Why are women not required to register for selective service like men are?
2007-01-17 02:01:00 · 19 answers · asked by Egghead 4 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Draecoiram, thank you for those links.
2007-01-17 03:58:33 · update #1
wendy g - I was thinking that the Swiss (in addition to the Israelis) also had cumpulsory military service for both sexes, but I may be mistaken about that.
2007-01-17 16:10:30 · update #2
The same reason women are not "allowed" to fight on the front lines...because we are supposed to be the weaker sex? Honestly, I don't know, either. But I think we should be required, we should fight on the front lines, and we should be drafted (if one is ever reinstated). The only problem I can see would be with couples who have children and BOTH are drafted. I think in this case, the couple should decide who should stay with the child/children, and a petition filed for that person to stay. Otherwise, in times of war, the orphan rate would be astronomical, and a huge burden on the state (and we all know the state just can't have that).
The Israeli army has compulsory service requirements for both men and women (it is the only one in the world) and it has been that way since it was formed in 1948. So far, their army hasn't fallen apart because the men are too "distracted" or because women are dropping their guns and shooting their fellow soldiers. Israel has one of the best trained armies in the world.
2007-01-17 08:45:25 · answer #1 · answered by wendy g 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It goes to the idea that women in a fighting unit will divert the men's attention away from the battle. Instead of watching for the enemy and protecting himself, the men in a unit will be more likely to be looking after the women, making sure they are OK and out of danger.
Of course this rationale is tossed out the window now that girls are allowed into combat units, but the premise is still valid. Men still look after women. You are fighting 200,000 years of evolution, in which we protected our females.
The only realistic way to get around unit deterioration and to still allow women in combat is the segregate the army. We already segregate boot camp into all male and all female units, this practice should continue with combat units. 100% male, 100% female.
2007-01-17 06:23:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most feminists if handed a rifle and back pack and instructed to climb in the fox hole would try to renig and get out of it.
Personally, I would not my wife or daughter drafted and sent to war.
And also, Women just do not belong in the fox hole fighting wars with the men.
Even in the Bible the women stayed home and the men went to do battle.
Some say the men make the wars. When you are attacked as in most of our wars, sometimes war becomes necessary.
As in the war at present.
How to you talk and reason with people who are inhuman, consider us infidels, their only alternative is to bury you for no other reason, you do not believe as you do.
The Muslims claim that is not so.
Well, you take a Bible and go to their country and tell them that Jesus is their savior and see how much they respect you.
Come to think of it. That could be said about America to. How sad.
2007-01-17 05:01:25 · answer #3 · answered by smially 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
why? so it receives rid of haram needs! and its not basically directed to females its also directed to adult men as well to diminish there gaze! If Imams concentration on females so what? unfortunatly females lose there modesty so there is not something incorrect with the Imams or students specializing in us basically ability they care and love us for the sake of Allah and decide us to stay far flung from haram issues which will end us up in hell!
2016-10-17 01:52:42 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We still have a double standard and sexist society about that and also maybe because if two people are parents of a child, I guess they want that child to have at least one living parent and not lose both of them.
2007-01-17 16:01:58 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because when the Draft was made most women were at home raising the kids and didn't know anything about war and the army.
2007-01-17 03:33:14 · answer #6 · answered by robedzombiesoul 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who would watch the kids? Most men would not want women to have to go to war, they would take their place for them in a heartbeat. Most of the men I know anyways.
2007-01-17 02:04:49 · answer #7 · answered by pearl28 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I've heard rumours that they will have to register in the near future.
2007-01-17 09:00:11 · answer #8 · answered by Terry Z 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because in the USA, women can't be drafted.
This thinking probably stems back to the need for self-preservation. To preserve our way of life and our "clan," the women must survive and procreate. You cannot run the risk of having all of your "breeding age" women killed in a war.
Archaic? Perhaps, but still a valid idea.
2007-01-17 02:04:04 · answer #9 · answered by kja63 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Women around live amunition is not a good idea. Also women are no good as fighters, it has been tried over and over, the most recent exampel on a large scale is the use of women against the Nazis in Stalingrad. If even Stalin refrained from sending women (somone who was of the opinion that mother Russia had waay to many children) that means they werent worth the supplies they ate up (as fighters).
2007-01-17 03:03:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