There might be some exceptions but generally, a female body is not built for combat. That is their anatomy. For example, there is a mere modicum of testosterone in females.
The average female soldier will always be inferior to an average male soldier. The physical standards for male and female soldiers are not the same in most militaries;
" The Marine Corps had originally indicated that, as of January 1, 2014, female Marines would be required to perform a minimum of three pull-ups in order to pass the PFT. However, when more than half of female recruits were unable to meet this standard, the change was delayed. In 2017, the flexed-arm hang event was eliminated, and both male and female marines were given the choice to do either push-ups or pull-ups for this event."
(An untrained young male can do more than 3)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Physical_Fitness_Test
There are many more examples where the physical standards are relaxed for the female soldiers.
Besides, how many females could carry a heavier injured soldier out of the line of fire while wearing a heavy combat kit?
Why would one want to compromise the national security in the name of women empowerment is something which I am unable to grasp. In one team, if a soldier slows down others because he/she is not as fit as them then he/she is a liability. Induction of females in a combat unit will have detrimental effect on the efficiency of that unit.
Courage is a male trait. It is the job of men to protect their women and children, not the other way around. Sending women on front line when healthy males sit on their asses is not "women empowerment". Women can do better by giving birth to future male soldiers rather than going to the front and being a liability for their team mates. Why would any self respecting man want his daughters and sisters put their lives on the line and fight for him?
@Desert Fox @Nilgiri