I agree with you. There are some things women can do better than men.
I was a hurdler in college. I can remember seeing how easy it was for girls to go over the hurdles. Of course they were lower by a good bit and I was a lot faster but getting that trail leg over the hurdle was much easier for girls who were far more flexible in the hips.
There is one camera assembly job which I now forget but it could only be done by Japanese women with their very fine and delicate motor skills.
I think he may have thought you meant equal in combat.
If I had to make a guess (and it is just a guess, based on observation and what I know of myself) I’d say the top 20% of women would be better in a modern military situation than the bottom 20% of men... so yes, there would be a very few women who would make an acceptable recruit.
But when people who know far more about the military than I do say that even having a small number of women on the front lines would be disruptive, and when I see how standards ARE lowered so that more than the occasionally physically qualified woman can pass, I can’t believe that even allowing the top women into the ranks would be a good thing.
I -do-, however, think women should be eligible for a ‘draft’ or sorts in times of crisis, to be conscripted into jobs of a national-service nature while the men are off fighting. Yes, many women will volunteer, and did on the home front in WWII, but if we reach a point where men are being drafted to go fight, I see no reason why women shouldn’t be drafted to work jobs of great need back in this country where they can support the country’s efforts.