Women in combat II: Auntie Sam wants you

[EgonSpengler]

A U.S. Federal judge in Texas has ruled that our men-only system of selective service (aka "The Draft", even though we haven't had a draft in a long time) violates the US Constitution's equal protections clause of the 14th Amendment.

The New York Times, 24 February 2019, "Drafting Only Men for the Military is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules"

Judge Gray H. Miller of Federal District Court in the Southern District of Texas took note of the Supreme Court’s 1981 ruling that the exclusion of women from the draft was “fully justified” because women then were not allowed to serve in combat. But the Pentagon abolished those restrictions in 2015, opening the way for women to serve in any military role for which they could qualify.

“While historical restrictions on women in the military may have justified past discrimination, men and women are now ‘similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft,’” Judge Miller wrote in his ruling. “If there ever was a time to discuss ‘the place of women in the Armed Services,’ that time has passed.”

This isn't a term of national service like you see in some countries, this is strictly about a military draft, which we haven't seen since the Vietnam War. It could be argued that this is all moot, because we're terribly unlikely to have another military draft for anybody of any gender. Personally, I don't have any problem with this; I'm not sure I can imagine a plausible scenario where a draft would even be necessary, and I'm not sure what a force of hastily-trained, conscripted troops would provide in any likely 21st-Century conflict. And is it too cynical to wonder if the American people might be more circumspect about going to war if they knew their 18-year-old girls would be at risk?

Anyway, this decision doesn't instantaneously rewrite the draft laws, and the way government moves, it may take a while even if there's general agreement. Some of my colleagues have girls, ages 10, 5 and 2, iirc; I'm curious what their reactions to this will be.

 

[Phrossack]

If there is a draft, it makes sense not to discriminate.

But I have my doubts a draft will ever be used again here. It's unpopular, it fills the military with troops who are often worse than useless, and frankly the average American is in such poor physical shape that they're not worth recruiting.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If there is a draft, it makes sense not to discriminate.

But I have my doubts a draft will ever be used again here. It's unpopular, it fills the military with troops who are often worse than useless, and frankly the average American is in such poor physical shape that they're not worth recruiting.

When you are young the application of external discipline in a workout program can overcome the poor physical shape pretty readily.

In a time of economic unrest the draft is a convenient way to get the most likely sources of trouble off the streets. Adding young females might be fair, but it dilutes that purpose. I'm not opposed, since I don't support that purpose.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

And is it too cynical to wonder if the American people might be more circumspect about going to war if they knew their 18-year-old girls would be at risk?

It's a sensible thing to wonder. After all, one of the reasons women weren't allowed in combat before was because they would be the ones to replenish the country's population after the war's conclusion, to replace the people who had died. Dead women don't have babies.

Also, in the two World Wars, women were expected to run the family home or farm, and of course there were many who stepped into the jobs traditionally held by men, while the men were off fighting. It does help to have a functioning society to come home to.