War has always been a terrible reality of humanity, which imposes significant obligations on all citizens of the country. It presents society with extremely urgent and difficult dilemmas, in particular regarding the rights and choices of individuals. The question of whether men and women have choices in wartime is complex and multifaceted. It covers legal, social and psychological aspects that are worth analyzing for a better understanding of the situation.
Personal rights of an individual and duties before the state
In the conditions of war, the rights of individuals are often relegated to the background, giving way to collective duties to the state. Every citizen becomes part of a war machine that seeks to ensure survival and victory. On the one hand, the Constitution of Ukraine guarantees basic human rights and freedoms, on the other – martial law and mobilization impose obligations on all citizens.
In wartime, the bodies of citizens are often perceived as property of the state. The state determines where and how people should serve, and what risks they should take. Moreover, men are traditionally perceived as soldiers and defenders, and their bodies as instruments of war. Women, on the other hand, remained out of active military service for a long time, although they performed important auxiliary roles – rear support, medical assistance, volunteering. However, the reality of modern conflicts refuted these stereotypes. Now women are actively involved in active participation in hostilities, they serve in various positions – from medics to riflemen, command units, take part in reconnaissance operations, and often demonstrate great courage and professionalism. However, this raises the issue of protecting their rights, ensuring proper service conditions, because, unfortunately, they often face gender stereotypes and discrimination.
Legal aspects
In wartime, limiting the rights of men and women causes serious problems. The Law of Ukraine “On Military Duty and Military Service” defines mandatory military service for men aged 18 to 60 and voluntary service for women. In addition, the recently passed mobilization law obliges conscripts to update their credentials and provides a number of new restrictions for evasion of military service.
That is, the current legislation limits the right of men and women to personal choice, as the state determines where and how they should serve. Illegal attempts to evade service are punished in accordance with the legislation on administrative offenses and the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which further emphasizes the seriousness of this issue. In the conditions of martial law, Ukrainian men who are subject to mobilization do not have the right to freely travel abroad. This rule was introduced to ensure that there is a sufficient amount of mobilization resource for the defense of the country. In this way, the state controls the movement of citizens, which causes a certain number of men to feel that their freedom is restricted and creates additional psychological pressure.
Therefore, men do not have the right to choose whether to serve in the army or not, to stay in their homeland or go abroad. The state makes the choice for him, and illegal attempts to evade this choice are condemned and prosecuted. In addition, from October 1, 2023, certain categories of Ukrainian women must also register for the military. This decision caused a significant public outcry and prompted a rethinking of the gender roles of men and women during the war.
The rights of men and women during war is an important topic for discussion. International conventions such as the Geneva Conventions protect the rights of military personnel, including the right to humane treatment and protection from torture and ill-treatment. However, in practice, these rights may be violated in conditions of active hostilities. In Ukraine, military personnel have the right to adequate conditions of service, medical care, protection from discrimination and violence. However, these rights are not always enforced.
Socio-psychological aspect
In the conditions of war, considerable psychological pressure is exerted on men and women. Many of them face a difficult dilemma: to stay safe but feel guilty for not helping the state, or to go to the front and risk their lives. On the one hand, protecting the country is a collective duty that requires sacrifices from every citizen. On the other hand, restrictions on personal freedom and coercion to participate in military operations can be considered a violation of basic human rights.
In this case, the question of ethics also arises, which is also very difficult, especially when it comes to evasion of service. Does a person have the right to refuse to participate in war for moral or religious reasons? The answer to this question depends on the legal system and moral standards of society.
The choice to serve or not to serve is often accompanied by social pressure and stigmatization, especially for men who are traditionally seen as protectors. They are accused of treason, cowardice or lack of patriotism. This creates additional pressure and forces many to fulfill their duties, even if they do not personally support participation in the war.
Women who choose to serve may also face prejudice and discrimination. Their motivations and choices are often questioned, and they may face additional challenges in the service.
Liberal or conservative approach?
After the start of the war, most Ukrainian women continued to live in the realities of the liberal XXI century, where the personal rights of the individual come first, and the duties to the country and the nation come second. Now Ukrainian women have the right to choose for themselves – whether to join the Armed Forces, whether to stay in Ukraine, whether to leave for peaceful Europe, whether to adhere to conservative family values, or to refuse to have children, devoting themselves to a career or creativity.
However, the life of most men has undergone significant archaization and has come closer to the realities of the first half of the 20th century, when duties to the country and the nation meant much more than personal rights. However, the conservative approach to the gender role of men is not always harmoniously combined with the modern liberal approach to the role of women. In times when every man was considered a potential soldier, every woman had a certain social function – the birth of new warriors. At the same time, for men, service in the army was an unwavering obligation, and having children was not a woman’s choice, but also her duty. Attempts to abandon this role caused public condemnation, where there was no place for the principle “my body is my personal business”. A healthy female body was considered the property of the country and the nation, just like the body of a conscripted man.
