Hhhhhhmmmmm, this topic has been 'interesting' to say the least. So, my input then....
Equality is absolutely the right thing to do and should be applauded... However there is a practical side that has to be looked at when employing women in certain roles such as infantry. Whilst medics in Afghanistan showed what women who are given a chance are capable of it is one side of a story. Doing this over a 20+ year career, week in, week out is another thing.
I have no doubt there are women who can carry 20 kg bergans (Commando Test) or keep up with men when tabbing over high ground (Goose Green etc) or mill with a bloke of a similar stature (Para Regt milling) etc. The long term effects for the average infanteer are lower limb injuries and back problems that plague them for their careers and in later life.
Women are more likely to be injured when subjected to the rigours of infantry training vs males(see links below). As much as this will annoy some, this is unfortunately science fact. There are ways to mitigate some injuries but the reality is that women are just built differently and suffer more through over-striding, weight bearing and different hormonal needs that cause other isues such as (relative) iron deficiency) and a body not designed to pack on muscle mass and with a (relatively) less robust skeletal system.
This all tied in with a bodymass to weight carried ratio being at a guess about 15-20% different without correcting for lean body mass, bone strength and absolute cardiovascular fitness. There are ways to limit these issues, but as the MoD lost 26 aircrew at a cost of £100's millions due to musculo-skeletal injury over a 6 year period they are unlikely (never!) to implement anything worthwhile for infantry units.
The crux of my point, from a strategic and military point of view, females will more likely get injured = time off = less manpower = less to do the fighting = less likely mission success.
From a human and moral point of view and being a father to daughters, more injuries = more pain = more chance of repeat injuries = chronic pain = lack of operational effectiveness = med discharge = life of pain and suffering.
I really would hate for numerous young women in their prime to have life changing injuries or chronic pain for the sake appeasing the bra burners and make some politician look good. The long term health effects on women have to be taken seriously if we must go down this route and planned for by using peer reviewed studies from respected academics. We cannot let political correctness cloud a potential health timebomb without fully knowing the implications.
And just to be clear, I 100% support women in all front line roles providing the entry standard is not adjusted for gender.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8331441/
http://natajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.4085/1062-6050-51.9.09?code=nata-site
https://www.hsrd.research.va.gov/for_researchers/cyber_seminars/archives/705-notes.pdf
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/26/army-stats-show-that-women-are-injured-twice-as-of/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18849872/
http://jmvh.org/article/load-carriage-and-the-female-soldier/