Actually, no women are made for it. Some women at the top end of the bell curve overlap where a lot of men are and can pass a test. Even a month of training. Or two.
But it is like trying to recruit old guys in the interest of fairness. I went to Afghanistan at 49. I rarely got off the FOB because no one WANTED me to go off the FOB with them.
I could do pretty good on a fitness test. I could stand up to combat duty for 4, 6 hours...maybe more, in a pinch. But I could not have done what the 20 year old guys were doing - going 18 hours, then the next day, then the next, and doing it for a year.
I suppose 1% of guys in the 50s could handle being a ground combat troop, which is quite different from deploying to a combat zone in a supporting role. But why would you waste time looking for them, when 70% of guys in their 20s can be trained to handle the work?
And if you seek out women instead of old guys, you add sex to the battlefield - NOT a good idea. But the Gods of the Copybook Headings will need to teach America the lesson...
Things that lifetime civilians like me would never know. Thanks for the insight.
It is never a good idea to introduce the romantic element into the combat team. Then again, the Burr & Romney males don’t want to serve so you have to go at 49...plus the gals man enough to serve.