Assuming we're talking about the tiny minority of women currently serving in the military who meet the standards required for combat roles, there's still a lot to consider:
-Women are twice as likely to develop a musculoskeletal injury (and it goes up to seven times more likely for more specialist training regimes like commando or paratroop roles)
-Women currently serving are 15-20% more likely to suffer a Disease Non-Battle Injury (that will go up after they're allowed in combat)
-Women currently serving are twice as likely to develop mental health problems (15% vs 6.8% in men, and again will go up when they're allowed in combat)
-Women's bodies do not respond well to the nutritional, stress and sleeping stresses that combat causes (it's completely different to having a baby, that's a dumb comparison for obvious reasons)
-Women are quicker to fatigue than men and cannot be pushed to the kinds of limits that men can when the situation warrants it
I'm not going to talk about unit cohesion, killer instinct and all the rest of it but those are also important things to consider. The only Western military that has allowed women in combat roles for some time is the IDF (probably because Israel is outnumbered 25:1 and is desperate for manpower). They strictly segregate into all-female combat units only, which are only used for light duties and won't face the enemy unless the situation is truly desperate.
Integrate women into combat units and the unit won't be as effective, end of. That's what all the studies have concluded. I reckon what will happen is women will be allowed to serve, will end up on average getting killed more often than men, and there will be a feminist backlash in 20 years time seeking to make a grievance out of it.
