Es geht halt nicht nur um Gleichberechtigung sondern auch um Kosten. Auch wenn ich schlussendlich für “Ja” gestimmt habe, kann ich es nachvollziehen.
gartezwergli_3 on
Es isch kei Glichberechtigung wenn mer de Fraue wo scho en grossteil vo de Care-Arbeit I dere Gsellschaft leistet No witeri Verantwortige Ufdruckt. Für Care-Arbeit wo Fraue leisted bechemed mer nüt und erwartet wirds trotzdem, mit em dank no das mer bi de AHV benachteiligt wird wenn mer Teilzit schaffet und Chind Grosszieht. Care-Arbeit isch gnueg Service Citoyen!
FailerOnBoard on
du bisch dir scho bewusst, dass zum 85% dagege zha bruusch meh als numme d fraue???d fraue mached maximal nur 51% vode schwiizer bevölkerig uus.
was meinsch vo wo chömmed die (mindestens!) 35% her?
LeroyoJenkins on
I’m in favor of equality in armed service, but I voted no because the Initiative was designed in a completely stupid way.
If the Initiative was “things remain the same as today, but mandatory for men and women, who can be randomly dispensed from service (both from military or civil) due to excess of supply” or something of the sort, I’d have voted yes.
In general, the quality of the Initiatives is quickly declining, leaning strongly towards populism and stupidity.
Papierkor654 on
Gibt es irgendwo abstimmungsresultate nach Geschlecht? Fänds noch interessant wie da die aufteilung ist.
goodestname on
Newsflash: S Militär isch für alli scheisse und gäbtis d Möglichkeit über d Dienstpflicht abzstimme wäred super viel degege. Glichberechtigung ≠ Will ich liide münd alli liide.
rocketess on
Als Frau wo us andere Gründ ja gstumme het: Alli statt nur gwüssi zumne Dienst zwinge isch nöd Glichberechtigung, Glichberechtigung wär s Militär für alli freiwillig z‘mache. 🤷♀️
Jazzlike-Owl-244 on
Das het ja au nüt mit Gleichberechtigung ztue heisst ja ned Gleichberechtigungsinitiative🤦
gundilareine on
Was ich noch problematischer finde, ist die konstant niedrige Stimmbeteiligung bei fast allen Abstimmungen. Diesmal haben nur 42,9% der Bevölkerung abgestimmt. 57,1% haben nichts dazu gesagt.
Ich finde, wir sollten alle unsere Freunde, Nachbarn & Kollegen aufmerksam machen abzustimmen. Es wird einem soooo einfach gemacht – alle Unterlagen kommen nach Hause, abstimmen am Küchentisch (oder in der Waschküche, oder wo auch immer – es wäre total easy!
Warum macht es sich die Mehrheit so vermeindlich einfach? Es ist mir ein Rätsel.
AssassinOfSouls on
Ok,
I will just copy-paste my comment from the other thread.
>
>It’s an initiative that really manages to piss everyone off, from all sides. I would say that the few votes that got the “yes” are virtue-signaling that women should serve too.
>If you look at the proposal you will find at least one point (if not more) that is completely unacepptable for someone from every side of the political spectrum.
>Mandatory service for women
>Mandatory civil service
>Army and civil protection still mandatory and manpower must be maintained so they get priority.
>Increase in cost because of mandatory civil service.
>Truly I believe the proposing committee are all griefters and tanked their own initiative on purpose, if any of these proposals were taken to the pools separately (mandatory service for women and univeral service rather than military service) it would likely have done way better IMO.
Like…
* sexists will hate it as will many women who don’t want to serve because it introduces mandatory service for women.
* Right wingers will hate it because you are expanding civil service and increased costs
* Centrists will hate it because it will cost more money and you are doubling the population not participating in the workforce and also increased costs.
* Leftist will hate it because mandatory military service is still not optional because the Army will still get priority and require 140,000 people. Also most of them want to get rid of mandatory service completely, not expand it.
People voting yes likely did so in order to send the message about equality, which is fair enough… but the initiative was written to basically maximise the number of people that would hate it.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but it is so incompetently written and out of touch with reality that I genuinely cannot rule out that this was done on purpose and the proposal was malicious to begin with, in order to sabotage any votes regarding this in the future.
As the saying goes: *”a pensar male si fa peccato ma spesso ci si indovina”*
lurk779 on
This was not, I repeat, this was **not** a vote about “equality”. This was a hideous attempt to remove conscription by making that “equal” choice a… well, a choice. No more mandatory military service for **anyone**.
If it was about *actual* equality vs armed service, I’d be the first to sign the initiative.
