You are conflating two different things: registering with the Selective Services is not the same thing as being sent into combat. Not even close. I’m at a loss to understand why my daughter wasn’t required to so register while my sons must.
Surely you know the US eliminated the draft and created an all volunteer military? Happened in the 70s. Nonetheless, mandatory Selective Service registration continues to this day, but for men only.
Since then men have not been drafted nor have most volunteered to serve a day in the military, much less in combat. It’s all optional now. But registering for men isn’t. Failure to do so carries a fine of up to $250K.
Since women have pushed successfully to serve in combat with very few actually serving, then, like all men, all women should be required to register. That doesn’t mean women will be sent into combat any more than a man registering with SS will be either drafted or sent into combat.
For generations women served on the front lines as nurses and in support roles; that was and is considered quite honorable. Most of those women returned stateside to have and raise families after having done their patriotic duty.
All true, in fact, one daughter wants to be an army nurse. But it's the context that's changed. The world you described was when the Presidency was in the hands of men who were more or less normal Americans. The purpose of this Klingon in the White House in pushing fags and women into combat—and maybe women into the draft—is different. That's why it's a no-go.
I don't think we conservatives should get distracted about whether our sons and daughters are being treated differently. With 0bummer, it's not about military realities at all. His military meddling (through his surrogates in the Senate and at Defense) is strictly to advance his agenda—probably to dilute and compromise the conservative core of military culture so it will serve him instead of the Constitution.