.
Personally, I think having a draft is a terrible idea regardless of gender.
They voted down adding women to this already bad idea. Potentially in the future, they remove the draft altogether.
I guess my point is, why would you want them to make the situation worse just so it is equal?
Statistically woman do so much more care work then men, they already served the country well. There is no need to also draft them. It’s only fair. It would also work if more men would take care of kids, the elderly or do other chores without any pay and skip any career for that.
This comment is pure comedy gold.
There is also the emprical evidence that women make less over the course of their careers. An extra year or two of work experience can help to offset that.
Obviously not everyone falls into those gender norm buckets. But… they are “gender norms” for a reason. And while I don’t know how our trans friends impact that (or if Switzerland acknowledges their existence…), it isn’t the worst way to break things down to having roughly half the population on the frontlines and the other half keeping the country running.
But this is the kind of thing that brings out the MRA tendencies in everyone as a kneejerk reaction.
Military service isn’t “being on the frontline.” I don’t know how Switzerland handles it, but in the US a lot of aid work is done by reservists. I’m sure Switzerland does similar things with these people. Sure, they’re also all trained to fight, but they aren’t fighting in a war right now, so they use them to do other things. Some of that will be building bunkers and stuff, but a lot is probably doing things that support the country in other ways.
Being drafted is different than doing chores or working in care roles. Everyone capable should be responsible for the defense of those who are not in times of war regardless of sex.
There are also plenty of care roles, and chores, in military service.
Yes more Men should take on the life outside of work, but that has nothing to do with 50% of a countries population being forced to give up and risk their lives while the other isn’t even though they are capable of, and excel in, combat and support roles.
Being drafted is different than doing chores or working in care roles. Everyone capable should be responsible for the defense of those who are not in times of war regardless of sex.
And working in factories, taking care of kids, and just existing are very much part of the war effort. And their lives are very much at risk during a war. Just ask Ukraine.
It is one of those knock-ons from (especially) WW1 and 2 where draft dodging and “conscientious objectors” were such a risk as more and more people came back from the front with grotesque wounds and mental trauma. A culture of “only cowards don’t go to war” was built up VERY rapidly… and caused immense issues as young men were unable to fight due to physical ailments or mental trauma so bad that even the 1910s/40s cared.
Except also Rosie the Riveter and all that.
It all ties into the “myth” of “civilian targets” during a full scale war. EVERYONE can agree that blowing up a hospital is evil. What about a factory that makes shoes? What about one that makes boots? Shells? Similarly, EVERYONE can agree that blowing up a residential area is how you go to hell. Now about about a residential area on a military base? Now what about the barracks on a base? Are you only allowed to attack the enemy once they step foot off base?
And going back to that hospital… what about a power plant? Because a LOT of lives are lost when hospitals have extended outages. But those plants ALSO literally power the war effort.
Which is the reality of things. When you just have a massive global north military destroying a country in the name of “counter-terrorism”? Yes, the reality is that a lot of the terrorist/guerilla cells are going to fundamentally be in residential areas and next to hospitals both for optics and convenience. But there is a LOT of “oh… there were some hamas soldiers in that children’s ward, sure” evil.
But when an entire country is mobilized for war? The distinction between civilian and military becomes INCREDIBLY murky. Which… we can very much see in Ukraine and russia.
Because, yes, you need people on the front line. You also need people on the backlines for logistics and support. And… you need people just living their lives so that there is something worth fighting for. Rotating troops back for leave is immensely important for morale and… if they return to a skeleton crew raising children in abandoned dormitories? They can never recharge from The War and that leave stops mattering. Which leads to rapid desertion and even worse mental trauma.
And… The Enemy is very aware of that.
Oh give me a break, women are getting away worse in so many facets of life. When we have fixed discrimination against women we can talk about them doing mandatory civil service.
Edit: Did not know that on Lemmy we have such an issue with women’s rights.
So? Are we supposed to have a fair, equal society or are we playing these games of measuring each other’s cocks?
Measure whatever you want but maybe first make it slightly more equal for the ones who have been disadvantaged for decades? But no, one party always focuses on the few things man have where they are slightly worse of.
I’m a feminist and I honestly don’t understand this mentality. Mixing genders in all activities is good for our society, period.
Not if said activity is forced upon you. Women can already voluntarily join the military or civil service.
So can men, but in this instance they’re also compelled. The ask here is that if men are compelled to service, women should be too. That’s obviously equal treatment and fair.
Am I in the wrong movie? Women are at a huge disadvantage in life (Gender pay gap, workplace representation, unpaid care and domestic work, education and job positions, healthcare, part-time employment, promotion and career advancement, violence against women, political representation) and we should work to solve that but for some reason we first want to force them to also serve in the military while leaving the current system in place that puts them at a disadvantage? Oh the heavens, men have to serve for a single year…yes that is super important, not all the things they get a huge advantage in life?
Insane that any democracy would reject an inheritance tax
with the revenues to be used to fight the impact of climate change and help Switzerland meet its ambitions to have net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
Maybe the people wanted to have actual social services provided to them instead of climate action.
They could light the money on fire and it would still be worth impleminating
Why is that insane? Wasn’t tax already paid on that money once?
This bullshit-argument again.
Guess what, money will circle around the economy and it will be taxed on different occasions and often several times during its lifespan (whatever that means for todays mostly digital money anyways). Especially when things (or money) change owners, tax is to be expected.
When you got paid, you paid income tax, and when you buy stuff with it - oh my gosh! - taxes again!! (In the form of VAT) Outrageous!
This is such a common thing, that it simply baffles me how anyone could think that “that money has been taxed already” is a sound argument.
ITT: people judging the vote and the voters by the magnanimous title alone.
The initiatives were worded and implemented so poorly, that it wouldn’t surprise me if the initiants wanted to lose both these votes.
- The inheritance tax would have caused mass nationalisations and it had pegged the tax proceeds to go towards climate goals instead of let’s say the federal pension fund deficit (AHV-Loch). It would be incorrect to state that the voters don’t support an inheritance tax or climate goals based on this vote.
- The “service citoyen” proposal would have made some kind of civil or military service mandatory for all, but would have essentially reduced the military to a volunteer force, which would be socially unacceptable. The Swiss have a historically repeatedly confirmed will to keep a citizen’s militia as the country’s only security force.
The takes on here are wild as a Swiss dude.
Hint: Mandatory service is a problem.
