"If a woman is physically incapable of doing a job, she ought not to do it. If a man is physically incapable of doing a job, he ought not to do it. A man who is five feet nothing and 98 lb. is not superior to a woman who is 5'10" and 165 lb. of solid muscle, merely due to the fact that he has a penis and she has none. This is not a question of male and female. It is a matter of ability to do a job."
You are missing the point. More than likely the "5 foot nothing, 98 lb male" will not make the selection cut due to physical unsuitability. The 5 foot nothing woman with identical physical capability could possibly be selected under the "gender normed" regime of dual physical standards that have been adopted to insure politically acceptable numbers of women.
Remember, a man who can only meet the female standard of physical fitness gets washed out. Women get to stay and are magically presumed to be able to do the same job under the same criteria as the washed out male soldier.
No YOU are missing the point. I am saying that there ough to be ONE standard and ANYBODY who meets it ought to be accepted and anybody who does NOT meet it ought to be washed out.
I am 100% against a standard for men and a standard for women. ONE STANDARD FOR EVERYBODY.