Of course Napoleon had problems. There is no permanent war.
But had he been off the battlefield every two weeks, his problems would have been much worse.
Also, had Napoleon been female, he also would have risked becoming pregnant.
And then what?
The mindset of the gestating female is hardly suited for conquering Europe.
If my example of Napoleon doesn’t suit you, insert the name of any famous general, any man who won wars, any man who conquered nations.
And note, you will have to insert the name of a man, because, well, that’s who does that sort of thing.
How many children do YOU have, if the answer to the above query is "yes"?
Do you now, or have you ever had an IBS or colitis attack? If so, for how long have you had either condition?
Should the answer to the above questions are "no", then you are incapable of comprehending my posts and it shows. If the answers are "yes", then none of your recent posts make any sense. ;^)
Re "war"/being in the thick of battles...not familiar with Florence Nightingale, are you? *snicker*
I want to say that first off, I totally agree about military. Women should not be in the military (WADR to those, including my favorite cousin, who are/were). Especially when paired with men - they get pregnant (even if it’s immoral indeed, it does happen), and that is not a way to have a war.
As far as general leadership, they can handle it. The PMS thing hardly ever changes my feelings or behavior; never has. Maybe some women, but not nearly as stereotypically incapacitating/altering as it’s made out to be.
Many of the men you think of had to deal with constant irritation and illness, including the incomparable Washington. They were strong enough to deal with it, but then again, since illness was SO common then, it probably was expected to keep working unless you were truly bowled over by it.