Gender Equality and Selective Service

© 2023 Niki Christine. All Rights Reserved.

DISCLAIMER 

As this paper was inspired by common conservative arguments regarding women, feminism, and gender equality, it is written in the format of a non-nuanced, traditionally conservative understanding of gender and individuality. I recognize the complexity of this discussion in the light of more modern gender terminology, however, this paper will not explore these aspects in order to avoid topic convolution. 
​

While this paper does address the general, traditionally conservative, and historical concepts of a woman’s social role and responsibilities, is it important to not reduce the argument to solely generalizations and stereotypes. As women and men are multifaceted, complex beings, typical roles and abilities are heavily influenced by one’s individuality, in addition to the impacts of gender-specific socialization. Additionally, gender terminology, the understanding of gender, and the exploration of gender have greatly advanced over the decades following the last U.S. draft in 1973. Therefore, both men and women have come to inhabit, understand, and re-develop their social roles and expectations as a result, potentially even creating a new set of gender stereotypes entirely. As gender continues to progress, reconstruct, and evolve, the typical social responsibilities of men and women shift. However, as this calls for a further, nuanced discussion of its own, this paper serves to focus on the philosophical concepts regarding historical gender roles, drafts, gender equality, and the value of different forms of labor required during a draft.

Introduction

When discussing gender equality and the social, as well as political, expectations of men and women, naturally discussions regarding selective service occur- as it is a political structure that highlights a long existing, and current system built upon gender division and roles. As women are not required to enlist in selective service, arguments regarding gender equality and impartiality bring forth claims that this enlistment is necessary to ensure fairness. This claim, as a result, proposes questions regarding women’s military capabilities- both past and present- as well as the value of the roles women have played in past drafts, such as providing child care. This paper serves to address these questions and shed light upon the valuable roles, and necessary acts of labor, women have historically fulfilled and provided during drafts.


Women in Military - Past and Present

In discussions regarding the advancements and arguments of feminism, the retort that women must be signed up for selective service, in the name of gender equality, is not uncommon. For women to receive opportunities equal to men they must earn it by putting themselves forward to experience the exact political circumstances of men. This logic naturally assumes that there is no inherent quality within either men or women which creates superiority, but rather the political and social commitments they are bound to. While one may refer to the outdated notion that men are of greater physical capability and thus the necessary individuals to promote successful service, the documented role women have played in military history negates this idea. Women have demonstrated the capability to successfully serve over the course of the past 200 years, finding ways to serve even in times when enlisting as a woman was illegal (DeSimone, Danielle). Through this, women have depicted a particularly unique devotion, capability of intellect, and physical strength that has benefited the United States military and population. Whether it was through mending clothes, tending to wounds as a nurse, growing crops, performing door-to-door campaigning, and more- women have continually put themselves forward to serve and provide aid however they could despite legal limitations (DeSimone, Danielle). Women have opted to participate in service in times they were legally prevented from officially enlisting, thus highlighting the historical commitment of women to serve. In addition to this, women in history have consistently been subjected to lesser education, therefore any arguments regarding the breadth of a woman's capability during this time are faulted by the fact their judgment is based on intellectually and physically oppressed women. Consequently, the argument that women are not physically or intellectually capable of serving to the same degree is a moot point- as they have been doing so for centuries despite discriminatorily not being afforded the same legal opportunity. Instead, women were serving, voluntarily, without the privilege of voting or having a political voice regarding the state of the nation, especially during war.

However, if the capability of women within the military in contrast to men is further pushed, one may argue that the services women perform are not of the same value to the military as that which men perform. When discussing this, it would likely be pointing back to time periods when women were not legally able to enlist or were limited in the roles they were able to play due to gender restrictions, as this was when women were not given the opportunity to develop or demonstrate the full extent of capability in roles men had historically occupied. Despite being granted legal opportunity to enlist in 1948, a range of jobs continued to remain banned from women. The Risk Rule of 1988 enforced this, stating that women would be excluded from “non-combat units or missions if the risk of exposure to direct combat, hostile fire or capture were equal to or greater than the risk in the units they supported” (“The Risk Rule.”). It was not until 1994 that this rule was rescinded by Defense Secretary Les Aspin, who stated that service members are eligible to be assigned to any position in which they qualify (“The Risk Rule.”). However, this rescission did not lift the ban on women in combat, as it also stated that “women shall be excluded from assignment to units below the brigade level whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground” (“The Risk Rule.”). This means that women, though now afforded the legal opportunity to list and serve in a variety of military positions, still remained discriminated against due to gender.

