Shouldn't women have to register for Selective Service in the US?

Since the pentagon has opened up front-line combat roles to women, should the requirement to register for Selective Service (the draft) still only be required for males? There's no longer much limitation on the part of women to support the military in a time of war so it would seem logical to make them closer to equality by also requiring they register for Selective Service, just like males, when they turn 18 (by year 2016).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...omen-expected-on-front-lines-by-2016/2434911/

I am not aware of any current DoD action to change this policy, but with the most recent changes to enable women to fulfill nearly any military role, it seems logical that they also carry the responsibility to enroll in the Selective Service. To do so would require Congress to amend the law.

Thoughts? I ask because my son got his notification letter yesterday and wondered why it only applies to men. I didn't have a valid reason now that women and men are as equal as ever before in the military.

 

.
I was drafted in 1966. I learned firsthand that the draft is not only the stripping away of a man's so-called inalienable human rights, but a death sentence for many..

Women of course, are a special group that actually has "rights" and will NEVER, EVER be drafted, without loopholes to ensure they will never have to do anything they don't want to.

.

 

It just seems since they have fought so hard to be equal and within the military they have made strides to get into many combat roles, why not also allow them to equally be drafted in the event we need to call large numbers to serve? I know what you're saying, but with equality such a big topic it should apply to the bad as equally as the good.

 

Yes.

If women had to share the burden of combat, I bet we would be a lot less likely to go to war in the first place.

 

Women should be required to register for selective service also.

 

Just another case of "equality" meaning that some are more equal than others.

 

.Actually, all men should be given a pass the next time the draft rolls around...as reparations for the millions of men whose inalienable rights were alienated(?).

'

 

Uh, if you had women for head of state in every country, there probably wouldnt be any wars to go to.

 

You're kidding right? If we had a woman for head of state - we'd be fighting wars every time a new "Twilight" movie comes out over whether or not "Edward" or "Jacob" was cuter

PMS and the launch code to a nuclear arsenal don't mix

 

You don't think much of women, do you, does this include your mother?

I never had PMS.

 

I think that personality-wise women are more prone to violence and conflict than men are - the reason most domestic violence takes place against women, is because men are physically stronger - but I believe if the opposite was true (ex. women were physically stronger than men in general) then the rates would go higher.

Sure men kill themselves in wars, but not many men send Selena Gomez death threats online for dating Justin Bieber (a true story). Men have a higher threshold of tolerance before they become uncontrollably angry, women tend to be more emotionally-driven (and most violence is an emotional reaction)

 

Oh, I see, you aren't being serious, thanks, I will move on.

Check you stats, most violent crimes and acts of terrorism are ommitted by young males.

 

Reverse the physical profiles (ex. if women were the physically stronger sex), and the rates would be much higher. A male physique with a female brain would be a ticking time bomb

 

You might be right. Since there is a movement within feminism to abort male children with the intent of reducing the percentage of males to less than 10%, and women, generally, are not fond of dirty dangerous work, like soldering, there is the possibility you may be right. If there aren't enough men to do the dirty dangerous work of soldering as a result of selective abortions, it might mean the end of war. Of course, selective abortion of males and the dirty dangerous work they do would also mean the end of a lot of things like the food you eat, the house you live in, the cars and planes you drive and fly in ec cetera...

A disproportionate share of fatal work injuries involved men relative to their hours worked in 2012. 92% of workplace deaths were men in 2012.
Source for the number of workplace deaths of men in 2012:
http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshcfoi1.htm
http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0011.pdf

 

Absolutely! And there should also be more social pressure for women to serve their communities just as men have over the last 100,000 years. If you want equal rights to the booty, you should also have equal repsonsability to fight and protect it. That includes women in the police force, fire fighters, front line military jobs, construction, infrastructure work.... It is about time that women walk the walk and contribute instead of push themselves into the front of the line to get at the gravy jobs. If you want access to the riches of this country, it would be nice if some of you could actually contribute in a meaningful way first. Men have been building communities and protecting them for centuries, woman up and contribute.

 

As we saw with Margeret Thatcher.

 

Maybe you're on to something. Feminist believe white men should be punished for things other white men did before they were born, often looong before they were born,
so you would think Feminists must be for punishing women for something other women did not do long before they were born-right???

surely...right???

 

I agree. Now that women can go into combat roles, there is not much reason to limit selective service to just men. In fact, we should open it to women, and make it voluntary, rather than mandatory. Since you have to register for selective service to get student loans, it makes sense to me that should just be open to people who volunteer to be drafted.

 

Women can physically do 90% of military occupations. There's no reason why they should not be included with males in registering for selective service. Obviously don't put them in infantry units, but as the infantry only comprises 1 in 10 of Army personnel. They can certainly do 9 in 10 of the occupations offered.

 

Supremely illogical. The incidence of men who bash rape and kill women IS emotionally driven. Yet here you claim men have a higher threshold of tolerance... before they become uncontrollably angry... what utter rot. Look at statistics for the preponderance of violence perpetrated on women by raging uncontrollable men who lose the plot because they have NO control of their emotions. You really talk a lot of rot.

The stereotype of emotionally-driven women is a myth. Look no further than horrific crimes perpetrated by men to see the extent of emotions that are out of control and where these men have NO control of their emotions. I can't believe anyone would still peddle this nonsense of women's emotionality in 2013.

 

So should women be drafted?
'

 

Absolutely, if there is ever a draft again. Women have proven their value and effectiveness in so many fields, the military included. They fought hard to overcome stereotypes and are now reaping the benefits of that hard work. Because they even fight in combat roles, there's not much justification for drafting only men these days.

 

Nobody should be drafted or have to register for selective service. If enough people won't volunteer to fight in a conflict then the US has no business being in that conflict.

That said, IF you are going to have a selective service then women should be included.

 

.
Sure but let's hear it from the ladies

 

Women are more emotionally driven and prone to petty violence or conflict (men get violent over serious issues, women get violent over "which Twilight character is hotter" or whether or not 'her bestie was talking to her ex') - like I pointed out the reason for the disproportionate statistics is that men are physically stronger, and therefore more capable of violence. Be honest, how many times have you seen a group of men beating the crap out of each other over whether or not Megan Fox is 'cuter' than Anne Hathaway?

If the physical profiles were reversed (ex. women were the physically stronger sex), then the rates of domestic violence against men would be much higher than they currently are against women.


Relatively speaking, men are "Mr. Rogers" armed with an AR15 - women are "Hannibal Lector" armed with a peashooter. But swap the weapons, and who'd be more dangerous?