Let's get one thing straight here. I'm not making the claim that "more men died in battle full stop". It's you that's making the claim "more women died in childbirth full stop". I'm pointing out that what you provide to support that doesn't hold water and isn't even remotely close.

Now, i wasnt even going to bring this up, because normally it doesn't really matter. But since were going back hundreds of thousands of years, it actually does matter.

Girls and boys are not born 50/50. (UK study) There are usually ~105 boys born for every 100 girls. And we have in modern times seen that number increase after times of war and distress.

couple with a very disturbing practise called "female infanticide". Why would they do that? You probably ask. And again. We can only truly answer for the modern times since they didn't really catalog that sort of thing 4000 years ago. But it boils down to that boys are more capable of hard labour and more likely to stay with their family, compared to the women who would go to stay with their partner and his family.

So if you are worried about who will take care of you when you're old. You'll be looking at your sons. So when food is running scarse. Who do you think they feed first? Or at all for that matter.

And you will probably say something like, pfff sure, how often did that happen? And the answer to that is more than enough for the Brittish to outlaw it in 1870

And of course. It's not exactly the kind of thing most people wrote down and documented (dear diary, today we killed our baby daughter). So we can't know how prevelant it was across the world throughout history. But from our modern accounts, it seems to occur more as resources decrease. 50% of your kids were expected to die anyway. Might as well keep feeding the ones that can protect you later.

More boys being born. Girls being killed in their cribs for being a waste of food. Leads to a society with more boys than girls. More boys => larger army = larger wars => more deaths among soldiers

Which all points towards that the notion that more women dying in childbirth than men in battle. Historically speaking, isn't very clear. I think now having looked into it more, that it's entirely possible more men have died in battle. Can i prove it? Of course not. We don't know too much about what happened 10000 years ago. People were unfortunately notoriously illiterate and not very good at writing things down.

As a final note. You have not proved anything. Beyond that you seem to think every girl born grew up past puberty. And that your scope of "calculations" consists of trying to compare 300000 years of births with, 5000? 7000? years of men dying in battle.

Me calling out your moronic statements is not finger wagging or moving a goalpost. Anyway. You wanted some links, enjoy. Bonus points if you can read enough to learn which ethnicity in the UK is suspected of aborting girls due to having a lot more boys born than girls on average.