Furthermore, this discrimination lived on for two decades following the Risk Rule repeal. It was not until 2015 that the ban on women in combat roles was lifted, thus granting women the greatest sense of military equality yet (Moore, Emma). However, when discussing women now filling previously dominated combat roles, a comparison between the two sexes in performance would be unfair. As it has been less than a decade since women have been allowed to enter these positions, the precedence of their male counterparts must be accounted for. Nevertheless, it is worth acknowledging that, despite the institutional and cultural barriers, “women are achieving greater seniority and leadership across the services” (Moore, Emma). Even further, gaining equal military opportunity has only led to a growing trend of women enlisting to serve, thus proving that the responsibility of serving does not inhibit women from participating at their own will (U.S. Department of Defense). Taking into consideration the growing trend of women enlisting alongside equal position opportunities, it is clear that women are devoted to serving. Additionally, as women continue to demonstrate success in these male-dominated positions, the notion that women are less capable becomes outdated. Furthermore, their willingness to take on combat roles, and their demonstrated success, naturally indicate that nonmilitary women would be just as capable to perform in the case of a draft as their nonmilitary male counterparts, as neither have a military background but both genders have documented research regarding their success within the military Consequently, this signifies that women are capable of profitably fulfilling a variety of military roles and have done so for centuries despite their unequal status and opportunities. Therefore, the question of whether or not women are willing to serve in dangerous, and urgent military circumstances becomes redundant.


Ascribing Value to Labor

However, the claim that women must be drafted in order to be considered equal raises a range of questions regarding value. Value of a person, jobs, skills, and more must then be assessed- as referring to the draft as a form of women participating equally negates the roles they are traditionally referenced to have played in the past, and supposedly would play now should a draft occur today. Again, this paper is addressing the typical, traditionally conservative argument that is often referring to the notion of women staying home during a draft to care for a household, raise children, etc. If not a mother or wife, then to care for herself- which would have been a worthy challenge itself for women during past drafted wars, as they resided within a culture that tethered a woman's livelihood and value to a man. In each of these situations, there is a particular and unique burden placed upon women that is inherently erased by claiming that equality is deserved only if they extend past this burden. For the sake of remaining concise, I will narrow down the vast responsibilities women endured during a draft, with a particular focus on mothers and the duties of motherhood.

Mothers are synonymous with the creation of life. Without a womb, mankind would cease or continue to exist, therefore the ability to sustain procreation is one of the, if not, highest valued abilities- an ability reserved for women only. A successful pregnancy is a necessity for the longevity of mankind, and should a draft occur- there must be policies in place that protect pregnant women. Therefore, all blanket retorts which claim that women should be drafted to successfully achieve gender equality are ill-devised, unconvincing, and unrealistic. If this argument is made, then it should be quickly followed by an understanding of the absolutely vital role that women play in the sustainment of mankind. Furthermore, while it has been established that women can perform military roles with the same efficacy as a man, men cannot perform the same life-sustaining action as women. In addition to giving birth, women are an absolute necessity to a child's life for no less than six months post-birth, though it is encouraged for a mother to breastfeed their children for up to a year- “as the longer a child is breastfed the greater the protection from certain illnesses and long term diseases” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Consequently, mothers cannot, and should not, leave their child at the will of a draft and its unpredictability. However, if a woman must, then policies and solutions must be considered regarding the feeding of these newborn children, whether it be through the form of formula, or other. Moreover, suggesting that women be drafted, though not completely unreasonable, is a conversation far beyond the depths of underdeveloped ideas which rely solely on the simple notion that it is unfair that women are not. Additionally, this innately brings into question the value of different roles and labors necessary for a successfully functioning society. This includes the role of sustaining a steady population. As a draft would imply a severe war, the population decrease would be significant as a result of the inevitable many deaths within both military and civil populations. Furthermore, increasing the likelihood of women dying during this time is irrational, as it is the lives that they can create and sustain which will help avoid a seriously negative consequence of population decline and deprivation.

Additionally, this discussion must acknowledge the inarguable and consistent demands of child care. If women are to be drafted, there must be policies in place to ensure that there will be a guardian remaining to care for a child, should it not be the mother. Furthermore, even as children grow and eventually no longer rely on breastmilk, or formula, to survive, daily caretaking remains. Nevertheless, proposing that women be drafted on behalf of equality is not inherently problematic, however, it does require a proper social assessment of the traditionally ascribed social roles, and, in some regards, active resocialization. Furthermore, the ability and preparedness of men to care for a child emotionally, physically, and intellectually- in addition to maintaining a household- must be considered, as these responsibilities have historically fallen on women. As of 2021, research has shown that women, on average, are more likely to take on and care more for household activities, and spend more time than men providing childcare (USA Facts). The expectation of women to do the majority of the work necessary to raise a child(s) has been a cultural norm for thousands of years. This is often followed by the argument that women are the weaker sex, and thus best capable of birthing and taking on the role of child care rather than pursuing any intellectual or creative social/political roles. Consequently, women have long endured the social expectation of managing the responsibilities of domestic labor, therefore women are more likely to be prepared and capable of tending to children and maintaining a household, than their male counterparts. However, this is not to say that men are incapable but to acknowledge that it is unlikely they have been, or currently are, as capable or prepared to manage this role in comparison to their female counterparts- who have been socialized for thousands of years to bear the burden of domestic care with little, to no help from men. If a draft were to occur, it is a non-negotiable fact that there must be a parent or guardian who remains home to care for a child(s), thus leading to the natural question of who would be best prepared. Based on the current statistics regarding caretaking for children, women will be most capable. However, as stated earlier, it is not necessarily wrong to draft women- it would simply require significant thought and subsequent policies to successfully create a system that drafts all individuals without causing further social breakdown and chaos.

