PJ Media
BY TONI AIRAKSINEN SEPTEMBER 13, 2018
CHAT 189 COMMENTS
The nation’s oldest men’s group has filed an unprecedented lawsuit against the Selective Service System (SSS), alleging that the military draft amounts to “discrimination against males” and “unconstitutional” treatment of young men.
The lawsuit, filed by California lawyer Marc Angelucci, challenges the SSS’s policy of requiring that all United States men sign up for the draft. According to federal law, all men must register within 30 days of their 18th birthday or face a variety of penalties.
“It’s what a man’s got to do. By registering, a young man stays eligible for jobs, college loans and job grants, job training, driver’s license in most states, and U.S. citizenship for most immigrant men,” exhorts the draft’s website.
Obtained by PJ Media, the lawsuit explains that about 16 million men are currently registered by the SSS. These men are, essentially, “on call” soldiers until they turn 26. The SSS claims this is “voluntary participation.” The lawsuit deems it “unconstitutional.”
In an interview, Angelucci said that the harms of the SSS are “obvious.”
“I doubt anyone would question the harm if we only forced women to register their bodies as on-call warriors who have to continue reporting their whereabouts to the federal government for years under penalty of prison, fines, or loss of financial aid,” he said.
Men do indeed get penalized if they fail to register, he added. In one high-profile case, Elgin v. Bush, three men working for the federal government lost their jobs after it was discovered that they failed to register for the draft when they were young.
Even the U.S. Department of Defense agrees. In a 2017 report, department officials wrote that the SSS contradicts the “nation’s touchstone values of fair and equitable treatment.”
“Men are treated differently than their female counterparts, for reasons seemingly grounded in gender; this inequity creates the perception of discrimination and unfair dealing—a tarnish that attaches to the military selective service system writ large.”
SPONSORED
To fix this, the lawsuit urges the SSS to change course.
However, this doesn’t necessarily mean they want women to be drafted. The plaintiffs take no position on whether the solution should be to end the draft entirely, or to require both men and women to register, said Angelucci.
Their only position is that male-only requirements should be recognized as unconstitutional, Angelucci explained. He filed the lawsuit on behalf of the National Coalition For Men (NCFM), a 501(c)3 nonprofit in California.
The lawsuit is NCFM’s first challenge against the federal government.
Warren Farrell — author of “The Myth of Male Power” (1993) — explains that the SSS is just one way that men are “the disposable sex” in society. The fact that few recognize this is further evidence of the depth of “unconscious sexism” against men.
“Males aren’t expendable—we need them to be willing to protect us in war, fighting fires and in all the hazardous jobs—but when they come home with PTSD, they’re disposable, and calling men heroes if they sacrifice their life is a social bribe,” he tells PJ Media.
In his most recent book, “The Boy Crisis” (co-authored with John Gray, PhD.), Farrell worries about the message this discrimination sends to young men.
“In school, your son learns that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection for both sexes, but when your son turns eighteen; he discovers that only he and other boys will be required by U.S. law to register for the draft.”
“The catch-22 of your son as hero is that the more he becomes a hero as a killer, the less likely he is to become a hero as a husband… what he does to be loved [by the country] often divorces him from love [by his partner].”
The SSS did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. A Texas court is scheduled to determine a trial date in January 2019.
Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @Toni_Airaksinen.
Northeastern Prof Warns: Male Military Veterans ‘Reinforce Hegemonic Masculinity,’ Sexism
This is a characterisation of a scenario and is just to highlight the discrimination and inequality that exists in this subject. I realise that the immigration systems are far more complicated and technical than that portrayed in this story. He could have of course applied for the ‘SS101 code’ (A number just used as an example) and carried it with him at all times but why should he have to do this when Jane does not.
Harry and Jane Smith were in there late 30s and desperately wanted to live in the USA and went through all the immigration procedures to become ‘Americans’ once settled they decided to get a drivers licence to explore their new home. Jane made an appointment at the licence testing station and Harry booked in for the following day, “Congratulation Mrs smith you have qualified for a driver’s licence, go out and enjoy your travels” said the woman behind the desk. Harry went in the following day as arranged and the woman at the desk said “We have all your details but I will need the code off your SS101 letter to proceed”. Harry said “I’m 38 and just arrived in the country” the woman at the desk told him it doesn’t make any difference all men older than 26 have to have one. Harry decided if Jane has her licence then that will do for any travelling they wanted to do and the college they wanted to enrol in was walking distance from where they were living.
With that behind him they went to get a student loan and attend the college, Jane applied, and in due course she received a letter saying she had been accepted for the loan and the course and was to start on the 1st of the following month. Harrys letter arrived the following day saying we can’t proceed with your course application until you have supplied the code from your SS101 letter. Jane decided that doing the course on her own would not be much fun and declined her offer and they both decided that they would look for a job instead
The Post Office was advertising for staff and they thought that would be an interesting occupation and both applied for employment, after Jane’s interview, she was told, “Congratulation Mrs Smith welcome to the team you can start next Monday”. Harrys interview didn’t go as well, after all the application was put in, they called him and said there’s a job here for you, but as this is a federal government job, we need the code from your SS101 letter.
By this time Harry was getting really depressed seeing Jane is sailing through all these things and him not been able to get anything. “Stuff it”, he says “I’ll go on social security”. He went to the social security office and started the interview as they went through his situation, he was told he was not entitled to any of this until he supplied the code from a SS101 letter.
The elections were coming up and Harry thought I’m going to vote against this government that is putting all these burdens on me, and went off to enrol to vote. He completed his enrolment form but the woman behind the desk said “This is all fine but I can’t lodge the enrolment as we will need the code off your SS101 letter.” Later, Jane said she would try to help out by using her vote
Harry had had enough of this and told Jane we are leaving this so-called land of the free and going back to the old country. Jane wouldn’t have any of that and said “What other country has the education and employment opportunities there is here, and I can drive to the most exciting cities or visit the beautiful open countryside, drive to the snow fields to ski or go to the beaches to swim”. Harry said “You can do what you want but I’m going back to the old country I am going to the emigration department tomorrow and I’m leaving”
Harry went to the office the following morning and the woman at the desk said “I am so sorry it didn’t work out for you but let’s get things underway and get some of the paperwork done, first of all do you have the code from your SS101 letter”…………..
Yup.
I cannot for the life of me understand why this is still the case. I don’t understand why people don’t see this as discrimination. My only thought is discrimination against men is not recognized. Best of luck. This is a disaster. I served in the Navy from 78 to 82. I was honorably discharged and went on to college. In 2009 I went back to school to obtain a teaching certification and was told my student loan had not been approved due to my not signing up for selective service. I never saw the “post card” they sent me. I had numerous addresses for 3 years following my discharge. I would have absolutely signed up. I have had to deal with this stigma for years and the only way around it is to show DD214. There are probably a lot of people like me.