13 commenti
Sauce: https://www.admin.ch/gov/de/start/dokumentation/abstimmungen/20251130/service-citoyen-initiative.html
was ist genau dein Problem?
Es geht halt nicht nur um Gleichberechtigung sondern auch um Kosten. Auch wenn ich schlussendlich für “Ja” gestimmt habe, kann ich es nachvollziehen.
Es isch kei Glichberechtigung wenn mer de Fraue wo scho en grossteil vo de Care-Arbeit I dere Gsellschaft leistet No witeri Verantwortige Ufdruckt. Für Care-Arbeit wo Fraue leisted bechemed mer nüt und erwartet wirds trotzdem, mit em dank no das mer bi de AHV benachteiligt wird wenn mer Teilzit schaffet und Chind Grosszieht. Care-Arbeit isch gnueg Service Citoyen!
du bisch dir scho bewusst, dass zum 85% dagege zha bruusch meh als numme d fraue???d fraue mached maximal nur 51% vode schwiizer bevölkerig uus.
was meinsch vo wo chömmed die (mindestens!) 35% her?
I’m in favor of equality in armed service, but I voted no because the Initiative was designed in a completely stupid way.
If the Initiative was “things remain the same as today, but mandatory for men and women, who can be randomly dispensed from service (both from military or civil) due to excess of supply” or something of the sort, I’d have voted yes.
In general, the quality of the Initiatives is quickly declining, leaning strongly towards populism and stupidity.
Gibt es irgendwo abstimmungsresultate nach Geschlecht? Fänds noch interessant wie da die aufteilung ist.
Newsflash: S Militär isch für alli scheisse und gäbtis d Möglichkeit über d Dienstpflicht abzstimme wäred super viel degege. Glichberechtigung ≠ Will ich liide münd alli liide.
Als Frau wo us andere Gründ ja gstumme het: Alli statt nur gwüssi zumne Dienst zwinge isch nöd Glichberechtigung, Glichberechtigung wär s Militär für alli freiwillig z‘mache. 🤷♀️
Das het ja au nüt mit Gleichberechtigung ztue heisst ja ned Gleichberechtigungsinitiative🤦
Was ich noch problematischer finde, ist die konstant niedrige Stimmbeteiligung bei fast allen Abstimmungen. Diesmal haben nur 42,9% der Bevölkerung abgestimmt. 57,1% haben nichts dazu gesagt.
Ich finde, wir sollten alle unsere Freunde, Nachbarn & Kollegen aufmerksam machen abzustimmen. Es wird einem soooo einfach gemacht – alle Unterlagen kommen nach Hause, abstimmen am Küchentisch (oder in der Waschküche, oder wo auch immer – es wäre total easy!
Warum macht es sich die Mehrheit so vermeindlich einfach? Es ist mir ein Rätsel.
Ok,
I will just copy-paste my comment from the other thread.
>
>It’s an initiative that really manages to piss everyone off, from all sides. I would say that the few votes that got the “yes” are virtue-signaling that women should serve too.
>If you look at the proposal you will find at least one point (if not more) that is completely unacepptable for someone from every side of the political spectrum.
>Mandatory service for women
>Mandatory civil service
>Army and civil protection still mandatory and manpower must be maintained so they get priority.
>Increase in cost because of mandatory civil service.
>Truly I believe the proposing committee are all griefters and tanked their own initiative on purpose, if any of these proposals were taken to the pools separately (mandatory service for women and univeral service rather than military service) it would likely have done way better IMO.
Like…
* sexists will hate it as will many women who don’t want to serve because it introduces mandatory service for women.
* Right wingers will hate it because you are expanding civil service and increased costs
* Centrists will hate it because it will cost more money and you are doubling the population not participating in the workforce and also increased costs.
* Leftist will hate it because mandatory military service is still not optional because the Army will still get priority and require 140,000 people. Also most of them want to get rid of mandatory service completely, not expand it.
People voting yes likely did so in order to send the message about equality, which is fair enough… but the initiative was written to basically maximise the number of people that would hate it.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but it is so incompetently written and out of touch with reality that I genuinely cannot rule out that this was done on purpose and the proposal was malicious to begin with, in order to sabotage any votes regarding this in the future.
As the saying goes: *”a pensar male si fa peccato ma spesso ci si indovina”*
This was not, I repeat, this was **not** a vote about “equality”. This was a hideous attempt to remove conscription by making that “equal” choice a… well, a choice. No more mandatory military service for **anyone**.
If it was about *actual* equality vs armed service, I’d be the first to sign the initiative.