So, while I was doing some of my reading today, I came across an interesting article that will make life a little more interesting for the young women that I know [1]. By law, all American men between the ages of 18 and 25 have to register with the Selective Service (even if they do so as a conscientious objector), but up to now women have been exempt from this because they were not allowed in combat roles. Since women have now been accepted for combat roles, it would appear that various legal principles would require that all women now undertake the same responsibility that men do and register with selective service in some fashion, now that the military is planning on making no distinction by gender in terms of the roles and responsibilities of (potential) soldiers.

Some people have taken this announcement with a great deal of panic and assumed that women will now be potentially subject to a draft. However, I think that to be somewhat unlikely, for a variety of reasons. For one, the United States is not really in the financial state to increase the size of the military or even to preserve such military strength as we currently possess. We are in, and will continue to be in, a period of retrenchment for the foreseeable future, which means that cutbacks rather than an increase in size are to be expected for some time. Likewise, the fact that women are now considered suitable for combat roles means that even more people are likely to be drafted. In previous generations, it was considered proper for women to send white feathers to those men who refused to sign up for combat, as a sign that they were cowardly. Now, with women being subject to the same potential treatment, it seems unlikely that they would be so bloodthirsty themselves, as they might receive their own white feathers in their turn.

As a military historian, one of the more fascinating aspects of military history is the way in which the womenfolk of a given nation or culture encourage the behavior of men. Men, in general, are drawn to activities that receive the praise and adoration of young ladies. Even for those many centuries in which women were highly discouraged from warfare, if not outright forbidden, the role of women in endorsing military service as an attractive and eligible form of service for one’s country was a considerable enducement in many cultures (like the American South and France, and Imperial Great Britain, to name but a few). If a uniform and a big gun attracts a lovely maiden as a potential partner, there will be a large supply of men willing to receive that attention and affection. Whether this particular phenomenon will change in the future as women become subject to the same dangers of combat remains to be seen. I would be curious to hear comments from young women in particular about this point, and what they think of the likelihood of having to register for Selective Service themselves.

Again, I think it unlikely that women (or men) are likely to be drafted for military service in the near future. Obviously, if our own internal cultural divisions become more severe and end up in civil dischord, my opinion would change. But for the moment, I think that a desire to lower the expenses of foreign combat is likely to mean that both men and women in the military are likely to be involved in logistics and support functions for the militaries of others in relatively small numbers, as has been the case in Libya, Mali, Syria, Uganda, and Niger over the past year. So, to the young women who read this blog, I ask: what do you think about the growth of women in combat roles? Do you think it is a good or a bad thing? Do you like the fact that you may very soon have to register for the Selective Service like men have for decades? Does the potential of being placed in a combat role change your perception of the courage or cowardliness of men in combat in times of war?

[1] http://news.yahoo.com/listen-ladies-uncle-sam-might-want-too-081223505.html