​Moreover, as it is well known that child-care and domestic labor has been a woman’s responsibility and expectation during war times, the argument that women should be drafted- despite the necessary labor they provided by raising children during these times- raises questions of value. Knowing that it is women who cared for and raised children during drafts, calling for them to be drafted inherently creates a labor vacuum. The demand for child care will remain, but those historically responsible for it would no longer be a reliable source for fulfilling the role- as they would also be at the will of selective service demands. Moreover, this idea ignores the necessary labor women have managed and delivered during a draft. Raising and caring for children is an essential role that women fulfilled during draft times, and claiming that they must be signed up for selective service to be equal assumes that the act of serving is inherently more valuable than the act of raising children. However, if a draft occurs and service is demanded, sufficient child care will be of equal demand as parents are pulled away from their homes- a demand that has been fulfilled by women. This is a form of labor that must be fulfilled, just as the draft demands the act of service is fulfilled, therefore it appears irrational to place a higher value upon one role over the other. Both of these roles become of equal value, as they are, and would be, inarguable social demands. Considering that the alternative is child neglect, placing a higher value on selective service creates a slippery slope regarding societal and familial values. The logic behind demanding women be drafted, in the name of gender equality, naturally creates the assumption that the role women have played in past drafts is not of equal necessity or value. As a result, she must increase the value of her actions during emergency war times and serve- despite the fact that the expectation of child care and household labor would likely remain within a woman’s social expectation. When discussing women being drafted as a requirement of equality, it is important to consider the requirement of child care, and the demand for childcare the draft inherently creates. This is in addition to calling into question the modern preparedness and capability of men to perform domestic duties to the same degree as women, in light of the continuously sexist and misogynistic socialization and culture.

Furthermore, suggesting that women must perform more labor, such as the labor of serving, for the balance beams of gender to fall equally suggests that policies have been written to favor women by giving them easier, lesser-valued roles. Moreover, it proposes it is this legislation, written to seemingly benefit women, that must be dismantled to break down the barriers preventing complete equality. However, it has been men who have historically written the policies regarding women's rights, including a woman’s legal participation and potential job roles within the military. Furthermore, claiming that women must be drafted to be equal only serves to highlight that it is men who have granted women abstinence from being drafted, and it is women who remain at the mercy of men to dismantle these misogynistic policies and promote greater gender equality- considering that men continue to fill the majority of political and legislative roles. To not draft women was a decision made by men, furthermore, the complaint that it is unfair that women not be drafted, often made by men, only serves to highlight the faults and illogical systems that have been perpetuated as a result of a misogynistic culture. The burden to fix this supposed inequality does not reside with the oppressed, but the oppressor- which has been, and continues to be, men.

Conclusion

Men have unequally placed the responsibility of domestic labor upon women, and therefore remain less adequate at the skill of caring for children and running a household. As misogynistic narratives continue to perpetuate this sexist phenomenon, it appears illogical for such a misogynistic system to recommend the practice of drafting women, as this would partially place the expectations of domestic labor on men, as well- a responsibility they have historically denounced and neglected. However, if this is to be the case, the conversation surrounding drafting women requires an in-depth analysis of the value that is childcare, and the ability of men to perform childcare and household duties to the same degree as women, should an emergency draft occur.







Work Cited

“Department of Defense Releases Annual Demographics Report - Upward Trend in Number of Women.” U.S. Department of Defense,
www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3246268/department-of-defense-releases-annual-demographics-report-upward-trend-in-numbe/. Accessed 24 July 2023.

DeSimone, Danielle. “Over 200 Years of Service: The History of Women in the U.S. Military.” United Service Organizations, 28 Feb. 2023, www.uso.org/stories/3005-over-200-years-of-service-the-history-of-women-in-the-us-military.
​
“Frequently Asked Questions (Faqs).” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4 Aug. 2022, www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/faq/index.htm#:~:text=Top%20of%20Page-,How%20long%20should%20a%20mother%20breastfeed%3F,12%20months%20old%20or%20older.

“How Do Men and Women Use Time Differently?” USAFacts, 18 Oct. 2022, usafacts.org/articles/how-do-men-and-women-use-time-differently/#:~:text=How%20much%20time%20do%20men,caring%20for%20children%20than%20men.

Moore, Emma. “Women in Combat: Five-Year Status Update.” Center for a New American Security (En-US), www.cnas.org/publications/commentary/women-in-combat-five-year-status-update. Accessed 24 July 2023.

“The Risk Rule.” The New York Times, 16 Aug. 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/16womenbox.html.