If that policy should be changed the only women who would be able to serve would be those who are so psychologicaly damaged by their inability to actualize female nature that they may be a damge to their fellows for that fact alone. The only way I see for a woman to participate in deadly, confrontational force, and remain female in mind and character is when the last resort of complete annihilation forces a suspension of nature, which it has in the past from time to time.
I don't think I miss your point and I judge rightly. You think that the relationship between men and women is created and ordained by the society and culture in which they live. This belief is reinforced by the use of female characters in movies and television, and their success in endevors of the strength and violent scenes.
The vicarious emotional experience you get from watching such malarkey bypasses your reason and knowledge that these are contrived stories, the like of which have only occured extremely rarely in history in extremely rare circumstances. You are unaware of how you have been manipulted.
The "women should be protected trap" only comes from the operating system of a man that came with him at birth. If you are a man and you don't understand it you are abnormal and should get counceling to uncover you problem so you can deal with it.
Lacking these pathological conditions, one must suspect a particular susceptibility to social engineering, which susceptibility is usually found in men who look no further than the end of their penis.
In all healthy cultures at all times among all races this natal attitude of men is the same. The only time something different has been seen is in the cases of aged, senile cultures, where homosexuality runs rampant and which culture is ready to fade away, or in cases of nations, countires, groups or tribes dominated by madmen, like the current Islamic practices.
If you are not a man, you are a feminist, and carry the credibility problem inherent in that programing. 