Avatar feed
Responses: 15
LTC Professor Of Military Science / Department Chair
8
8
0
This shouldn't even be up for debate - women should be required to register for selective service, just as their male counterparts have to do. That is until congress deems Selective Service outdated and does away with it...which I don't see happening anytime soon.
(8)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Mark Saffell
6
6
0
Funny. They want the part they want but don't want the other part. Too bad. equal means equal in all aspects.
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CSM Battalion Command Sergeant Major
5
5
0
I thought "equality" was the goal here?
(5)
Comment
(0)
SPC Information Technology (It)
SPC (Join to see)
9 y
CSM, they only want equality on things that benefit only women.
(1)
Reply
(0)
CPT Multifunctional Logistician
CPT (Join to see)
9 y
CSM (Join to see), the goal should be to let fully-qualified people perform combat arms jobs. The average woman is not built to be a successful infantry Soldier. I see no benefit to our country to send young women to their deaths en masse. It seems cowardly on the part of American men. (I personally hope to change branches to combat arms, but I do not represent the "average woman" in terms of fitness.)
(0)
Reply
(0)
CSM Battalion Command Sergeant Major
CSM (Join to see)
9 y
Fair enough, but what about the 18 year old "hipster" dude in Seattle who has no urge, and even less physical ability, to be a combat arms Soldier or any kind of Soldier? Should he be able to "opt out" of selective service because he lacks the physical ability AND just happens to be male? Your physical abilities are apparently greater than your female peers, and I would suspect better than some of your male counterparts. Shouldn't the conversation instead be, "Should we still have a selective service program and registration for the draft"? How is it "cowardly" on the part of American men to say that if we are truly shooting for equality we want everybody to be treated equally? Remember that equality and fairness in advancement were the reasons the policy was changed in the first place; it certainly wasn't changed because we had a shortage of men in combat arms.

Look, I'm all for people having the opportunity to do whatever they are capable of. We have, in this battalion, one of the first women to try to go to Ranger School. She was not selected for attendance at the end of the process, and she is currently applying to go back and try it again. She can physically perform better than many of her male counterparts and is a fantastic young officer.

The only "problem" with women serving in combat arms is leadership. Too many leaders may approach the idea with preconceived notions that they will be sub-standard performers. That is idiotic when we consider that if we hold everybody to the same standard and expect high results we will generally get those high standards.

My experience has been that if you treat a Soldier like a Soldier they will perform regardless of their gender.

I'm all for women serving in any capacity that they are capable of. I just think that if we are going force males into selective service the same rule has to apply to females.
(2)
Reply
(0)
CSM Battalion Command Sergeant Major
CSM (Join to see)
9 y
4aaf40b4
Based on this poll it may be required. It seems people want to remain safe, but not help provide that safety.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close