Why are women excluded from selective service registration?

Question

In this country women can vote, run for president, join the army, receive equal federal benefits for school under Title IX yet only men have the responsibility of defending the country. Should not equal rights come with equal responsibility?

Answer 1

Absolutely. When I was younger it made me furious that the government made my brother register, but could care less if I did.

Either we should all have to register, or none of us should.




Maybe I don't have the physical ability to be in the infantry or front lines, but I can damn sure fly a fighter jet or drive a tank as well as any man.

Answer 2

Some of these answers are hilarious. It seems feminists are in favor of putting women on the front lines and subject to selective service, it just isn't quite as important as special rights and privileges like equal pay for less work.

If the women protesting for the right to vote had the fortitude of today's feminist, women would never have been given the right to vote.

Women will never make an effort to gain the less pleasant parts of equality. They will never freely give up the monopoly on reproduction rights and they will never fight to be truly equal. The best that can be expected of feminism is to fight for special rights and less responsibility, which is, after all, the answer to the question.

Answer 3

I remember when this was being debated in the early 1980s. The reason women were excluded was because many of the lawmakers felt it would be detrimental to their families (although I wonder why males aren't seen in the same light) and that they might be put into situations where they are in combat. Still, I don't believe anybody should be drafted. People should not be forced to serve in the military if they really don't want to. Part of the reason I feel that way is because I remember the draft during the Vietnam War. The young men who came from privileged families could use their family connections and other loopholes to avoid being put into dangerous situations while those who were poorer were sent anyway. It wasn't fair then and it wouldn't be now if the draft were re-instated.

Answer 4

Second Amendment to the Constitution defining who the Militia is.
It states every able bodied man eighteen years and over is in the Militia. Which simply means like it or not you are in the inactive reverses from the second you turn eighteen of you are an able bodied male.
That given with you are so called drafted what you are actually doing is being called up from the inactive reserves if you are a man.
Note the constitution was specific in stating male or man:

That was one of the big bones of contention when the ERA amendment failed to pass. A lot of women's organizations was against it for that reason. If it had passed then women would also be eligible for the drift or more to the point they'd also been considered Militia and subject to being drafted (called up to active duty).

Also there is the one thing women can do which is impossible for men. That is get pregnant and give birth. The last thing you need in a fire fight is a pregnant woman or women especially if you are getting over run and it had gotten down to hand to hand combat with baynets, K-bars, machetes and E-Tools.

Answer 5

Of course it should...but you're talking about the same military that kicks men out for being gay. Apparently equal rights stop at the frontline for pretty much anyone who isn't a macho heterosexual man.
And equal federal benefits for school? What country are you living in? A black man will get more money for school than a white woman, simply because he's black. That's nowhere near equal.

Answer 6

I totally agree with you on this one. And I'll take it a step farther and say I'm in favor of a draft for both sexes, be it peace time or war. (In peace time there's a lot of bridge building and other pubic works projects that could be done.) I think the exclusion in registration is a hold-over from the past that needs to be corrected. I'm sure if you started a grass roots organization to make this change in society you'd find a lot of support from both sexes. But wait! If you did that then you wouldn't have enough time to post the same redundant questions here at YQ&A. Is the trade off worth it? You be the judge.

Answer 7

I wanted to be a fighter pilot as a kid. I was told "women can't do that because it's the front line and they are not allowed to be on the front lines." That was not long ago and I don't think it has changed.

Women want to join too. If needed I would join and do some BS job for my country.

Answer 8

In a perfect society, yes. In our society, no. If you think preferencial treatment with regards to selective service is unfair, experience the Affirmative Action laws at work. People are given special treatment in college entrance and employment requirements based on race, color and sex. Exactly opposite of what the Constitution says.

Answer 9

To answer your question: sexism, plain and simple. It’s the same reason other countries subject their male citizens to military slavery: It’s supposedly “unmanly” to have better things to do with your life.

Answer 10

It's discrimination, just like not allowing women in the military on the front lines.