it all makes no sense these huge weights - what are they trying to tell us? The women can handle anything even if they shouldn’t have to, nor should the men - it’s all insane.
Are you saying that carrying a 55 to 100lb pack is not necessary? If so, what is your reasoning?
BTW, In Vietnam my pack at the beginning of an operation usually weighed 65 to 95lbs. The lighter weights were when we were in the mountains.
Instead of carrying a weeks worth of two meals per day we only carried one meal per day and sometimes omitted the helmet and the spare radio battery for a one week patrol. Also left shaving gear, etc back at base camp, just to get the weight down.
After 'Nam while on a training exercise in mountains of Korea, the three enlisted radio operators on my Forward Air Controller team carried packs of 105# to 110#. The "little guy (5' 7", 135#) had the lightest. My pack was 115#. I was 5'8", 160# at the time.
Our packs had 50# lbs of radios & spare batteries, chow, water, helmet & flak jacket, weapons (no ammo or frags, which would have added 12-15 lbs, minimum), sleeping bag, rain pancho, cold weather gear plus a dry change of clothing.