The inability to freely dispose of one’s body is a common world practice. For example, the ban on abortion in Poland seems like an archaic phenomenon that shames this country in front of the civilized world. In 2020, the Constitutional Court of Poland issued a decision that established an almost complete ban on abortion, which caused sharp protests from the liberal part of society. Poland’s new government is trying to steer the country’s laws in a more liberal direction, including relaxing abortion rules, but divisions within the governing coalition are slowing that progress.
Nor could the English women of Churchill’s time or the Finns of Mannerheim’s time legally terminate a pregnancy of their own free will. France went even further in these matters – the laws adopted in the 1920s not only increased the penalties for abortion, but also prohibited the use of contraceptives, as well as their advertising and sale. This was seen as a way to make up for losses after World War I, when France suffered significant human losses. Legalization of contraception was restored in the country only in 1967.
In Nazi Germany, women were encouraged to have as many children as possible. The “Mother of the Cross” policy rewarded women who bore many children to support the Aryan nation. At the same time, abortion was prohibited, and any attempt to terminate a pregnancy was severely punished.
In the USSR, Stalin also introduced a policy aimed at increasing the birth rate. Abortions were outlawed in 1936, and women who attempted them were prosecuted. At the same time, the birth of children was considered the duty of every woman, and mothers with many children received awards and benefits. During the Holodomor of 1932-1933 in Ukraine, caused by the policy of collectivization and repression, millions of Ukrainians died. This led to a significant decrease in the population, and the repressive policy towards the peasants left a deep mark on the demographic structure of Ukraine. Abortion was banned even after the Second World War, as a result of which the state’s population decreased significantly. The total losses of the military and the civilian population during the war, according to various sources, range from 50 to 75 million people. Of them, approximately 8 to 10 million are Ukrainians, which is almost a quarter of the entire population of Ukraine at that time.
On the other hand, at the end of the 20th century, China introduced the one-child policy, which lasted from 1979 to 2015. It was a coercive government policy aimed at limiting the birth rate to control overpopulation. Women who violated this policy faced severe fines and other sanctions.
Currently, the war in Ukraine has led to a demographic catastrophe, and the birth of children has become no less important for the country than the defense of independence with weapons in hand. But when proponents of harsh methods talk about Ukraine becoming a large military camp for decades, they often ignore the archaism of women’s gender roles.
In 2023, a scandalous statement by the former adviser to the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the executive director of the “Ukrainian Institute of the Future” Vadym Denysenko, whose son, by the way, lives abroad, caused a great resonance. Denysenko proposed to ban men from leaving the country for 3 years after the war. Such a proposal contradicts not only liberal values, but also elementary logic, because it is obvious that the continuation of the ban on the departure of men will not solve the country’s demographic problems. Women are also needed to give birth to children, but Denysenko did not dare to announce the closing of borders for them.
In addition, in the midst of a war, social media proposals often appear among politicians and ordinary citizens to limit the civil rights of men who did not fight after the war. In such a case, illiberal calls for the deprivation of civil rights and childless women, who also do not contribute sufficiently to the national cause, will not be surprising.
One of the intrigues of the war in Ukraine is how durable liberal inertia will prove to be. Will Overton’s conservative windows widen? Will modern archaism affect the customs of millions of Ukrainian men and women? Our future depends on the answer to these questions.
If liberal values of the 21st century prevail, Ukrainian men and women will retain their current status, and no one will encroach on their personal rights. However, there is a high probability that after the war the state will save the demographic situation due to migration from Asian and African countries. But in this case, we will have to forget about the mononational and monocultural Ukraine of the future. We will have to come to terms with the fact that our country is inhabited by people of different ethnic origins and religious views.
At the same time, if the conservative approach of the first half of the 20th century prevails, strict restrictions will affect not only Ukrainian men, but also Ukrainian women. Then in Ukraine they can try to ban abortions and make access to contraceptives as difficult as possible, referring to the historical experience and examples of other countries. In this case, female childlessness will be subject to the same stigma as male evasion of service, and the philosophy of childfree (conscious childlessness) can be equated with national treason. At the moment, such a scenario seems fantastic, but one should not forget that a few years ago, the war, general mobilization and the closing of borders for Ukrainian citizens also looked like nonsense.
Thus, war and gender are complex and interrelated issues that require an intelligent approach. In the conditions of a military conflict, the rights of individuals are often limited in favor of the collective needs of the state, which poses difficult dilemmas for society. The role of men and women is changing, but the main problems remain relevant: how to ensure equal rights and conditions for all, how to find a balance between individual rights and state duties, how to fight gender stereotypes. Ukraine and other countries of the world are gradually moving towards a more equal society, but this path is long and difficult. In this case, a balance should be found between the need to ensure national security and the protection of the rights of its citizens.
