The military is doing "inclusivity training"?
The military has been doing its own version of inclusivity training for 50 years, when the military began making the concept of "we're all green" a proactively explicit doctrine instead of an implied idea.
But what is an idyllic concept in the civilian community is, as you have said, a necessity of the military telos. We can't win wars without it. That is, in fact, the reason why military leaders went to Truman to push for an integrated service, not the other way around.
By the late 60s, it was clear that service integrtion was still short of actual "inclusivity" (although "inclusivity" wasn't the word the military used at the time, it's the concept they were groping for). But practical inclusivity is a different thing from idyllic inclusivity.
Here is an example: For everyone who enters basic training, the military's intention is that each person finishes basic training strong and successfully. That is, for everyone an
equal outcome. But people do not enter at equal levels. Some are overweight, some underweight, some weak, some slow, some bright, some dull, some can fallow directions, some are hard-headed. So to achieve an equal outcome, they must receive
unequal treatment. The slow and weak must work harder. The duller must study longer. The overweight must run farther. The hard-headed get more discipline.
The military must also accurately access true requirement versus arbitrary bars, which is why Marine Corps basic is has always been more physically rigorous than Air Force basic. Sometimes those have to be reconsidered. For instance, my field, Intelligence, had been barred to women up into the 70s. Why? Well, because we typically worked on the flight line and thus were considered "operations," and women could not be in "operations."
Duh! But...intelligence is not flying aircraft into combat. It's not even doing a lot of heavy physical labor. It's mostly sitting in chairs at desks using our brains...and women have brains, too. So sometimes military traditions need re-evaluation. What do we really need?
In the Navy, women had long been barred from sea duty. Because they could not go to sea (or into the air or under the sea), they could not earn various warfare badges, which virtually shut them out of higher promotion levels. But the Navy realized that in a lot of ratings (Naval occupations)--like Intelligence--male sailors were doing the minimum of sea duty necessary to qualify for the warfare badges, and were often far behind women in all the other qualifications necessary for the badges. So in the promotion boards, instead of warfare badges (which women couldn't get anyway) as automatic discriminator criteria, promotions boards were instructed to examine how much each candidate had actually accomplished across the board. If the woman was maxing out on everything else possible to she could do except getting the warfare badge, she should rate higher than a man who was clearly doing the bare minimum, including the minimum it had taken to get the warfare badge. (Today, women can go to sea, so the promotion considerations can be identical.)
These methods are not the way the civilian community does "inclusivity," and the military must be careful not to mimic the civilian method of inclusivity.
For example, here is where a mistake has been made: The Marine Corps, when it expanded the roles of women in the Corps, increased the rigor of women's training, keeping them separate from men in the early weeks. In those early weeks, they gave the women "more" of what American high school graduate girls commonly lacked in comparison with high school graduate boys: Not only more physical training but also more explicit training in
assertiveness. Then, with that additional training in the areas American teenaged girls are typically weaker than American Teenaged boys, they were combined in the final weeks of training. Again: Unequal treatment to achieve an equal outcome.
But under pressure of civilian idyllic inclusivity, in which equal outcome is supposed to result from equal treatment even from unequal starting positions, the Marine Corps has been forced to combine male and female training from the beginning day. So, essentially, the weak Marine doesn't get more training in the weak areas...they have to reduce the requirement instead.