If someone enlists without a specialty guaranteed it's called "open contract". So something like this happens after boot camp, at least in the Marines.

Male Marine: "I'd like to be an avionics tech and get a good job after I get out"

Assignments officer: "Too bad. we need infantrymen, and you meet the only requirement: you're male. Off you go to the School of Infantry"

Now if we let only those females physically qualified to be in the infantry, then this might happen:

Female Marine: "I'd like to be an avionics tech and get a good job after I get out"

Assignments officer: "Too bad. we need infantrymen. Can you meet the physical requirements for the infantry?"

Female Marine: "Oooh, no, sorry. I just couldn't do enough push-ups/pull-ups/whatever that day. Oh, well."

Assignments officer: "OK, you're a cook"

You can see how unfair it would be to male Marines if females essentially got to choose not to have the hardest, most dangerous job, by simply sandbagging the physical test. You can say that "everyone is in combat" or "there is no front". To do so, however, ignores that driving a truck for a living, and getting shot at while you're doing it, is seriously different form actively going looking for a fight every day and night.

You're right that we need women in the armed forces, and more of them, too. That's because 50% of the smartest people women. But you need to use the right tool for the job, and the job of the infantryman or cannoneer is a man's job.

I think the rules in place are just fine -- not perfect, but by no means absurd. One unrelated shooting incident does not change anything.

The marines still have cooks? I thought that was being done by KBR.

Yep, still cooks, plumbers, and ejection seat mechanics ...

Oh yes, you're so right. "Honey, step back from the cannons, men are working here. In fact, we're getting a little hungry. Fix us a sandwich?"

Are you kidding? US citizens in 2009 still think like this?

Also, if you are stupid enough to enlist in an "open contract", you probably deserve what you get. It's very easy to say to the recruiter, "Oh, you can't get me a slot at the avionics school? No problem. I'm going to go back to my XBox. Call me when you find a slot." Recruiters have montly enlistment goals to meet. They'll find you that slot if it means not losing out on an enlistment for the month.

Yes, even in 2009, a 103-pound projectile still weighs 103 pounds, and not every woman can sling them around. On the infantry side, mortar tubes, base plates, and machine guns weigh the same for men and women.

As for your recruiter quotas, you can't get blood from a turnip -- there are only so many guarantees for enlistees. Otherwise, why are there open contracts?

Hey Robbo, can every man swing a 103 pound projectile? I assume those who didn't wouldn't be qualified for infantry and those who did would, right?

Yes, that's my point. If you qualify to be a Marine, i.e. you graduate from boot camp (and you are male), then you are qualified to be in the infantry, artillery, or the other jobs that Mr Saletan pointed out are restricted to men only.

Letting some women "qualify" by some physical test only opens up the opportunity to cheat the system.

As others have pointed out: what about the draft? Why don't women have to register for the draft? If things are in the crapper so bad that we need to draft people, then we need infantrymen -- all men who pass boot camp qualify; not all women who pass boot camp qualify.

Denying women the option to serve in combat arms positions because some might "cheat" to get out of it is a very weak argument. Even if cheating did turn out to be a problem (which I rather doubt - this is a volunteer military, so if you didn't want to risk serving in the infantry, don't enlist), then create a system of identifying and punishing cheaters. That really isn't all that difficult.

Robbo578:

As others have pointed out: what about the draft? Why don't women have to register for the draft? If things are in the crapper so bad that we need to draft people, then we need infantrymen -- all men who pass boot camp qualify; not all women who pass boot camp qualify.

No, all men who pass boot camp can do X amount of pullups, X amount of crunches, and run their 3 miles in X amount of time. That says nothing of carrying that 103 lb munition you mentioned. You cannot deny that some men, regardless of passing a PFT, are not physically strong enough to serve effectively in a combat arms unit. But at least they have the opportunity to try. Is that really so much to ask for?

Read about the Israel Defense Forces - proof that allowing women in infantry units can work out just fine.